Joint Decision-Making in Farm Families as a Function of Status and Role

Abstract

THIS paper has arisen from two interests, one applied and the other theoretical. An assumption of a recent emphasis in cooperative extension work in agriculture and home economics, variously called and home and the and home unit approach, is that effective work in assisting families to make the best use of their resources requires the involvement of both husband and wife. Stated another way, the attainment of both farm and family goals requires joint discussion and consensus on the part of husband and wife. From a theoretical point of view this paper utilizes the concepts of status and role to explain the extent of joint involvement of husband and wife under varying conditions of size of farm business, indebtedness, and level of living. Students of the family have attempted to show how participation in decision-making is a function of cultural values and social structure.' The general notion is that the wife's participation in major decisions concerning the family is associated with the extent of patriarchalism in the family and the status of the wife. With greater emphasis upon democratic values and with increased education and social contacts of the wife, her status in the family becomes more comparable with that of the husband. Based upon this reasoning one would expect husband-dominated decision-making to be negatively associated with the adoption of technological changes on the farm and in the home. No significant associations were found between husband-dominated decisions and adoption of improved farm practices, however, in a study among farm owners in Wisconsin.2 On the other hand, Hill and associates show that communication between husband and wife is affected by the wife's feeling of respect for the husband and by her modesty, and that the extent of communication is positively associated with the acceptance of birth control measures among Puerto Rican families.3 Due to the inconsistencies of empirical findings with the implications of certain theoretical notions, two alternative hypotheses were tested. Stated in null form these are: Hypothesis 1: Joint involvement of husband and wife in major decisions is not associated with the social status of the wife as indicated by educational level and formal social participation. Hypothesis 2: The greater the degree of * revision of a paper presented at a joint session of the Rural Sociological Society and the American Sociological Society, Washington, D. C., August, 1957. Data for the paper were obtained as a part of a study of the evaluation of a farm and home development extension program for young farm families supported by the Cooperative Extension Service in Agriculture and Home Economics and by the Wisconsin Agricultural Experiment Station. The Numerical Analysis Laboratory provided assistance in computations for the study. Nancy Wood, Project Assistant, assisted in the techniques of analysis. 1 James S. Brown, The Farm Family in a Kentucky Mountain Neighborhood, Lexington: Kentucky Agricultural Experiment Station Bulletin 587, 1952, p. 32; Carle C. Zimmerman, Family and Civilization, New York: Harper and Brothers, 1947, Chapter 7; 0. A. Oeser and F. E. Emery, Social Structure and Personality in a Rural Community, New York: The Macmillan Co., 1954, Chapter 8; Eleanor Godfrey, A Construction of Family Types and Their Empirical Validation, doctoral dissertation, Harvard University, 1950; and Marion Levy, The Family Revolution in Modern China, Camhridvn. Mass: Harvard University Press. 1949. 2 E. A. Wilkening, Changes in Farming as Related to Familism, Family Decision-Making and Family Integration, American Sociological Review, 19 (February, 1954), pp. 29-37, and Adoption of Improved Farm Practices as Related to Family Factors, Madison: Wisconsin Agricultural Experiment Station Bulletin 183, 1953, Appendix Table 9. 3 Reuben Hill, Kurt Back and J. Mayone Stycos, Intra-family Communication and Fertility Planning in Puerto Rico, Rural Sociology, 20 (Sept.Dec.. 1955), nnp 25R-271.