O. A. OESER and S. B. HAMMOND (Eds.). Social Structure and Personality in a City. (Studies of Social Behaviour, Vol. I.) Pp. xxii, 344. $4.50. Social Structure and Personality in a Rural Community. (Studies of Social Be haviour, Vol. II.) Pp. xiii, 279. New York: The Macmillan Company, 1954. $3.75
| Author | Thomas O. Wilkinson |
| DOI | 10.1177/000271625530000146 |
| Published date | 01 July 1955 |
| Date | 01 July 1955 |
| Subject Matter | Articles |
153
viewed
in
their
proper
historical
and
cul-
tural
setting.
At
present
there
is
a
need
for
studies
of
urbanization
in
world
per-
spective.
The
Urban
South
should
be
seen
as
one
of
the
elements
of
this
world-wide
trend.
Sociological
studies
in
the
South
have
been
largely
slanted
to
rural
society.
Now
that
the
South
is
going
urban
in
a
big
way,
it
may
be
hoped
that
this
volume
will
en-
courage
sociologists
of
that
region
to
ex-
pand
their
researches
to
take
into
account
the
great
changes
accompanying
the
shift
to
a
city-dominated
area.
NOEL
P.
GIST
University
of
Missouri
O.
A. OESER
and
S.
B.
HAMMOND
(Eds.).
Social
Structure
and
Personality
in
a
City.
(Studies
of
Social
Behaviour,
Vol.
I.)
Pp.
xxii,
344.
$4.50.
Social
Structure
and
Personality
in
a
Rural
Community.
(Studies
of
Social
Be-
haviour,
Vol.
II.)
Pp.
xiii,
279.
New
York:
The
Macmillan
Company,
1954.
$3.75.
Numerous
studies
have
appeared
which
describe
the
world-wide
shift
of
population
from
rural
to
urban
areas
and
its
broad
economic
and
political
consequences.
De-
tailed
explorations
of
the
consequences
of
this
shift
in
terms
of
changing
social
con-
texts
for
the
emergence
of
individual
per-
sonalities
are
a
good
deal
less
numerous.
These
volumes,
based
upon
research
largely
supported
by
UNESCO,
are
a
useful
ad-
dition
to
the
latter
type
of
study.
They
present
a
collection
of
working
papers
on
rural
and
urban
personality
structures
in
Australia
by
a
group
of
University
of
Mel-
bourne
social
psychologists.
The
emphasis
is
upon
ideological
differences
in
person-
ality
make-up
rather
than
upon
a
complete
over-all
picture
of
Australian
life.
That
is
to
say,
the
orientation
is
a
selective
socio-
psychological
one,
not
an
exhaustive
an-
thropological
one.
In
undertaking
the
study
the
authors
have
avoided
the
pitfalls
of
exploring
too
broad
a
field.
They
recognize
the
unwieldy
nature
of
any
such
unit
of
analysis
as
&dquo;the
Australian
individual.&dquo;
Rather,
they
limit
their
focus
to
two
phases
or
age
segments
within
an
individual
life
span:
children
aged
ten
to
twelve
years
and
their
parents.
They
address
themselves
to
the
question
of
how
the
personality
structures
of
these
selected
groups
are
influenced
by
the
Aus-
tralian
mode
of
life
and
whether,
within
this
mode
of
life,
there
are
significant
rural-urban
differences.
Individual
personality
structure
is
de-
fined
as
a
system
of
values,
needs,
and
modes
of
response;
the
differences
in
pat-
terns
of
social
expectations
and
pressures
which
condition
this
personality
structure
are
explored
in
sample
rural
and
urban
communities.
Individuals
within the
sample
were
interviewed
to
assess
the
extent
and
character
of
their
participation
in
family,
school,
and
other
community
groups.
The
data
from
those
interviews
are
subjected
to
various
techniques
of
small
group
analysis.
There
emerges
first
a
contrast
between
urban
and
rural
families
in
terms
of
group
activities.
For
both
rural
parents
and
chil-
dren,
the
family
household
is
the
focus
of
a
larger
proportion
of
day-to-day
activities
than
is
the
case
for
urban
family
groups.
This
in
itself
is
no
new
discovery,
but
the
authors
define
this
contrast
in
meaningful
empirical
terms.
For
example,
they
have
constructed
indices
for
the
assessment
of
tensions
associated
with
the
intra-family
activities
for
both
parents
and
children.
Farm
youths,
with
heavier
household
participation
scores
than
the
urban
youths,
show
lower
degrees
of
tension
associated
with
these
activities.
This,
in
addition
to
the
fact
that
the
over-all
tension
score
for
urban
families
is
greater
than
that for
rural
households.
By
pursuing
still
further
the
factors
associated
with
this
contrast,
the
authors
conclude
that
the
basic
orienta-
tions
of
the
children
are
functionally
re-
lated
to
the
place
of
the
family
within
the
larger
social
organization.
Urban
children
find
themselves
oriented
more
directly
to-
wards
their
peers,
even
though
the
family
represents
their
&dquo;strongest
emotional
ties
and
contributes
much
more
to
meeting
their
basic
needs.&dquo;
Adult
urban
existence
makes
stronger
demands
in
the
direction
of
getting
on
with
others
largely
in
secondary
contacts
rather
than
in
the
direction
of
family
solidarity.
Children
brought
up
To continue reading
Request your trial