UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

Values an planning opinions: towards the synthesis of "planning opinion types" in a community Winterhalt, William H. 1973

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

Notice for Google Chrome users:
If you are having trouble viewing or searching the PDF with Google Chrome, please download it here instead.

Item Metadata

Download

Media
831-UBC_1973_A6_7 W55_7.pdf [ 7.94MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 831-1.0101228.json
JSON-LD: 831-1.0101228-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 831-1.0101228-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 831-1.0101228-rdf.json
Turtle: 831-1.0101228-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 831-1.0101228-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 831-1.0101228-source.json
Full Text
831-1.0101228-fulltext.txt
Citation
831-1.0101228.ris

Full Text

VALUES AND PLANNING OPINIONS: TOWARDS THE SYNTHESIS OF ' "PLANNING OPINION TYPES" IN A COMMUNITY by WILLIAM H. WINTERHALT B.Eng., M c G i l l U n i v e r s i t y , 1969 A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF SCIENCE i n the School of Community and Regional Planning We accept t h i s thesis as conforming to the required standard THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA September, 1973. In presenting t h i s thesis i n p a r t i a l f u l f i l m e n t of the requirements for an advanced degree at the University of B r i t i s h Columbia, I agree that the Library s h a l l make i t f r e e l y available f o r reference and study. I further agree that permission fo r extensive copying of t h i s thesis fo r scholarly purposes may be granted by the Head of my Department or by hi s representatives. It i s understood that copying or publication of t h i s thesis for f i n a n c i a l gain s h a l l not be allowed without my written permission. Department of Scool of Community and Regional Planning The University of B r i t i s h Columbia Vancouver 8, Canada Date September 11. 1973 i ABSTRACT This research was undertaken p r i m a r i l y to f i n d a v a l i d method of formulating community goals within the planning process. Proper d e f i n i t i o n of goals was seen as the key to t h i s i d e a l l y r a t i o n a l process and as something which has too often been neglected by p r a c t i c i n g planners. Since values are portrayed i n the l i t e r a t u r e as the determiners of our choices among a l t e r n a t i v e s , i t seems reasonable to assert that the formation of a person's opinions on planning issues w i l l be linked with h i s value system. I f a parsimonious set of values dimensions can be i d e n t i f i e d as the latent basis of broad scale planning opinion formation, r e l i a b l e measures of these dimensions could be used as c r i t e r i a to define groups of people with s i m i l a r opinions on the issues that are of fundamental i n t e r e s t i n planning. I t was envisioned that these groups could be used i n a v a r i e t y of i n t e r a c t i v e programs designed to a s c e r t a i n the goals of a community. Two study objectives were outlined: 1) to determine whether values measures add s i g n i f i c a n t l y to the power of socio-economic variables i n discriminating between groupings of respondents defined on planning opinions. 2) to describe the values sub-domain capable of y i e l d i n g e f f i c i e n t enough discriminators to be used i n actual planning a n a l y s i s . i i A questionnaire was designed to provide measures of values, of planning opinions, and of socio-economic v a r i a b l e s . Factor analysis was used to reduce the number of variables and to obtain more r e l i a b l e compound measures. Seven values variables (Authoritarianism, Dependent Mi s t r u s t , Socialism, L i b e r a l Restraint, Conservatism, Independent Cynicism, and Religious Cynicism), f i v e planning opinion variables (Control Growth, Parks and Preservation, Land and Housing Control, P u b l i c T r a n s i t , and Housing Mix), and nine socio-economic variables (Age, Sex, M a r i t a l Status, E t h n i c i t y , S o c i a l Status, Family R e s p o n s i b i l i t y , Housing S t a b i l i t y , Auto Dependence, and Adults!) were used i n the subsequent an a l y s i s . A - h i e r a r c h i c a l grouping analysis using the planning opinion scores as c r i t e r i a r esulted i n the assignment of 207 cases to nine d i s t i n c t planning opinion groups. Two discriminant analyses were made to test the hypothesis that personal values i n combination with socio-economic variables  discriminate s i g n i f i c a n t l y better between opinion groups defined i n the  domain of broad scale planning issues than do socio-economic variables  alone. The analysis r e s u l t s supported the hypothesis. To pursue the second objective of the t h e s i s , a stepwise discriminant analysis was used to f i n d the reduced set of values and socio-economic variables which discriminated most e f f i c i e n t l y between planning opinion groups. The s i x optimum variables thus i d e n t i f i e d ( f i v e of the seven values variables and housing s t a b i l i t y ) were then used to create nine new "planning values groups". I t was found that planning i i i opinion scores discriminated s i g n i f i c a n t l y between these new groups. Thus, traces of the sought a f t e r l i n k between values and planning opinions had been uncovered. These analysis r e s u l t s j u s t i f y further research and lead to the suggestion that f a i r l y stable "planning opinion types" could eventually be defined with the help of values measures. "Community values p r o f i l e s " (the frequency d i s t r i b u t i o n of "planning opinion types") would then become useful i n planning issue a n a l y s i s , c i t i z e n p a r t i c i p a t i o n programs and i n goal formulation e f f o r t s . Planning issue analysis would involve using planning opinion "type samples" to a s c e r t a i n the modal "type opinions" on the issues of i n t e r e s t . Community f e e l i n g on the issue could then be gauged by weighting each modal opinion i n proportion to i t s corresponding frequency d i s t r i b u t i o n i n the "community values p r o f i l e " . S i m i l a r l y , " c i t i z e n panels" with the values p r o f i l e of any p a r t i c u l a r p o r t i o n of a community could be used i n i n t e r a c t i v e types of planning programs. In each case, the " c i t i z e n panel" would e s s e n t i a l l y act on behalf of the community as do the jurors i n a court case. i v TABLE OF CONTENTS Page INTRODUCTION 1 CHAPTER I. PERSPECTIVE OF THE THESIS . . . 6 The Nature of Values . . . . 6 Major Planning Models . . . 10 Planning Strategies . . . . 12 Focus of the Enquiry . . . . 17 CHAPTER I I . THE STUDY DESIGN 18 Flow of the Study . . . . 18 The Questionnaire 19 The Sample of Respondents . . . 19 The Personal Values Component . . 22 The Planning Issues Component . . 27 The Socio-Economic Variables Component 30 Sample Size 35 , The Analysis Design . . . . 36 CHAPTER I I I . ANALYSIS AND RESULTS . . . . 40 Return Rates and Missing Data . . 40 Socio-Economic Description of the Sample 42 Factor Analysis to Create Planning Opinion Variables 44 Cluster Analysis on Planning Opinions . . . . . . . 53 Values Variables 57 Socio-Economic Variables . . . 68 Testing the Hypothesis . . . . 73 The Optimum Values and Socio-Economic Variables . . . . 77 V TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued) Page CHAPTER IV. THE UTILITY OF PLANNING OPINION GROUPS 82 The Basis for Planning Opinion Types 82 Analysis Using Planning Opinion Types 86 Community Values Panels . . . 89 CHAPTER V. THE STATE OF THE QUEST . . . 93 Directions f o r Further Inquiry . 93 Summary and Conclusion . . . 98 APPENDIX A. L i s t s of Survey Statements with Response Means and Standard Deviations 103 APPENDIX B. Questionnaire 119 APPENDIX C. Coding of the Family R e s p o n s i b i l i t y and Family Cost Variables . 120 APPENDIX D. Procedures f o r Estimating Missing Background Data . . . . . 123 APPENDIX E. Histograms of Ten Socio-Economic Variables 125 BIBLIOGRAPHY 129 v i LIST OF TABLES Table Page 1 Coding of Socio-Economic Variables . . . . 34 2 Questionnaire Returns by Census Tract . . . 40 3 Socio-Economic Variables by Census Tract . . 43 4 Planning Opinions Factor Matrix . . . . 46 5 Factor A (Control Growth) Item Loadings . . 47 6 Factor B (Parks and Preservation) Item Loadings . 48 7 Factor C (Land and Housing Control) Item Loadings 49 8 Factor D (Public Transit) Item Loadings . . . 50 9 Factor E (Housing Mix) Item Loadings . . . 50 10 Factor F (Political Change) Item Loadings . . 51 11 Factor G (Cluster Housing) Item Loadings . . 52 12 Planning Opinions: Seven Factor Solution Interpretation Summary . 52 13 Cluster Analysis on Planning Opinions . . . 54 14 Group Means on Planning Opinion Scores . . . 56 15 Values Factor Matrix 59 16 Factor A (Authoritarianism) Item Loadings . . 61 17 Factor B (Dependent Mistrust) Item Loadings . . 62 18 Factor C (Socialism) Item Loadings . . . . 63 19 Factor D (Liberal Restraint) Item Loadings . . 64 20 Factor E (Conservatism) Item Loadings . . . 65 21 Factor F (Independent Cynicism) Item Loadings . 66 22 Factor G (Religious Cynicism) Item Loadings . . 67 23 Final Values Factors 67 24 Socio-Economic Factor Matrix 69 25 Final Set of Socio-Economic Variables . . . 71 26 Matrix of Correlations of Planning Opinion Scores, Socio-Economic Variables and Values Measures . 72 27 Discriminant Analyses (Test of Hypothesis) . . 74 v i i LIST OF TABLES (Continued) Table Page 28 Planning Opinion Group Means on Socio-Economic and Values Variables 76 29 Stepwise Discriminant Analysis to I d e n t i f y Optimum Reduced Set of Variables . . . . 79 30 Discriminant Analyses Using Planning Values Groups 81 31 Issue Opinion Table: Housing Mix . . . 84 32 "Types" Composition of Census Tracts . . . 89 33 Percentage of Working Wives and Family R e s p o n s i b i l i t y by Stage of the Family L i f e Cycle 120 v i i i LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS Figure Page 1 Hierarchy of values . . . . . . . 7 2 The r o l e of values 8 3 Census t r a c t s surveyed . . . . . . 22 4 Analysis procedure 37 5 Community values p r o f i l e 83 6 Cumulative frequency d i s t r i b u t i o n s of opinions on two issues 87 7 Relative annual cost of supporting four f a m i l i e s f o r f o r t y years 121 ACKNOWLEDGMENT I would l i k e to express my thanks to my thesis advisers, Professors William Rees and John B. C o l l i n s , f o r a l l t h e i r help and encouragement. Professors Robert K e l l y , Brahm Wiesman, and Paul Roer a l l devoted some of t h e i r valuable time to assess the merits of my thesis proposal and to o f f e r valuable suggestions i n the c r u c i a l formulation stage of the study. 1 INTRODUCTION For some time, people have been c a l l i n g f o r greater c i t i z e n p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n planning (Burke, 1968; Darner, 1971). Some see t h i s as a v i t a l component i n the formulation of community goals ( C o l l i e r , 1968). To a f a i r extent t h i s p a r t i c i p a t i o n has been forthcoming, but i t too often f a l l s short of what i s needed to v a l i d a t e any synthesis of goals. I t has p r i m a r i l y been focused on issues a r i s i n g out of the "environmental c r i s e s consciousness" which evolved i n the s i x t i e s . During t h i s decade, many people began to see.-that some large scale developments were causing a d e t e r i o r a t i o n i n the environment that f a r outweighed t h e i r attendant b e n e f i t s . The r e s u l t i n g objections to such developments were fueled by contentions that the d e t e r i o r a t i o n seemed to a f f e c t the low income groups r e l a t i v e l y more and that the benefits seemed to accrue c h i e f l y to the higher income groups (Damer, 1971). However, even with this new impetus, t r a d i t i o n a l lobbyists such as ratepayer's groups, business a f f i l i a t e d associations and organized environmentalists have been doing most of the p a r t i c i p a t i n g . Further-more, a t y p i c a l consequence of t h i s new p a r t i c i p a t i o n i s that i l l conceived plans are shelved, but no cooperative mechanism i s established to prepare acceptable a l t e r n a t i v e plans. The shelving of the l a t e s t of a succession of plans f o r a t h i r d crossing over Burrard I n l e t i n Greater Vancouver i s a case i n point. E f f e c t i v e planning i s needed to replace t h i s muddled s i t u a t i o n . Continuous representative input i s required from the whole 2 community to. enable planners to formulate proper goals which can serve as the basis f o r the successive evolution of objectives, p o l i c i e s and plans. Although t h i s l e v e l of input might eventually be achieved through a reorganization of our p o l i t i c a l s t r u c t u r e , we should, i n the meantime, try to f i n d other ways of e l i c i t i n g the appropriate kind of c i t i z e n p a r t i c i p a t i o n . This type and degree of c i t i z e n input w i l l have to go beyond what i s now generated by "issues". It w i l l have to deal with b a s i c goal statements and p a r t i c i p a n t s w i l l have to be representative of the range of views i n the population as a whole. Perhaps e f f o r t s should be made to develop techniques f o r s e l e c t i n g representatives from amongst the population to p a r t i c i p a t e i n the formulation of goals. A l t e r n a t i v e l y , ways could be developed of gauging the representativeness of p a r t i c i p a t i o n and of encouraging the involvement of under represented groups i n t r a d i t i o n a l p u b l i c programs. This research i s aimed at fi n d i n g out i f measures of personal values are an adequate basis for synthesizing "planning opinion types". The s p a t i a l frequency d i s t r i b u t i o n of these types ("community values p r o f i l e s " ) f o r a community or parts of a community could be used by planners to gauge the representativeness of c i t i z e n input to p u b l i c programs; to guide the locations of innovative developments; to help i n the s e l e c t i o n of representatives f o r planning advisory panels; and f o r a whole range of everyday planning analysis tasks. 3 The general hypothesis i s that a person's socio-economic p o s i t i o n and his values w i l l l a r g e l y determine h i s stance on the types of broad scale p u b l i c p o l i c i e s with which planners are fundamentally concerned. I f th i s i s the case, then i t should be possible to c l a s s i f y people by "planning opinion type" and to construct maps showing the d i s t r i b u t i o n of these various types i n the community. I t i s i m p l i c i t that c l a s s i f i c a t i o n by socio-economic p o s i t i o n and by l o c a t i o n without accounting for values i s less s u i t e d to the purposes defined. None of these proposed uses of community values p r o f i l e s should be viewed as ways of circumventing the normal p o l i t i c a l process or open p u b l i c hearings, nor should too great a r e l i a n c e be placed on inferences drawn from t h e i r use about what i s best f o r any segment of the community. They are recommended, however, as substitutes f o r the socio-economic p r o f i l e s of communities which many planners consciously or unconsciously use to estimate the l i k e l y degree of r e c e p t i v i t y to contemplated actions. This thesis describes a t e s t survey of respondents i n the City of Vancouver that was designed to assess the u t i l i t y of personal values measures i n the task of def i n i n g "planning opinion types" that would be r e l a t i v e l y stable across a range of planning issues and hence u s e f u l f o r planning analysis purposes. An important i n i t i a l hypothesis of the study was that personal values differences i n combination with  socio-economic variables w i l l discriminate s i g n i f i c a n t l y better between  opinion groups defined i n the domain of broad scale planning issues than 4 w i l l socio-economic variables alone. Included under the heading of socio-economic v a r i a b l e s were a number of important s i t u a t i o n a l measures with respect to the s p e c i f i c planning issues studied. For example, automobile usage and housing type were included as important s i t u a t i o n a l measures with respect to opinions on transportation and housing mix issues r e s p e c t i v e l y . The term " s i g n i f i c a n t l y b e tter" i s used to imply something on the order of a f i f t y per cent increase i n discriminatory power. Similar response p r o f i l e s to statements on several metropolitan scale planning issues are the basis for creating the planning opinion groups to test the hypothesis. E s t a b l i s h i n g the v a l i d i t y of t h i s hypothesis i s a key step i n making a case f o r the use of "community values p r o f i l e s " i n the planning process. I f the hypothesis were not v e r i f i e d , t h i s would tend to v i n d i c a t e the p r a c t i c e of regarding census tr a c t s as homogeneous planning opinion units because of t h e i r r e l a t i v e homogeneity with respect to socio-economic measures. Thus, an objective of the study was to show that personal values within census t r a c t s are not homogeneous and, by establishing, a firm l i n k between values and planning opinions, that i t i s a serious error to regard planning opinions within census t r a c t s as homogeneous. Af t e r t h i s preliminary hypothesis was v a l i d a t e d , the next step was to see how e f f e c t i v e socio-economic and values variables were as c r i t e r i a to define useful "planning values types". Could the socio-economic and values variables now be used to c l a s s i f y cases r e l i a b l y 5 into the planning opinion groups? This i s a d i f f i c u l t task and the correspondence between the two groupings was expected to be low. Moderate measurement r e l i a b i l i t i e s and the improbability of s e l e c t i n g the best value dimensions to include i n a preliminary study almost guaranteed such a r e s u l t . However, i t was hoped that the r e s u l t s would help to i d e n t i f y the nature of the value measurements that should be included i n other more accurate and s p e c i f i c studies exploring these r e l a t i o n s h i p s . Measured planning opinion scores f o r the d i f f e r e n t "planning opinion types" are used i n contrived planning analyses designed to show how such informationaalong with charts of the d i s t r i b u t i o n s of these types i n a community can be used to estimate probable r e c e p t i v i t y to various planning proposals. The concept of "community values panels" i s introduced and t h e i r p o t e n t i a l use i n the planning process i s discussed. 6 CHAPTER I PERSPECTIVE OF THE THESIS The Nature of Values To assess the v a l i d i t y of using values to help d i f f e r -e ntiate Between d i s t i n c t opinion groupings among the urban p u b l i c , appropriate measures of values must be devised. Values have been va r i o u s l y defined as: 1) "complex but d e f i n i t e l y patterned p r i n c i p l e s . . . which give order and d i r e c t i o n to the ever-flowing stream of human acts and thoughts as these r e l a t e to the s o l u t i o n of common human problems (Kluckhohn and Strodtbeck, 1961, p. 4)." 2) "the determiners i n man that influence h i s choices i n l i f e and that thus decide h i s behaviorr (Inlow, 1972, P. 2)." 3) "those conceptions of desirable states of a f f a i r s that are u t i l i z e d i n s e l e c t i v e conduct as c r i t e r i a f o r preference or choice or as j u s t i f i c a t i o n f o r proposed or a c t u a l behavior (Williams, 1967, p. 23)." The common thread running through these d e f i n i t i o n s i s that values are the lat e n t basis f o r acceptance or r e j e c t i o n of a l t e r n a t i v e s . But, there i s i n fac t a continuous gradation i n the concreteness of a person's makeup from h i s ego to h i s most s u p e r f i c i a l impressions. In a discussion of the realm of a t t i t u d e s , Oppenheim has stated: "For ease of understanding, s o c i a l psychologists make a rough d i s t i n c t i o n among these d i f f e r e n t l e v e l s . . . c a l l i n g the most s u p e r f i c i a l one b e l i e f s , the next one a t t i t u d e s , a deeper l e v e l , values or basic a t t i t u d e s , and 7 a s t i l l deeper l e v e l , p e r s o n a l i t y (1966, p. 109)." The schematic i l l u s t r a t i o n of t h i s gradation (Fig. 1) i s reproduced from Oppenheim's book (p. 110). B e l i e f s Attitudes Values or Basic Attitudes P e r s o n a l i t y Figure 1. ~ Hierarchy of values. This thesis adopts a pragmatic approach and a d e f i n i t i o n of values as "constructs i n the mind of the researcher which explain, or l a b e l , the conceptual c r i t e r i a people use as judgement standards when choosing from a l t e r n a t i v e s " i s appropriate (Schwarzweller, 1960, p. 127). In other words, d e f i n i t i o n s of values, of a t t i t u d e s , of p e r s o n a l i t y t r a i t s , of b e l i e f s , of i d e a l s or whatever from the f i e l d s of psychology, 8 e t h i c a l philosophy, anthropology, sociology and p o l i t i c a l science were drawn on; and those associated measuring instruments (question-naire items, t r a i t s , dimensions) that seemed to have p a r t i c u l a r relevance to people's opinions on a l t e r n a t i v e planning states were used. The following concept of values captures the essence of t h i s approach: " I f our problem i s to predict from an external stimulus to subsequent behaviour we may treat values as intervening v a r i a b l e s , i n s i d e the black box of the s o c i a l actor (Williams, 1967, p. 25)." The term "values" i s used only to i n d i c a t e that the intervening v a r i a b l e s expected to be relevant are approximately at that l e v e l i n Oppenheim's diagram which i s l a b e l l e d "values". The diagram i n Figure 2 i l l u s t r a t e s the s t r u c t u r a l r o l e of values which was examined i n t h i s study. Choice Figure 2. — The r o l e of values. In t h i s context, values are those personal conceptions about the character and function of human existence which, i n conjunction with a person's socio-economic s t a t e , determine h i s choice from a set of 9 a l t e r n a t i v e plans or p o l i c i e s . A good correspondence was expected both between a person's value system and his l i f e s i t u a t i o n , and between h i s value system and h i s preferences for p o l i c y a l t e r n a t i v e s relevant to planning. A case was made for the view that one of the most important tasks of a planner i s to ascertain the broad scale planning goals of hi s community. Thus, the p o l i c y a l t e r n a t i v e s examined were ones that r e l a t e to the types of l i f e s t y l e s people wish to pursue, to the kinds of urban structures they f e e l are necessary to f a c i l i t a t e these l i f e s t y l e s , to the extent to which they believe that t h e i r needs w i l l i n t e -grate or clash with those of others, and to the kinds of s o c i a l choice rules they deem equitable i n community goal formulation. Since a study of the r e l a t i o n s h i p i n the diagram (Fig. 2) required measurements of the personal p o s i t i o n s of i n d i v i d u a l s v i s - a - v i s the p o l i c y areas to be investigated, and since the s p e c i f i c a t i o n of t h i s p o s i t i o n would have become unwieldy i f other than very general planning issues were investigated, the plan was to choose issues s u f f i c i e n t l y general to allow the usual socio-economic information to specify a person's stake i n the a l t e r n a t i v e s . 10 Major Planning Models I t i s important to r e l a t e t h i s research e f f o r t to some of the current ideas on the planning process, planning s t r a t e g i e s , and the nature of p u b l i c decision making. There i s no pretense that any of these subjects i s treated i n an exhaustive fashion, since the intent i s merely to e s t a b l i s h a l i n k between t h i s study and portions of the l i t e r a t u r e on these topics. Several models have been suggested as guides f o r planning. Probably s t i l l dominant i s the c l a s s i c a l r a t i o n a l model (Braybrook and Lindblom, 1963; Davidoff and Reiner, 1962; Bolan, 1967; Alterman, 1970). I t includes the following steps: 1) Goal formulation. 2) I d e n t i f i c a t i o n of a l t e r n a t i v e means. 3) Evaluation and p o l i c y choice. 4) E f f e c t u a t i o n . The f i r s t step i n the sequence i s a c r i t i c a l one and i t can be handled i n s e v e r a l ways. U n t i l r e l a t i v e l y recently, the p r o f e s s i o n a l planning s t a f f and the planning commission were considered to be the guardians and spokesmen f o r the whole p u b l i c i n t e r e s t (Bolan, 1967). In other words, a community values formulation was considered to be something that could be r e l i a b l y prescribed by these bodies through judicious a p p l i c a t i o n of t h e i r expertise. This view has l a r g e l y been replaced (at l e a s t i n the domain of semantics) by the r e a l i z a t i o n that "neither the planner's t e c h n i c a l competence nor h i s wisdom e n t i t l e s him 11 to ascribe or d i c t a t e values to h i s immediate or ultimate c l i e n t s " (Davidoff and Reiner, 1962, p. 108). From t h i s springs the suggestion that the values of d i f f e r e n t groups have to be made e x p l i c i t and the whole linked to a clear formulation of goals. "The comprehensive planner must assume that h i s community's various c o l l e c t i v e goals can somehow be measured at least roughly as to importance and welded i n t o a s i n g l e hierarchy of community objectives (Altshuler, 1965, p. 186)." Although these revelations may seem enlightened, they are of l i t t l e import unless they lead to o p e r a t i o n a l i z a t i o n . Suggestions f o r accomplishing t h i s are to use the "market analysis approach" (public opinion p o l l s , surveys, etc.) or to set up free form c i t i z e n p a r t i c i p a -t i o n programs. The discussion of these i s pursued l a t e r i n connection with planning s t r a t e g i e s . However, i t seems f a i r to say that many planners who espouse the r a t i o n a l planning model are content e i t h e r to ignore the goals formulation step, or to r e l y on the shadowy i n t e r p r e -t a t i o n of such goals handed down by p o l i t i c i a n s and o f f i c i a l s over the years. Another major planning model i s the d i s j o i n t e d incrementalism model. Here, the major objective i s to move away from known s o c i a l i l l s rather than towards s p e c i f i c goals (Braybrooke and Lindblom, 1963, p. 71). The focus i s on "the increments by which the s o c i a l states that might r e s u l t from a l t e r n a t i v e p o l i c i e s d i f f e r from the status quo (p. 84)." Braybrooke and Lindblom argue that, while the r a t i o n a l model seems to s p e c i f y a l o g i c a l s e r i e s of steps i n which l i s t s of goals, a l t e r n a t i v e s 12 and consequences need to be prepared, i t s p e c i f i e s no l o g i c a l t a c t i c s f o r creating these l i s t s . They point out that the majority of planners proceed incrementally (despite t h e i r avowed ideals) and that they could probably do so more e f f e c t i v e l y i f they recognized the greater l u c i d i t y of the d i s j o i n t e d incrementalism model. They claim that the model can e f f e c t i v e l y be employed by progressive planners as w e l l as t r a d i t i o n a l i s t s (p. 110). However, i t would hardly seem any less d i f f i c u l t to define how much of an increment to consider than i t i s to know when comprehensiveness has been adequately approximated i n the steps of the r a t i o n a l model. In other words, the d i s j o i n t e d incrementalism model provides no guidelines f o r knowing when "non-incrementally achievable s t a t e s " should be brought i n t o the consideration. I t would seem f a r more desirable f o r a progressive planner to... have as an i d e a l a model which i s always somewhat beyond h i s reach than one whose guidelines he would continually have to surpass to achieve optimally progressive s o l u t i o n s . Since the incrementalism model possesses no advantage over the r a t i o n a l model and may be less d e s i r a b l e , i t i s not referred to i n subsequent discussion. Planning Strategies Special e f f o r t i s needed on the part of planners to formulate community goals. A number of the strategies that planners employ i n t h e i r work are now discussed with p a r t i c u l a r reference to t h e i r appropriateness i n goal formulation e f f o r t s . Five major st r a t e g i e s are 13 discussed. They are the e l i t i s t strategy, the c l i e n t analysis strategy, c i t i z e n p a r t i c i p a t i o n , advocacy planning, and the co l l a b o r a t i v e approach. The E l i t i s t Strategy i s the one most often employed by planners who believe that there e x i s t s one "public i n t e r e s t " which i s a compre-hensible aggregation of the independent i n t e r e s t s of i n d i v i d u a l s and groups and that i t can be adequately determined by an expert planner who c a r e f u l l y analyses the forces operating i n the community and who studies the socio-economic facts that are a v a i l a b l e to him (Alterman, 1970, p. 139). Quick and easy evidence showing that many c i t i z e n s are not int e r e s t e d i n Broad community goals i s used to j u s t i f y using the planner's supposed expert i n s i g h t to a r r i v e at a unitary goal formulation (Altshuler, 1965). The C l i e n t Analysis Strategy emBraces a wide range of approaches from what could Be termed "expert study" to "humBle in q u i r y " . The former would lead to s e l e c t i v e studies to aid i n the "formulation of p l a u s i B l e , compatiBle and f e a s i B l e values and c r i t e r i a for consideration By the po l i c y makers (Reiner, 1967, p. 235)." Here, the planner sees himself as a pace-setter, and, while he attempts to incorporate the values of h i s c l i e n t s , he i s not strongly committed to seeing that they p r e v a i l (Alterman, 1970, p. 130). The humBle approach presupposes "a f a i t h i n people's capacity to think independently and to propose a l t e r n a t i v e s which are j u s t as legitimate as those proposed By the planner (p. 131). C i t i z e n P a r t i c i p a t i o n means many things to d i f f e r e n t people. C i t i z e n p a r t i c i p a t i o n may Be used as a cooptation device to prevent 14 a n t i c i p a t e d obstruction or as a one way information channel for p u b l i c plan promotion (Arnstein, 1969; Burke, 1968). The more commendable uses of c i t i z e n p a r t i c i p a t i o n include partnership approaches, delegation of power, and c i t i z e n c o n t r o l (Arnstein, 1969). The l a t t e r two s t r a t e g i e s are employed when groups of c i t i z e n s seek to obtain (usually through angry protests) complete or dominant power over those planning matters concerning them. Both of them may be linked with advocacy planning e f f o r t s and they are re l a t e d to the t r a d i t i o n a l planning agencies' f a i l u r e to be i m p a r t i a l i n t h e i r e f f o r t s . The partnership approach to c i t i z e n p a r t i c i p a t i o n should be the one aspired to by planners i n t r a d i t i o n a l r o l e s . I t s objective i s to work with c i t i z e n s throughout a l l phases of the planning process and to incorporate t h e i r views to the f u l l e s t p ossible extent. Advocacy Planning: Davidoff (1965) has suggested that planners should become advocates for s p e c i a l i n t e r e s t groups or c l i e n t s f o r whom they would prepare goal statements and a l t e r n a t i v e plans, thereby f o r c i n g the p u b l i c agencies to compete with other planning groups for p o l i t i c a l support. The f a c t u a l bases f o r the various plans could be examined and debated i n p u b l i c j u s t as l e g a l matters are debated i n a court of law. This strategy i s a very good one to employ whenever the i n t e r e s t s of a c l e a r l y i d e n t i f i a b l e group are being maligned by a t r a d i t i o n a l planning agency. Advocacy e f f o r t s w i l l obviously complement some.of the c i t i z e n p a r t i c i p a t i o n strategies outlined above. However, 15 advocacy should not be considered a panacea. I f i t were applied i n d i s c r i m i n a n t l y , i t would lead to an unnecessary t e c h n i c a l escalation and probably propel the l e v e l of debate even further away from the c a p a b i l i t i e s of the average man instead of towards them. The kind of monopolism manifest i n the law profession may be a necessary e v i l i n the l e g a l system, but i t i s hardly a desirable introduction i n the more s e n s i t i v e processes of goal s e t t i n g and planning. "Advocacy i f necessary, but not n e c e s s a r i l y advocacy" seems to be a reasonable viewpoint. The Collaborative Approach seeks a genuine interchange between planners and a representative cross section of the community throughout the course of the planning process (Godschalk and M i l l s , 1966). I t has also been termed the "informal coordinator c a t a l y s t " strategy (Bolan, 1967). It i s the planning strategy which i s most consistent with the s p i r i t of t h i s t h e s i s . The planner using t h i s strategy seeks to i d e n t i f y the values and a c t i v i t i e s of d i s t i n c t subcommunities (Godschalk and M i l l s , 1966, p. 90). Several researchers have attempted to do t h i s i n recent years by studying people's a c t i v i t i e s i n the urban s e t t i n g (Chapin, 1965; MacMurray, 1971; Anderson, 1971). I t has been f a i r l y convincingly established that i n d i v i d u a l s can be c l a s s i f i e d i n t o l i f e s t y l e groups with s i m i l a r a c t i v i t y patterns and s i m i l a r scores on a number of socio-economic measures (Chapin, 1965). I f more research i s forthcoming on the impact of urban decisions on these l i f e s t y l e groups, a c t i v i t y studies 16 w i l l become us e f u l information bases for formulating community goals. The complementary approach of acquiring a better understanding of community substructure through the study of residents' values i s the focus of t h i s t h e s i s . The c o l l a b o r a t i v e planning strategy has as i t s aim the establishment of a two-way communication flow between planners and members of the p u b l i c through a l l convenient channels. Attitude and opinion surveys would be used to construct community p r o f i l e s ; organized discussion groups would be scheduled on a regular b a s i s ; workshops would be held at successive stages of plan refinement; and e f f o r t s would be made to ensure that representativeness i s achieved by concentrating s p e c i a l a ttention on the usually s i l e n t segments of a community. The c o l l a b o r a t i v e approach i s inconsistent with the e l i t i s t strategy, with the cooptation and p u b l i c promotion stances that are g l i b l y l a b e l l e d c i t i z e n p a r t i c i p a t i o n , and with the "expert study" s t y l e of c l i e n t a n a l y s i s . I t i s independent of, but not inconsistent with, advocacy and i t s associated c i t i z e n p a r t i c i p a t i o n t a c t i c s . It i s f u l l y consistent with the partnership type of c i t i z e n p a r t i c i p a t i o n strategy and with the "humble i n q u i r y " s t y l e of c l i e n t a n a l y s i s . The c o l l a b o r a t i v e strategy could be misused i f a planner were to allow h i s personal values to play too large a r o l e i n h i s analyses. The s t r u c t u r a l openness of the approach would tend to ensure that such d e f i c i e n c i e s are r e c t i f i e d through the p o l i t i c a l process. However, i t i s 17 more l i k e l y that the planner using the co l l a b o r a t i v e approach w i l l have to r e s i s t i n t r u s i o n from p o l i t i c i a n s who f e e l that part of t h e i r own ro l e i s being usurped (Godschalk and M i l l s , 1966). In f a c t , there i s a good case f o r saying that p o l i t i c i a n s should be more responsible i n t h i s area. Perhaps the day w i l l come when p o l i t i c i a n s are forced to bring a l i t t l e more science to bear on t h e i r roles as representatives of people so that they could l e g i t i m a t e l y provide some of the input to the goal formulation process (Goodall, 1970). Focus of the Enquiry This thesis explores the use of values analysis i n the planning process. A discussion i s presented of what that process should be and how various current planning strategies r e l a t e to i t . I t i s argued that the e t h i c a l planner should devote considerable attention to ascertaining the values and goals of h i s community. The r a t i o n a l e of the enquiry i s most consistent with the view that the r a t i o n a l planning model i s a useful i d e a l and that the collabora-t i v e strategy i s the best one for a progressive planner to use. However, i t i s c l e a r that many aspects of t h i s study into the connection between values and planning opinions are also relevant to the other outlooks discussed i n t h i s chapter. 18 CHAPTER II THE STUDY DESIGN Flow of the Study The primary purpose of t h i s study i s to demonstrate that personal values differences i n combination with s'ocio-economic variables discriminate s i g n i f i c a n t l y better between opinion groups defined i n the domain of broad scale planning issues than do socio-economic variables alone. A second purpose i s to discover a usable l i n k between personal values and broad scale planning opinions. Accordingly, i t was decided to obtain measures of variables i n three d i f f e r e n t domains, that of values, that of planning opinions, and that of socio-economic v a r i a b l e s . Respondent's opinions on planning issues were used as c r i t e r i a to create planning opinion groups ("types") which were then used i n a p a i r of discriminant analyses using socio-economic variables alone and socio-economic v a r i a b l e s combined with values variables as discriminators. Since the l a t t e r d i s c r i m i n a t i o n was s i g n i f i c a n t l y better than the former, the main hypothesis was v e r i f i e d . To c l a r i f y the l i n k between values and planning opinions, a stepwise discriminant analysis was used to i d e n t i f y a reduced set of values and socio-economic variables which discriminated optimally between planning opinion groups. By using these optimal variables (which were predominantly values measures) as c r i t e r i a to create a new set of planning values groups, 19 i t was possible to test the effectiveness of the planning opinion scores i n d i s t i n g u i s h i n g between these groups. This test indicated the extent to which the optimal variables were the latent basis of planning opinions. The Questionnaire For the purposes of the study, a questionnaire had to be designed containing these three elements: 1) Statements to be used i n constructing values measures. 2) Statements designed to measure people's opinions about several important planning issues. 3) Questions to produce scores on socio-economic variables (the socio-economic and s i t u a t i o n a l sphere). Such a questionnaire would have to be quite long i n order to measure a l l of these domains adequately. Since a low response rate and i t s attendant bias would be incompatible with the purposes of the study, i t was apparent that a mailed questionnaire would not be acceptable. Since the questionnaire format would also have to be highly structured to permit m u l t i v a r i a t e analysis techniques to be used, there was no advantage to the use of an interview approach. Consequently, a s e l f administering questionnaire was designed which could be delivered to people's homes and c o l l e c t e d l a t e r . The Sample of Respondents One of the objectives of t h i s study i s to a s c e r t a i n the extent 20 of the explanatory power of values and of socio-economic variables with regard to planning opinions. The intent i s to test an approach to goal formulation rather than to make statements about the values or opinions of people i n any s p e c i f i c l o c a l i t y . To be consistent with these objectives, the sampling procedure should maximize the chances of obtaining data with r e a l i s t i c ranges of opinions, values and socio-economic p o s i t i o n s , but the sample need not be s t r i c t l y representative of any r e a l l i f e community. A further constraint on the sample i s the need to ensure that the s i t u a t i o n s of the respondents v i s - a - v i s the planning issues selected f o r examination are maximally r e f l e c t e d by the socio-economic variables measured. This can be i l l u s t r a t e d by an example: Suppose the issue i s pu b l i c transportation, the sample i s confined to the C i t y of Vancouver proper, and the extent of each respondent's use of both automobiles and buses i s measured along with h i s socio-economic s i t u a t i o n , then the s i t u a t i o n s of the respondents with respect to the issue have been adequately s p e c i f i e d . However, i f the sampling i s extended to encompass Greater Vancouver, a measure of l o c a t i o n on an urban-suburban continuum would have to be included to achieve the same l e v e l of s p e c i f i c i t y . Thus, the sample was r e s t r i c t e d to the Ci t y of Vancouver proper since i t i s a large enough area to y i e l d a r e a l i s t i c v a r i a t i o n i n a l l the sampling v a r i a b l e s , but i t i s s t i l l compact enough to allow respondents' s i t u a t i o n s with respect to a number of broad scale planning issues to be adequately r e f l e c t e d by a small set of v a r i a b l e s . R e s t r i c t i n g the sample to 8-10 census t r a c t s within the 21 City of Vancouver and to a number of blocks within each of these t r a c t s was compatible with the objectives of the study and reduced the work of d i s t r i b u t i n g and picking-up the questionnaires. Houses i n the selected blocks were sampled on a systematic basis (adjacent houses on the same side of a str e e t u n t i l a questionnaire was accepted, and then the t h i r d house on the other side of the s t r e e t , etc.) and questionnaires were l e f t with those residents who agreed to complete one. The actual s e l e c t i o n of the census tr a c t s to be included i n the sample was made as follows: 1) The 1961 census data f o r the f i f t y - s i x census t r a c t s i n the Ci t y of Vancouver and the census t r a c t containing the University Endowment Lands were examined. 2) The t r a c t s were ordered from lowest to highest i n terms of average family income. 3) With the ordered t r a c t s along the base l i n e , four s t a t i s t i c s from the census were pl o t t e d . These were the average number of persons per household, the percentage of household heads i n the 25-34 year age bracket, the average number of rooms per dwelling, and the average family income. 4) Nine t r a c t s which were f a i r l y evenly d i s t r i b u t e d along the income scale were selected i n such a way that they encompassed a v a r i e t y of environment types as determined by the values of the four p l o t t e d c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s . The tr a c t s that were chosen are outlined i n the accompanying map (Fig. 3). The blocks and s p e c i f i c houses to be surveyed were selected i n a systematic manner i n the f i e l d . Figure 3 — Census tra c t s surveyed. N 3 23 The Personal Values Component This study i s a f i r s t attempt at demonstrating that values very strongly underly opinions on major planning issues. Since there i s l i t t l e previous work to suggest which values these might be, i t was decided to use a broad sampling from t h i s realm. By sampling too broadly, there i s the r i s k that scale r e l i a b i l i t i e s w i l l be low and that the questionnaire w i l l be too long to be w e l l received by prospective respondents. However, choosing the wrong value dimensions to sample i n a narrower but more thorough fashion was a more disturbing prospect, and at l e a s t with the broader approach, the study would be useful to point the way f o r further e f f o r t s . At t h i s point, a s l i g h t digression i s i n order to explain the operational d i s t i n c t i o n that has been drawn between values and planning opinions. A person's opinions are l a r g e l y determined by h i s basic values, and, while the former could e a s i l y change as more facts are brought to bear on an issue, the l a t t e r are generally considered to be more stable. Values were defined i n Chapter I as basic p r e d i l e c t i o n s which people use as judgement standards when choosing from a l t e r n a t i v e s . However, values are d i f f i c u l t to measure d i r e c t l y and must generally be i n f e r r e d from a study of the a l t e r n a t i v e s people s e l e c t , or equivalently from the attitudes or opinions they express. Opinions w i l l be accurate i n d i c a t o r s of a person's values only i f they are concerned with c l e a r l y understood and fundamental issues. In f a c t , opinions or attitudes on such fundamental human issues are used by 24 psychologists as measures of values. Therefore, i n an operational sense, an opinion i s a value when i t i s concerned with a fundamental issue. In t h i s context, the aim of the study i s to show that opinions on broad scale planning issues are linked with opinions on the funda-mental issues that are t r a d i t i o n a l l y used as values measures. The t r a d i t i o n a l d i s t i n c t i o n between values and opinions i s maintained p r i m a r i l y to f a c i l i t a t e the discussion throughout t h i s t h e s i s . A review of the l i t e r a t u r e was made to try to i d e n t i f y the nature of the personal values that would l i k e l y be r e l a t e d to the formation of opinions on planning issues and to ascertain whether or not any of the published value, a t t i t u d e or psychological scales could e f f e c t i v e l y be employed i n t h i s study. There are several good published inventories of these scales (Robinson, Rusk and Head, 1968; Bonjean, H i l l and McLemore, 1967; M i l l e r , 1970; Shaw and Wright, 1967; Buros, 1972; Robinson and Shaver, 1969). None of the scales seemed adequate fo r the purposes of t h i s t h e s i s . Some tapped relevant s i n g l e value dimensions, but were too long to use i n a study which sought to explore the realm of values more broadly. Using such sc a l e s , the questionnaire could only have included about four value dimensions with no guarantee of t h e i r being the best ones. Other shorter scales of equal relevance were reported to have low r e l i a b i l i t i e s and would l i k e l y be unsuccessful measures of uncertain t r a i t s . Many contained statements about si t u a t i o n s which are not pertinent i n t h i s era or i n t h i s country. Others appeared to be instruments designed f o r captive audiences and would be d i f f i c u l t to use on the general p u b l i c . This l a t t e r point i s p a r t i c u l a r l y true for those having a highly "psychological flavour". 25 While none of the published scales could be used i n t h e i r e n t i r e t y , they and the l i t e r a t u r e on values were h e l p f u l i n i d e n t i f y i n g worthwhile dimensions and items to include i n the study. One hundred and twenty-two value statements embracing eleven valuation areas were used. A l i s t of these statements categorized by valuation area i s included i n Appendix A. The source of each statement and the scale from which i t i s drawn are included i n t h i s l i s t i n g . Many of the statements i n the questionnaire are worded s l i g h t l y d i f f e r e n t l y than they were i n t h e i r o r i g i n a l form because of the need to adapt them to the response format, structure, and mood of our instrument, and because of the need to achieve a balance between p o s i t i v e l y and negatively worded statements. Two points concerning the design of the values segment of the questionnaire need to be emphasized. F i r s t l y , by using s i n g l e items rather than e n t i r e scales from published sources, a s i g n i f i c a n t aid i n the i n t e r -p retation of the content of the values data was s a c r i f i c e d . A c a r e f u l record of the source value dimensions f o r the statements was kept with the hope that they would a i d i n the i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of the factors which resulted from l a t e r a n a l y s i s . However, i f a f a c t o r analysis of the values data did not y i e l d factors whose high-loading statements were derived from the same scales or valuation areas, then the i n t e r p r e t a t i o n would be f a i r l y s ubjective. But, since the main objective of the study was to e s t a b l i s h the strength of the r e l a t i o n s h i p between values and opinions on planning issues without undue concern for the exact i d e n t i f i c a t i o n of s i g n i f i c a n t value dimensions, t h i s was a r i s k which could be taken i n the i n t e r e s t s of keeping the values pool f a i r l y broad. 26 The second point to consider i s that, although the broad l e v e l of the i n v e s t i g a t i o n i s emphasized, there are nevertheless a universe of value dimensions which have not been included i n the study. Some of the more s i g n i f i c a n t ones deserve some comment. The dogmatism and opinionation scales of Rokeach (1960) could have been used to investigate the connection between planning opinions and his concept of closed and open b e l i e f systems. Although Rokeach's theory was appealing enough and would undoubtedly have y i e l d e d i n t e r e s t i n g r e s u l t s , h i s two scales included too many items to be used i n this study. Nevertheless, several i n d i v i d u a l items from h i s dogmatism scale were used. Riesman"s (1950) t h e o r e t i c a l continuum of inner-other directedness was not pursued as such, but s i m i l a r value dimensions were subsumed i n the questionnaire within the valuation areas of i n t r o s p e c t i v e -ness and individualism. I t was not expected that inner-other directedness would be strongly r e l a t e d to planning opinions, and consequently only a few items from the inner-other directedness scales of Kassarjian (1962) and Peterson (1964) were used. The Study of Values personality inventory developed by A l l p o r t , Vernon and Lindzey (I960) seemed too s i m p l i s t i c to y i e l d u s e f u l r e s u l t s i n t h i s a p p l i c a t i o n . I f a more comprehensive measure of the s i x modes of valuation ( t h e o r e t i c a l , economic, p o l i t i c a l , a e sthetic, s o c i a l , and r e l i g i o u s ) o r i g i n a l l y proposed by Eduard Spranger (1928) were a v a i l a b l e , t h e i r use could merit more serious consideration. 27 F i n a l l y , a number of published m u l t i t r a i t psychological personality tests and inventories were considered. Among these are included the Edwards Personal Preference Schedule (Edwards, 1959), the C a l i f o r n i a Psychological Inventory (Gough, 1957), the Guilford-Zimmerman  Temperament Survey (Guilford and Zimmerman, 1949), the Sixteen Personality  Factor Questionnaire ( C a t t e l l , 1956), and the Eysenck Personality Inventory (Eysenck and Eysenck, 1969). The scales of some of these instruments are f a r too c l i n i c a l f o r our purposes. Others are designed f o r general populations, but they tend to s t r e s s those aspects of p e r s o n a l i t y that bear on interpersonal r e l a t i o n s h i p s rather than on person to society r e l a t i o n s h i p s (which are more the focus of t h i s study). Only a few items from the carefreeness, s e n s i t i v i t y and s o c i a b i l i t y scales of the Eysenck  Personality Inventory were included i n the questionnaire. The Planning Issues Component The objective of t h i s study was to explore the r e l a t i o n s h i p of a planning opinion grouping wi t h i n a population to the values and socio-economic posit i o n s of the members of that population. Accordingly, i t was necessary to s e l e c t a number of planning issues on which people's opinions could be measured so that these measures could serve as the c r i t e r i a f o r creating planning opinion groups. Furthermore, the planning issues chosen must be broad scale ones which w i l l be f a m i l i a r to the respondents and which they w i l l recognize as s i g n i f i c a n t within t h e i r own community. Such issues should be r e a l problems with which respondents have had some experience and which they have no d i f f i c u l t y conceptualizing. 28 The issues that f i r s t come to mind are transportation, growth, s o c i a l i n t e g r a t i o n of neighborhoods, housing types mix, land c o n t r o l , and p o l l u t i o n regulation. These were to be considered, but to expand the preliminary l i s t , the work of the Greater Vancouver Regional D i s t r i c t ' s Livable Region Program s t a f f was examined. This program sought c i t i z e n input to help define the issues of concern i n the region. They published A Report on L i v a b i l i t y (Greater Vancouver Regional D i s t r i c t , 1972) which summarized the issues of concern to the many c i t i z e n s who p a r t i c i p a t e d i n t h e i r p u b l i c meetings. The main issues i d e n t i f i e d were growth, public p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n government, transportation, land cost and taxes, housing supply, services to improve community l i f e , n a tural recreation amenities, and p o l l u t i o n c o n t r o l . In the f i r s t draft of the study questionnaire, twelve such planning issues were included. The issues were transportation (public t r a n s i t and freeways), housing mix, a strong versus weak downtown, the work^-home r e l a t i o n s h i p , the l o c a l government process, growth, house s i z e , h i s t o r i c b u i l d i n g preservation, land c o n t r o l , parks, community spaces, and neighborhood control, of l o c a l p r o j e c t s . Two, three or four statements were drafted to measure a respondent's opinion on each of these issues. However, a f t e r f u r t h e r review, i t was decided that some of these issues were somewhat too p e r i p h e r a l and that a larger number of statements would be required to measure opinion on an issue. The need f o r more statements on each issue was a r e s u l t of the i m p r a c t i c a b i l i t y of designing unidimension-a l l y scaled statements and of a decision to employ the same seven point 29 (strongly agree to strongly disagree) response format f o r both the planning issue and value statements i n the questionnaire. The i n t e n t i o n was to construct planning issue opinion scores by f a c t o r analyzing the planning issue statements. Consequently, the issues of growth, transportation, housing mix, and l o c a l government structure were selected f o r major emphasis. Six to eight statements, intended to embrace the range of s i g n i f i c a n t viewpoints, were prepared on each of these issues. An a d d i t i o n a l ten opinion statements on four other issues ( h i s t o r i c b u i l d i n g preservation, land c o n t r o l , community space, and parks) were also included i n the questionnaire. These l a s t four issues were thought to be f a i r l y important ones which, however, did not have as many facets as the four major issues. I t was intended that they be included i n the factor analysis to see i f they would emerge as d i s t i n c t f a c t o r s . The f o r t y statements included as the planning opinion component of the questionnaire are grouped under t h e i r respective issue headings i n Appendix A. Values statements and planning issue statements were i n t e r -mixed i n the questionnaire booklet that was used. Together, they comprise the one hundred and sixty-two statements i n the Survey Statements portion of the booklet. A copy of the booklet i s contained i n Appendix B. 30 The Socio-Economic Variables Component The purpose of t h i s study i s to demonstrate that people's opinions on broad scale planning issues are more d i r e c t l y r e l a t e d to t h e i r personal values than they are to t h e i r socio-economic posi t i o n s or manifest s i t u a t i o n s within a community. In order to do t h i s with some c r e d i b i l i t y , a reasonable set of socio-economic variables ought to be employed. At a minimum, a l l those variables which are t r a d i t i o n a l l y a v a i l a b l e at some l e v e l of aggregation through census data and those that are ro u t i n e l y a part of almost any s o c i a l survey should be included. These would be age, sex, m a r i t a l status, income, occupation, education, e t h n i c i t y , type of housing, type of tenancy, number of c h i l d r e n , ages of c h i l d r e n , number of adults i n the household, and perhaps a few others. A l l of them are included i n the Study of Values and Urban Opinions questionnaire. In addition to these " t r a d i t i o n a l " questions, i t was decided to ask respondents what use they made of c i t y buses and i f they had access to an automobile. These variables were intended to co n t r o l for " s i t u a t i o n a l d i f f e r e n c e s " with respect to the transportation issue. " S i t u a t i o n a l d i f f e r e n c e s " with respect to the other planning issues i n the survey are adequately s p e c i f i e d by the variables already proposed. The questions designed to obtain the socio-economic measures are found on the page e n t i t l e d Background Information i n the questionnaire booklet (Appendix B). Numerous other s o c i a l v a r i a b l e s (such as distance to work, s i z e of home town, s i z e of dwelling u n i t , etc.) were considered for i n c l u s i o n i n t h i s component of the study. They were omitted for two reasons. 31 F i r s t l y , since these p o t e n t i a l additions would be strongly co r r e l a t e d with the chosen set of socio-economic v a r i a b l e s , they would not l i k e l y add s i g n i f i c a n t l y to t h e i r explanatory power. Secondly, unless some dimensionality exists or can be imputed with respect to such s o c i o l o g i c a l v a r i a b l e s , they are poorly suited to the multivariate analysis techniques used i n t h i s study, and therefore are not good competitors against the values v a r i a b l e s . Dichotomous v a r i a b l e s , such as sex, can be used, but they are l i k e l y to be good discriminators only when a reasonable frequency balance e x i s t s i n the sample. Thus, a l l of the information c o l l e c t e d concerning occupation or e t h n i c i t y cannot be used. This leads to a discussion of how to overcome some of these l i m i t a t i o n s on the socio-economic variables included i n the study. Some of them, such as age (years), income ($l,000's), education (years), number of adults, and number of ch i l d r e n , are n i c e l y continuous and present no problem. Sex i s dichotomous, but since i t i s balanced, i t can be coded 0-1 on a convincing si n g l e dimension. Occupation was coded i n t o a unidimensional seven class scale of status using the Canadian Occupational Class Scale constructed by Blishen (1958). The seven occupational groupings of the scale are based on combined standard scores f o r income and years of schooling by sex from 1951 census data f o r each of the approximately three hundred occupations l i s t e d . I t should be noted that the questionnaire seeks information on I the occupation and education of both the respondent and h i s or her spouse i Cif a p p l i c a b l e ) . This i s done so that the occupation (or, very infrequently, 32 the education) score for a spouse can be substituted for the respondent's when he or she f a i l s to supply t h i s information, or i n the event of an u n c l a s s i f i a b l e occupation such as housewife. Type of tenancy (own or rent) i s coded dichotomously as 0 or 1. There does not seem to be a way of avoiding the i n e v i t a b l e uneven frequency s p l i t of t h i s v a r i a b l e . Information on m a r i t a l status was s o l i c i t e d along the standard c l a s s i f i c a t i o n l i n e s (with the addition of a "cohabiting" category). However, from the outset i t was decided that responses should be collapsed i n t o a unidimensional v a r i a b l e (has mate equals 1, has no mate equals 0). ! Responses to the question on c u l t u r a l group i d e n t i f i c a t i o n were coded i n t o two separate variables — race and e t h n i c i t y . A f t e r a search of the l i t e r a t u r e (Greely, 1971; Katzman, 1969; Warner and Srole, 1945; B e l l , 1955), a v a r i a t i o n of the r a c i a l and ethnic c l a s s i f i c a t i o n system outlined by Warner and Srole (pp. 290-292) i n The S o c i a l Systems of  American Ethnic Groups was used for t h i s purpose. In t h i s c l a s s i f i c a t i o n system, r a c i o - c u l t u r a l groups are ranked according to t h e i r degree of differ e n c e from the dominant anglo-saxon protestant group. Degree of differ e n c e i s a composite measure which subsumes degree of subordination, strength of ethnic and r a c i a l subsystems, and time f o r a s s i m i l a t i o n . Because i t was anticipated that 70-90 percent of the respondents i n the sample would i d e n t i f y themselves with the dominant anglo-saxon group, t h i s response was coded 0, while a l l other ethnic i d e n t i f i c a t i o n s were coded 1. S i m i l a r l y , non-Caucasian was coded 1 on the v a r i a b l e race, whereas Caucasian 33 was coded 0. I t was expected that t h i s method would take the greatest f e a s i b l e advantage of the discriminatory power of t h i s information. (It was also anticipated that the v a r i a b l e race might not prove to be s i g n i f i c a n t because of extreme skewness.) Housing type and housing tenancy are both coded 0-1. In the case of the former v a r i a b l e , 1 represents a s i n g l e family home and 0 represents other types of housing. In the case of housing tenancy, 1 represents ownership and 0 represents r e n t a l . It was expected that these va r i a b l e s would be very unevenly s p l i t . Two v a r i a b l e s were to be assembled from the Background Infor- mation portion of the questionnaire to measure stage i n the family l i f e c y c l e . The l i t e r a t u r e on family l i f e cycle was examined ( B e l l , 1955; Lansing and Kish, 1957; Duvall, 1967; Benson et a l . , 1969) and a family r e s p o n s i b i l i t y scale was contrived f o r the eight stages i n the family l i f e cycle i d e n t i f i e d by Duvall i n her book Family Development. Her table showing percentages of working wives by stage i n the family l i f e cycle (p. 484) was used as a surrogate to key family r e s p o n s i b i l i t y to stage i n the c y c l e . The table from Duvall's book and the c a l c u l a t i o n s that were used are shown i n Appendix C. The r e s u l t i n g coding key i s presented i n Table 1. A second v a r i a b l e , family cost, was to be used as a measure of the f i n a n c i a l commitment associated with the various family formations. Duvall's chart showing the annual cost of supporting various s i z e f a m i l i e s (p. 374) was used to derive t h i s s c a l e . The r a t i o of the support cost of 34 the d i f f e r e n t f a m i l i e s to that of a c h i l d l e s s couple (between the eighth and twentieth years of marriage) was used as the score f o r the family cost v a r i a b l e . The coding key i s shown i n Table 1, while Duvall's chart and the c a l c u l a t i o n s used to derive the scores are presented i n Appendix C. TABLE 1 CODING OF SOCIO-ECONOMIC VARIABLES Variable Coding Age Sex Income Occupational Status Education Number of Adults Number of Children M a r i t a l Status E t h n i c i t y Race Automobile Use Bus Use Housing Tenancy Housing Type Family Cost Family R e s p o n s i b i l i t y years male (1), female (0) thousands of d o l l a r s low (1) to high (7) on "Blishen Scale" (1958) years number number has mate (1), has no mate (0) anglo-saxon (0), others (1) Caucasian (0), non-Caucasian (1) car f o r own use (2), car i n household (1), no car (0) 8 or more times per week (2), 3-7 times per week (1), 0-2 times per week (0) own (1), rent (0) sin g l e family home (1), others (1) si n g l e (2), married couple (3), one c h i l d family (7), two chi l d r e n family (10), three c h i l d r e n family (13), each added c h i l d (+2) sin g l e (0.5), married couple (1.0), oldest c h i l d l e s s than 2^ years (4.0), " 6.. " (3.4), " 13 " (2.7), " 20 " (1.7), some chi l d r e n leaving home (1.6), empty nest to retirement (1.3), retirement to death (1.0) 35 The v a r i a b l e "automobile use" was coded '2' i f a respondent bad an automobile f o r his personal use, '1' i f an automobile was operated by someone i n the household, and '0' i f no one i n the household owned an automobile. "Bus use" was coded i n a s i m i l a r manner, except that '0', ' l 1 and '2' represented use pf buses 0-2 times per week, 3-7 times per week and eight or more times per week re s p e c t i v e l y . Sample Size The questionnaire booklet designed for t h i s study contained approximately 180 items, and i t took 30-40 minutes to complete. The 122 value statements comprised the largest set which was analyzed i n a s i n g l e f a c t o r a n a l y s i s . Consequently, a minimum of 122 respondents were required so that an analysis could be j u s t i f i e d (Rummel, 1970, pp. 219-220). I f the purpose of t h i s study were to make generalizations about the meaning or s t a b i l i t y of values f a c t o r s , a sample of 500-1000 respondents would be needed. However, the objective i n t h i s case was to determine i f some values variables were useful f or d i s t i n g u i s h i n g between planning opinion groups, and, accordingly, i t was reasonable to consider a sample s i z e c l o s e r to the minimum g u i d e l i n e s 0 In f a c t , since i t was expected that 8-10 groups would be created f o r purposes of a n a l y s i s , a minimum of 200 respondents was established as a target i n order to ensure that there would be a reasonable number of cases i n each group. 36 The Analysis Design The questionnaire designed f o r t h i s study provided three sets of v a r i a b l e s . There were 122 variables c o n s i s t i n g of agreement-disagreement scores (1-7) on values statements, f o r t y variables consisting of agreement-disagreement scores on planning issue statements, and sixteen socio-economic variables coded from the answers to the background information questions. The analysis design employed i n the i n v e s t i g a t i o n of r e l a t i o n s h i p s between these variables i s outlined i n Figure 4. Three mu l t i v a r i a t e techniques were employed i n the o v e r a l l a n a l y s i s . They were factor a n a l y s i s , c l u s t e r analysis and discriminant a n a l y s i s . Explanations of t h e i r operations and purposes can be found i n a number of texts (Rummel, 1970; Geer, 1970; Cooley and Lohnes, 1971; Press, 1972). The f i r s t task with each of the three v a r i a b l e sets was to carry out a f a c t o r analysis to synthesize r e l i a b l e i n t e r p r e t a b l e factors from the o r i g i n a l data. This was an e s s e n t i a l operation for the planning issue and value statements. I t was an optional step for the socio-economic va r i a b l e s since they are more inte r p r e t a b l e and r e l i a b l e i n t h e i r o r i g i n a l form. However, f a c t o r i n g was used to reduce the number of v a r i a b l e s i n t h i s set so that the running times of the discriminant analysis programs would be shortened. I n t e r p r e t a b i l i t y of factors and r e l i a b i l i t y of synthesized f a c t o r scores are the important c r i t e r i a i n deciding whichifactor s o l u t i o n of each set to carry into l a t e r stages of a n a l y s i s . 37 Planning Issue Statements Factor Analysis Planning Opinion Factors Cluster Analysis Planning Opinion Groups i Socio-Economic Variables Factor Analysis F i n a l Socio-Economic Variables I Value Statements Factor Analysis Values Factors Pooled Variables Discriminant Analyses Hypothesis Test £ Stepwise Discriminant Analysis Optimum Variable Set Cluster Analysis Planning Values Groups Discriminant Analysis Strength of Link Between Values and Planning Opinions Figure 4 — Analysis Procedure. 38 Once a fa c t o r s o l u t i o n f o r the planning, issue statement was selected, planning opinion f a c t o r scores were computed and used i n a h i e r a r c h i c a l c l u s t e r analysis program to create planning opinion groups. However, t h i s program returns a serie s of groupings con s i s t i n g of successively fewer and l a r g e r groups instead of a unique best s o l u t i o n . It i s the analyst's task to pick a best grouping with few enough groups to s u i t h i s purposes and with as low a cumulative error association as possib l e . As a further aid i n th i s s e l e c t i o n , the d i s t i n c t i v e n e s s of group means (for several p l a u s i b l e groupings) on the set of planning opinion scores was considered. At t h i s point, the discriminant analysis program coded by Cooley and Lohnes (1971) was used i n two ways: 1) to determine how w e l l socio-economic variables discriminate between the planning opinion groups, and, 2) to see how w e l l socio-economic and values variables combined discriminate between them. Since the l a t t e r d i s c r i m i n a t i o n was s i g n i f i c a n t l y b e t t e r than the former, the mnain hypothesis was v e r i f i e d . A stepwise discriminant analysis program (BMD:07M which i s implemented i n the p u b l i c f i l e at the University of B r i t i s h Columbia computing centre) was used to i d e n t i f y a reduced set of socio-economic and .values', v a r i a b l e s which was optimally e f f i c i e n t i n di s c r i m i n a t i n g between planning opinion groups. This reduced set of variables was then used to create (by c l u s t e r analysis) new "planning values groups". These new groups were i n turn used i n a discriminant analysis with planning opinion scores as discriminators. This l a s t t e s t indicated how e f f e c t i v e 39 the reduced set of variables was at c l a s s i f y i n g people into v a l i d groups f o r planning and community analysis purposes. 40 CHAPTER III ANALYSIS AND RESULTS Return Rates and Missing Data A t o t a l of 207 questionnaires were returned complete enough to be included i n the an a l y s i s . Table 2 gives a d e s c r i p t i o n by census t r a c t of the responses to the survey. TABLE 2 QUESTIONNAIRE RETURNS BY CENSUS TRACT Census Tract Income Rank No. I n i t i a l Refusals Usable Returns No. Later Refusals No. Spoiled Returns Number Not Returned C a l l s No. % No. % 7 1 58 20 34 20 34 5 5 8 23 2 43 8 19 20 47 7 0 8 3 3 61 20 33 23 38 7 0 11 28 4 57 21 37 24 42 5 1 6 45. 5 56 , 21 37 21 37 7 2 5 49 6 43 6 14 24 56 5 1 7 54 7 44 10 23 26 59 3 2 3 38 8 41 6 15 26 63 3 2 4 53 9 41 5 12 23 56 1 3 9 To t a l 444 117 26 207 47 43 16 61 There seemed to be a s l i g h t tendency f o r the percentage return and the percentage i n i t i a l acceptance to be greater i n the higher income census t r a c t s (they are ranked from low to high i n the t a b l e ) . However, 41 i f the figures had been adjusted to exclude those refusals and non-returns which were a t t r i b u t a b l e to language d i f f i c u l t i e s , the lowest response rate would probably have prevai l e d i n the middle income t r a c t s . (No a c t u a l figures are a v a i l a b l e to check t h i s impression.) As noted i n Table 2, sixteen of the returned questionnaires were unusable because a major proportion of the data was missing. A l l booklets i n which answers to a s u b s t a n t i a l portion of the socio-economic questions or more than ten percent of the statement items were missing were c l a s s i f i e d as unusable. In a majority of questionnaires, there were a few statements that had been omitted. In approximately f i v e percent of them, quite a few (6-16) statements had been omitted. Responses f o r these neglected statements were estimated while coding the data. Generally, the mid-range of the scale was used, but frequently, fo r what appeared to be strongly polar items, responses were assigned i n mild accordance with the general impression conveyed by the respondent's other answers. Fortunately, only fourteen of the acceptable questionnaires had missing socio-economic data. Twelve respondents had l e f t out family income, one had omitted family income and occupation, and one had omitted occupation and education. A l l of t h i s information was estimated i n the manner described i n Appendix D and coded into the data f i l e . Consequently, no missing data procedures were required i n the subsequent an a l y s i s . 42 Socio-Economic Description of the Sample D i s t r i b u t i o n s t a t i s t i c s f o r the socio-economic variables i n the data are presented by census t r a c t (and for the t o t a l sample) i n Table 3. Histograms showing the d i s t r i b u t i o n s of a l l but the s i x dichotomously coded variables are p l o t t e d i n Appendix E. Note from Table 3 that f o r t y s i x percent of respondents i n the t o t a l sample were male. Census Tracts 54 and 53 y i e l d e d the highest and lowest percentages of male respondents at 61 percent and 26 percent resp-e c t i v e l y . The average age of respondents was 43 years. Age varied from a low of 30 years f o r Census Tract 7, to a high of 55 years for Census Tract 38. The average income of the t o t a l sample was $12,100. This f a i r l y high average i s a t t r i b u t a b l e to the f a c t that an overwhelming majority of respondents i n Census Tracts 38 and 53 had incomes above $20,000. The average occupational status on the 'Blishen Scale' was 4.0. The average number of years of education was 12.7. The average numbers of adults and of c h i l d r e n were 2.38 and 2.03 r e s p e c t i v e l y . The low number of children was mostly accounted f o r by the small contribution from Census Tract 3 ( i n the West End). The average score on family r e s p o n s i b i l i t y was 1.6 which i s equivalent to that of a family with teenage chi l d r e n . S i m i l a r l y , the average family cost of 7.1 was equivalent to that incurred by a family with one c h i l d . Seventy-five percent of the residents i n the t o t a l sample had a mate. The lowest averages on t h i s measure occurred i n Census Tracts 7 and 3 TABLE 3 SOCIO-ECONOMIC VARIABLES BY CENSUS TRACT Census co CO rH cn cu cn 3 u 3 to ca rH T J C -H u :=> o> c_> ' CO 4J rH cn 3 4J 3 rH T3 c •H u CO <5 a) rH u cO c •H cn 4-J O m TJ *R o CO •H o o rH •rl u 4-1 •H •H CO rH CO CO * J >J .c i>> p! >> CO ft 3 CO CO ft rH 4-1 3 4J O .JO •rH •rl o ca 3 • S co e U 13 j§ o CO CU CO CO o co W 3 P4 2 ft Tract o -  O O <-t -rt  u -H 4 J - H -   ' H , Q CO 00 >> 60 M c u c o c o 4 J r J x : i > > e : > > c o o o to c o c CO c r x 3 c O C O U r H O r H 4 - ! - H 0 !=> -H C -rH J O 5  -U  , Q • r l f t - H - r l d C l J O co co cn a cu w a ca 3 6 • c o g u jz o +J cn 3 e 3 3 00 CJ Cl o 4J —3 ' . 9 O c O d J c O CO 4J. eg 3 3 ° ^ J? „ <J CO H O CO  2 ; 3 f q p t i f n S W p i < P3 ffi H S3 7 20 30.0 23 20 34.0 3 23 37.9 28 24 37.5 45 21 43.6 49 24 42.9 54 26 51.5 38 26 55.4 53 23 49.2 0.55 8.0 2.40 0.40 8.2 1.95 0.44 7.4 3.96 0.54 10.0 2.96 0.33 9.7 3.00 0.46 10.3 3.92 0.62 13.5 4.89 0.50 19.2 5.85 0.26 20.5 6.17 10.6 2.85 1.45 10.6 1.85 2.05 12.7 1.87 0.48 11.0 2.29 2.54 12.0 2.67 2.00 11.9 2.29 2.13. 13.7 2,42 1.92 16.3 2.73 2.69 14.9 2.39 2.87 1.41 6.6 0.55 2.00 8.0 0.70 1.00 3.4 0.52 2.10 .8.9 0.79 1.19 6.7 0.76 1.65 6.4 0.71 1.70 5.9 0.77 1.57 7.8 0.92 1.90 10.4 0.96 0.70 0.40 1.30 0.15 0.05 1.30 0.39 0.04 0.83 0.33 0.04 1.50 0.33 0.05 1.57 0.17 0.0 1.29 0.15 0.0 1.73 0.15 0.04 1.89 0.04 0.0 1.96 0.30 0.40 0.75 0.60 0.45 0.80 0.91 0.0 0.0 0.29 0.67 1.0 0.43 0.71 0.90 0.38 0.67 0.71 0.27 0.89 1.0 0.0 0.96 1.0 0.04 1.00 1.0 T o t a l 207 43.0 0.46 12.1 4.00 12.7 2.38 2.03 1.62 ' 7.1 0.75 0.26 0.06 1.50 0.35 0.65 0.80 Minimum 16.0 Maximum 80.0 Std. Dev. 16.9 Skewness 0.2 0.0 3.0 l i O 1.0 23.0 7.0 0.50 6.7 1.92 0.2 0.5 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 20.0 6.0 9.0 3.1 0.92 1.87 0.3 .1.4 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 4.0 21.0 1.0 1.21 5.2 0.43 0.40 0.7 -1.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 2.0 0.44 0.24 0.74 1.1 3.6 -1.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 1.0 1.0 0.63 0.48 0.40 1.6 -0.6 -1.52 LO 44 with 55 percent and 52 percent mated r e s p e c t i v e l y . Twenty-six percent of respondents ind i c a t e d an ethnic i d e n t i f i c a t i o n other than anglo-saxon, and only a f i f t h of these were non—Caucasians. These few non-Caucasians can be mostly accounted for by the large Chinese response i n Census Tract 7. The average score on automobile use was 1.5 which suggests a mid-way point between part use and f u l l use of an automobile. The bus use score averaged 0.35 o v e r a l l and showed a s i g n i f i c a n t v a r i a t i o n ranging from 0 (no use) to 0.91 (3-7 uses per week) f o r the nine census t r a c t s . The bus use score (0.91) only dominated the automobile use score (0.83) i n Census Tract 3. S i x t y - f i v e percent of respondents owned t h e i r own housing and 80 percent l i v e d i n s i n g l e family homes. S i g n i f i c a n t departures from the o v e r a l l mean on ownership occurred i n the two lowest income t r a c t s and i n the West End t r a c t . The l a t t e r t r a c t provided the only major departure from the predominance of the s i n g l e family housing type. Factor Analysis to Create Planning Opinion Variables Agreement-disagreement scores on the f o r t y planning opinion statements ( r e f e r to the l i s t i n Appendix A) were subjected to a p r i n c i p a l components f a c t o r a n a l y s i s . Twelve p r i n c i p a l factors with Eigenvalues greater than 1.0 appeared i n the s o l u t i o n . The f i r s t seven of these which accounted for 49 percent of the t o t a l variance were ortho-gonally rotated to a simple structure s o l u t i o n (varimax approximation). 45 The r e s u l t i n g factor loading matrix appears i n Table 4. Note that the v a r i a b l e s are reordered i n t o t h e i r simple structure groups (according to t h e i r highest c o r r e l a t i o n with a f a c t o r ) . Only loadings of 0.25 or greater are shown to improve r e a d a b i l i t y . Factors are l a b e l l e d A, B, C, etc., p r i o r to i n t e r p r e t a t i o n . Communalities (row sums of squared f a c t o r loadings) are noted i n the l a s t column of the table. They in d i c a t e the proportion of the variance of each v a r i a b l e which i s accounted f o r by the f a c t o r s o l u t i o n . The column sums of squared fa c t o r loadings are also given. They i n d i c a t e the amount of explained variance which, each f a c t o r contributes to the t o t a l . The percentage of t o t a l explained variance contributed by each f a c t o r i s recorded i n the l a s t row of the table. A negative loading indicates r e l a t i v e support f o r a statement since the response format associates the low end of the 1-7 scale with agreement. Relative support does not imply a degree of absolute agree-ment with a statement since the f a c t o r analysis program standardizes a l l v a r i a b l e s . Consequently, i f the mean response to a statement i s a high (disagreement) number such as 5, any score below that l e v e l i s taken as r e l a t i v e support. The s i t u a t i o n i s reversed i n the case of r e l a t i v e disagreement. Examination of the.mean and standard deviation (recorded i n Appendix A) of a statement w i l l help r e l a t e t h i s f a c t o r i n t e r p r e t a t i o n to the actual responses on the survey booklets. Ultimately, the usefulness of any factor s o l u t i o n must be based on the i n t e r p r e t a b i l i t y of the factors and on the estimated r e l i a b i l i t y 46 TABLE 4 PLANNING OPINION FACTOR MATRIX Factors Commu-Planning Issue Statement A B c D E F G .104-Stop growth despite economy -0.79 0.65 70-Stop growth for l i v a h i l i t y -0.73 0.60 79-Shift road funds to t r a n s i t . -0.43 0.27 0.40 22-Kake p u b l i c t r a n s i t free -0.41 0.25 124-Gronth won't add i n t e r e s t -0.37 -0.37 0.33 112-Growth f o r higher standards 0.65 0.27 0.55 12-Allow economy to grow 0.67 0.28 0.62 87-Growth freedom inseparable 0.73 0.55 129-We have enough parks now 0.72 0.32 0.65 156-Replace h i s t o r i c buildings 0.26 0.61 0.46 45-Develop mixed cost housing -0.41 -0.30 -0.27 0.38 138-Stop h i s t o r i c b u i l d i n g loss -0.30 -0.50 0.27 0.51 38-Assist .community projects -0.61 0.45 97-Neighborhood parks needed -0.67 0.51 73-Buy a l l possible parkland -0.71 0.56 I l l - R i s i n g land cost i s f a i r 0.29 0.54 0.49 76-One class neighborhood i s best 0.27 0.47 0.29 0.45 148-Disperse high r i s e s -0.40 -0.40 -0.29 0.47 139-Hany house types a l l areas -0,49 -0.27 -0.36 0.49 90-People input not experts -0.32 -0.49 -0.30 0.48 84-Need land p r i c e c o n t r o l -0.31 -0.62 0.25 0.60 16-Need rent housing a l l areas -0.62 0.45 67-Freeways needed ri g h t away 0.69 0.58 75-Don't spend on t r a n s i t 0.28 0.66 0.55 1-Frecways needed regardless 0.26 0.60 0.37 0.66 105-Need neighborhood government -0.27 0.37 -0.33 -0.26 0.47 52-Frce downtown of autos -0.26 -0.35 -0.38 0.29 0.53 126-Keep high r i s e s confined 0.80 0.68 137-Restrict townhouses 0.68 0.58 110-One housing type i s best 0.37 0.39 -0.27 0.42 146-Third Crossing t r a n s i t only -0.29 0.33 -0.30 -0.27 0.43 9-0nly t r a n s i t users to pay 0.26 0.30 0.23 131-This government i s responsive 0.65 0.49 145-At large e l e c t i o n s best 0.31 0.50 0.37 66-Profcssional decisions best 0.32 0.40 -0.36 0.45 55-Appoint neighborhood representatives -0.50 0.43 62-Adopt the ward system -0.66 0.57 141-Use land for s i n g l e homes 0.34 0.27 0.27 0.42 0.47 120-Cluster houses to get space -0.56 0.37 98~Clustering of houses needed -0.62 0.41 Sum Square Factor Loadings 3.81 3.53 2.68 2.66 2.49 2.20 2.20 19.59 Percentage of T o t a l Variance 19.6 18.0 13.7 13.6 12.7 11.2 11.2 47 of f a c t o r scores. The seven f a c t o r s o l u t i o n i s now discussed with respect to these considerations. The strongest factor (A) i s a Control Growth fa c t o r . Its f i v e highest loading items (see Table 5) are a l l statements about the advantages or disadvantages of growth i n the Vancouver context. Support for p u b l i c financing of t r a n s i t f a c i l i t i e s i s moderately associated with i t . TABLE 5 FACTOR A (CONTROL GROWTH) ITEM LOADINGS Item Loading 104-Stop growth despite the economy -0.79 70-Stop growth to maintain l i v a b i l i t y -0.73 87-Growth and freedom are inseparable 0.73 12-Allow the economy to grow 0.67 112-Growth needed for higher standards 0.65 79-Shift road funds to p u b l i c t r a n s i t -0.43 22-Public t r a n s i t should be free -0.41 124-Growth won't add more i n t e r e s t -0.37 84-We need land p r i c e c o n t r o l -0.31 138-Need to stop loss of h i s t o r i c buildings -0.30 The most r e l i a b l e unit weight r a t i o n a l score which can be constructed f o r t h i s f a c t o r uses the f i v e highest loading statement v a r i a b l e s . The score i s simply the sum of variables '12', '87' and '112', plus 16, minus the sum of variables '70' and '104'. The most r e l i a b l e r a t i o n a l score of t h i s type i s used as an estimate of the measurement 48 r e l i a b i l i t y of each f a c t o r . The r e l i a b i l i t y of the r a t i o n a l score i s computed using the Kuder-Richardson KR20 formula f o r i n t e r n a l consistency r e l i a b i l i t y (Magnusson, 1967). This r e l i a b i l i t y estimate i s 0.81 f o r fac t o r A. Factor B i s c l e a r l y a Parks and Preservation f a c t o r . The three highest loading items r e f e r s p e c i f i c a l l y to parks, and the next four items lend credence to the broader i n t e r p r e t a t i o n i n d i c a t e d by the i n c l u s i o n of the word "preservation" i n the fa c t o r name. The three highest loading items can be used to construct a r a t i o n a l f a c t o r score with an 0.80 r e l i a b i l i t y c o e f f i c i e n t . TABLE 6 FACTOR B (PARKS AND PRESERVATION) ITEM LOADINGS Item Loading 129-We have enough parks now 0.72 73-Buy a l l possible parkland -0.71 97-Neighborhood parks are needed -0.67 38-Assist community projects -0.61 156-Replace old h i s t o r i c buildings 0.61 138-Stop loss of h i s t o r i c buildings -0.50 45-Develop mixed cost housing -0.41 52-Get automobiles out of downtown -0.35 90-Citizen input instead of experts -0.32 Factor C i s a Land and Housing Control f a c t o r . The three highest loading items suggest t h i s i n t e r p r e t a t i o n . The moderate loading 49 (-0.49) on the statement i n favour of c i t i z e n input i n decision-making indicates that i t i s responsive control which i s the basis of t h i s f a c t o r . Using the two items r e f e r r i n g to land p r i c e c o n t r o l , a factor score can be constructed which has a r e l i a b i l i t y of 0.69. TABLE 7 FACTOR C (LAND AND HOUSING CONTROL) ITEM LOADINGS Item Loading 16-We need r e n t a l housing i n a l l areas -0.62 84-We need land p r i c e c o n t r o l -0.62 I l l - R i s i n g land costs are f a i r 0.54 90-Citizen input instead of experts -0.49 139-Range of housing types a l l over -0.49 76-0ne class neighborhood i s best 0.47 148-Disperse high r i s e s -0.40 52-Get automobiles out of downtown -0.33 45-Develop mixed cost housing -0.30 Factor D i s c l e a r l y a P u b l i c T r a n s i t f a c t o r . Its four highest loading statement items are d i r e c t l y concerned with private versus p u b l i c modes of transportation. The other s i x statements which co r r e l a t e moderately with the fa c t o r suggest that an element of general progressiveness i n planning i s associated with i t . R e l i a b i l i t y f o r the r a t i o n a l score approximation i s highest (0.67) when i t employs only the two highest loading statements. 50 TABLE 8 FACTOR D (PUBLIC TRANSIT) ITEM LOADINGS Item Loading 67-Freeways are needed immediately 0.69 75-Don't spend on p u b l i c t r a n s i t 0.66 1-Freeways are e s s e n t i a l regardless 0.60 52-Get automobiles out of downtown -0.38 105-We need neighborhood government 0.37 110-0ne housing type i s best 0.37 141-Use land f o r s i n g l e homes 0.34 129—We have enough parks now 0.32 66-Professional decisions are best 0.32 145-Elections at large are best 0.31 Factor E can be termed a Housing Mix factor since i t s , f o u r highest loading v a r i a b l e statements deal with various aspects of housing types i n t e g r a t i o n . Other item loadings i n the 0.25-0.33 range are i n d i c a t i v e of a reluctance to endorse coercive or extreme measures i n a v a r i e t y of planning p o l i c y areas. The two leading items associated TABLE 9 FACTOR E (HOUSING MIX) ITEM LOADINGS Item Loading 126-Keep high r i s e s confined 0.80 137-Restrict townhouses 0.68 148-Disperse high r i s e s -0.40 110-One housing type i s best 0.39 146-Third crossing f o r t r a n s i t only 0.33 9-Users should pay for p u b l i c t r a n s i t 0.30 51 with t h i s f a c t o r can be used to construct a r a t i o n a l f a c t o r score approximation with an i n t e r n a l consistency r e l i a b i l i t y of 0.67. Factor F i s c l e a r l y a P o l i t i c a l Change f a c t o r . Seven of the eight items l i s t e d i n Table 10 serve to e s t a b l i s h t h i s i n t e r p r e t a t i o n . The most r e l i a b l e r a t i o n a l f a c t o r score approximation (with a r e l i a b i l i t y of 0.54) employs the four highest loading items. TABLE 10 FACTOR F (POLITICAL CHANGE) ITEM LOADINGS Item Loading 62-Adopt ward system -0.66 131-Present government i s responsive enough 0.65 145- E l e c t i o n s at large are best 0.50 55-We should appoint neighborhood representatives -0.50 66-Professional decisions are best 0.40 105-We need neighborhood government -0.33 90-Need c i t i z e n input instead of experts -0.30 146- T h i r d Crossing f o r p u b l i c t r a n s i t only -0.30 Factor G can be termed a Cluster Housing factor i n accord ; with i t s three highest loading statement items. The other four items i n Table 11 have moderate loadings on factor G, and neither support nor refute i t s i n t e r p r e t a t i o n . No factor score approximation can be found which has an i n t e r n a l consistency r e l i a b i l i t y of more than 0.47. 52 TABLE 11 FACTOR G (CLUSTER HOUSING) ITEM LOADINGS Item Loading 98-Houses should be clustered -0.62 120-Need denser housing f o r more space -0.56 141-Use land f o r s i n g l e homes 0.42 1-Freeways are e s s e n t i a l regardless 0.37 124-Growth won't add any i n t e r e s t -0.37 139-Need many house types i n a l l areas -0.36 66-Professional decisions are best -0.36 The interpretation of the seven factor solution i s summarized in Table 12. Five of the seven factors have associated rational score r e l i a b i l i t i e s which are high enough (above 0.65) for them to be used in later stages of the analysis. Of these, the Control Growth, Public Transit and Housing Mix factors are more or less aligned with three of the major planning issue areas i n i t i a l l y defined for testing. The "local TABLE 12 PLANNING OPINIONS: SEVEN FACTOR SOLUTION INTERPRETATION SUMMARY Factor Name Per Cent Reliability Variance Control Growth 19.6 0.81 Parks and Preservation 18.0 0.80 Land and Housing Control 13.7 0.69 Public Transit 13.6 0.67 Housing Mix 12.7 0.67 P o l i t i c a l Change 11.2 0.54 Cluster Housing 11.2 0.47 53 government structure" issue has only emerged as a weak and u n r e l i a b l e factor ( P o l i t i c a l Change) and i s best excluded from further a n a l y s i s . This major issue has e i t h e r not strongly coalesced i n people's minds, or else the survey statements simply missed the mark. Two of the secondary issues, which were only represented by a few items, emerged f a i r l y strongly i n the Parks and Preservation, and i n the Land and Housing Control f a c t o r s . It i s not s u r p r i s i n g that the two factors excluded from further consideration are the smallest ( i n terms of percent variance explained) of the seven f a c t o r s . The retained factors account for 38 percent of the variance i n the responses to the f o r t y o r i g i n a l planning issue statements,.. The f i v e f i n a l planning opinion factor scores for each respondent were calculated using the beta weights from the m u l t i p l e regression of each f a c t o r on the o r i g i n a l v a r i a b l e s . Cluster Analysis on Planning Opinions A h i e r a r c h i c a l c l u s t e r analysis program was run using the f i v e planning opinion f a c t o r scores as c r i t e r i o n v a r i a b l e s . The c l u s t e r i n g of cases produced by the program ( i n descending order of group size) as i t progressed towards a s i n g l e group i s displayed i n Table 13. Inter-p r e t i v e a i d s — e r r o r added, cumulative error, and s e l e c t i o n v a l u e — a r e tabulated. 54 TABLE 13 CLUSTER ANALYSIS ON PLANNING OPINIONS Group Size of Groups at Cum. Error Selec-Level Each Level Err o r Added t i o n Value 3 7 5 19 9 14 1 12 1 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 19 22 19 21 14 22 23 40 18 29 56 63 27 81 207 34 14LJ 21 22 36 70 151 347 11.4 0.11 359 11.7 0.46 371 12.0 0.35 387 15.8 4.82 402 15,8 0.03 425 22.3 5.26 449 24.1 1.00 473 24.6 0.20 499 26.1 0.65 532 32.1 2.07 566 34.0 0.47 60'2 36.0 0.41 664 62.0 4.32 727 62.9 0.07 812 85.4 1.44 917 105.2 0.69 .1(030 112.7 0.14 Since t h i s h i e r a r c h i c a l grouping technique does not produce a unique best s o l u t i o n , i t i s the researcher's task to choose a best grouping. There are four c r i t e r i a to consider i n making the s e l e c t i o n : 1) The cumulative error should be minimized. 2) The number of groups and group sizes i n the chosen grouping should be suited to the purpose of the research. 3) The grouping chosen should precede steps associated with a s i g n i f i c a n t error increase (the s e l e c t i o n value i s one measure of t h i s ) . 4) The grouping chosen should be i n t e r p r e t a b l e , with respect to group measures, on the o r i g i n a l c r i t e r i a . 55 For the purposes of t h i s t h e s i s , only solutions with numbers of groups i n the range 4-14 (and preferably i n the range 6-12) should be considered. Table 13 shows a steady rate of error accumulation u n t i l the 15 groups aggregation l e v e l i s reached. Then, there i s a large er r o r jump i n the merger to 14 groups, and again a steady increase i n error to the 13 groups l e v e l . Four of the groups i n the 13 groups aggregation have considerably less than 10 members. These small groups can be discarded and t h e i r members ei t h e r reassigned to other groups or l e f t out of fur t h e r analysis e n t i r e l y . A l t e r n a t i v e l y , a lower l e v e l grouping can be considered. A f t e r an error jump at the 12 groups aggregation l e v e l , the error accumulates f a i r l y s t e a d i l y u n t i l the next jump at 8 groups. Therefore, the 9 groups c l u s t e r i n g should be examined. Two of i t s groups have less than ten members. Again, these groups could e i t h e r be neglected or t h e i r members reassigned to the other seven groups. S i m i l a r l y , i t appears that the s i x groups l e v e l i s another that should be given further consideration. The cumulative er r o r increases very s u b s t a n t i a l l y a f t e r that point. Thus, there were three groupings—at the 6, 9 and 13 groups l e v e l s — t h a t merited further consideration. The groupings with the larger numbers of groups preserve proportionately more of the d i s t i n c t i v e -ness i n the o r i g i n a l data because of the nature of the grouping mechanism. 56 This f a c t favored s e l e c t i o n of the 9 major groups of the 13 groups aggregation (groups of less than ten cases were neglected) as the best grouping. Accordingly, the group means on planning opinion scores f o r thi s 9 groups case were examined to see i f i t s high l e v e l of d i s t i n c t i v e -ness was r e f l e c t e d c l e a r l y enough from a planning perspective f o r i t to be selected. These means are displayed i n Table 14. TABLE 14 GROUP MEANS ON PLANNING OPINION SCORES Factor Group Size Control Parks and Land and Housing P u b l i c Housing Growth Preservation Control Transit Mix 19 -0.71 0.89 -0.18 -0.42 -0.67 14 -0.68 0.59 -0.19 1.52 -0.75 21 -0.70 0.40 0.63 -0.05 0.52 14 0.91 0.39 0.48 0.00 1.72 34 1.26 0.39 -0.18 0.29 -0.22 23 -0.12 0.06 0.71 -1.36 -0.43 19 -0.78 -0.08 -1.46 0.06 -0.37 22 0.09 -0.23 0.83 1.06 -0.19 22 -0.45 -1.17 0.19 -0.13 0.49 An examination of the ent r i e s i n the table reveals that each of these groups has a markedly d i f f e r e n t score from every other group on at least one of the f i v e f a c t o r s . Many of the pairs of groups have s u b s t a n t i a l l y d i f f e r e n t scores on two or three of the fa c t o r s . From a planning analysis perspective, t h i s supports the suggestion that these groups should not be integrated any further. 57 The next step i s to use a discriminant c l a s s i f i c a t i o n program to c l a s s i f y each of the 19 discarded cases (from the 4 omitted groups) into one of the 9 retained groups. This program also performs a p o s t e r i o r c l a s s i f i c a t i o n of a l l cases and computes the percentage of correct c l a s s i f i c a t i o n s . Ninety percent of cases were c o r r e c t l y c l a s s i f i e d i n t h i s a p p l i c a t i o n . Not s u r p r i s i n g l y , the c l a s s i f i c a t i o n of the discarded cases was predominantly to the two groups into which a majority of them had been merged i n l a t e r steps of the h i e r a r c h i c a l c l u s t e r analysis. As a r e s u l t of t h i s r e c l a s s i f i c a t i o n , a l l the cases are clustered i n t o nine groups whose members have s i m i l a r planning opinion scores. At t h i s point, nine planning opinion groups have been synthesized and can be used i n discriminant analyses designed to test the main hypothesis and to investigate the s t a b i l i t y and u t i l i t y of such grouping constructs i n planning analysis a p p l i c a t i o n s . Values Variables The f a c t o r analysis of the 122 value statements i s now discussed. These statements, along with the mean responses and standard deviations, are l i s t e d i n Appendix A. A p r i n c i p a l components fa c t o r analysis program was run and i t y i e l d e d f o r t y p r i n c i p a l factors with Eigenvalues greater than 1.0. This f a c t o r s o l u t i o n accounted f o r 73 percent of the variance i n the o r i g i n a l data. The f i r s t ten p r i n c i p a l factors accounted f o r h a l f (37 percent) of t h i s explanatory power. 58 Since the goal of the analysis was to extract i n t e r p r e t a b l e values factors from the data and to construct corresponding r a t i o n a l values scores, and since i t was expected that an average of ten to twelve items per f a c t o r would be needed to obtain s a t i s f a c t o r y r e l i a b i l i t i e s , i t seemed apparent that no more than ten factors could be used. Accordingly, the f i r s t ten p r i n c i p a l components were orthogonally rotated using the varimax c r i t e r i o n (simple s t r u c t u r e ) . The r e s u l t i n g f a c t o r matrix i s reproduced i n Table 15. For each f a c t o r , the Kuder-Richardson i n t e r n a l consistency r e l i a b i l i t y was computed f o r the most r e l i a b l e r a t i o n a l factor score approximation. These r e l i a b i l i t i e s were less than 0.60 f o r the three smallest f a c t o r s . These factors (H, I and J) were therefore l e f t out of furt h e r consideration. The seven retained values factors accounted f o r 30 percent of the variance i n the o r i g i n a l 122 statements. The f a c t o r matrix i s now re-examined i n an e f f o r t to improve the r a t i o n a l score estimate of each of the seven retained f a c t o r s . This i s done by including items o r i g i n a l l y associated with the three omitted factors and by s h i f t i n g the contribution of some variables from t h e i r leading f a c t o r to another on which they load almost as highly. This process r e s u l t s i n the i n c l u s i o n of 100 items i n the seven r a t i o n a l score formulas and i n the discarding of the remaining 22 items. Some of the r e l i a b i l i t i e s are improved by one or two percentage points and the addition of more items improves the correspondence between the factors and our r a t i o n a l measure. 59 TABLE 15 VALUES FACTOR MATRIX Value Statement Factor Co.nmu-n a l i ty A U C D F. F G 11 I J 118-Should cure not punish convicts .67 0.54 162-Abolish bar b a r i c death penalty .66 0.65 27-1.1'e okay £or men to keep house .48 0.26 . 63-Vlc.lfare users aren't greedy .45 0.36 153-Preserve r i g h t not to work .28 0.31 32-Attacking f a i t h f u l unforgivable -.30 .30 .27 0.38 136-Auto i s e s s e n t i a l to freedom -.31 0.20 159-Gut re a c t i o n i s best guide -.31 .29 0.30 71-Social needs are family concern -.35 .32 0.33 150-Devclopers know best -.36 -.25 .25 .34 0.39 13-Some races n a t u r a l l y i n f e r i o r -.36 -.31 . 33 0.36 64-1 have a scheduled l i f e -.37 .35 0.34 5-Each should mind own business -.39 .28 0.40 8-Disregard the few dissenters -.40 .26 -.26 0.21 161-Mannerly equals nice person -.40 -.39 .30 .36 0.44 3-1t's best l i f e weeds out weak -.42 -.26 0.44 4-Uelfare only f o r incapacitated -.43 .30 0.40 125-Final say to the husband -.44 -.25 0.37 157-Need less t a l k more work -.47 0.35 149-Sex crimes merit whipping -.50 -.29 0.43 17-Good job i s wel], defined -.52 .35 0.45 155-111 should be f o r b i d children -.53 -.25 0.41 2 - P a t r i o t i c l o y a l - good c i t i z e n -.57 .25 0.44 29-Justice needs crime punishment -.57 .28 0.46 89-Impose morality on the young -.59 0.50 33-Trespossers should be fined -.64 0.50 36-Rebellious youth needs to change -.66 0.63 130-Stricter law means less crime -.67 0.57 115-Murderers deserve hanging -.70 -.26 0.63 24-Obediencc f i r s t v i r t u e i n c h i l d -.71 .25 0.66 102-People " f r e e l y " work hard .36 .25 0.24 114-Punish industry' abusing public .35 .31 -.26 0.36 39-Local group i s most rewarding -.30 0.26 58-Aiubition equals good character -.30. -.32 .26 .29 0.42 69-Many do sports only f o r status -.33 0.29 101-Can't rely on anyone any more -.31 -.37 0.43 107-Wise follow c u l t u r a l norms -.29 -.37 .32 0.40 154-Nat.ion run by a few i n power -.37 -.28 0.31 65-Too many do-good s o c i e t i e s -.39 .26 0.27 99-Welfare users should not vote -.33 -.40 0.40 143-Children are mostly a nuisance -.41 0.25 142-Politicians make shady deals -.43 .30 -.35 0.46 147-1 repeat views for emphasis -.44 -.26 0.31 35-I.earn best by following advice -.44 0.32 144-Fri.ends need same b e l i e f s -.45 0.38 42-Trusting i n v i t e s trouble -.48 -.25 0.34 117-Most communities good enough -.55 .29 0.47 160-The wise say what others want -.56 0.45 132-Choosc fr i e n d s to help you -.58 0.47 50-Natural to alv.'ays seek gain -.60 0.40 56-Owuing e s s e n t i a l to progress .59 0.53 100-1 admire self-made successes -.32 .46 0.40 43-Many do care about others .44 0.30 80-lncones should not be l i m i t e d .43 0.25 21-Peoplc loaf i f government controls .41 0.'26 57-Progrcss needs l o g i c a l minds .38 0.27 14-Knows l i f e pattern f o r ten years -.27 .33 0.29 11-1 p r e f e r restrained neighbors .26 0.24 41-Life lias nicrit'vithout causes .22 0.11 113-Taxing poor should stop -.25 -.25 0.22 93-The re's too much "privacy" -.35 .26 0.33 158-There's no j u s t i f y i n g war -.37 .30 .27 0.35 47-Ultimately complete socialism -.58 0.52 60 TABLE 15 (Continued) Value Statement Factor Commu-nality 2G-I an usually carefree: 94- Ccnter of l i f e is within 106-Kost ideas nou are worthless 127- Abidcs other l i f e styles 31-Country alv:ays needs power 48- Scheduled living means no joy 30-Trust feelings over thoughts 19- City grows best by private acts 59- Unions seldom elect honestly 81- The unsure are annoying 103-Sing].e l i f e less satisfying 86-Morc effort to stop racism 82- 1 argue mostly on principles 61-Often my plans aren't best 78-Just economy means less crime 119-Frecdom before national order 135-Necd sex education in schools 51-Nccd teach young birth control 60- Wc need controversial radio 46-Like discussing life.-s meaning 116-Nations need leaders not laws 53- The imperfect can have appeal 109-Only realistic ideas are good 77-Only money guides public policy 128- Kould enjoy living abroad 122- Most politicians serve voters 121-People aren't too foolish 7-We have best government so far 151-Community.good is my good 123- Our lot is always improving 74-Kealth belongs to the capable 133- V/e progress only as a group 95- Politicians mostly serve us 54- Locals due greatest respect 37-Religion may save society 72-Pondering l i f e is useful 92-Religlons mostly cause trouble 108-Religion is mostly myth 25-Real friends s t i l l easily found 91-Teach children cooperation 40-1 find national sports boring 18-Change opinions to follow norm 20- 1 often worry about things 8&-I stay in fringes of a party 15-Simp.le answers are unrealistic 85-1 generally act before thinking 28-1 can't do many things at once 10-Necd to integrate work and l i f e 134- Things belong to a l l of us 23—Justice sometimes demands war 96- Pay sexes equally 68-Marriage is losing significance 44-Live for today only 49- Women are poor organizers '152-Our education is in good shape 34-Need laws to restrict births 83- Most arguments are irrelevant 6-People want nn5rc of same 140-V.'onders about other's behavior -.34 -.34 -.32 .29 -.25 -.25 -.28 .26 .29 0.26 -.28 .35 .34 -.25 .32 -.26 -.31 .25 .25 -.33 .32 -.28 .29 .62 0.47 .57 0.42 .43 0.44 .42 0.25 .42 0.-42 .40 0.22 .38 -.28 0.34 .37 .25 0.32 .33 .31 0.37 . .31 0.29 -.26 0.13 .61 0.42 .50 0.40 .45 0.29 .43 -.28 0.38 .29 .42 -.26 0.39 .40 0.42 .40 -.36 0.35 .38 0.30 .32 0.15 .26 .32 0.28 .32 -.31 0.31 .31 0.32 .30 0.26 .30 -.30 0.26 .54 0.47 .46 0.30 .46 0.30 .30 .45 0.33 .39 .26 0.36 .36 0.42 .35 0.32 .34 0.34 .27 0.37 .74 0.64 .31 .28 .33 0.38 -.66 0.59 -.69 0.55 .28 .33 .30 0.48 -.26 0.21 -.27 0.20 -.33 0.32 .33 -.34 0.40 -.38 0.27 -.41 0.32 -.43 -.28 0.34 -.56 0.36 -.25 0.21 .29 -.35 0.42 -.35 0.36 .34 -.38 0.40 -.43 0.43 -.65 0.51 .42 0.41 .40 0.31 .38 0.27 .28 -.28 0.30 -.29 0.22 -.41 0.29 4.3 4.1 3.6 3.5 3.1 2.8 2.7 44.8 9.5 9.2 7.9 7.7 ' 6i9 6.2 6.0 Sum Square Factor Loadings Percentage of Total Variance 10.4 23.2 6.1 13.7 4.4 9.8 61 The value statements which were used to compute the f a c t o r score are l i s t e d i n the table accompanying the i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of each f a c t o r . The r e l i a b i l i t i e s and the formulas for computing the f a c t o r scores are also given i n these tables. The t r a i t measured by the scale from which an item was o r i g i n a l l y drawn i s noted ( i n abbreviated form) i n the column e n t i t l e d " i n d i c a t o r " . These i n d i c a t o r s serve as a guide to the i n t e r p r e t a t i o n and naming of the f a c t o r s . (Unabbreviated i n d i c a t o r names are l i s t e d with the statements i n Appendix A.) TABLE 16 FACTOR A (AUTHORITARIANISM) ITEM LOADINGS Item Indicator Loading 24--Obedience most important v i r t u e A u t h o r i t a r i a n -0.71 115--Murderers deserve hanging -Humanitarian -0.70 130-- S t r i c t e r laws mean less crime -Soc. Support -0.67 118--Cure rather than punish crimes Tenderminded 0.67 162-Abolish b a r b a r i c death penalty Tenderminded 0.66 36--Rebellious youth ought to change Au t h o r i t a r i a n -0.66 33--Need more f i n i n g of trespassers - A d a p t a b i l i t y -0.64 89--Impose morality on the young Heed authority -0.59 29--To punish crime i s j u s t i c e -Humanitarian -0.57 2--Good c i t i z e n i s l o y a l p a t r i o t i c Heed authority -0.57 155--111 should be denied ch i l d r e n Toughminded -0.53 149--Sex criminals deserve whipping Toughminded -0.50 27--It's okay f o r men to keep house An t i Soc. Trad. . 0.48 157--Less t a l k more work i s needed Au t h o r i t a r i a n -0.47 63--Most welfare users aren't greedy Supportive 0.45 125--Man should have f i n a l say Pro Soc. Trad. -0.44 3--It's best weak are weeded-out Toughminded -0.42 5-- A l l should mind own business -Communitarian -0.39 R e l i a b i l i t y (KR20) =0.90 Score = 112 + Sum Pos. Ldg Items - Sum Neg. Ldg Items 62 The i n d i c a t o r s of the items associated with Factor A r e f e r predominantly to authoritarianism and toughmindedness value t r a i t s . However, since most of the items r e l a t i n g to toughmindedness have a strong a u t h o r i t a r i a n f l a v o r , t h i s f a c t o r can be named Authoritarianism. Other i n d i c a t o r s attached to associated items r e f e r to t r a i t s which are "consistent with t h i s i n t e r p r e t a t i o n . TABLE 17 FACTOR B (DEPENDENT MISTRUST) ITEM LOADINGS Item Indicator Loading 50-People always seek own gain E x p l o i t a t i v e -0.60 132-Pick f r i e n d s to help you Status Concern -0.58 160-The wise~say what's expected E x p l o i t a t i v e -0.56 117-Most communities good enough -Communitarian -0.55 42-Trusting i n v i t e s trouble E x p l o i t a t i v e -0.48 144-Friends need same b e l i e f s Dogmatism -0.45 35-Learn best follow advice -Individualism -0.44 147-1 repeat myself f o r emphasis Dogmatism -0.44 143-Children are mostly a pain A l i e n a t i o n -0.41 99-Welfare users shouldn't vote -Soc. Support -0.40 65-Have too many do-good groups -Communitarian -0.39 154-A powerful few run the nation P o l . F a t a l i s t -0.37 101-You can't r e l y on anyone now Anomia -0.37 102-People " f r e e l y " work hard - E x p l o i t a t i v e 0.36 69-Many do sports f o r status only Soc. Cynicism -0.33 13-Some races are i n f e r i o r - E q u a l i t a r i a n -0.31 39-Local groups are the best Local Attitude -0.30 6-People only want more of the same Soc. Cynicism -0.29 R e l i a b i l i t y (KR20) =0.79 Score = 136 + Sum P o s i t i v e Loading Items - Sum Negative Loading Items 63 Factor B can be termed Dependent Mi s t r u s t . Among i t s i n d i c a t o r s are a l i e n a t i o n , dogmatism and e x p l o i t a t i o n . The e x p l o i t a t i v e items suggest a mistrust of people and a propensity to e x p l o i t rather than an a c t i v e e x p l o i t a t i o n . The fac t o r name is' based mostly on ac t u a l item content. Three items taken from scales used to measure radicalism (or i t s inverse) support the choice of the name Socialism f o r f a c t o r C. The prima f a c i e content of a number of other items (with i n d i c a t o r s such as s o c i a l support and humanitarianism) lend weight to the i n t e r p r e t a t i o n . The TABLE 18 FACTOR C (SOCIALISM) ITEM LOADINGS Item Indicator Loading 56-0wning i s needed f o r progress Econ. Conserv. 0.59 47-Ultimately complete s o c i a l i s m Radicalism -0.58 100-1 admire self-made people -Soc. Support 0.46 43-Many do care about others F a i t h i n People 0.44 80-Incomes should not be l i m i t e d -Sharing Wealth 0.43 21-Government control leads to l o a f i n g Econ. Conserv. 0.41 57-We need l o g i c f o r progress -Spontaneity 0.38 158-There's no j u s t i f y i n g war Humanitarianism -0.37 93-There's too much "privacy" -Privacy Need- -0.35 134-Everything belongs to a l l E q u a l i t a r i a n -0.33 14-Life pattern known for ten years Simple Values 0.33 23-War i s sometimes j u s t i f i e d -Humanitarian 0.32 4-Give welfare only to the i l l -Soc. Support 0.30 8-Disregard minor dissenters -Soc. Support 0.26. R e l i a b i l i t y (KR20) =0.73 Score = 1.29 (32 + Sum P o s i t i v e Loading Items - Sum Negative Ldg. Items) 64 b e l i e f that "people don't care about others" i s strongly associated with t h i s Socialism f a c t o r . Factor D was named L i b e r a l Restraint from an i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of a c t u a l item content. None of the i n d i c a t o r s s p e c i f i c a l l y r e f e r s to l i b e r a l i s m , although f i v e of them are r e l a t e d to the concept of r e s t r a i n t or r i g i d i t y . I TABLE 19 ; FACTOR D (LIBERAL RESTRAINT) ITEM LOADINGS Item Indicator Loading 26-1 am usually carefree Carefreeness 0.62 94-The center of l i f e i s within Individualism 0.57 106-Most ideas now are worthless Dogmatism 0.43 127-New l i f e s t y l e s don't bother me A n t i Soc. Trad. 0.42 31-Country shouldn't give up power -Radicalism 0.42 48-Routine l i v i n g i s less j o y f u l Tolerate Ambig. 0.40 30-1 t r u s t f e e l i n g over thought Spontaneity 0.38 19-City grows best by p r i v a t e acts Individualism 0.37 17-Good jobs are w e l l defined - T o l . Ambiguity 0.35 59-Unions seldom e l e c t honestly Conservative 0.33 81-The unsure are annoying R i g i d i t y 0.31 72-It's good to ponder " l i f e " R estraint 0.31 32-Attacking f a i t h f u l unforgivable Dogmatism 0.30 83-Most argument i s irrelevancy Dogmatism 0.28 103-Single l i f e i s less s a t i s f y i n g - A l i e n a t i o n -0.26 R e l i a b i l i t y (KR20) =0.75 Score = 1.2 (8 + Sum P o s i t i v e Loading Items - Sum Negative Ldg. Items) 65 Factor E can be termed Conservatism. Only two of i t s i n d i c a t o r s d i r e c t l y r e f e r to a radical-conservative dimension, but the consistent r e j e c t i o n of statements expressing reformist sentiments gives a strong impression of " s i l e n t majority conservatism". TABLE 20 FACTOR E (CONSERVATISM) ITEM LOADINGS Item Indicator Loading 86-More action to stop racism 82-1 argue only on p r i n c i p l e s 61-0ften my plans aren't best 78-Just economy means less crime 119-Freedom before n a t i o n a l order 135-Sex education f o r grade school 51-Teach young b i r t h c o n t r o l 60-Controversial radio needed 96-Equal pay f o r women 20-0ften worry about things 46-Like discussing l i f e ' s meaning 116-Nations need leaders not laws 53-The imperfect can have appeal 109-Only r e a l i s t i c ideas are good 114-Punish industry abusing p u b l i c 77-0nly money guides p o l i c y 128-1 would enjoy l i v i n g abroad 58-Ambition means good character E q u a l i t a r i a n 0.61 R i g i d i t y 0.50 -Dominance 0.45 Econ. Radical 0.43 Tenderminded 0.42 Sex Permissive 0.40 Sex Permissive 0.40 Pol. Radical 0.38 Eq u a l i t a r i a n 0.34 Sensitive 0.33 Introspective 0.32 Auth o r i t a r i a n 0.32 Complex Values 0.32 Env. Mistrust 0.31 Moral Resp. 0.31 Po l . Cynic 0.30 Complex Values 0.30 Status Concern 0.29 R e l i a b i l i t y (KR20) =0.71 Score = Sum of A l l Items 66 Factor F which was given the name Independent Cynicism has been f a i r l y f r e e l y interpreted based on de facto item content rather than on the i n d i c a t o r associations. Even so, at least h a l f of the items are cl o s e l y a l l i e d with independent or c y n i c a l a t t i t u d e s . TABLE 21 FACTOR F (INDEPENDENT CYNICISM) ITEM LOADINGS Item Indicator Loading 122-Most p o l i t i c i a n s serve voters Government Trust 0.54 121-People aren't too f o o l i s h - E x p l o i t a t i v e 0.46 7-We have best government today N a t i o n a l i s t i c 0.46 151-Community good i s my good Communitarian 0.45 123-Our l o t i s always improving -Anomia 0.39 74-Wealth belongs to the capable D i s t . Wealth 0.36 64-1 have w e l l ordered l i f e R i g i d i t y 0.35 133-Group progress only r e a l kind Communitarian 0.35 142-Politicians make shady deals Pol. Cynicism -0.35 95-Most p o l i t i c i a n s serve p u b l i c - P o l . Cynicism 0.34 107-Wise follow c u l t u r a l norm Other Directed 0.32 161-Mannerly equals nice person Status Concern 0.30 25-Real friends s t i l l found Morale 0.28 54-Locals due greatest respect Local Attitude 0.27 R e l i a b i l i t y (KR20) =0.67 Score = 1.29 (8 + Sum P o s i t i v e Loading Items - Sum Negative Ldg. Items) F i n a l l y , f a c t o r G i s c l e a r l y i n t e r p r e t a b l e as Religious Cynicism. 67 TABLE 22 FACTOR G (RELIGIOUS CYNICISM) ITEM LOADINGS Item Indicator Loading 37-Religion may save society Religionism 0.74 108-Religion i s mostly myth Al i e n a t i o n -0.69 92-Religions mostly make trouble -Religionism -0.66 R e l i a b i l i t y (KR20) = 0.79 Score = 6 (16 + Sum P o s i t i v e Loading Items - Sum Negative Ldg. Items) The seven values factors which were retained f o r further analysis are l i s t e d i n Table 23. This table also contains the means, standard deviations, and i n t e r n a l consistency r e l i a b i l i t i e s of the r a t i o n a l values f a c t o r scores. The cor r e l a t i o n s among the scores are given i n Table 26. These f i n a l factors explain 30 percent of the variance i n the o r i g i n a l value statements and 37 percent of that i n the 100 retained items. TABLE 23 FINAL VALUES FACTORS Factor R e l i a b i l i t y Mean Standard Name Deviation Authoritarianism 0.90 73.1 20.9 Dependent Mistrust 0.79 57.7 14.5 Socialism 0.73 57.2 15.5 L i b e r a l Restraint 0.75 67.2 15.0 Conservatism 0.71 56.7 12.2 Independent Cynicism 0.67 75.8 13.5 Religious Cynicism 0.79 64.2 28.6 68 Socio-Economic Variables A f t e r some r e f l e c t i o n , i t was decided to subject the o r i g i n a l sixteen socio-economic variables to a factor analysis to see i f t h e i r number could be reduced somewhat. Accordingly, the sixteen v a r i a b l e s , whose means and standard deviations are l i s t e d i n Table 3, were fa c t o r analyzed using the p r i n c i p a l components model. Seven factors with Eigen-values above 0.85 and accounting f o r 73 percent of the variance were returned. These factors were orthogonally rotated to a simple structure s o l u t i o n . The r e s u l t i n g f a c t o r matrix i s reproduced i n Table 24. The i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of these factors i s straightforward. Factor A measures Family R e s p o n s i b i l i t y . Factor B i s c l e a r l y a S o c i a l  Status f a c t o r since i t s three highest loading variables (occupational status, education, and income) are the t r a d i t i o n a l measures of t h i s dimension. Factor C can convincingly be termed S o c i a l S t a b i l i t y . Factors D and E f'are vdiad and dipole factors which measure C u l t u r a l D i s tinctiveness ( r e l a t i v e to the dominant anglo-saxon Caucasian culture) and Automobile  Dependence re s p e c t i v e l y . Factors F (Sex) and G (Number of Adults) are almost unique factors ( i . e . having one high loading v a r i a b l e only). The achievable r a t i o n a l score r e l i a b i l i t i e s were computed f o r the f i v e non-unique f a c t o r s . Since these f a l l i n the range 0.61-0.81, i t appeared that t h i s seven f a c t o r reduction of the socio-economic v a r i a b l e domain was adequate f o r use i n further analysis. Accordingly, a program was run to produce the corresponding regressed f a c t o r scores. However, these 69 TABLE 24 SOCIO-ECONOMIC FACTOR MATRIX •> . Factor Commu-Variable . . A B C D E .... F ..... G . n a Family Cost . . . . 0.88 0.86 Family R e s p o n s i b i l i t y . 0 . 8 6 0.83 M a r i t a l Status . . . 0.64 0.25 -0.33 0.64 Number of Children . . 0.62 0.56 0.29 0.79 Occupational Status . 0.89 0.85 Education 0.85 0.76 Family Income . . . 0.30 0.64 0.66 Age 0.80 0.29 0.82 Housing Tenancy . . 0.80 -0.26 0.78 Housing Type . . . . 0.59 -0.32 -0.44 0.69 Bus Use . . . . . 0.89 0.85 Automobile Use . . . ^0.70 -0.35 0.75 Race 0.85 0.74 E t h n i c i t y . . . . . 0.83 0.72 Sex -0.88 0.80 Number of Adults . . -0.89 0.84 Sum sq. factor loadings 2.60 2.18 2.13 1.57 1.47 1.21 1.21 12.37 Percent t o t a l variance 21.0 18.0 17.0 13.0 ..12.0 10.0 10.0 scores had standard deviations varying between 0.56 and 6.33, and a s i g n i f i c a n t proportion of i n t e r f a c t o r c o r r e l a t i o n s between 0.40 and 0.79. According to the theory underlying the fa c t o r s o l u t i o n and score computation, the standard deviations should be close to 1.0 and the i n t e r - c o r r e l a t i o n s close to 0.0. Since these departures from the i d e a l were too large to be neglected, another s o l u t i o n was sought. Rational score approximations to several of these factors were constructed and used along with some of the o r i g i n a l v a r i a b l e s . The v a r i a b l e 70 race was discarded since only 6 percent of the t o t a l sample were non-Caucasian and i t correlated 0.44 with the less highly skewed e t h n i c i t y v a r i a b l e . I t was expected that most of the discriminatory power of the p a i r would be contributed by e t h n i c i t y alone. Sex and number of adults were retained as s i n g l e v a r i a b l e s . Bus use and automobile use were combined into a si n g l e score (measuring Automobile Dependence) with an estimated i n t e r n a l consistency r e l i a b i l i t y of 0.67. S i m i l a r l y , housing tenancy and housing type were combined into a score measuring Housing  S t a b i l i t y with an estimated r e l i a b i l i t y of 0.81; and family cost, family r e s p o n s i b i l i t y , and number of children were combined i n t o a score measuring Family R e s p o n s i b i l i t y with an estimated r e l i a b i l i t y of 0.75. M a r i t a l status was not included i n the l a t t e r score because i t lowered the r e l i a b i l i t y somewhat. Occupational status, education, and family income were used i n a compound r a t i o n a l score approximating the S o c i a l Status f a c t o r . I t had an estimated r e l i a b i l i t y of 0.78. Scores and d i s t r i b u t i o n s t a t i s t i c s f o r the new v a r i a b l e s were computed for each case. D i s t r i b u t i o n s t a t i s t i c s f o r the retained o r i g i n a l variables were examined to see i f v a r i a b l e transformations to improve t h e i r normality seemed warranted. Several of the variables were highly skewed, but, since they were e i t h e r dichotomous or had t h e i r peaks completely at one end of t h e i r range, no reasonable transformation could be used to reduce t h e i r skewness. Only the v a r i a b l e "number of adults" was a c t u a l l y transformed (the quadratic root was used to reduce the magnitudes of the skewness and k u r t o s i s ) . 71 Thus, the s i z e of the socio-economic variables set was reduced by discarding one v a r i a b l e (race), r e t a i n i n g four variables unaltered, taking the fourth root of another, and computing four new compound v a r i a b l e s . The f i n a l nine variables are l i s t e d i n Table 25. The c o r r e l a t i o n s among these variables are given i n Table 26. TABLE 25 FINAL SET OF SOCIO-ECONOMIC VARIABLES Variable Name Score Formula R e l i a -b i l i t y Mean Standard Deviation Skew-ness S o c i a l Status Income + 2 (Occupa-t i o n + Education) 0.73 45.6 13.8 0.34 Family Respon-s i b i l i t y Fam. Resp. + 2 (Fam. Cost + No. Children) 0.74 34.5 23.0 0.20 M a r i t a l Status — 0.75 0.43 -1.15 Age . . . . — 43.0 16.9 0.21 Housing S t a b i l i t y Housing Tenancy + Housing Type 0.78 1.45 0.80 -1.00 E t h n i c i t y — 0.26 0.44 1.09 Sex . . . . — 0.46 0.50 0.17 Adults (No. Adults)* 5 — 1.23 0.11 0.44 Auto Dependence (2 + Auto Use-Bus Use) 0.66 3.15 1.19 -1.20 M n o 6 r-o Co »— O UJ vO to NJ vO Cn Co UJ NJ UJ ! — • » — • » — • -E> I—* UJ O Co -£> CO »- O UJ o M ro o C/t N> «0 VO CO U W CO ON «n O i CO CT> vo Oi W h- »-* O I- O f- o ro ~o -P» - o CO Ln N Oi VO O Co ro -T>-co u> Co cr« c \ vo o o ro u> to co ro O Cn UJ 00 o ro Ov CO vo M r - I O H o o »-o >— o V o p b q a. K tn r t o« o "TO F M K ro cw 3 o to o r t H" r t o H o H* O O »-O O o o o o o o Cn O ro O I o o o o o o * ro Cn I— CO O r-* UJ Parks and Preservation Land and Housing Control Public Transit Housing Mix Age Sex Marital Status Ethnicity Social Status Family Responsib-i l i t y Housing Stability Auto Dependence Adults Authoritarianism Dependent Mistrus Socialism Liberal Restraint Conservatism Independent Cynicism Religious Cynicism ZL 73 Testing the Hypothesis At this point, the two sets of variables (socio-economic and values) can be used i n discriminant analyses to d i f f e r e n t i a t e between planning opinion groups. The hypothesis states that the two sets combined w i l l discriminate s i g n i f i c a n t l y better than the socio-economic set alone. The discriminant analysis program coded i n M u l t i v a r i a t e Data  Analysis by Cooley and Lohnes (1971, p. 258) was implemented f o r th i s stage of the an a l y s i s . Part of the output from three runs of t h i s program—using the planning opinion groups as input and discriminating on socio-economic and values variables combined, on socio-economic variables alone, and on values v a r i a b l e s a l o n e — i s reproduced i n Table 27. Factor loadings on the s i g n i f i c a n t discriminant functions appear i n the columns of Table 27. A chi-squared approximation of the d i s t r i b u t i o n of Wilk's Lambda was used i n s i g n i f i c a n c e tests on the discriminant functions (see Tatsuoka, 1971). Only those functions s i g n i f i c a n t at the 0.05 l e v e l are tabulated. Communalities f o r the fa c t o r space defined by the discriminant functions are l i s t e d f o r each d i s c r i m i -nation. Loadings and communalities with absolute values of less than 0.2 and 0.1 resp e c t i v e l y are not noted i n the table. The percentage of the variance i n the set of va r i a b l e s accounted f o r by each discriminant function i s l i s t e d i n the f i r s t row below the loadings (the o v e r a l l t o t a l s f o r the sets of functions appear under the communalities). The second row shows the percentage of the a v a i l a b l e discriminating information (percent trace) TABLE 27 DISCRIMINANT ANALYSES (TEST OF HYPOTHESIS) Combined Va r i a b l es Soci V a r i o-Econ. ables Values Variables Function Func. Function A B C Comm. A Comm. A B C Comm. Age . . . . . . -0.45 0.24 0.23 -Sex -0.30 -0.25 0.15 0.54 0.29 M a r i t a l Status . . -0023 0.37 0.12 E t h n i c i t y . . . . S o c i a l Status -0.41 -0,. 45 0.38 0.69 0.48 Family Responsibility -0.22 Housing S t a b i l i t y -0.33 -0.48 0.34 0.67 0.41. Auto Dependence -0.30 -0.28 0.18 0.39 0.14 Adults 0.21 Authoritarianism 0.46 -0.63 0.62 -0.66 0.45 0.66 Dependent Mistrust 0.55 -0,41 0.23 0.52 -0.66 0.46 0.67 Socialism . . -0.24 0.50 0.65 0.73 0.41 -0.48 0.68 0.86 L i b e r a l Restraint -0.72 0.51 0.75 0.29 0.65 Conservatism -0.64 -0.40 0.57 0.54 0.69 0.77 Independent Cynicism -0.26 0.66 0.51 0.48 -0.57 0.56 Religious Cynicism 0.34 0.22 0.16 -0.37 0.19 Percent Variance Percent Trace Canon. Correlation 12.6 13.3 5.8 39.8 24.9 14.3 0.64 0.55 0.45 31.7 79.0 18.4 18.4 42.3 42.3 0.44 30.6 21.2 10.6 44.8 28.2 14.7 0.59 0.50 0.39 62.4 87.6 Eta-Squared (Eta) 0.76 (0.87) 0.41 (0.64) 0.64 (0.80) 75 contained i n each discriminant function. The t h i r d row contains the canonical c o r r e l a t i o n s f o r each discriminant function. The l a s t row contains eta-squared—which measures the proportion of c r i t e r i o n variance explained by a l l of the discriminant f u n c t i o n s — a n d , i n brackets, the generalized c o r r e l a t i o n r a t i o (eta)—-which i s regarded as a m u l t i v a r i a t e generalization of the univariate c o r r e l a t i o n r a t i o (Cooley and Lohnes, 1971| vp. 234). The means f o r the groups on a l l of the v a r i a b l e s , which are i n t e r e s t i n g i n t h e i r own r i g h t , are tabulated i n Table 28. The r e s u l t s shown i n Table 27 are now interpreted. Eta-squared i s 0 . 7 6 f o r discrimination on the combined variables compared to 0.41 f o r d i s c r i m i n a t i o n on socio-economic variables only. This tends to strongly support the hypothesis. I t i s almost a doubling i n o v e r a l l discriminatory power. The analogous s t a t i s t i c f o r discrimination on values variables alone (0.64) indicates that a s u b s t a n t i a l improvement would r e s u l t even from a s u b s t i t u t i o n of values for socio-economic v a r i a b l e s . However, eta and eta-squared are not f u l l y accepted s t a t i s t i c s , and i t i s more t r a d i t i o n -a l to i n t e r p r e t the discriminant functions and t h e i r canonical c o r r e l a t i o n s . The analysis on socio-economic variables alone produced one s i g n i f i c a n t discriminant function with a canonical c o r r e l a t i o n of 0.44, while the analysis on the combined variables produced three s i g n i f i c a n t discriminant functions with canonical c o r r e l a t i o n s of 0.45, 0.55, and 0.64. The comparison i s f u r t h e r c l a r i f i e d by an examination of the loadings and communalities i n each case. Most of the discriminating power TABLE 28 PLANNING OPINION GROUP MEANS ON SOCIO-ECONOMIC AND VALUES VARIABLES 1 Variable Groups T o t a l 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Sample 38 .3 35.6 44 .2 52.9 37.5 40 .2 49.9 46.6 46 .1 43.0 Sex . , 0. 41 0.44 0. 15 0.57 0.35 0. 50 0.62 0.57 0. 54 0.46 M a r i t a l Status . . . . 0. 74 0.78 0. 55 0.86 0.71 0. 75 0.83 0.76 0. 79 0.75 0. 33 0.17 0. 30 0.21 0.26 0. 35 0.24 0.33 0. 13 0.26 S o c i a l Status . .' . 46 .4 44.3 33 .4 46.6 49.2 44 .5 46.4 41.7 53 .2 45.6 Family Responsibility 35 .8 34.4 31 .9 38.2 34.6 34 .8 30.1 31.9 40 .0 34.5 Housing S t a b i l i t y . . . 1, 33 1.28 . 1. 00 1.64 1.24 1. 30 1.86 1.62 1. 79 1.45 Auto Dependence 3. 07 2-78 2. 80 3.29 3.06 3. 25 3.28 2.90 3. 71 3.15 1. 21 1.20 .1, 20 1.21 1.25 1. 22 1.25 1.24 1. 23 1.23 Toughminded Authoritarianism 71 .6 62.3 92 .8 78.1 59.9 71 .7 80.5 67.4 79 .6 73.1 56 .6 60.2 43 .5 52.8 55.4 52 .8 64.1 56.4 64 .0 56.7 Insecure Mistrust 53 .8 50.8 73 .9 49.4 53.3 59 .5 62.3 54.7 60 .5 57.7 Independent Cynicism 74 .4 84.3 69 .6 71.9 84.8 76 .0 71.7 76.8 69 .7 75.8 Jaded Socialism . . . . 54 .9 66.8 55Q0S 50.6 64.6 49 .8 56.7 65.5 47 .4 57.2 Religious Cynicism 55 .1 69.7 63 .9 66.0 75.9 62 .1 58.8 69.1 57 .0 64.2 L i b e r a l R i g i d i t y . . . . 68 .8 72.3 49 .0 68.5 70.5 58 .0 68.6 72.9 72 .1 67.2 Number of cases 27 18 20 14 34 20 29 21 24 207 77 for the "socio-economic variables alone" case i s contributed by the variables s o c i a l status, housing s t a b i l i t y , and (moderately) sex. However, i n the "combined v a r i a b l e s " case, a l l of the socio-economic variables contribute less to the discrimination than do any of the values v a r i a b l e s , except f o r r e l i g i o u s cynicism. This i s c l e a r l y seen i n the communalities column. S o c i a l status and housing s t a b i l i t y remain the most important socio-economic variables i n the "combined v a r i a b l e s " d i s c r i m i n a t i o n , but age (instead of sex) becomes the t h i r d most important. It i s i n t e r e s t i n g to note that 62 percent of the variance i n the values battery i s useful i n discriminating between groups i n the "values only" case despite the f a c t that r e l i g i o u s cynicism contributes minimally. The Optimum Values and Socio-Economic Variables Confirmation of the hypothesis has shown that values variables are the key to d e f i n i n g groups with r e l a t i v e l y uniform opinions on broad scale planning issues. The optimum set of variables (from the socio-economic and values variables) f o r creating "planning values types" was i d e n t i f i e d . The extent to which planning opinion variables discrim-inated between these "planning values types" was then i n d i c a t i v e of the u t i l i t y of t h i s optimum set of v a r i a b l e s i n planning opinion a n a l y s i s . An e f f e c t i v e set of such variables could be used to create stable groupings for planning analysis purposes. Although i n d i v i d u a l s would be linked to one stable group or another as t h e i r values change, planning issues would not a r i s e which would necessitate a r e d e f i n i t i o n of the stable groups. 78 Stepwise discriminant analysis was used to i s o l a t e the reduced set of socio-economic and values variables which discriminated optimally between planning opinion groups. At each step, t h i s program adds one v a r i a b l e to a pool of discriminating v a r i a b l e s . The added v a r i a b l e i s the one on which the con d i t i o n a l group means given the remaining entered variables are most s i g n i f i c a n t l y d i f f e r e n t . The procedure stops when none of the excluded variables s i g n i f i c a n t l y (a p r o b a b i l i t y l e v e l FPROB i s defined) adds to the discriminating power of the set of entered v a r i a b l e s . This stepwise discriminant analysis program was run with the planning opinion groups and the combined set of values and socio-economic variables as input. FPROB was set at 0.05. Discriminant functions were returned with s i x variables entered. These variables were conservatism, authoritarianism, s o c i a l i s m , dependent mistrust, housing s t a b i l i t y , and l i b e r a l r e s t r a i n t . The loadings on the functions and the associated s t a t i s t i c s f o r the discriminant .analysis on t h i s reduced set of variables are reported i n Table 29. When a l l sixteen variables contributed to the dis c r i m i n a t i o n , eta-squared was 0.76 (Table 27). To further t e s t the u t i l i t y of the reduced v a r i a b l e set, i t was used i n the h i e r a r c h i c a l c l u s t e r analysis program to create new "planning values groups". These groups were then used i n a Cooley-Lohnes discriminant analysis on planning opinion scores. Thus, a measure was obtained of how we l l planning opinions discriminated between groups defined on the reduced v a r i a b l e set (consisting predominantly of values measures). TABLE 29 STEPWISE DISCRIMINANT ANALYSIS TO IDENTIFY OPTIMUM REDUCED SET OF VARIABLES Variable Discriminant Function Commu-n a l i t y A B C D Conservatism . . 0. 41 -0.43 0.39 Authoritarianism -0. 38 -0.78 -0035 0.88 Socialism . 0. 74 -0.32 0.40 0.80 Dependent Mistrust . . . -0. 49 -0.60 -0. 36 0.37 0.88 Housing S t a b i l i t y . . . 0.59 -0. 78 • 0.99 L i b e r a l Restraint . . 0. 76 -0.18 0.65 Percent Variance Percent Trace Canonical Correlation 28. 46. 0. 6 8 60 27.2 27.5 0.50 12.5 14.7 " 0.39 8.0 8.1 0.30 76.3 97.1 Eta-Squared (Eta) 0.64 (0.80) 80 The r e s u l t s of the analysis described i n the proceeding para-graph are now discussed. The h i e r a r c h i c a l c l u s t e r analysis on the s i x optimum variables returned groupings at both the 8 and the 9 groups aggregation l e v e l s which could have been c a r r i e d into the next phase of analysis. Nine groups were used and the r e s u l t s of subsequent discriminant analyses on both planning opinion scores and on the o r i g i n a l grouping c r i t e r i a are given i n Table 30. Eta-squared f o r the multiple group di s c r i m i n a t i o n on planning opinion scores i s 0.62. Not s u r p r i s i n g l y , t h i s i s very close to the eta-squared value (0.64) obtained when the planning opinion groups were discriminated on the optimum set of va r i a b l e s . These two discriminant analyses are e s s e n t i a l l y d i f f e r e n t views of the same r e l a t i o n s h i p and the r e s u l t s i n d i c a t e that, despite the indeterminacy i n the analysis design (con-t r i b u t e d l a r g e l y by a heavy re l i a n c e on c l u s t e r a n a l y s i s ) , a s a t i s -factory degree of convergence i n extracting the optimum explanatory power i n the data r e l a t i v e to the study objectives has been achieved. TABLE 30 DISCRIMINANT ANALYSES USING PLANNING VALUES GROUPS Variable Discrimination on Optimum Set of Variables Discrimination on Planning Opinions Discriminant Functions Commu- Discriminant Functions Commu-A B C D E ; n a l i t y A B C n a l i t y Housing S t a b i l i t y -0.95 1.00 Authoritarianism 0.87 0.84 Conservatism -0.20 0.87 0.43 1.00 Dependent Mistrust 0.53 -0.25 0.53 0.59 0.99 Socialism . . . . -0.64 -0.46 0.46 -0.36 1.00 L i b e r a l Restraint -0.33 -0.71 0.23 0.21 0.72 Parks and Preservation 0 , 45 -0.32 -0.94 0. 98 Housing Mix . . . . 0 .45 0. 25 Control Growth . . 0.70 0. 54 Land and Housing Control -0 .53 -0.50 0.25 0. 59 Public Transit 0 .72 -0.36 0. 65 Percent Variance Percent Trace Canonical Correlation 18.9 60.1 0.93 34.0 27.1 0.87 18.5 7.6 0.68 12.1 3.9 0.56 9.1 K2 0.35 92.5 99.9 20.0 49.8 0.61 20.0 37.7 0.56 20.0 7.6 0.29 60.0 95.1 Eta-Squared (Eta) 0.99 (0.99) 0.62 (0 .79) 00 82 CHAPTER IV THE UTILITY OF PLANNING OPINION GROUPS The Basis f o r Planning Opinion Types The analysis described i n Chapter I I I convincingly shows that personal values are e f f e c t i v e discriminators between d i s t i n c t i v e planning opinion groups. The survey data was examined from several d i f f e r e n t perspectives to ensure that some degree of convergence, i n i d e n t i f y i n g a best grouping and the best r e l a t e d values factors was achieved. However, i t i s apparent that more research i s needed to r e f i n e the i d e n t i f i c a t i o n of the basic value dimensions pertinent to planning opinion formation. Ways i n which t h i s task might be approached are discussed i n Chapter V. At t h i s juncture, i t i s assumed that greater refinement i n s p e c i f i c a t i o n of b a s i c values and "planning opinion types" i s achievable, and i n a n t i c i p a t i o n of t h i s , the various uses than can be made of them are discussed. The planning opinion groups which were keyed d i r e c t l y on planning opinion c r i t e r i a are used to i l l u s t r a t e these uses since they are most representative of the sorts of groups that might eventually be synthesized using a mixture of values and planning opinion c r i t e r i a . In other words, i t i s expected that, i f t h i s l i n e of enquiry i s pursued, the equivalent of the "planning opinion types" and of the "planning values types" could be made to correspond f a i r l y exactly, and, at t h i s point, i t i s apparent that the planning opinion groups are the best proxies for these i d e a l "types". Any area can be analyzed by conducting a routine survey to 83 determine the frequency d i s t r i b u t i o n of "types" within i t . A d i s -aggregated analysis using these types w i l l preserve more information on opinion variance within the area being tested than would any other p r a c t i c a l disaggregation technique. Once a "community values p r o f i l e " (frequency d i s t r i b u t i o n of "types") has been prepared f o r a given area, i t can be used to analyze issues as they a r i s e , i r r e s p e c t i v e of whether these issues were of any consequence at the time of the p r o f i l e survey. An i l l u s t r a t i o n i s i n order. Assume that the 207 cases i n t h i s study represent a random sample i n an area of i n t e r e s t . Then, the graph i n Figure 5 i s a "community values p r o f i l e " of the area. This "types" frequency p r o f i l e i s not too revealing on i t s own, but serves as the basis f o r issue analyses. The next step i s to examine an "issue-opinion table" such as the one on the housing mix issue given i n Table 31. Percent Frequency 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Types Figure 5 <— Community values p r o f i l e . 84 TABLE 31 ISSUE-OPINION TABLE: HOUSING MIX Type Issue 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Housing Mix 7.2 11.3 4.4 3.9 5.4 3.9 7.4 5.2 4.1 The average scores shown are a c t u a l l y r a t i o n a l score approximations of the Housing Mix factor re-scaled i n t o the range 2-14. The score i s a simple additive combination of the responses to two issue statements ("High r i s e apartments should be confined to a few s p e c i a l areas of the C i t y " and "Townhouses and s i m i l a r types of housing should be r e s t r i c t e d to c e r t a i n areas of Vancouver"). Hence, a score of 8 represents n e u t r a l i t y on the compound issue. Only type '2' respondents have an average opinion (11.3) favorable towards housing mix. Types '1' and '7' are j u s t shy of n e u t r a l i t y at 7.2 and 7.4 r e s p e c t i v e l y . A l l other types are decidedly i n opposition to housing mix ( t h e i r means average approximately 4.5). A simultaneous examination of Table 31 and Figure 5 reveals much about the f a v o r a b i l i t y towards housing mix i n t h i s hypothetical te s t area. I t can be stated that 9 percent of residents i n the area favor housing mix and have an average support score of 11.3, 27 percent are s l i g h t l y opposed to housing mix (with support scores of approximately 7.3), and the remainder (64 percent) are strongly opposed (with scores of 85 approximately 4.5). Therefore, an estimate of the o v e r a l l average score i s 0.09(11.3) + 0.27(7.3) + 0.64(4.5) = 5.9. Similar information could be assembled f o r a l l areas f o r which there were "community values p r o f i l e s " and f o r a l l issues f o r which there were "issue-opinion tables". The former could be obtained i n i n i t i a l surveys and could be revised at appropriate i n t e r v a l s . The "issue-opinion tables" could be constructed f o r any issue that arose by conducting very small surveys (20-30 observations f o r each "type"). In some cases, estimates of probable group reactions to issues could be used i n rough a n a l y t i c work. This would be f a c i l i t a t e d by the greater f a m i l i a r i t y with the latent values basis of each type which would n a t u r a l l y occur as experience with t h i s method increased. A s i m i l a r analysis (by "types") to that advocated here was conducted to predict the r e s u l t s of the 1960 n a t i o n a l e l e c t i o n i n the United States (Sola Pool and Abelson, 1961). In th i s p r o j e c t , the voters were categorized i n t o 480 types. On the basis of the information contained i n 60 opinion p o l l s conducted over a seven year period, estimates were made of the e f f e c t s of the important e l e c t i o n issues on the voting stance of each type. A probable voting d i s t r i b u t i o n f o r each type was prepared and, by a process of aggregation, state by state predictions were made of the outcome of the e l e c t i o n . These predictions correlated 0.82 with the actual outcome. Consider the assertion that the use of "planning opinion types" preserves more information on opinion variance than any other p r a c t i c a l 86 grouping methodology. I t was investigated by comparing estimates of cumulative frequency d i s t r i b u t i o n s of opinions on a number of selected issues. Two d i f f e r e n t estimates of each d i s t r i b u t i o n — o n e based on the "planning opinion types" and another based on the census t r a c t groups— were compared to the act u a l d i s t r i b u t i o n f o r two separate issues. The r e s u l t i n g cumulative frequency graphs are shown i n Figure 6. The score on each issue i s the sum of responses to two items and thus scores are whole integers ranging from 2-14 (with 8 as a n e u t r a l p o i n t ) . Census t r a c t groups are used i n a c o n t r o l estimate to represent the l e v e l of accuracy that could be expected to r e s u l t from a simple aggregation of sub—area measurements. It i s apparent from Figure 6 that use of "planning opinion type" estimates r e s u l t s i n a better approximation to the actual d i s t r i b u t i o n than does use of a sub-area aggregation strategy (repre-sented by the use of census t r a c t groups i n t h i s instance). The l a t t e r method preserves l i t t l e more than the mean response tr a n s l a t e d i n t o a threshold value. This t e s t supports the contention that grouping on planning opinion and values c r i t e r i a i s superior to other disaggregative techniques. Analysis Using Planning Opinion Types L i s t s of respondents by "type" obtained from i n i t i a l and update surveys i n a community could be used to assemble "type samples". These Percent e m u l a t i v e Frequency 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Figure 6 — Cumulative frequency d i s t r i b u t i o n s of opinions on two i s s u e s . 88 "type samples" could be used to establish the average "type opinions" on issues of interest. Depending on the issue, a mailed questionnaire could be used for this purpose, or else "types representatives" could be asked to appear in person at simulation or plan presentations and urged to indicate the extent of their approval or disapproval in some defined manner. In,fact, "citizen panels" could be constructed to simulate the values profile of any particular portion of a community and used in interactive types of planning analyses programs. Before discussing this latest proposal at greater length, an example issue-analysis is presented. Suppose that a planner wants to introduce controlled higher density development in the form of integrated design projects into several single family residential areas of Vancouver. He is convinced that properly designed higher density projects w i l l foster a new accep-tance of mixed density housing in these types of neighborhoods. However, the key question i s : In which particular neighborhood might he find enough citizen support to undertake such a project? If the community could be shown a successful example of high density integrated develop-ment, i t would be easier to promote similar ventures in other areas. Suppose that the census tracts surveyed in this study comprise the area under consideration for this venture and that the distribution of "types" within them has been accurately ascertained. Then, Table 32 can be used along with Table 31 to provide the answer to the key question. The average pro housing mix opinion score (or an estimate of the whole 89 TABLE 32 "TYPES" COMPOSITION OF CENSUS TRACTS Percentage of "type" i n census t r a c t /-I L. ens us Tract "Type" T o t a l 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 7 25 15 15 5 15 5 20 0 0 100 23 15 20 5 10 5 15 15 10 5 100 3 22 13 26 0 18 :> 13 0 4 4 100 28 8 0 21 4 13 21 8 17 8 100 45 0 5 5 0 24 5 28 24 9 100 49 0 8 12 8 17 13 17 17 8 100 54 19 4 0 19 19 4 4 8 23 100 38 23 11 0 4 11 8 19 12 12 100 53 4 4 4 9 26 4 4 18 0 31 100 score d i s t r i b u t i o n ) can be computed for each of the nine t r a c t s . Thus, i t i s found that Census Tracts 7, 23, 38, and 3 with average scores of 6.8, 6.7, 6.5, and 6.0 r e s p e c t i v e l y have the highest pro housing mix opinion. Although a l l of these scores are somewhat on the a n t i side of the n e u t r a l point, the i n d i c a t i o n i s , nevertheless, that promotion of the integrated design scheme would meet with the l e a s t resistance i n Census Tracts 7, 23, or 38. Community Values Panels A " c i t i z e n panel" having a values p r o f i l e i d e n t i c a l to any p a r t i c u l a r "community values p r o f i l e " could be assembled and used i n 90 i n t e r a c t i v e programs to provide step by step feedback as community plans are evolved. Through the use of simulation techniques, a l t e r -native futures that might otherwise be d i f f i c u l t to conceptualize could be presented to the panel f o r comment and evaluation. Examples of such types of simulation are presented i n the l i t e r a t u r e by a number of authors who have experimented with them (Helmer, 1966; Chapin, 1965). "Community values panels" could be asked to rank planning goals as a framework f or the preparation of q u a l i t a t i v e goal statements that would t r u l y r e f l e c t the concerns of the community. Such statements could be updated by " c i t i z e n panels" at regular i n t e r v a l s to r e f l e c t changes in' community perception brough about by events or by commentary i n the news media. A couple of cautionary notes should be introduced at th i s point. F i r s t l y , when making use of "community values panels" to estimate community f e e l i n g and opinion on planning matters, planners would have to be aware of the educational change e f f e c t that any simulation, presenta-t i o n or i n t e r a c t i o n i s having on the p a r t i c i p a n t s . The degree of plan promotion introduced should not exceed that which could conceivably be aimed at the o v e r a l l p u b l i c and which would withstand the onslaught of countering arguments. The danger of a l t e r i n g the values of the panel members through hard s e l l promotion i s a r e a l one. The u t i l i t y of the panel rests on i t s v i a b i l i t y i n simulating the opinions and values of the / larger community. Care should be exercised to ensure that the panel 91 guides the program rather than the reverse. A natural safeguard exists i n the fact that any shortcomings i n t h i s regard w i l l probably r e s u l t i n self-deception rather than i n community deception ( p a r t i c u -l a r l y i f the p u b l i c i s allowed to view the proceedings). Community t e l e v i s i o n coverage of such presentations would be an e f f e c t i v e way to ensure proper balance as w e l l as to generate community i n t e r e s t i n the planning process (Lemaistre, 1972). A second misuse of the methods advocated i s to employ them to examine problems on too small-a s c a l e . The e n t i r e formulation i s based on "types" defined with respect to broad scale planning concerns. These "types" would not be e f f e c t i v e i n the analysis of neighborhood scale planning issues since i n t e r - i n d i v i d u a l equity considerations would begin to assume primary importance. People's socio-economic positions r e l a t i v e to the l o c a l issues at hand would begin to overshadow the e f f e c t of values ( p a r t i c u l a r l y of broad scale values) i n determining t h e i r opinions. "Planning opinion types" could also be used to gauge the representativeness of the c i t i z e n input to free involvement p u b l i c p a r t i c i p a t i o n programs. The best way to do t h i s i s to ask p a r t i c i p a n t s to complete a b r i e f questionnaire designed to ascertain which broad "type" they resemble the most. The frequency d i s t r i b u t i o n of types p a r t i c i p a t i n g i n the program could be compared to that of the community. I f the p a r t i c i p a n t s i n these programs were observed to be s e r i o u s l y unrepresent-ati v e of the larger community, program strategy could be a l t e r e d to e l i c i t p a r t i c i p a t i o n from the poorly represented "types". 92 Questionnaires for estimating a respondent's "type" could be quite b r i e f and f a i r l y v a r i a b l e i n content. Once a s o l i d values basis f o r the "types" i s found, i t would be a r e l a t i v e l y straightforward matter to se l e c t values dimensions and (or) planning opinion factors that are s u f f i c i e n t l y e f f e c t i v e discriminators between groups to be used i n c l a s s i f i c a t i o n . Ultimately, "ways to plan" narratives could be composed f o r each "type" i n a format s i m i l a r to that used by Morris (1956) i n h i s Ways to Live questionnaire. With t h i s type of instrument, respondents could choose t h e i r associated "type" d i r e c t l y . 93 CHAPTER V THE STATE OF THE QUEST Directions f o r Further Inquiry This study has succeeded i n revealing a valuable l i n e of i n q u i r y , but has l e f t many matters i n an indeterminate state v i s - a - v i s the design of a t r u l y useful methodology. In t h i s chapter, possible refinements to future studies of t h i s type i n the areas of improved scale r e l i a b i l i t i e s , more s p e c i f i c measures of values, improvements i n the determination of planning opinions, larger sample s i z e s , and a l t e r n a t i v e grouping techniques are discussed. R e l i a b i l i t i e s : Perhaps the most obvious thing that can be done to e x p l i cate a stronger r e l a t i o n s h i p between values and planning opinions i s to improve the measurement r e l i a b i l i t i e s of both values and planning opinions. The average measurement r e l i a b i l i t y achieved i n t h i s study was approximately 0.75. I f i t could be raised to 0.85 or higher, corresponding improvement i n v a l i d i t y measures would probably be r e a l i z e d . The most obvious way to accomplish t h i s i s to include more items i n the measure of each dimension. A l t e r n a t i v e l y , attempts could be made to f i n d items that are more strongly correlated with t h e i r respective s c a l e s . Since these ways are not mutually exclusive, a two-pronged attack i s probably i n order. Too few items seemed to be the major problem with the measures of planning opinion i n t h i s study, whereas the values measures suffered from low item c o r r e l a t i o n s . 94 The Values Domain: In the values domain, s i x dimensions were i d e n t i f i e d that were u s e f u l i n discriminating between planning opinion groups. These dimensions were Authoritarianism, Conservatism, Dependent Mis t r u s t , Socialism, Independent Cynicism and L i b e r a l Restraint. Ninety-seven items were used i n the construction of r a t i o n a l scores for these s i x dimensions. Their scale r e l i a b i l i t i e s varied between 0.67 and 0.90 (averaging 0.76). These values dimensions and t h e i r corresponding items should serve as u s e f u l departing points i n the design of values components i n follow-up studies. The nature of the s i x dimensions indicates that most of the e f f o r t should be devoted to those values having to do with people's conceptions of i d e a l s o c i a l norms, t h e i r expectations and f e l t o bligations towards others i n so c i e t y , and t h e i r p r e d i s p o s i t i o n to accept tor;reject v a r i e t y i n l i f e s t y l e s and philosophies. A re-assessment of published scales designed to measure values i n these areas would be a useful preliminary step i n a further study. Perhaps some of the scales could be used to improve on measurement r e l i a b i l i t i e s and to expand the coverage i n a number of valuation areas. Another useful approach would be to conduct a ser i e s of smaller surveys asking respondents d i r e c t l y what the r e l a t i o n s h i p i s between t h e i r values and t h e i r opinions on a range of planning issues. Such interviews could provide valuable i n s i g h t s that would aid i n the task of e x p l i c i t l y d e f i n i n g the nature of the values that should be included i n further studies. 95 Planning Opinions: Considerable improvement i n the formulation and measurement of opinions on planning issues should also be a goal of subsequent studies. I t i s apparent that too few (forty) planning opinion items were included i n the questionnaire of t h i s study. As a r e s u l t , some of the issues i n i t i a l l y i d e n t i f i e d as important did not c l e a r l y emerge i n the f a c t o r i n g of the statement v a r i a b l e s . It was also evident that the planning issue statements were not l u c i d enough to produce as strong a set of factors as had been o p t i m i s t i c a l l y a n t i c ipated. Perhaps i f they had been presented together as a unitary component of the questionnaire, rather than randomly i n t e r -mixed with values statements, the i n t e r c o r r e l a t i o n s among them would have been stronger and the f a c t o r analysis r e s u l t s somewhat better and more stab l e . Unstructured interviews might be h e l p f u l i n i d e n t i f y i n g the unidimensional. issues that e x i s t i n the public consciousness. In any case, a better approach might be to use one of the r a t i o n a l scale construction techniques to define strongly unidimensional planning opinions. Guttman s c a l i n g , H-scaling, the unfolding technique, or a number of other methods (Dawes, 1972; Stouffer, 1962; Coombs, 1964) could perhaps be used e f f e c t i v e l y . Whichever technique i s employed, i t should be one that tends to e l i c i t a high degree of consistency from respondents by encouraging them to make intercomparisons among response choices to sets of items. R e p l i c a t i o n surveys w i l l probably be required to design t r u l y e f f e c t i v e scales of these types. 96 A l t e r n a t i v e s to Grouping Analysis: Latent structure analysis can be employed to create groups d i r e c t l y from the responses to a set of dichotomous items (Lazarsfeld .and Henry, 1968). This could be a very e f f e c t i v e technique since i t would avoid the need for two s t a g e s — f a c t o r analysis and grouping a n a l y s i s — i n the creation of groups from an i n i t i a l data matrix. Latent structure analysis i d e n t i f i e s a predeter-mined number of l a t e n t groups each of which i s s p e c i f i e d by i t s set of p r o b a b i l i t i e s of p o s i t i v e response to the statement items used i n the a n a l y s i s . The nature of each group i s i n t e r p r e t a b l e from t h i s set of item p r o b a b i l i t i e s . Unfortunately, a r e l i a b l e l a t e n t structure analysis requires a f a i r l y large sample (n3* 1,000), and the l a t e n t structure analysis computer routines developed to date are f a i r l y i n e f f i c i e n t (Lazarsfeld and Henry, 1968). The l a t t e r l i m i t a t i o n i s more serious than the former since, a large sample would be required i n any case to develop a usable "planning opinion types" formulation. A f a c t o r analysis which treats variables as observations and respondents as score c r i t e r i a (Q Factor Analysis) could also be used to create groups from data i n a s i n g l e d i r e c t step (Rummell, 1970; Winch, 1947). Such an analysis would y i e l d loadings of cases on f a c t o r s . Thus, clu s t e r s of cases loading highly and i n the same d i r e c t i o n on a f a c t o r would define a v a l i d group. Unfortunately, t h i s method has the more serious disadvantages of both latent structure analysis and of the two stage approach. It s use would require a huge amount of computer time i f any reasonable number of cases were to be analyzed, and a considerable 97 amount of subjective i n t e r p r e t a t i o n would be required to s e l e c t the s p e c i f i c f a c t o r s o l u t i o n to be used i n group formulation. Perhaps the best course of a c t i o n — g i v e n the present state of the a r t — w o u l d be to use c l u s t e r a n a l y s i s , but to c a r e f u l l y consider the objective function which i s to be optimized by the grouping (Ward, 1963). Another a l t e r n a t i v e i s to plo t a l l the cases on each p a i r of c r i t e r i a and to manually group them ( i n much the same manner as one might carry out a graphical f a c t o r a n a l y s i s ) . F i n a l l y , i t appears from the study r e s u l t s that the socio-economic component should be de-emphasized i n future studies. Researchers should c o l l e c t some information i n t h i s (domain purely f o r the sake of i n t e r e s t , but those questions that might be considered object-ionable should d e f i n i t e l y be deleted. The sex and housing s t a b i l i t y measures that were revealed to have some us e f u l discriminatory power should be retained, and, perhaps, the measurement of the l a t t e r could be improved. In any case, the emphasis i n the immediate future should be on discovering the appropriate values dimensions. The s p e c i f i c r e l a t i o n -ship between socio-economic measures and these values could be studied at some l a t e r time. 98 Summary and Conclusion This study was designed to ascertain whether measures of personal values could be used as the bases for the synthesis of stable "planning opinion types" within a community. Such "types" could be used i n a v a r i e t y of i n t e r a c t i v e planning analysis s i t u a t i o n s and f o r the purpose of formulating broad scale community planning goals. The l a t t e r task i s a v i t a l l y important step i n the planning process and one that has been l a r g e l y ignored by planners. Values are portrayed i n the l i t e r a t u r e as the latent bases for our acceptance or r e j e c t i o n of a l t e r n a t i v e s . I t seems reasonable, therefore, to assert that the formation of a person's opinions on broad scale planning issues w i l l be d i r e c t l y linked with h i s values. I t i s also probable that opinions on planning issues spring from a r e l a t i v e l y few value dimensions from the domain of a l l possible values. I f t h i s i s the case, then a knowledge of t h i s values sub-domain and r e l i a b l e instruments to measure i t s important dimensions could be very e f f e c t i v e l y used at several points i n the planning process. An objective of t h i s study was to test the assertion that values measures add s i g n i f i c a n t l y to the power of socio-economic variables i n discriminating between groups of respondents defined on planning opinions. This test serves to i n d i c a t e whether the quest f o r a p a r s i -monious set of latent planning values i s a useful one i n l i g h t of the explanation of planning opinions that can be r e a l i z e d by using 99 t r a d i t i o n a l socio-economic measures. A second objective was to determine how e f f e c t i v e l y values dimensions could be defined that are e f f i c i e n t enough discriminators between planning opinion groups to a c t u a l l y be used i n planning a n a l y s i s . These objectives were formulated within the i d e a l i z e d frame-work of the r a t i o n a l planning model. The four key steps of t h i s model are goal formulation, i d e n t i f i c a t i o n of a l t e r n a t i v e means, evaluation and p o l i c y choice, and e f f e c t u a t i o n . The argument here i s that "planning opinion types" may be the key to proper goal formulation and to the co l l a b o r a t i v e planning approach which has as i t s aim a genuine and continuous interchange between planners and the community. A s e l f administering questionnaire was designed to measure var i a b l e s i n the three separate domains of values, of planning opinions, and of socio-economic p o s i t i o n s . The data c o l l e c t e d were then analyzed following the procedure sketched i n Figure 4. Simply stated, each of the three domains was f a c t o r analyzed to reduce them to r e l i a b l e and manageable sets of f a c t o r scores; opinion groups were synthesized using a c l u s t e r analysis on planning opinion f a c t o r s ; and, ultimately, these groups were used i n discriminant analyses with the other v a r i a b l e sets as di s c r i m i n a -tors to te s t the primary hypothesis. Factor analysis of the planning issue statements re s u l t e d i n the s o l u t i o n summarized i n Table 12. The f i v e planning opinion scores computed for each case measured (support of) Control Growth, Parks and 100 Preservation, Land and Housing Control, Public T r a n s i t , and Housing Mix. A h i e r a r c h i c a l grouping analysis using these scores as grouping keys l e d to the d e f i n i t i o n of nine d i s t i n c t planning opinion groups. Factor analysis of the values statements from the question-naire resulted i n seven r a t i o n a l factor scores. These factors (as indicated i n Table 23) were named Authoritarianism, Dependent Mi s t r u s t , Socialism, L i b e r a l Restraint, Conservatism, Independent Cynicism, and Religious Cynicism. S i m i l a r l y , the i n i t i a l set of sixteen socio-economic variables was reduced to nine a f t e r a f a c t o r analysis indicated which ones could l o g i c a l l y be combined in t o r a t i o n a l f a c t o r scores. Two discriminant analyses were made to test the hypothesis. Values and socio-economic variables combined were found to discriminate s i g n i f i c a n t l y better between the planning opinion groups than d i d the socio-economic variables alone (as indicated by t h e i r eta-squared values of 0.76 compared to 0.41). S i m i l a r l y , a .discrimination using values alone produced an eta-squared of 0.64. A stepwise discriminant program was used to f i n d a reduced set of values and socio-economic variables which discriminated most e f f i c i e n t l y between planning opinion groups. The s i x optimum variables thus i d e n t i f i e d ( f i v e of.the seven values variables and "housing s t a b i l i t y " ) were then used to create a new set of nine "planning values groups". I t was found that planning opinions discriminated s i g n i f i c a n t l y between these groups (with an eta-squared equal to 0.62). Thus, the strength of the d i s c r i m i -101 nation was r e l a t i v e l y i n v a r i a n t i r r e s p e c t i v e of whether planning opinions were used as grouping keys and values as discriminators or v i c e versa. The strength of these discriminations (eta-squared greater than 0.60) suggests that traces of a stable l i n k between values and planning opinions have been uncovered. Although t h i s study has not discovered a strong enough r e l a t i o n s h i p to j u s t i f y immediate use of "planning opinion types" i n planning a n a l y s i s , i t has produced sound enough r e s u l t s to j u s t i f y f u r t h e r studies of the l i n k between values and planning opinions. Chapter IV i s devoted to a discussion of the p o t e n t i a l uses of "planning opinion types" to stimulate further study along the same l i n e s . The creation and use of "community values panels" to represent the views of any given sub-community i n i n t e r a c t i v e planning programs i s emphasized. The use of "community values p r o f i l e s " i s advocated f o r evaluation of public p a r t i c i p a t i o n programs and f o r a range of planning analysis purposes. Studies designed to carry on with the task of e x p l i c a t i n g the la t e n t values basis f o r broad scale planning opinions must improve on the measurement r e l i a b i l i t i e s and on the grouping technique employed i n t h i s study. I t i s suggested that an interview survey which allowed respondents to d i r e c t l y explain the values basis for t h e i r planning opinions would be h e l p f u l i n defining the boundaries of the sought a f t e r values domain. 102 Future studies should t r y to improve on the measurement of the planning opinions themselves. A number of s c a l i n g techniques might be employed to e f f e c t t h i s , and a l a r g e r number of questionnaire items should be devoted to the task. F i n a l l y , to r e i t e r a t e , t h i s study has convincingly demonstrated the superior power of values over socio-economic measures i n the e x p l i c a -t i o n of planning opinions. I t has p a r t i a l l y discovered the values domain which can be instrumental i n the synthesis of stable "community values types" f o r use i n a v a r i e t y of planning analysis programs. And, i t has pointed the way f o r future e f f o r t s aimed at these same objectives. 103 APPENDIX A VALUES STATEMENTS CATEGORIZED BY VALUATION AREA Note: The names and sources of scales from which statements were taken are l i s t e d on the right-hand sides of the pages. Introspectiveness 20-1 often worry about things I have done or s a i d . 26-1 am usually carefree. 30-1 t r u s t my f e e l i n g s more than my thoughts. 44-We should eat, drink and be merry, f o r tomorrow we die. 46-1 l i k e to discuss the more serious questions of l i f e with my f r i e n d s . 57-Logical thinking i s c e r t a i n l y e s s e n t i a l to progress. 72-No time i s better spent than that devoted to thinking about the ultimate purposes of l i f e . 85-1 generally do and say things quickly without stopping to think. 88—1 usually stay i n the back-ground at p a r t i e s and get-togethers. 140-1 frequently wonder why people behave as they do. 159-A gut reaction i s a better guide to action than any t h e o r e t i c a l approach. S e n s i t i v i t y (Eysenck and Eysenck, 1969^ p. 203) Carefreeness (Eysenck and Eysenck, 1969, p. 202) Spontaneity (Vancouver Urban Futures Project, n.d.) Expression (Robinson and Shaver, 1969, p. 446) Introspectiveness (Eysenck and Eysenck, 1969, p. 234) Suspiciousness (Vancouver Urban Futures Pr o j e c t , n.d.) Restraint (Robinson and Shaver, 1969, p. 446) Impulsiveness (Eysenck and Eysenck, 1969, p. 200) S o c i a b i l i t y (Eysenck and Eysenck, 1969, p. 200) Introspectiveness (Eysenck and Eysenck, 1969, p. 234) Spontaneity (Vancouver Urban Futures Project, n.d.) 104 Regard f o r People 6-Most people don't want things to be d i f f e r e n t , they j u s t want more of what they've already got. 42- Anyone who completely t r u s t s someone else i s asking f o r trouble. 43- When you get r i g h t down to i t , quite a few people r e a l l y do care what happens to you. 50-It's human nature never to do anything unless there's some personal advantage to i t . 69-Many people only engage i n sports such as s k i i n g and g o l f i n g because of the status they think they get. 102-Generally speaking, people w i l l work f a i r l y hard without being forced to do so. 121-Most people know what's good for them and aren't too e a s i l y fooled. 160-The best way to handle people i s to t e l l them what they want to hear. A l i e n a t i o n - Cynicism 25-Real friends are s t i l l easy to f i n d . 40-1 f i n d n a t i o n a l spectator sports ( l i k e f o o t b a l l , base-b a l l and hockey) pretty boring. S o c i a l Cynicism (Vancouver Urban Futures Project, n.d.) E x p l o i t a t i v e (Shaw and Wright, 1967, p. 438) F a i t h i n People (Rosenberg, 1956, p. 690) E x p l o i t a t i v e (Shaw and Wright, 1967, p. 438) S o c i a l Cynicism (Vancouver Urban Futures Pr o j e c t , n.d.) E x p l o i t a t i v e (Shaw and Wright, 1967, p. 438) E x p l o i t a t i v e (Shaw and Wright, 1967, p. 438) E x p l o i t a t i v e (Shaw and Wright, 1967, p. 438) General Morale ( M i l l e r , 1970, p. 156) A l i e n a t i o n (Bonjean, H i l l and McLemore, 1967, p. 31) 77-Money i s the most important fa c t o r i n f l u e n c i n g p u b l i c p o l i c i e s . P o l i t i c a l Cynicism (Robinson, Rusk and Head, 1968, p. 481) 105 9 5 - P o l i t i c i a n s represent the general p u b l i c more frequently than they represent s p e c i a l groups. 101-These days a person doesn't r e a l l y know whom he can count on. 103-0n the whole, a s i n g l e l i f e would probably be les s s a t i s -f y i n g than a married l i f e . 108-Religion i s mostly myth. 122- Once they're i n o f f i c e , most elected o f f i c i a l s do remember the people who elected them. 123- The s i t u a t i o n of the average person i s getting a l o t better. 142- In order to get nominated, most candidates f o r p o l i t i c a l o f f i c e have to make some pretty shady bargains. 143- I f people r e a l l y admitted the tr u t h , they would agree that c h i l d r e n are more often a nuisance than a pleasure to t h e i r parents. 152-Our p u b l i c education i s i n pretty good shape. 154-The country i s run by a few people i n power and there i s not much the re s t of us can do about i t . P o l i t i c a l Cynicism (Robinson, Rusk and Head, 1968, p. 481) Anomia (Bonjean, H i l l and McLemore, 1967, p. 34) A l i e n a t i o n (Robinson and Shaver, 1969, p. 201) Al i e n a t i o n (Robinson and Shaver, 1969, p. 201) Government Trust (Vancouver Urban Futures Pr o j e c t , n.d.) Anomia (Bonjean, H i l l and McLemore, 1967, p. 34) P o l i t i c a l Cynicism (Robinson, Rusk and Head, 1968, p. 481) A l i e n a t i o n (Robinson and Shaver, 1969, p. 201) Al i e n a t i o n (Robinson and Shaver, 1969, p. 201) P o l i t i c a l Fatalism (Vancouver Urban Futures Pr o j e c t , n.d.) Dogmatism 7-This country has the best example of government yet devised. Nationalism (Digman, 1962, p. 435) 106 32-The worst crime a person could commit i s to attack p u b l i c a l l y the people who believe i n the same things as he does. 41-It i s not necessary f o r a person to devote himself to an i d e a l or cause f o r l i f e to become meaningful. 61-In group undertakings, you often r e a l i z e that your own plans were not the best. 83-In a heated discussion people have a way of bringing up i r r e l e v a n t issues rather than s t i c k i n g to the point. 106-Most of the ideas which get printed nowadays aren't worth the paper they are printed on. 119-Ensuring that there i s complete freedom f o r a l l i s more import-ant than the maintenance of i n t e r n a l order wi t h i n the nation. 144-In the long run, the best way to l i v e i s to pick friends and associates whose tastes and b e l i e f s are the same as one's own. 147-In a discussion, I often f i n d i t necessary to repeat myself several times to make sure I am being understood. Authoritarianism 2-Patriotism and l o y a l t y are the f i r s t and the most important requirements of a good c i t i z e n . 24-0bedience and respect for authority are the most important v i r t u e s that children should lea r n . Dogmatism (Rokeach, 1960, p. 73) Dogmatism (Rokeach, 1960. p. 73) Dominance (Eysenck and Eysenck, 1969, p. 232) Dogmatism (Rokeach, 1960, p. 73) Dogmatism (Rokeach, 1960, p. 73) Tendermindedness (Eysenck, 1954, p. 276) Nationalism (Digman, 1962, p. 435) Dogmatism (Rokeach, 1960, p. 73) Acceptance of Authority (Robinson, and Shaver, 1969, p. 446) Authoritarianism (Bonjean, H i l l and McLemore, 1967, p. 49) 107 36-Young people'sometimes get re b e l l i o u s ideas, but as they grow up they ought to get over them and s e t t l e down. Authoritarianism (Bonjean, H i l l and McLemore, 1967, p. 49) 89-The facts on crime and sexual immorality show that we w i l l have to crack down harder on young people i f we are going to save our moral standards. 116-What t h i s country needs most, more than laws and p o l i t i c a l jprjograms, i s a few courageous and devoted leaders i n whom the people can put t h e i r f a i t h . 130-We would have less crime i f our laws were more s t r i c t . 157-If people would t a l k less and work more, everybody would be better o f f . Acceptance of Authority (Robinson and Shaver, 1969, p. 446) Authoritarianism (Bonjean, H i l l and McLemore, 1967, p. 49) S o c i a l Support (Vancouver Urban Futures Project, n.d.) Authoritarianism (Bonjean, H i l l and McLemore, 1967, p. 49) Community Integratedness 5-A community would get along better i f each one would mind h i s own business and l e t others take care of t h e i r s . Cooperative Community At t i t u d e (Robinson, Rusk and Head, 1968, p. 393) 39-The most rewarding organizations a person can belong to are l o c a l clubs and associations rather than large nationwide organizations. 54-We should have greater respect f o r a man who i s w e l l estab-l i s h e d i n h i s l o c a l community than f o r a man who i s widely known i n h i s f i e l d but who has no l o c a l roots. Local Attitude (Robinson, Rusk and Head, 1968, p. 399) Local Attitude (Robinson, Rusk and Head, 1968, p. 399) 65-We have too many organizations for doing good i n the community. Cooperative Community At t i t u d e (Robinson, Rusk and Head, 1968, p. 393) 108 71-The s o c i a l needs of the c i t i z e n s are the r e s p o n s i b i l i t y of them-selves and t h e i r f a m i l i e s and not of the community. 117-Most communities are good enough as they are without s t a r t i n g any new improvement programs. 133-Each one of us can make r e a l progress only when the group as a whole makes progress. 151-What i s good f o r the community i s good f o r me. Cooperative Community Attitude (Robinson, Rusk and Head, 1968, P. 393) Cooperative Community Attitude (Robinson, Rusk and Head, 1968, p. 393) Cooperative Community Attitude (Robinson, Rusk and Head, 1968, p. 393) Cooperative Community Attitude (Robinson, Rusk and Head, 1968, p. 393) Humanitarianism 3-It's j u s t as w e l l that the struggle of l i f e tends to weed out those who cannot stand the pace. 23-Under some conditions, war i s necessary to maintain j u s t i c e . 29-Justice demands the punishment of cri m i n a l s . 34-There should be a law against any couple having more than two c h i l d r e n . Toughmindedness (Eysenck, 1954, P. 277) Humanitarianism (Shaw and Wright, 1967, p. 352) Humanitarianism (Shaw and Wright, 1967, p. 352) A n t i S o c i a l T r a d i t i o n (Vancouver Urban Futures Project, n.d.) 99-When a person goes on welfare, S o c i a l Support (Vancouver Urban his r i g h t to vote should be Futures Project, n.d.) suspended u n t i l he i s employed again. 115-Capital punishment gives the cr i m i n a l what he deserves. 118-Our treatment of criminals i s too harsh; we should try to cure them, not punish them. 149-People who commit crimes such' as rape and attacks on ch i l d r e n ought to be p u b l i c a l l y whipped. Humanitarianism (Shaw and Wright, 1967, p. 352) Tendermindedness (Eysenck, 1954, P. 277) Toughmindedness (Digman, 1962, p. 435) 109 155-Persons with serious defects and diseases should be pre-vented from having c h i l d r e n . 158-There i s no conceivable j u s t i f i c a t i o n f o r war. 162-The death penalty i s wrong and barbaric; i t should therefore be abolished. Toughmindedness (Eysenck, 1954, p. 277) Humanitarianism (Shaw and Wright, 1967, p. 352) Tendermindedness (Digman, 1962, p. 435) Conservatism 8-We shouldn't worry about a few dissenting i n d i v i d u a l s -i t ' s the majority that we should plan f o r . 19-The c i t y grows best through pri v a t e decisions by i n d i v i d -uals who know t h e i r own needs. S o c i a l Support (Vancouver Urban Futures Project, n.d.) S o c i a l Individualism (Vancouver Urban Futures Project, n.d.) 21-People would not do t h e i r best i f government owned a l l industry. 31-In taking part i n any form of world o r g a n i z a t i o n , i t h i s country should make c e r t a i n that none of i t s independence and power i s l o s t . Economic Conservatism (Shaw and Wright, 1967, p. 312) Radicalism (Eysenck, 1954, p. 277) 37-Religion offers the best hope Religionism (Digman, 1962, p. 435) for survival of our c i v i l i z a t i o n . 47-Ultimately, private property Radicalism (Eysenck, 1954, p. 277) should be abolished and complete socialism introduced. 51-Instruction i n b i r t h control ought to be given to a l l young people. 56-Private ownership of property i s necessary for economic progress. 59-Very few unions e l e c t o f f i c e r s by honest s e c r e t - b a l l o t e l e c t i o n s . Sex Permissiveness (Digman, 1962, p. 435) Economic Conservatism (Shaw and Wright, 1967, p. 312) Conservatism (Robinson and Shaver, 1969, p. 393) 110 60-There should be f a r more p o l i t i c a l and c o n t r o v e r s i a l discussion on the radio than we have now. 63-Most people on p u b l i c assistance are needy, not greedy. 68-Marriage as a s o c i a l i n s t i t u t i o n i s l o s i n g i t s s i g n i f i c a n c e today. 74-The wealth of t h i s country i s r i g h t f u l l y placed l a r g e l y i n the hands of the few people who are capable of managing our large businesses and i n d u s t r i e s . 78-If our economic system were j u s t , there would be much less crime. 80-A person's own a b i l i t y should be the only r e s t r i c t i o n upon the amount of money he may honestly acquire. 92-Religion i s probably a greater source of trouble i n thecworld than i t i s a source of good. 113- Income taxes should be eliminated f o r the lowest income groups. 114- Any p r i v a t e industry abusing the p u b l i c i n t e r e s t should be severely penalized. 135-Some sex education should be given to a l l boys and g i r l s of grade school age. 150-Private developers and business-men often know better than the government where developments'; c./.l*. should or should not occur. P o l i t i c a l Conservatism (Digman, 1962, p. 435) Acceptance of P u b l i c Dependence (Anderson, 1965, p. 112) A n t i S o c i a l T r a d i t i o n (Vancouver Urban Futures Project, n.d.) R e d i s t r i b u t i o n of Wealth (Shaw and Wright, 1967, p. 188) Economic Conservatism (Shaw and Wright, 1967, p. 312) R e d i s t r i b u t i o n of Wealth (Shaw and Wright, 1967, p. 188) Religionism (Digman, 1962, p. 435) R e d i s t r i b u t i o n of Wealth (Shaw and Wright, 1967, p. 188) Moral Accountability (Vancouver Urban Futures Project, n.d.) Sex Permissiveness (Digman, 1962, P. 435) S o c i a l Individualism (Vancouver Urban Futures Project, n.d.) I l l Independent - Ambitious 10- We shouldn't be so concerned with keeping work and s o c i a l a c t i v i t i e s separated. 11- 1 prefer to l i v e i n an area where neighbors keep to themselves. 18-0ne should change h i s opinions when they become r a d i c a l l y d i f f e r e n t from those of others. Other Directedness (Kassarjian, 1962, p. 226) Privacy Need (Vancouver Urban Futures Project, n.d.) Other Directedness (Peterson, 1964, p. 200) 33-Trespassing laws should be more c a r e f u l l y enforced. Environmental A d a p t a b i l i t y (Vane. Urban Futures Project, n.d.) 35-A person can learn better by following Iridividualism (Robinson and the advice of others than he can° by s t r i k i n g out on h i s own. 58-The extent of a man's ambition to better h i s p o s i t i o n i s a pretty good i n d i c a t i o n of h i s character. 91-A c h i l d should be taught that cooperation i s more important than s e l f - d i s c i p l i n e . 93- There i s too much emphasis on privacy i n our s o c i e t y . 94- 0ne must avoid dependence upon persons or things, teh center of l i f e should be found w i t h i n oneself. Shaver, 1969, p. 488) Status Concern (Bonjean, H i l l and McLemore, 1967, p. 461) Other Directedness (Kassarjian, 1962, p. 226) Privacy Need (Vancouver Urban Futures P r o j e c t , n.d.) Individualism (Robinson and Shaver, 1969, p. 448) 100-1 admire those who have started from scratch and have r e a l l y made i t . S o c i a l Support (Vancouver Urban Futures P r o j e c t , n.d.) 107-A person should be c a r e f u l to l i v e up Other Directedness (Kassarjian, to the p r e v a i l i n g standards of h i s 1962, p. 226) culture rather than r e l y i n g on h i s own standards. 132-One of the things you should consider Status Concern (Bonjean, H i l l i n choosing your friends i s whether and McLemore, 1967, p. 461) they can help you make your way i n the world. 136-The p r i v a t e automobile i s e s s e n t i a l to our sense of freedom. Free Automobile Use (Vancouver Urban Futures Project, n.d.) 112 161-Possession of proper s o c i a l Status Concern (Bonjean, H i l l and manners i s usually the mark of McLemore, 1967, p. 461) a desirable person. Equalitarianism 4-Welfare should be r e s t r i c t e d to those who are incapable of working. 13-Some races are n a t u r a l l y i n f e r i o r to others. 27-If a wife has a good income and a job she l i k e s , there's no reason why the husband should not stay home and keep house. 49-Women are not the equals of men i n organizing a b i l i t y . 86-There has been too much t a l k and not enough r e a l action i n doing away with r a c i a l d i s c r i m i n a t i o n . 96-Men and women doing the same work should receive the same pay. 125-Even when both husband and wife are working, the husband should have the f i n a l say i n how the family income i s spent. 134-Everyone should get what he needs since the things we have belong to a l l of us. 153-We must preserve the r i g h t not to work as w e l l as the r i g h t to work. S o c i a l Support (Vancouver Urban Futures Project, n.d.) Equalitarianism (Digman, 1962, p. 435) A n t i S o c i a l T r a d i t i o n (Vancouver Urban Futures Project, n.d.) Equalitarianism (Digman, 1962, p. 435) Eqaulitarianism (Robinson and Shaver, 1969, p. 447) Equalitarianism (Digman, 1962, P. 435) Anti S o c i a l T r a d i t i o n (Vancouver Urban Futures Pr o j e c t , n.d.) Equalitarianism (Robinson and Shaver, 1969, p. 447) S o c i a l Support (Vancouver Urban Futures Pr o j e c t , n.d.) 113 R i g i d i t y 14- 1 have^a p r e t t y good idea what I w i l l be doing f o r another 10 years. 15- People who i n s i s t on a yes or no answer j u s t don't know how complicated things r e a l l y are. 17-A good job i s one where what i s to be done and how i t i s to be done are always c l e a r . 28-1 get upset i f I must do too many things at once. 48-People who f i t t h e i r l i v e s to a schedule probably miss most of the joy of l i v i n g . 53—The unfinished and imperfect often have greater appeal than the completed and polished. 64-1 have a w e l l ordered s t y l e of l i f e with regular hours and an established routine. 81- I t i s hard to sympathize with a person who i s always doubting and •Tunsure about things. 82-Most of the arguments or quarrels I get in t o are about matters of p r i n c i p l e . 109-These days, good ideas are useless unless they are worked out i n r e a l terms. 127-People who l i v e r e a l l y d i f f e r e n t l y from the way I do don't bother me at a l l . Complex Valuation (Eysenck, 1954, p. 184) Intolerance of Ambiguity (Robinson anand Shaver, 1969, p. 321) Intolerance of Ambiguity (Robinson and Shaver, 1969, p. 321) Environmental Mistrust (Vancouver Urban Futures Project, n.d.) Intolerance of Ambiguity (Robinson and Shaver, 1969, p. 321) Complex Valuation (Eysenck, 1954, p. 184) R i g i d i t y (Eysenck, 1954, p. 222) R i g i d i t y (Eysenck, 1954, p. 222) R i g i d i t y (Eysenck, 1954, p. 222) Environmental Mistrust (Vancouver Urban Futures Project, n.d.) Anti S o c i a l T r a d i t i o n (Vancouver Urban Futures Project, n.d.) 128-1 would l i k e the experience of l i v i n g Complex Valuation (Eysenck, 1954, and working i n a foreign country. p. 184) 114 Means and Standard Deviations of the Value Statements Item Mean Std.Dev. Item Mean Std.Dev. Item Mean Std.Dev. 2 3.44 1.97 49 5.32 1.75 107 5.14 1.58 3 4.96 1.81 50 4.89 1.86 108 4.83 1.80 4 3.51 2.28 51 2.15 1.48 109 3.57 1.85 5 4.96 2.10 53 3.38 1.64 113 3.17 1.87 6 3.90 1.90 54 4.82 1.59 114 2.25 1.36 7 3.97 1.77 56 3.04 1.74 115 3.87 2.12 8 3.54 1.94 57 2.03 L.20 116 3.54 1.92 10 3.52 1.67 58 3.43 1.87 117 5.19 1.38 11 4.25 1.96 59 4.16 1.59 118 4.18 1.83 13 5.47 2.03 60 3.79 1.72 119 4.72 1.70 14 3.69 2.02 61 2.99 1.40 121 3.98 1.72 15 3.02 1.71 63 3.18 1.71 122 4.44 1.66 17 3.63 2.01 64 3.72 1.81 123 3.45 1.56 18 5.40 1.76 65 4.48 1.78 125 4.94 1.81 19 5.07 1.85 68 3.85 1.94 127 2.75 1.53 20 3.80 1.91 69 4.49 1.80 128 2.73 1.71 21 3.16 2.08 71 4.31 1.83 130 4.07 2.04 23 4.32 2.24 72 3.78 1.78 132 5.68 1.52 24 3.45 2.08 74 4.72 1.86 133 4.28 1.74 25 4.20 2.06 77 3.18 1.68 134 4.29 1.84 26 3.99 1.79 78:> : 3.89 1.93 135 2.26 1.40 27 4.37 2.12 so:: 3.12 1.80 136 3.52 1.86 28 3.26 .1.74 81 3.25 1.69 140 2.84 1.52 29 2.71 1.76 82 3.46 1.61 142 4.40 1.70 30 3.99 1.74 83 2.46 1.17, 143 5.48 1.58 31 2.58 1.72 85 4.65 1.73 144 4.29 1.80 32 4.59 1.80 86 2.87 1.51 147 4.70 1.61 33 3.43 1.73 88 4.36 1.76 149 4.61 2.23 34 5.29 1.84 89 4.17 1.99 150 4.20 1.97 35 5.11 1.68 91 4.25 1.89 151 4.00 1.68 36 3.46 1.82 92 4.61 1.93 152 4.24 1.83 37 4.14 1.97 93 4.96 1.59 153 4.21 1.87 39 3.72 1.69 94 3.39 1.79 154 4.68 1.85 40 4.42 2.18 95 4.53 1.71 155 3.28 1.74 41 3.49 1.88 96 1.86 1.27 157 3.57 1.79 42 4.57 1.92 99 5.85 1.48 158 3.46 1.98 43 2.40 1.41 100 2.18 1.24 159 4.52 1.52 44 4.78 1.85 101 3.96 1.87 160 4.72 1.73 46 2.84 1.57 102 2.86 1.46 161 4.12 1.81 47 5.81 1.66 103 3.29 1.96 162 4.30 2.14 48 3.40 1.86 106 4.22 1.74 115 Planning Opinion Statements  Categorized by Issue Transportation 1-Whether or not a rapid t r a n s i t system i s b u i l t , freeways w i l l be e s s e n t i a l to Vancouver i n ttheffuture. 9-Any expansion of the p u b l i c transportation system i n Vancouver should be paid f o r by the people who use i t . 22-Public transportation i n Vancouver should be made free of charge. 52-Private automobiles i n the downtown area should be gradually replaced by a p u b l i c transportation system. 67-Transportation i n Vancouver should be improved immediately by the construction of a system of freeways. 75- Increased spending on p u b l i c transportation i n Vancouver i s not j u s t i f i e d . 79-Most of the money that i s now spent b u i l d i n g and improving roads and highways i n Greater Vancouver should be spent on pu b l i c t r a n s i t . 146-A t h i r d crossing over Burrard I n l e t should only be considered i f i t i s needed e x c l u s i v e l y f o r rapid t r a n s i t . Housing Mix 16-We should do a l l we can to make sure that there i s some housing f o r rent i n a l l Vancouver neighborhoods. 45-Housing developments' should contain a v a r i e t y of income groups. 76- A neighborhood should consist mostly of people i n the same s o c i a l class who prefer the same types of housing. 110-A t y p i c a l neighborhood i n Vancouver should have one basic type of housing i n a f a i r l y narrow p r i c e range. 126-High r i s e apartments should be confined to a few s p e c i a l areas of the C i t y . 137-Townhouses and s i m i l a r types of housing should be r e s t r i c t e d to ce r t a i n areas of Vancouver. 116 139-A v a r i e t y of housing types (single family homes, townhouses, apart-ments and subsidized housing) should be provided i n every neighborhood i n Vancouver. 148-It would be better to have high r i s e apartments dispersed over the C i t y rather than a l l concentrated i n a few areas. Loca l Government 38-The Cit y should e s t a b l i s h a regular procedure for giving assistance to groups of c i t i z e n s who want to set up cooperative projects such as community centres. 55-The government should encourage people to contribute more to the development of the City by appointing representatives i n the l o c a l neighborhoods. 62-Greater Vancouver should adopt a ward system i n which aldermen represent s p e c i f i c areas of the C i t y . 66-Decisions i n the Vancouver c i t y government could be made better i f they were l e f t p r i m a r i l y to p r o f e s s i o n a l managers. 90-Members of the c i t y government should be t r y i n g harder to f i n d out what the c i t i z e n s want instead of j u s t l i s t e n i n g to the advice of the usual experts. 105-Neighborhood governments should be created and given the r e s p o n s i b i l i t y of spending a proportion of our taxes on l o c a l p r o j e c t s . 131-The present type of l o c a l government i n Vancouver responds f a i r l y w e l l to majority opinion and there i s no need to change i t . 145-Local government by a council of aldermen who are each elected by everyone i n the City i s the best kind for Vancouver. Growth 12-The economy of Vancouver must be allowed to continue to grow and ways w i l l j u s t have to be found to accommodate any future increases i n population. 70-Further growth should be stopped to prevent metropolitan Vancouver from becoming an unpleasant place to l i v e and work. 87-Attempts to slow down the high growth rate of metropolitan Vancouver would r e s t r i c t the freedom of too many people. 117 104-The s i z e of Greater Vancouver's population must be l i m i t e d even i f i t means less economic development. 112-Vancouver's high growth rate ought to be accommodated since i t ensures a good standard of l i v i n g f o r a l l . 124-Vancouver doesn't need more growth to make i t as i n t e r e s t i n g a place to l i v e as some of the bigger c i t i e s . H i s t o r i c Building Preservation 138-The City of Vancouver should pass a law to prevent people from tearing down h i s t o r i c b u i l d i n g s . 156-So c a l l e d " h i s t o r i c b u i l d i n g s " should be replaced l i k e anything else when they become obsolete. Land P r i c e Control 84-The government should s t a r t c o n t r o l l i n g the p r i c e of land i n Vancouver. I l l - R i s i n g land p r i c e s are a f a i r p r o t e c t i o n f o r a l l landowners and there i s no good reason to co n t r o l them. Community Open Space 98-The City government should encourage the construction of houses i n c l o s e l y spaced groups with communally owned open areas. 120-It's better to b u i l d townhouses and apartments surrounded by open space than i n d i v i d u a l homes with private yards. 141-We should continue to use most of the r e s i d e n t i a l land i n metropolitan Vancouver to b u i l d s i n g l e family homes on pri v a t e l o t s . Parks 73-The m u n i c i p a l i t i e s of Greater Vancouver should continue to buy as much parkland as they can i n order to provide needed recreation space f o r t h e i r c i t i z e n s . 97-More parks and open spaces are needed within a short distance of l o c a l neighborhoods. 129-The m u n i c i p a l i t i e s of metropolitan Vancouver already have enough park-land and shouldn't be t r y i n g to acquire so much more. 118 Means and Standard Deviations  of Planning Opinion Statements. Item Mean Std. Dev. Item Mean Std. Dev. 1 3.21 2.10 97 2.26 1.52 9 4.40 2.04 98 3.86 1.71 12 3.44 2.05 104 4.08 1.83 16 2.58 lj.62 105 2*57 1.69 22 4.72 2.03 110 4.88 1.57 38 2.59 1.47 111 4.92 1.70 45 3.08 1.72 112 4.43 1.65 52 2.51 1.75 120 5.07 1.53 55 2.88 1.48 124 2.64 1.58 62 3.00 1.56 126 2.49 1.52 66 4.57 1.71 129 5.48 - 1.48 67 4.75 1.92 131 4.44 1.51 70 3.99 1.82 137 3.41 1.87 73 2.30 1.53 138 2.77 1.59 75 5.34 1.49 139 3.89 1.94 76 4.55 1.87 141 3.86 1.73 79 4.30 1.74 145 3.92 1.65 84 3.47 2.03 146 3.67 1.91 87 3.95 1.69 148 4.58 1.81 90 2.47 1.45 156 5.17 1.68 119 APPENDIX B Study of Va lues and Urban O p i n i o n s This «oTT«y ooaslsts of IM stataawBtB •tout our City aad Oorara-••at, and about your attltuda towards various things. It Is part of a study to flat out BOW different typaa of paoplo can uadarstand aaeh othar battar and how this aan halp ua to build tba kind of City wa a l l Ilka. Tour opinion about tbaaa stataaaata i« artraaaly important to tba sueeass of this study. It should only taka about E0-B8 alnutas of your tlaa. Tour aaaa will aot ba raoordad aad a l l lafonatlon w i l l ba kapt eoafldaatlal. Thank you Tory auwa for your eooparatloa. Tours slaoaraly. B i l l WlatarhaTt THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA moot o* oomMiMun t U O O K U . I U M M 11 APPENDIX B 144. I n the l o n g r u n , the beet way t o l i v e i s t o p i c k f r i e n d s and a s s o -c i a t e s whose t a s t e s and b e l i e f s are t he same a s one's own. Agree A. s « 7 Disagree S t r o n g l y 1 * 13 * 5 6 S t r o n g l y 145. L o c a l government by a o o u n c i l of aldermen who are each e l e c t e d by everyone i n the C i t y l a t h e best k i n d f o r Vancouver. Agree n 2 3 4 6 6 7 D i s a g r e e S t r o n g l y S t r o n g l y 146. A t h i r d c r o s s i n g over B u r r a r d I n l e t should o n l y be c o n s i d e r e d i f i t i s needed e x c l u s i v e l y f o r r a p i d t r a n -s i t . Agree 1 0 3 4 5 6 7 D i s a g r e e S t r o n g l y S t r o n g l y 147. I n a d i s c u s s i o n , I o f t e n f i n d i t necessary t o repeat m y s e l f s e v e r a l t i m e s t o make sure I am bei n g understood. Agree .. „ , . 5 6 „ D i s a g r e e S t r o n g l y 1 2 3 * 0 6 ' S t r o n g l y 148. I t would be b e t t e r t o have h i g h r i s e apartments d i s p e r s e d over t he C i t y r a t h e r t h a n a l l o o n c e n t r a t e d i n a few a r e a s . Agree x 2 3 4 5 6 , D i s a g r e e S t r o n g l y S t r o n g l y 149. People who commit orimes such as rape and a t t a c k s on c h i l d r e n ought t o be p u b l i c a l l y whipped. A « r e e 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Disagree S t r o n g l y 1 * * * 0 8 ' S t r o n g l y 150. P r i v a t e d e v e l o p e r s and businessmen o f t e n know b e t t e r than the govern-ment where development should or should not oc c u r . A g r e e 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Disagree S t r o n g l y 1 * J * 5 0 7 S t r o n g l y 151. What i s good f o r t he community i s good f o r me. Agree S t r o n g l y 1 £ 3 4 5 6 7 Disagree S t r o n g l y 152. Our p u b l i c e d u c a t i o n i s i n p r e t t y good shape. A g r e e 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Disagree S t r o n g l y * 0 6 ' S t r o n g l y 153. We must p r e s e r v e the r i g h t c o t t o work as w e l l as the r i g h t t o work. * « r e e . 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 D l « S " e S t r o n g l y S t r o n g l y 154. The c o u n t r y i s r u n by a few people i n power and t h e r e i s not much the r e s t of us can do about i t . AJ™« , 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Disagree S t r o n g l y S t r o n g l y 155. Persons w i t h s e r i o u s d e f e c t s end d i s e a s e s should be prevented from h a v i n g o h l l d r e n . Agree S t r o n g l y 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 D i s a g r e e S t r o n g l y 156. So o a l l e d " h i s t o r i o b u i l d i n g s " should be r e p l a c e d l i k e a n y t h i n g e l s e when t h e y becoze o b s o l e t e . Agree x 2 3 4 5 6 7 D i s a g r e e S t r o n g l y S t r o n g l y 157. I f people would t a l k l e s s end wcrk more, everybody would be b e t t e r o f f . A f r e e , 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Disagree S t r o n g l y S t r o n g l y 158. There i s no c o n c e i v a b l e J u s t i f i c a -t i o n f o r war. Agree \ z 3 4 5 6 7 D'-sapree S t r o n g l y S t r o n g l y 159. A gut r e a c t i o n i s a b e t t e r guide t o a c t i o n than any t h e o r e t i c a l approach. A*1"8' , 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 D i s a g r e e S t r o n g l y S t r o n g l y 160. The best way t o handle people i s t o t e l l them what th e y want t o hear . Agree , 2 3 4 5 6 7 Disagree S t r o n g l y Str.-c.gly 161. P o s s e s s i o n of proper s o c i a l man-n e r s i s u s u a l l y the mark o f a d e s i r a b l e person. Agree . g _ . « « 7 Disagree S t r o n g l y 1 * 3 * 3 6 7 S t r o n g l y 162. The death p e n a l t y i s wrong and b a r b a r i c ; i t should t h e r e f o r e be a b o l i s h e d . Agree , £ 3 4 g 6 , Disagree S t r o n g l y S t r o n g l y 124. Vancouver doesn't need more growth to sake i t as interesting a place to l i v e as some of the bigger c i t i e s . AJTee , 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Disagree Strongly Strongly 125. Even when both husband and wife are working, the husband should have the f i n a l say i n how the fam-i l y income i s spent. Agree , - , . . « , Disagree Strongly 1 2 3 * 3 6 7 Strongly 126. High r i s e apartments should be con-fined to a few special areas of the City. A « r e e 1 2 S 4 5 6 7 Disagree Strongly 1 2 3 4 3 6 7 Strongly 127. People who l i v e r e a l l y d i f f e r e n t l y fros the way I do don't bother me at a l l . Agree , _ _ . s * 7 Disagree Strongly 1 2 3 * 0 6 7 Strongly 126. I would l i k e the experience of l i v -ing and working i n a foreign ooun-try . A £ r e e 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Disagree Strongly 1 2 3 * 3 6 7 Strongly 129. T.'.e =ur I c i p e l i t i e s of metropolitan Vancouver already have enough park-land and shouldn't be trying to accuire so much store. Agree , , . _ . . Disagree Strongly 1 2 3 * 6 6 7 Strongly 130. We would have less crime i f our laws were more s t r i c t , ' £ r e e 1 2 5 4 5 6 7 D i s a e r e e Strongly 1 d 3 * 3 0 ' Strongly 131. The preeent type of l o c a l govern-ment i n Vancouver responds f a i r l y well to majority opinion and there i s no need to change i t . A e r e e 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 D l s a « r o e Strongly 1 " 0 * 3 0 Strongly 132. Cue of the things you should con-sider in choosing your friends i s whether they can help you make your way in the world. A g r e e 1 2 3 4 5 8 7 D l ! a 8 1 " Strongly 1 z 3 * 3 6 7 Strongly 133. Each one of us can make real pro-gress only when the group as a whole makes progress. Agree Disagree Strongly 1 z 5 * 8 6 7 Strongly 134. Everyone should get what he needs since the things we have belong to a l l of us. Agree n , , . «. . _ Disagree Strongly 1 * 3 * 3 6 7 Strongly 133, Some sex eduoatlon should be given to a l l boys and g i r l s of grade school age. Agree . , , . « - - Disagree Strongly 1 a 3 * 0 6 ' Strongly 136. The private automobile i s essen-t i a l to our sense of freedom. A«ree l 2 a 4 5 « 7 Disagree Strongly 1 8 3 * 8 6 7 Strongly 137. Townhouses and similar types of housing should be restricted to certain areas of Vancouver. Agree 1 „ , . - . „ Disagree Strongly 1 * 3 * 0 6 7 Strongly 138. The Ci t y of Vancouver should pass a law to prevent people from tearing down hi s t o r i c buildings. Agree .. „ , . - - _ Disagree Strongly 1 * 3 * 3 6 7 Strongly 139. A variety of housing types (single family homes, tollhouses, apart-ments and subsidized housing) should be provided in every neigh-borhood in Vancouver. A g r e e i 2 4 <5 6 7 Disagree Strongly 1 2 3 * 0 6 ' Strongly 140. I frequently wonder why people behave as they do. Agree . „ , . - fi „ Disagree Strongly 1 4 3 * 3 6 ' Strongly 141. We should continue to use most of the resid e n t i a l land i n metropoli-tan Vancouver to build single fam-i l y homes on private l o t s . A g r e e 12"? 4 5 6 7 Disagree Strongly 1 * 3 4 3 6 ' Strongly 142. In order to get nominated, most candidates for p o l i t i c a l o f f i c e have to make some pretty shady bargains. A * r e e 1 2 3 4 6 6 7 Disagree Strongly 1 2 3 * 3 6 ' Strongly 143. I f people r e c l l y admitted the truth, they would agree that c h i l -dren are more often a nuisance than a pleasure to their parents. Agree Strongly 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Disagree * 0 0 ' Strongly BACKGROUND INF0RKATI0H Before you begin the main part of t h i s survey, would you please give us the following background information on yourself and your fami-l y . I t i s necessary to help us understand why people's attitudes and opinions are different. 1. How old were you on your last birthday? _J Tear* 2. Sax: I 1 Male I I renal* 3. Are you I 1 Single I I Married | 1 Separated I | Divorced I | Widowed I 1 Cohabiting 6. How many children do you have7 | | Please l i s t their ages. 8. Do you own or rent the place you liv e in? I 1 Own I I Rent 4. How many adults are there In your household? C. What i s or WBB the occu-pation of Yourself Tour wife or Tour husband 7. What was the highest grade of formal education reached by Tourself Tour wife or Tour husband How many automobiles are owned by members of your household? 10. In which of the following categories does your t o t a l  family Income f a l l ? Under 84 $4,000 t 4.6,000 t t8,000 t $10,000 $12,000 $14,000 $16,000 $18,000 $20,000 ,000 o 45,999 O $7,999 O 19,999 to t i l , 9 9 9 to $13,999 to $15,999 to $17,999 to $19,999 and over How many tines a week do you ride the c i t y buses? I Times/Week 1 1 Never Do you have an automobile for your own use? I I Tes [~J No 11. What particular c u l t u r a l group (Anglo-Saxon, French, Chinese, e t c ) do you belong to? SURVEY STATEMENTS Please read each statement c a r e f u l l y . There are 7 possible answers below each statement. Agree , . « - „ Disagree Strongly x * 3 * 0 6 7 Strongly Decide which answer suits you best and c i r o l e the proper number according to these categories: Agree Strongly - 1 Agree - 2 Agree slightly - 3 Heutral or Don't Know - 4 Disagree S l i g h t l y - 5 Disagree - 6 Disagree Strongly - 7 Work quickly. Tour f i r s t Impression i s usually the most aoourate. Do not ba concerned i f some of the statements seem the same. They are a l l s l i g h t l y d i f f e r -ent. Pleaae answer a l l of the questions. I f you aren't quite sure what some of them mean, c i r c l e the answer which i s olosest to your general f e e l i n g . 1. TThether or not a rapid t r a n s i t system i s b u i l t , freeways w i l l be e s s e n t i a l to Vancouver in the f u -ture. A G R E 8 1 2 s 4 s « 7 Disagree Strongly 1 8 3 * 8 6 7 Strongly 2. P a t r i o t i s m and l o y a l t y are the f i r s t and the most Important re-quirements of a good c i t i z e n . Agree Strongly 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Disagree Strongly 3. I t ' s just as w e l l that the struggle of l i f e tends to weed out those who cannot stand the paoe. Agree Strongly 1 2 3 4 S 6 7 Disagree Strongly 4. Welfare should be r e s t r i c t e d to those who are incapable of working. Agree Strongly 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Disagree Strongly 5. A comaunity would get along better I f each one would mind his own business and l e t others take care of t h e i r s . A e r e e l fi % 4 B * 7 D e g r e e Strongly 1 8 3 * 0 0 7 Strongly 6. Most people don't want things to be d i f f e r e n t , they Just want mora of what they've already got. Strongly 1 8 3 * 0 6 7 strongly 7 . This country has the best example of government yet devised. A g r e e 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 D i M 8 r e e Strongly Strongly 8. We shouldn't worry about a few dissenting individuals - i t ' s the majority that we should plan f o r . A G R E E 1 2 3 4 3 6 7 Disagree Strongly 1 * 0 * 5 6 7 Strongly 9. Any expansion of the public trans-portation system i n Vancouver should be paid for by the people who use i t . Agree , Disagree Strongly 1 8 3 4 6 6 7 Strongly 10. We shouldn't be BO concerned with keeping work and s o c i a l a o t i v l t l e a separated. Agree , 2 s 4 5 6 7 Disagree Strongly A ° Strongly 11. I prefer to l i v e i n an area where neighbors keep to themselves. A G R E E 1 2 3 4 K A 7 Disagree Strongly 1 8 3 * 6 6 7 Strongly 12. The economy of Vancouver must be allowed to continue to grow and ways w i l l Just have to be found to accomodate any future lnoreases i n population. Agree , „ . « . _ Disagree Strongly 1 * 3 * 8 6 7 strongly 18. Some races are naturally I n f e r i o r to others. A G R E E 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Disagree Strongly 1 8 3 * 6 6 7 Strongly 14, I have a pretty good idea what I w i l l be doing for another 10 years A G R E E . , * « A K M n Disagree Strongly 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Strongly 102. 103. 104. 105. 106. 107. Generally speaking, people w i l l work f a i r l y hard without being forced to do so. Agree , „ Strongly 3 4 5 6 7 Disagree Strongly On the whole, a single l i f e would probably be l e s s s a t i s f y i n g than a married l i f e . Agree l n 4 S 6 , Disagree Strongly Strongly The size of Greater Vancouver's population must be l i m i t e d even i f i t means less economic development. Agree . 2 , Strongly 4 5 6 7 Disagree Strongly Neighborhood governments should be created and given the r e s p o n s i b i l -i t y of spending a proportion of our taxes on l o c a l projects. Agree Strongly 1 2 3 5 6 7 Disagree Strongly Most of the ideas which get printed nowadays aren't worth the paper they are printed on. Agree . _ _ . . . - Disagree Strongly 1 8 3 * 0 6 7 Strongly A person should be c a r e f u l to l i v e up to the p r e v a i l i n g standards of hi s culture rather than r e l y i n g on h i s own standards. Agree . „ , . « . „ Disagree Strongly 1 A 3 * 8 6 7 Strongly 108. Religion i s mostly myth. Agree i 2 3 Strongly 4 5 6 7 109. Disagree Strongly These days, good Ideas are useless unless they are worked out i n r e a l terms. Agree x fi 3 4 B ft 7 Disagree Strongly Strongly 110. 111. 112. A t y p i c a l neighborhood i n Vancouver should have one basio type of hous-ing l n a f a i r l y narrow price range. Agree Strongly 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Disagree Strongly Rising land prloes are a f a i r pro-t e c t i o n f o r a l l landowners and there i s no good reason to oontrol them. A g r e ' 1 2 3 4 6 6 7 D l s a g r e e Strongly Strongly Vancouver's high growth rate ought to be aooomodated slnoe i t ensures a good standard of l i v i n g f o r a l l . Asre* . , o «. . A « « » Disagree Strongly 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Strongly 113, Income taxes should be eliminated for the lowest income groups. Agree Strongly 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Disagree Strongly 114. Any private Industry abusing the public interest should be several-l y penalized. Agree Strongly 1 2 3 .4 5 6 7 Disagree Strongly 115. C a p i t a l punishment gives the crim-i n a l what he deserves. Agree Strongly 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Disagree Strongly 116. What t h i s country needs most, more than laws and p o l i t i c a l programs, i s a few oourageous and devoted leaders i n whom the people can put t h e i r f a i t h . Agree Strongly 1 2 3 4 « - _ Disagree 3 0 ' Strongly 117. 118. 119. Most communities are good enough as they are without s t a r t i n g any new improvement programs. Agree Strongly 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Disagree Strongly Our treatment of criminals i s too harsh; we should t r y to cure them, not punish them. Agree Strongly 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Dis ree Strongly Insuring that there i s complete freedom f o r a l l i s more important than the maintenance of i n t e r n a l order w i t h i n the nation. A « r e e 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 D l s a g r e e Strongly Strongly 120. I t ' s better to b u i l d townhouses and apartments surrounded by open epaoe than i n d i v i d u a l homes with private yards. Agree , « « . < . „ Disagree Strongly 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Strongly 121. 122. Most people know what * s good for them and aren't too e a s i l y fooled. Agree Strongly 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Disagree Strongly Onoe they're i n o f f i c e , most elec-ted o f f i c i a l s do remember the people who elected them. Agree Strongly 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Disagree Strongly 123. The s i t u a t i o n of the average person i s getting a l o t better. A 6 " e . 1 2 3 4 6 fi , Disagree Strongly Strongly 81. I t l a bard to sympathize with a person who Is always doubting and unsure about things. - 1 2 5 4 5 6 7 Fi"!™' Strongly Strongly 82. Most of the arguments or quarrel* I get into are about matter* of p r i n c i p l e . Agree x 8 , 4 e n ^ i 8 ^ ^ ? * Strongly Strongly 88. In • heated discussion people hare • way of bringing up Irrelevant lssuea rather than ( t i c k i n g to the point. * « r e e l fi s 4 6 6 7 Disagree Strongly 1 8 3 * 0 0 7 Strongly 84. The government should start eon-t r o l l i n g the price of land i n Vancouver. ^ " • - 1 2 5 4 6 6 7 " " S " : Strongly Strongly 85. I generally do and say things quickly without stopping to think. Agree . _ - . « - _ Disagree Strongly 1 2 5 * 0 6 7 Strongly 86. There has been too much talk and not enough real action i n doing away with r a c i a l discrimination. A * r e e 1 2 3 4 S 6 7 Disagree Strongly Strongly 87. Attempts to slow down the high growth rate of metropolitan Van-couver would r e s t r i e t the freedom of too many people. Agree Strongly 1 2 9 88. I usually stay in the background at parties and get-togethers. Agree - - -Strongly A * 3 4 B a 7 Disagree 4 0 6 7 Strongly 89. The facts on crime and sexual immorality show that w* w i l l have to crack down harder on young people If we are going to save our moral standards. A g r e e 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 D i s a « r e * Strongly Strongly 90. Members of the e i t y government should ha trying harder to f i n d out what the o l t l t e n s want Instead of just l i s t e n i n g to ihe advloe of the usual experts. Agree Disagree Strongly 1 2 3 * 8 6 7 Strongly 91. A child should be taught that co-operation i s more important than s e l f - d l s c i p l l n e . A * r M , 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Pisa«re» Strongly Strongly 92. Religion i s probably a greater aouroe of trouble in the world than i t i s a souroe of good. Agree l l s 4 s 6 7 Disagre* Strongly Strongly 93. There 1* too muoh emphasis on privacy in our soolety. Agree l t j 4 5 6 7 Disagree Strongly Strongly 94. On* must avoid dependence upon parsons or things, the oenter of l i f e should be found within one-s e l f . Agree x z S 4 6 6 7 Pi 8 8^!* Strongly Strongly 95. Po l l t l o l a n s represent the general public more frequently than they represent speoial groups. Agree 1 2 3 4 6 6 7 Disagree Strongly Strongly 96. Men and women doing the same work should reoelve the same pay. Agree 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Disagree Strongly Strongly 97. More parks and open spaoes are needed within a short distanoe of l o c a l neighborhoods. Agree 1 2 3 4 6 6 7 Disagree Strongly Strongly 98. The C i t y government should enoour-age the oonstruotion of houses in closely spaoed groups with oommu-nally owned open areas. Agree , e s 4 B 6 , Disagree Strongly * " ° ' strongly 99. When a person goes on welfare, his right to vote should be suspended u n t i l he i s employed again. Agree 1 0 3 4 3 * 7 Disagree Strongly a 9 Strongly 100. Z admire those who have started from soretoh and have r e a l l y made I t . A* r *" . 1 * 8 4 6 6 7 Disagree Strongly Strongly 101. These day* a person doesn't r e a l l y know whom he oan oount on. Agree Strongly 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Disagre* Strongly 15. People who inaiat on a yes or no answer just don't know how compli-cated things r e a l l y are. A « r e * 1 s> 1 4. *. A 1 Disagree Strongly 1 2 3 * 5 6 7 Strongly 16. We should do a l l we ean to make sure that there Is some housing for rent i n a l l Vanoouver neigh-borhoods. A « r " - 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Pi"?": Strongly Strongly 17. A good job i s on* where what i s to be done and how l t 1* to be don* are always olear. A * W 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 D l « » S r M Strongly Strongly 18. One should change h i * opinion* when they beoome rad i o a l l y different from those of others. Agree x g 3 4 s 6 , Disagree Strongly Strongly 19. The c i t y grows best through privat* decisions by individuals who know thei r own needs. Agree , FI « . B 6 7 Disagree Strongly » o » / g ^ ^ y 20. I often worry about things I have done or said. Agree 1 2 3 4 6 6 7 Disagree Strongly Strongly 21. People would not do t h e i r best i f government owned a l l Industry. Agree 1 « s 4 3 6 7 Disagree Strongly 1 2 3 4 0 6 7 Strongly 22. Public transportation i n Vanoouver should be made free of oharge. Agree x 8 3 4 5 6 7 Disagree Strongly Strongly 23* Under some oonditions, war i s neo-essary to maintain justloe. Agree 1 « 3 4 s 6 7 Disagree Strongly 1 2 3 4 0 6 7 Strongly 24. Obedienoe and respect for authority are the most important virtues that ohlldren should learn. Agree 1 2 3 4 6 6 7 Disagree Strongly Strongly 26. Real friend* ar* a t l l l easy to f i n d . Agree Strongly 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Disagre* Strongly 26. I am usually oarefree. Agree . . . . . . _ Disagree Strongly 1 2 3 4 0 6 7 Strongly 27. I f a wife has a good 1noone end a job she l i k e s , there's no reason why the husband should not stay home and keep house. Agree Disagree Strongly 12 3 « 5 6 7 strongly 28. I get upset i f I must do too many things at onoe. A e r e a 1 s 1 4 * « 1 Disagree Strongly 1 8 5 4 5 6 7 Strongly 89. Justice demand* the punishment of oriminals. * e r e " i * s 4. * a 1 D l s » s r e e Strongly 1 B a 4 8 0 7 Strongly 30. I trust ay f e e l i n g * mora than sy thoughts. A « r 6 e 1 * * 4. « A m D l * a g T B * Strongly 1 8 3 4 8 0 7 Strongly 31. In taking part i n any form of world organization, t h i s country should make oertaln that none of i t s independence and power i s lost. Agree 1 e « A « . n Disagree Strongly 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Strongly 32. The worst crime a person could oommit i s to attack publloally the people who believe i n the same things as he does. Agree , Disagree Strongly 1 2 3 * 3 6 7 Strongly S3. Trespassing laws should he more carefully enforced. t f " ' , 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 \ * m g r l * Strongly * 0 D ' Strongly 34. There should be a law against any oouple having more than two c h i l -dren. A g r e e l s s 4 B a 7 Disagree Strongly 1 8 8 4 8 8 7 Strongly 35. A person can learn better by f o l -lowing the advioe of others than he can by s t r i k i n g out on h i s own. Agree , «, . . . . „ Disagree Strongly 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Strongly 36. Young people sometimes get rebel-lious ideas, but as they grow up they ought to get over them and settle down. A e r * # 1 2 3 4 3 6 7 Strongly Strongly 37. Religion offers the best hope for survival of our c i v i l i z a t i o n . Strongly 1 * 3 4 5 6 7 strongly 36. The C i t y should establish a regu-l a r procedure for giving assistance to groups of c i t i z e n s who want to aet up cooperative projeots suoh as community centres. A R r e e 1 2 3 4 3 6 7 D l 8 a 8 r 8 » Strongly 1 8 3 * 0 6 7 Strongly 30. The most rewarding organizations a person can belong to are l o c a l elubs and associations rather than large nationwide organizations. Strongly 1 8 8 4 8 6 7 Strongly 40. I r i n d national spectator sports ( l i k e f o o t b a l l , baseball and hook-ay) pretty boring. Agree • Disagree Strongly 1 8 3 4 8 6 7 Strongly 41. I t Is not necessary f o r a parson to derota himself to an Ideal or e ausa f o r l i f e to beoome meaning-f u l . Agree . , , . . . _ Disagree Strongly 1 2 3 * 3 6 7 Strongly 42. Anyone who completely trusts some-one alaa i s asking for trouble. Agree •, . s 4 . . 7 Disagree Strongly 1 8 5 * 8 6 7 Strongly 43. Then you get right down to i t , quite a few people r e a l l y do cara what happens to you. Agree i s s a R a i Disagree Strongly 1 8 8 4 8 6 7 Strongly 44. We should eat, drink and ba aerry. for tomorrow wa d l a . Agree , „ , x _ . „ Disagree Strongly 1 2 3 4 6 6 7 Strongly 45. Housing developments should contain a variety of income groups. **Tee i s % a * a i Disagree Strongly 1 2 3 * 8 8 7 Strongly 46. I l i k e to discuss the more serious questions of U f a with ay friends. Agree Strongly 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Disagree Strongly 47. Ultimately, private property should be abolished and complete socialism Introduced. Agree Disagree 8trongly 1 2 5 « 5 6 7 strongly 48. People i&o f i t t h e i r l i v e s to a schedule probably miss most of the Joy of l i v i n g . Agree , . „ . . „ Disagree Strongly 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 49. Women ars not the equals or men l a organizing a b i l i t y . Agree , «, „ . « . _ Disagree Strongly 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Strongly 50. I t ' s human nature never to do any-thing unless there's soma personal advantage to I t . Agree , „ _ A . Disagree Strongly 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Strongly 91. Instruction l n b i r t h eontrol ought to be given to a l l young people. Agree , „ « . « . _ Disagree Strongly 1 8 9 4 5 6 7 Strongly 52. Private automobiles l n the down-town area should be gradually replaced by a publlo transporta-tion system. A 8 r e * -1 » « A K . n Disagree Strongly 1 E 3 * 8 8 7 Strongly 53. The unfinished and lmperfeot often have greater appeal than the com-pleted and polished. A e r e * i p A K a ft Disagree Strongly 1 8 3 * 8 6 7 Strongly 54. We should have greater respeot for a man who i s well established l n his looal oommunlty than for a man who i s widely known ln his f i e l d but who has no looal root a. Agree Disagree Strongly 1 2 3 * 5 6 7 strongly 55. The government should enoourage people to oontribute mora to the development of the City by a p p o s -ing representatives i n the looal neighborhoods. A e r e* i o « A . . . Disagree Strongly 1 * 3 4 5 6 7 strongly 56. Private ownership of property i s necessary for eoonomlo progress. Agree , . . . « . » Disagree Strongly 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Strongly 57. Logical thinking i s oertalnly essential to progress. Agree . . . Disagree Strongly 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Strongly Strongly 58. The extent of a man's ambition to better his position i s a pretty good indication of h i s oharaoter. Agree Disagras Strongly 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 strongly 59. Very few unions eleot o f f i c e r s by honest seoret-ballot eleotlons. Agree DisagreS Strongly 1 * 3 * 5 6 7 strongly ' 60. There should be far more p o l l t l o a l and controversial discussion on the radio than wa have now. Agree 1 2 3 4 8 6 7 Disagree Strongly Strongly 61. In group undertakings, you often re a l i z e that your own plans were not tha bast. t f r , e , 12 3 4 6 6 7 Disagree Strongly Strongly 62. Greater Vanoouver should adopt a ward system l n whioh aldermen rep-resent specific areas of tha o i t y . Agree , 2 s 4 B . 7 Disagree Strongly Strongly 63. Most people on public assistance are needy, not greedy. Agree , 2 s 4 5 6 7 Disagree Strongly Strongly 64. I have a well ordered style of l i f e with regular hours and an estab-lished routine. Agree , 8 s 4 B 6 7 Disagree Strongly Strongly 65. We have too many organizations f o r doing good l n the community. Agree x 2 3 4 B 8 , Disagree Strongly Strongly 66. Decisions ln the Vancouver o i t y government could be made better i f they were l e f t primarily to profes-sional managers. A S r e # 12 3 4 5 6 7 Disagres Strongly x Strongly 67. Transportation i n Vanoouver should be Improved Immediately by the oonstruotion of a system of free-ways. Agree , 2 s 4 B 8 , Disagree Strongly Strongly 68. Marriage as a social i n s t i t u t i o n i s losing i t s signlfloanoe today. A«r«>» 1 2 3 4 6 6 7 Disagree Strongly ^ Strongly 69. Many people only engage l n sports such as skiing and golfing beoausa of the status they think they get. A g r e e 1 2 a 4 6 6 7 Disagree Strongly 1 8 3 * 6 6 7 Strongly 70. Further growth should be stopped to prevent metropolitan Vancouver from becoming an unpleasant place to l i v e and work. Agree 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Disagree Strongly Strongly 71. Tha aooial needs of the oltlzens are the r e s p o n s i b i l i t y of them-selves and their families and not of the oommunlty. Agree 1 2 3 . « < • Disagree Strongly 1 2 3 * 0 6 7 strongly 78. No time i s better spent than that devoted to thinking about the ultimate purposes of U f a . Agree , , . . . . _ Disagree Strongly 1 8 3 4 0 6 7 Strongly 73. The municipalities of Greater Vanoouver should continue to buy a a muoh parkland as they ean In order to provide needed recreation space f o r t h e i r o l t l z e n s . Agree Strongly 1 8 3 4 3 6 7 Disagree 4 8 8 7 Strongly 74. The wealth of t h i s country Is r i g h t f u l l y plaoed largely in the hands of the few people who are capable of managing our large businesses and Industries. Agree 1 j> « . • < , Disagree Strongly 1 2 3 4 8 6 7 Strongly 75. Increased spending on public transportation In Vancouver i s not J u s t i f i e d . Agree . - - . n * « Disagree Strongly 1 8 5 4 5 6 7 Strongly 76. A neighborhood should consist mostly of people i n the same so-o l a l olsss who prefer the same types of housing. A s r e " 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Disagree Strongly 1 * 3 * 0 6 7 Strongly 77. Money i s the most important factor influencing public p o l i c i e s . A g r e * 1 2 3 4 3 6 7 Disagree Strongly 1 z 8 4 8 6 7 Strongly 78. I f our economle system were Just, there would be much less crime. Agree l 2 a a a K * Disagree Strongly 1 8 ' 4 8 6 7 strongly 79. Most of the money that Is now spent building and improving roe da and highways i n Greater Vancouver should be spent on public transit. Agree Strongly 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Disagree 8 6 7 Strongly 80. A person's own a b i l i t y should ba the only r e s t r i c t i o n upon the amount of money he may honestly acquire. A g r • • 1 2 3 4 s 6 1 Disagree Strongly 1 8 3 4 8 6 7 Strongly 120 APPENDIX C Coding Keys for the Family R e s p o n s i b i l i t y  and Family Cost Variables Family R e s p o n s i b i l i t y The table i n Duvall's book (1967, p. 484) showing percent-ages of working wives by stages i n the family l i f e cycle was used to construct a coding key f o r family r e s p o n s i b i l i t y . These percentages are shown i n Table 33. For each stage of the c y c l e , the number f o r t y -eight was divided by the sum of the percentage of wives with f u l l - t i m e jobs and h a l f of the percentage of wives with part-time jobs. The numbers r e s u l t i n g from t h i s procedure are l i s t e d i n the l a s t row of TABLE 33 Percentages of Working Wives and Family R e s p o n s i b i l i t y by Stage of the Family L i f e Cycle Family Status Stage of the Family L i f e Cycle 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Percent Working Wives Part-time job 8 8 8 20 22 10 8 8 Full-time job 44 8 10 8 18 26 28 10 Family R e s p o n s i b i l i t y 1. 0 4.0 3.4 2.7 1.7 1.6 (1. 3)(1.0) 121 Table 33. Since the r e l a t i o n s h i p between family r e s p o n s i b i l i t y and percentage of working wives i s alt e r e d i n old age, the figures shown ( i n brackets) f o r stages 7 and 8 were substituted for the act u a l c a l c u l a t e d numbers. Family Cost This v a r i a b l e was coded using the information contained i n a graph of the r e l a t i v e annual cost of supporting four d i f f e r e n t s i z e f a m i l i e s over a f o r t y year period. The graph (from Duvall, 1967, p. 374) i s reproduced i n Figure 7. Families A, B, C, and D were f a m i l i e s with three c h i l d r e n , two c h i l d r e n , one c h i l d , and no c h i l d r e n r e s p e c t i v e l y . 1 1 A Family A i- — / s s~ I Family B — Family C vrr>f-p-i 11 . . p \ ' — ^ r u m iiy u — 1 / ^_ \ l J \ \ i i / I - — ' \ \ i i i r - H - pi 1 i 1 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 Y e a r s of M a r r i a g e Figure 7 <— Relat i v e annual cost of supporting four f a m i l i e s f o r fo r t y years. To derive a coding key, the unit costs at the f i f t e e n t h year of marriage for.the four family types were rounded to the nearest integer. 122 I t was noted that t h i s cost started at a base of three units for a c h i l d l e s s couple, increased by four units for f a m i l i e s with one c h i l d , and increased by three units each for f a m i l i e s with three and four c h i l d r e n . This set of figures was extended by adding an increment of two -units per c h i l d for each a d d i t i o n a l c h i l d i n a family a f t e r the t h i r d , and by assuming a unit cost of one f o r a s i n g l e person. The f i n a l unit costs employed were 1, 3, 7, 10, 13, 15, 17, etc. f o r s i n g l e persons, c h i l d l e s s couples, and f a m i l i e s with one c h i l d , two c h i l d r e n , three c h i l d r e n , etc. r e s p e c t i v e l y . 123 APPENDIX D Procedures f o r Estimating Missing Background Data Only three d i f f e r e n t items of background information (income, occupation and education) were missing i n a t o t a l of fourteen usable questionnaires. Accordingly, t h i s missing data was estimated to avoid dealing with missing data codes i n the an a l y s i s . The following graphs were prepared from the data i n 187 of the 193 complete questionnaires. Income ($l,000's) Education (years) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Occupational Rating Occupational Rating 124 In each of 12 cases for which only income was missing, the average income f o r the given occupational r a t i n g (adjusted up or down s l i g h t l y i f educational attainment was higher or lower than the norm) was entered i n the data f i l e . In the one case for which only education was provided, the occupational r a t i n g and income were estimated from the graphs. The one case f o r which only income was given was handled i n a s i m i l a r fashion. (For the sake of these two cases i t was not considered worth-while to plo t education versus income.) Although t h i s method may have caused the correlations among income, occupation, and education to be s l i g h t l y strengthened, t h i s e f f e c t was probably counterbalanced by greater accuracy i n estimating the group membership of these cases. 125 APPENDIX E Histograms of Ten Socio-Economlc Variables Percent Frequency 20 10 -25 35 45 55 Age i n Years 65 75 Percent Frequency 20-15H 10. 12 16 20 Income i n $1,000*5 Percent Frequency 20- f 10 - j . 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Occupational Status Percent Frequency 40 30 20 10 E 3 L 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 Percent Frequency 60-Education* i n Years 40-20. No. Adults 127 Percent Frequency 30" 20" 101 0 1 3 4 H 1 7 8 No. Children Percent Frequency No Car Family Car Automobile Use Own Car Percent Frequency 0-2 Times 3-7 Times 8 or More Bus Use (Times per Week) 128 Percent Frequency 30 • 1 20 • 10 • 0-0.9 1.0- 1.6- 2.1- 2.8- 3.5-1.5 2.0 2.7 3.4 4.0 Family R e s p o n s i b i l i t y Percent Frequency 50 1-5 6-10 11-15 16+ Family Cost 129 BIBLIOGRAPHY Aberback, J o e l D . 1 9 6 9 . A l i e n a t i o n and p o l i t i c a l behaviour. American P o l i t i c a l Science Review 63: 86-99. Agger, Robert E., Marshall N. Goldstein, and Stanley A. P e a r l 1961. P o l i t i c a l cynicism: Measurement and meaning: The Journal  of P o l i t i c s 23: 477-506. A l l p o r t , Gordon W., P h i l i p E. Vernon, and Gardner Lindzey 1960. Study of Values. 3rd ed. Boston: Houghton M i f f l i n . Alterman, Rachel 1970. The Intervention of Values i n the Planning Process. Master Thesis, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg. A l t s c h u l e r , Alan A. 1965. The goals of comprehensive planning. Journal of the American I n s t i t u t e of Planners 31: 186-194. Anderson, C. Leroy 1965. Development of an objective measure of o r i e n t a t i o n toward p u b l i c dependence. S o c i a l Forces 44: 107-113. Anderson, J . 1971. Space-time budgets and a c t i v i t y studies i n urban geography and planning. Environment and Planning 3: 353-368. Anderson, T.W. 1958. An Introduction to M u l t i v a r i a t e S t a t i s t i c a l  Analysis. New York: John Wiley. Arnstein, Sherry R. 1969. A ladder of c i t i z e n p a r t i c i p a t i o n . Journal of the American I n s t i t u t e of Planners 35: 216-224. Arrow, Kenneth J . 1963. S o c i a l Choice and In d i v i d u a l Values. 2nd ed. New York: John Wiley. Baggaley, Andrew R., and James P. Campbell 1967. M u l t i p l e discriminant analysis of academic c u r r i c u l a by i n t e r e s t and aptitude v a r i a b l e s . Journal of Educational Measurement 4: 143-149. B e l l , Wendell 1955. Economic, family, and ethnic status: An empirical t e s t . American S o c i o l o g i c a l Review 20: 45-52. Benson, Walene C., et a l . 1969. Family L i f e Cycle as an Independent  Variable. Master Thesis, University of B r i t i s h Columbia, Vancouver. Blalock, Hubert M. 1972. S o c i a l S t a t i s t i c s . 2nd ed. New York: McGraw H i l l . 130 Blishen, Bernard R. 1958. The construction and use of an occupational class scale. Canadian Journal of Economics  and P o l i t i c a l Science 24: 519-531. Bolan, Richard S. 1967. Emerging views of planning. Journal of  the American I n s t i t u t e of Planners 33: 233-245. Bonjean, Charles M., Richard J . H i l l , and S. Dale McLemore 1967. S o c i o l o g i c a l Measurement: An Inventory of Scales and  Indices. San Francisco: Chandler. Braybrooke, David, and Charles E. Lindblom 1963. A Strategy of  Decision. London: Free Press of Glencoe. Burke, Edmund M. 1968. C i t i z e n p a r t i c i p a t i o n s t r a t e g i e s . Journal  of the American I n s t i t u t e of Planners 34: 287-294. Buros, Oskar K., ed. 1972. The Seventh Mental Measurement Yearbook. Highland Park, N.J.: Gryphon Press. Butcher, James N. , ed. 1972. Objective Personality Assessment. New York: Academic Press. Carter, Roy E., J r . 1956. An experiment i n value measurement. American S o c i o l o g i c a l Review 21: 156-163. C a t t e l l , Raymond B., et a l . 1956. Sixteen Personality Factor Questionnaire (16PF). Champaign, 111.: I n s t i t u t e f or Personality and A b i l i t y Testing. Chapin, F. Stuart J r . 1965. Urban Land Use Planning. 2nd ed. Urbana: University of I l l i n o i s Press. C o l l i e r , Robert W. 1968. Charting community goals: The r o l e of c i t i z e n p a r t i c i p a t i o n . Community Planning Review 18(3): 20-22. Cooley, William W., and Paul R. Lohnes 1971. M u l t i v a r i a t e Data  Analysis. New York: John Wiley. Coombs, Clyde H. 1950. Psychological s c a l i n g without a unit of measurement. Psychological Review 57: 145-158. Coombs, Clyde H. 1964. A Theory of Data. New York: John Wiley. Coombs, Clyde H., Robyn M. Dawes, and Amos Tversky 1970. Mathematical  Psychology: An Elementary Introduction. Englewood C l i f f s : Prentice H a l l . 131 Darner, Sean, and C l i f f Hague 1971. Public p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n planning: A review. Town Planning Review 42: 217-232. Davidoff, Paul 1965. Advocacy and pluralism i n planning. Journal  of the American I n s t i t u t e of Planners 31: 331-339. Davidoff, Paul, and Thomas A. Reiner 1962. A choice theory of planning. Journal of the American I n s t i t u t e of Planners 28: 103-115. Dawes, Robyn M. 1972. Fundamental of Attitude iMeasurement. New York: John Wiley. Digman, John M. 1962. The dimensionality of s o c i a l a t t i t u d e s . The Journal of S o c i a l Psychology,. 57: 433-434. Duvall, Evelyn M i l l i s 1967. Family Development. 3rd ed. New York: J.B. L i p p i n c o t t . Dye, Thomas R. 1963. The local-cosmopolitan dimension and the study of urban p o l i t i c s . S o c i a l Forces 41: 239-246. Edwards. A.L. 1959. Edwards Personal Preference Schedule. New York: Psychological Corporation. Eysenck, Hans J . 1954. The Psychology of P o l i t i c s . London: Routledge and Kegan Paul. Eysenck, Hans J . , and S y b i l B.J. Eysenck 1969. Personality Structure  and Measurement. San Diego: Robert R. Knapp. Falk, Edward L. 1968. Measurement of community value: The Spokane experiment. Highway Research Record 229: 53-64. Geer, John P. van de 1971. Introduction to M u l t i v a r i a t e Analysis for  the S o c i a l Sciences. San Francisco: W.H. Freeman. Godschalk, David R., and William E. M i l l s 1966. A c o l l a b o r a t i v e approach to planning through urban a c t i v i t i e s . Journal of  the American I n s t i t u t e of Planners 32: 86-95. Goodall, M.C. "1970. Science, Logic and P o l i t i c a l Action. Cambridge: Schenkman Publishing. Gough, H.G. 1957. C a l i f o r n i a Psychological Inventory. Palo A l t o : Consulting Psychologists Press. Greater Vancouver Regional D i s t r i c t 1972. A Report on L i v a b i l i t y . (November), Vancouver. 132 Greely, Andrew M. 1971. Why Can't They Be Like Us? New York: E.P. Dutton. Greenstein, Fred I. 1967. The impact of personality on p o l i t i c s : An attempt to clear away underbrush. American P o l i t i c a l  Science Review 61: 629-642. G u i l f o r d , J.P., and W.S. Zimmerman 1949. Guilford-Zimmerman Temperament  Survey. Beverly H i l l s : Sheridan Supply. Harman, Harry H. 1967. Modern Factor Analysis. 2nd ed. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Hartman, Robert S. 1967. The Structure of Value: Foundations of  S c i e n t i f i c Axiology. Carbondale: Southern I l l i n o i s U n i v e r s i t y Press. Helmer, Olaf 1966. A Use of Simulation f o r the Study of Future Values. Santa Monica: The Rand Corporation. Horn, John L. 1965. An empirical comparison of methods for estimating f a c t o r scores. Educational and Psychological Measurement 25: 313-322. Horst, Paul 1965. Factor Analysis of Data Matrices. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston. Inlow, G a i l M. 1972. Values i n T r a n s i t i o n : A Handbook. New York: John Wiley. Jackson, Douglas N. 1971. The dynamics of structures p e r s o n a l i t y test Psychological Review 78: 229-248. Jones, Lyle V., and R. D a r r e l l Bock 1960. M u l t i p l e discriminant analysis applied to "Ways to Live" ratings from s i x c u l t u r a l groups. Sociometry 23: 162-176. Kassarjian, Waltraud Marggraff 1962. A study of Riesman's theory of s o c i a l character. Sociometry 25: 213-230. Katzman, Martin T. 1969. Opportunity, subculture and the economic performance of urban ethnic groups. American Journal of  Economics and Sociology 28: 351-366. King, L e s l i e L. 1969. S t a t i s t i c a l Analysis i n Geography. Englewood C l i f f s : Prentice H a l l . Kleinmuntz, Benjamin 1967. Personality Measurement: Ah Introduction. Homewood, 111.: Dorcey Press. 133 Kluckhohn, Florence R., and Fred L. Srodtbeck 1961. Variations i n  Value Orientations. Evanston, 111.: Row, Peterson. K o l l a t , David T., Roger D. Blackwell, and James F. Engel, eds. 1970. Research i n Consumer Behaviour. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston. Lamanna, Richard A. 1964. Value consensus among urban residents. Journal of the American I n s t i t u t e of Planners 30: 317-323. Lansing, John B., and L e s l i e Kish 1957. Family l i f e cycle as an independent v a r i a b l e . American S o c i o l o g i c a l Review 22: 512-519. Lansing, John B., and Robert W. Marans 1969. Evaluation of neighborhood q u a l i t y . Journal of the American I n s t i t u t e of Planners 35: 195-199. Lanyon, Richard I., and Leonard D. Goodstein 1971. Personality  Assessment. New York: John Wiley. La z a r s f e l d , Paul F., and N e i l W. Henry 1968. Latent Structure  Analysis. Boston: Houghton M i f f l i n . Lazlo, Erwin, and James B. Wilbur, eds. 1970. Human Values and  Natural Science. New York: Gordon and Breach Science Publishers. Lemaistre, James Frederick 1972. Community T e l e v i s i o n as an Aid f o r C i t i z e n Involvement i n the Planning Process. Master Thesis, University of B r i t i s h Columbia. Vancouver. L u r i e , Walter A. 1937. A study of Spranger's value-types by the method of f a c t o r a nalysis. The Journal of S o c i a l Psychology 8: 17-37. MacMurray, Trevor 1971. Aspects of time and the study of a c t i v i t y patterns. Town Planning Review 42: 195-209. Magnusson, David 1967. Test Theory. Reading, Mass.: Addison-Wesley. Margolis, John 1971. Values and Conduct. London: Oxford University Press. Mering, Otto von 1961. A Grammar of Human Values. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press. M i l l e r , Delbert C. 1970. Handbook of Research Design and S o c i a l  Measurement. New York: David McKay. 134 Morris, Charles 1956. V a r i e t i e s of Human Value. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Morris, Charles, and Lyle V. Jones 1955. Value scales and dimensions. Journal of Abnormal and S o c i a l Psychology 20: 523-535. Nash, Peter H., and Dennis Durden 1964. Attask-force approach to replace the planning board. Journal of the American  I n s t i t u t e of Planners 30: 10-22. Oppenheim, A.N. 1966. Questionnaire Design and Attitude Measurement. London: Heinemann Educational Books. P e r l o f f , Harvey S. 1957. Education for Planning: C i t y , State, and  Regional. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins Press. Peterson, Richard A. 1964. Dimensions of s o c i a l character: An empirical exploration of the Riesman typology. Sociometry ± 27: 194-207. Press, S. James 1972. Applied M u l t i v a r i a t e Analysis. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston. Reiner, Thomas A. 1967. The planner as value technician: Two classes of Utopian constructs and t h e i r impacts on planning. Taming Megalopolis. Ed. by H. Wentworth Eldridge. Vol. I. Garden C i t y : Anchor Books. Riesman, David 1950. The Lonely Crowd. New Haven: Yale University Press. Robinson, John P., J e r r o l d G. Rusk, and Kendra B. Head 1968. Measures  of P o l i t i c a l A t t i t u d e s . Ann Arbor: Survey Research Center, I n s t i t u t e for S o c i a l Research, University of Michigan. Robinson, John P., and P h i l i p R. Shaver 1969. Measures of S o c i a l Psychological A t t i t u d e s . Ann Arbor: I n s t i t u t e f or S o c i a l Research, U n i v e r s i t y of Michigan. Rokeach, Mil t o n 1960. The Open and Closed Mind. New York: Basic Books. Rorer, Leonard G. 1965. The great response-style myth. Psychological  B u l l e t i n . 63: 129-156. Rosenberg, Morris 1956. Misanthropy and p o l i t i c a l ideology. American  S o c i o l o g i c a l Review 21: 690-695. Rothenberg, Jerome 1961. The Measurement of S o c i a l Welfare. Englewood C l i f f s : Prentice H a l l . 0 135 Rulon, P h i l i p J . , et a l . 1967. M u l t i v a r i a t e S t a t i s t i c s for Personnel C l a s s i f i c a t i o n . New York: John Wiley. Rummel, Rudolph J . 1967. Understanding f a c t o r a nalysis. The Journal  of C o n f l i c t Resolution 11: 444-480. Rummel, Rudolph J . 1970. Applied Factor Analysis. Evanston: North-western Un i v e r s i t y Press. Ryan, Charles R., et a l . 1972. An evaluation of the f e a s i b i l i t y of s o c i a l diagnostic techniques i n the transportation planning process. Highway Research Record 410: 8-23. Schwarzweller, Harry K. 1960. Values and occupational choice. S o c i a l Forces 39: 126-135. Scott, William A. 1959. Empirical assessment of values and ideologies. American S o c i o l o g i c a l Review 24: 199-310. Shaw, Marvin E., and Jack M. Wright 1967. Scales f o r the Measurement  of A t t i t u d e s . New York: McGraw H i l l . Sola Pool, E t h i o l de, and Robert Abelson 1961. The Simulmatics Project. P u b l i c Opinion Quarterly 25: 167-183. Spranger, Eduard 1928. Types of Men. Paul Rigors, trans. H a l l e : Max Niemeyer Verlag. Stevens, S.S. 1966. A metric f o r the s o c i a l consensus. Science 151: 530-541. Stouffer,xSamual A. 1962. S o c i a l Research to Test Ideas. New York: The Free Press of Glencoe. Tatsuoka, Maurice M. 1971. M u l t i v a r i a t e Analysis: Techniques f o r Educational and Psychological Research. New York: John Wiley. Tatsuoka, Maurice M., and David V. Tiedeman 1954. Discriminant a n a l y s i s . Review of Educational Research 24: 402-420. Thurstone, L.L. 1959. The Measurement of Values. Chicago: U n i v e r s i t y of Chicago Press. Vancouver Urban Futures Project n.d. Series of publications to appear through the Minis t r y of State f o r Urban A f f a i r s . ( P r i n c i p a l I n v e s t i g a t o r s — W a l t e r Hardwick and John B. C o l l i n s ) U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia. Vancouver. 136 Veldman, Donald J . 1967. Fortran Programming for the Behavioral  Sciences. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston. Vernon, P h i l i p E., and Gordon W. A l l p o r t 1961. A test f o r personal values. Journal of Abnormal and S o c i a l Psychology 26: 231-248. Ward, Joe H., J r . 1963. H i e r a r c h i c a l grouping to optimize an objective function. American S t a t i s t i c a l Association  Journal 58: 236-244. Warner, W. Lloyd, and Leo Srole 1945. The S o c i a l Systems of American  Ethnic Groups. New Haven: Yale University Press. White, Ralph K. 1951. Value Analysis: The Nature and Use of the Method. Glen Gardner, N.J.: Society f o r the Psychological Studies of S o c i a l Issues. Williams, Robin M., J r . 1967. I n d i v i d u a l and group values. The Annals of the American Academy of P o l i t i c a l and S o c i a l  Science 371: 20-37. Winch, Robert F. 1947. H e u r i s t i c and empirical typologies: A job f o r f a c t o r a n a l y s i s . American S o c i o l o g i c a l Review 12: 68-75. Winkel, Gary H., Roger Malik, and P h i l i p T h i e l 1969. The role of personality differences i n judgments of roadside q u a l i t y . Environment and Behavior 1: 199-223. Workmeister, W.H. 1967. Man and His Values. L i n c o l n : U n i v e r s i t y of Nebraska Press. Wrightman, Lawrence S., J r . 1964. Measurement of philosophies of human nature. Psychological Reports 14: 743-751. Young, Robert C. 1966. Goals and goal s e t t i n g . Journal of the American I n s t i t u t e of Planners 32: 76-85. 

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}]}"
                            data-media="{[{embed.selectedMedia}]}"
                            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:
https://iiif.library.ubc.ca/presentation/dsp.831.1-0101228/manifest

Comment

Related Items