Skip to main content
Log in

Rural-urban residence and modernism: A study of Ankara Province, Turkey

  • Published:
Demography

Abstract

Data from the Ankara Family Study, in which 1138 married women living in Ankara city and four selected villages in Ankara Province were interviewed in 1965–66, are used to study the impact of the amount and timing of urban residential experience on six dimensions of modernism in attitudes and behavior. Scores on the modernism indexes consistently are higher for the women with urban residential experience. The proportions of variance in the study population accounted for by the urbanism factor are: nearly three-fifths on the mass media index; nearly two-fifths on the nuclear family role structure index; three-tenths on the home production or consumption index; two-tenths on the religiosity and extra-local orientation indexes; and a seventh on the extended family ties index. The place of residence prior to marriage, the period when decisions about schooling are made and socialization into adult roles occurs, appears to be of special importance. Women who migrated from villages to the city at any stage of the life-cycle, however, report attitudes and behavior more modern than those of women with no urban residential experience (though less modern than those of women who have always lived in a city). Such micro-social analyses may help to illuminate the relation between urbanization and modernization in developing nations and to account for the coexistence of modern and traditional patterns in transitional societies.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Abu-Lughod, J. 1964. Urban-rural differences as a function of the demographic transition: Egyptian data and an analytical model. American Journal of Sociology 69:476–490.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Adelman, I. and C. T. Morris. 1967. A quantitative study of social and political determinants of fertility. Economic Development and Cultural Change 14:129–157.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Andrews, F., J. Morgan, and J. Sonquist. 1967. Multiple Classification Analysis: A Report on a Computer Program for Multiple Regression Using Categorical Predictors. Ann Arbor: Survey Research Center, Institute for Social Research.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bendix, R. 1967. Tradition and modernity reconsidered. Comparative Studies in Society and History 9, 3:292–346.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blau, P. and O. D. Duncan. 1967. The American Occupational Structure. New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bogue, D. J. 1955. Urbanism in the United States, 1950. American Journal of Sociology 60:471–486.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bose, S. P. 1962. Peasant values and innovation in India. American Journal of Sociology 67: 552–560.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burch, T. K. 1967. The size and structure of families: a comparative analysis. American Sociological Review 32:347–363.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fei, H-T. 1946. Peasantry and gentry: an interpretation of Chinese social structure and its changes. American Journal of Sociology 52:1–17.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Friedl, E. 1964. Lagging emulation in post-peasant society. American Anthropologist 66:569–586.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Frey, F. W. 1964. Education. In R. E. Ward and D. E. Rustow (eds.), Political Modernization in Japan and Turkey. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gibson, G. 1969. Kin family network: over-heralded structure in past conceptualization of family functioning. Paper presented at the American Sociological Association meeting in San Francisco.

  • Gusfield, J. 1967. Tradition and modernity: misplaced polarities in the study of social change. American Journal of Sociology 72: 351–362.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hauser, P. M. (ed.), 1957. Urbanization in Asia and the Far East. Calcutta: UNESCO.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hoselitz, B. F. 1960. Sociological Aspects of Economic Growth. Glencoe: Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Inkeles, A. 1966. The modernization of man. In M. Weiner (ed.), Modernization: The Dynamics of Growth. New York: Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Inkeles, A. 1968. Making men modern: on the causes and consequences of individual change in six developing countries. Paper presented at the A.A.A.S. meetings, Dallas, Texas.

  • Kahl, J. A. 1968. The Measurement of Modernism: A Study of Values in Brazil and Mexico. Austin: University of Texas Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kazamias, A. M. 1966. Education and the Quest for Modernity in Turkey. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kuznets, S. 1963. Consumption, industrialization, and urbanization. In B. F. Hoselitz and W. E. Moore (eds.), Industrialization and Society. Mouton: UNESCO.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lerner, D. 1958. The Passing of Traditional Society. Glencoe: Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lewis, O. 1952. Urbanization without breakdown: a case study. Scientific Monthly 75: 31–41.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lewis, O. 1966. The folk-urban ideal types. In P. M. Hauser and L. F. Schnore (eds.), The Study of Urbanization. New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moore, W. E. and A. S. Feldman (eds.), 1960. Labor Commitment and Social Change in Developing Areas. New York: Social Science Research Council.

    Google Scholar 

  • Olsen, M. E. 1968. Multivariate analysis of national political development. American Sociological Review 33:699–712.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Robinson, R. D. 1963. The First Turkish Republic: A Case Study in National Development. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schnaiberg, A. 1968. Some Determinants and Consequences of Modernism in Turkey. Unpublished dissertation, University of Michigan.

  • Schnaiberg, A. 1969. The modernizing impact of urbanization: a causal analysis. Paper presented at the meetings of the Society for the Study of Social Problems, San Francisco, California.

  • Schramm, W. 1964. Mass Media and National Development. Stanford: Stanford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schuman, H. 1967. Economic development and individual change: a social-psychological study of the Comilla experiment in Pakistan. Occasional Papers in International Affairs, No. 15. Cambridge: Harvard Center for International Affairs.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sjoberg, G. 1964. The rural-urban dimension in preindustrial, transitional, and industrial societies. In R. E. L. Faris (ed.), Handbook 85 of Modem Sociology. Chieago: Rand MeNally.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smelser, N. J. and S. M. Lipset (ed.). 1966. Social Structure and Mobility in Economic Development. Chicago: Aldine,

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, D. H. and A. Inkeles. 1966. The OM Scale: a comparative socio-psychological measure of individual modernity. Sociometry 29:353–377.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sorokin, P. A. and C. C. Zimmerman. 1929. Principles of Rural-Urban Sociology. New York: Henry Holt.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sussman, M. B. and L. Burchinal, 1962. Kin family network: unheralded structure in current conceptualizations of family functioning. Marriage and Family Living 24:234–235.

    Google Scholar 

  • Taeuber, I. 1951. Family, migration and industrialization in Japan. American Sociological Review 16:149–157.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tisdale, H. 1942. The process of urbanization. Social Forces 20:311–316.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Turkey, 1965. 24.10.1965. Census of Population by Administrative Division. State Institute of Statistics, publication no. 537.

  • Vogel, E. F. 1967. Japan’s New Middle Class. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wirth, L. 1938. Urbanism as a way of life. American Journal of Sociology 44:1–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Schnaiberg, A. Rural-urban residence and modernism: A study of Ankara Province, Turkey. Demography 7, 71–85 (1970). https://doi.org/10.2307/2060024

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/2060024

Keywords

Navigation