The meaning of rurality from the person-on-the-street perspective was explored using data from a statewide telephone and mail survey of 1,241 Pennsylvania residents. Responses to 35 Likert items were factor analyzed and five factors were delineated: positive images of rural life, negative images of rurality, antiurbanism, agrarianism, and wilderness values. Widespread agreement with the positive images of rural life, antiurbanism, agrarianism, and wilderness values was found. Negative images of rurality were overwhelmingly rejected by the respondents. Rural dwellers were somewhat more positive in their attitudes toward all aspects of rurality than were urban or suburban residents. The relevance of these overall findings for rural development is suggested.

No abstract

No abstract

Panel studies, undertaken with grandiose plans and high hopes, frequently fail to live up to the expectations of the initiators of the research. Practical problems, such as continuity of personnel, institutional commitment, funding, design and substance of the data bank, and changing of facilities and equipment may interfere with the success of the project. The purpose of this paper is to describe some of the pitfalls that may be encountered in such longitudinal studies and to suggest ways in which the researchers' awareness of these hazards may facilitate planning to circumvent some of the difficulties.