This dissertation has been microfilmed exactly as received 69-11,670

MARTIN II, Donald Ray, 1941- A STUDY OF DEFINITIONS AND ATTITUDES TOWARD A SMALL COLLEGE NON-COMMERCIAL EDUCA­ TIONAL FM RADIO STATION.

The Ohio State University, Ph.D., 1968 Mass Communications

University Microfilms, Inc., Ann Arbor, Michigan

(c) Donald Ray Martin II 1969

ALL RIGHTS RESERVED A STUDY OF DEFINITIONS AND ATTITUDES TOWARD A SMALL COLLEGE

NON-COMMERCIAL EDUCATIONAL FM RADIO STATION

DISSERTATION

Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School of The Ohio State University

By

Donald Ray M artin I I , B .A ., M.S

*###*#

The Ohio State University 1968

Approved by

— ------u U .------/ Adviser .// Department ofvSpeech PLEASE NOTE:

Tables tend to curl, Filmed in best possible way.

UNIVERSITY MICROFILMS VITA

November 22, 19-41 Born Cleveland, Ohio

1963 ...... B.A., Otterbein College, Westerville, Ohio

1963 ...... M.S., Syracuse University, Syracuse, New York

1965-1968 ...... Instructor, Ohio Wesleyan University, Delaware, Ohio

19 6 8 - ...... Assistant Professor, California State Polytechnic College, San Luis Obispo, California

PUBLICATIONS

"Program Review of The Comic Arts." Educational Broadcasting Review, II (June, 1968), pp. 59-60.

FIELDS OF STUDY

Major Field: Educational Broadcasting

Studies in Broadcasting. Professors James E. Lynch, Richard M. Mall, and Harrison B. Summers

Studies in Communications Research. Professors Robert R. Monaghan and Wallace Fotheringham

Studies in Educational Media. Professors Sidney Eboch, I. Keith Tyler, and Thomas M iller TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

VITA i i

LIST OF TABLES v

LIST OF FIGURES ix

C hapter I . STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM 1 Introduction The Problem Need H ypotheses Design

I I . REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE...... 16 Introduction Case Study Institution Small College Radio Stations Broadcasting Studies with a Similar Design Summary

I I I . DESIGN OF THE S T U D Y ...... 33 Introduction Institution Selected for Study Selection of the Instrument Development of the Instrument Selection of the Sample Administering the Instrument Data Processing Procedure Procedure for Conclusions and Recommendations

IV. RESULTS OF THE INVESTIGATION 68 Introduction Linkage Analysis Data point Biserial Correlation Data Item Significance Test Between Present and Ideal for Groups Definition Analyses Attitude Analyses Testing the Hypotheses Summary

iii Chapter Page

V. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS...... 156 Introduction Case Study Institution Small College Radio Stations The D esign

SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY ...... 190

iv LIST OF TABLES

T able Page

1. WSLN Program Schedule ...... 39

2. Definition Elements of an Educational Radio Station for Structured Q-sorts ...... 43

3. Structured Q-sort Instrument for Measuring Definitions of an Educational Radio Station ...... 44

4. Attitude Elements Toward an Educational Radio Station for Unstructured Q-sorts ...... 49

5. Unstructured Q-sort Instrument for Measuring Attitudes Toward an Educational Radio Station .... 50

6. Distribution of Q-sort Cards ...... 53

7. Composition of the Structured Sample for the Q-sort Instruments ...... 55

8. Q-sort Response...... 59

9. Hypothetical Matrix for Preparing Point Biserial Correlation Data ...... 63

10. Item Scores Made by the Sample on the Definition- Present Q -sort...... 70

11. Item Scores Made by the Sample on the Definition- Ideal Q -sort ...... 71

12. Item Scores Made by the Sample on the Attitude- Present Q -sort...... 72

13. Item Scores Made by the Sample on the Attitude- Ideal Q -sort ...... 73

14. Intercorrelations of Persons in the Sample Over Definition-Present Q-sort Items ...... 74

15. Intercorrelations of Persons in the Sample Over Attitude-Present Q-sort Items ...... 75

v Table Page

16. Rows of Coefficients Added to Definition Q-sort Scores for Point Biserial Correlation Computation . . 79

17. Rows of Coefficients Added to Attitude Q-sort Scores for Point Biserial Correlation Computation . . 80

18. Point Biserial Correlations Between Definition Groups and Definition-Present Q-sort Items..... 81

19. Point Biserial Correlations Between Definition Groups and Definition-Ideal Q-sort Items ...... 82

20. Point Biserial Correlations Between Attitude Groups and Attitude-Present Q-sort Items ...... 83

21. Point Biserial Correlations Between Attitude Groups and Attitude-Ideal Q-sort Items ...... 84

22. Characteristics of Sample Members Affiliated with Group 1 ...... 85

23. Point Biserial Correlations Between Group 1 and Definition-Present Q-sort Items ...... 87

24. Point Biserial Correlations Between Group 1 and Definition-Ideal Q-sort Items ...... 89

25. Significant Item Differences for Group 1 Between the Present and an Ideal S ta tio n ...... 91

26. Characteristics of Sample Members A ffiliated with Group 2 ...... 92

27. Point Biserial Correlations Between Group 2 and Definition-Present Q-sort Items ...... 93

28. Point Biserial Correlations Between Group 2 and Definition-Ideal Q-sort Items ...... 96

29. Significant Item Differences for Group 2 Between the Present and an Ideal S ta tio n ...... 99

30. Characteristics of Sample Members A ffiliated with Group 3 ...... 101

31. Point Biserial Correlations Between Group 3 and Definition-Present Q-sort Items ...... 103 32. Point Biserial Correlations Between Group 3 and Definition-Ideal Q-sort Items ...... 106

vi Table Page

33. Significant Item Differences for Group 3 Between the Present and an Ideal S ta tio n ...... 108

34. Characteristics of Sample Members Affiliated with Group 4 ...... 110

35. Point Biserial Correlations Between Group 4 and Definition-Present Q-sort Items ...... 111

36. Point Biserial Correlations Between Group 4 and Definition-Ideal Q-sort Items ...... 112

37. Significant Item Differences for Group 4 Between the Present and an Ideal S ta tio n ...... 114

38. Significant Item Differences Between the Present and an Ideal S tatio n ...... 116

39. Composition of Definition Items Having Significantly Lower Means for Ideal Station Ranked in Descending Order of Significance ...... 117

40. Composition of Definition Items Having Significantly Lower Means for Present Station Ranked in Descending Order of Significance ...... 118

41. Characteristics of Sample Members Affiliated with Group 1 ...... 119

42. Point Biserial Correlations Between Group 1 and Attitude-Present Q-sort Items ...... 120

43. Point Biserial Correlations Between Group 1 and Attitude-Ideal Q-sort Items ...... 122

44* Significant Item Differences for Group 1 Between the Present and an Ideal S ta tio n ...... 124

45. Characteristics of Sample Members A ffiliated with Group 2 ...... 125

4 6. Point Biserial Correlations Between Group 2 and Attitude-Present Q-sort Items ...... 127

47. Point Biserial Correlations Between Group 2 and Attitude-Ideal Q-sort Items ...... 129

48. Significant Item Differences for Group 2 Between the Present and an Ideal S ta tio n ...... 130

vii Table Page

49. Characteristics of Sample Members A ffiliated with Group 3 ...... 131

50. Point Biserial Correlations Between Group 3 and Attitude-Present Q-sort Items ...... 132

51. Point Biserial Correlations Between Group 3 and Attitude-Ideal Q-sort Items ...... 134

52. Significant Item Differences for Group 3 Between the Present and an Ideal Station ...... 135

53. Characteristics of Sample Members A ffiliated with Group 4 ...... 136

54. Point Biserial Correlations Between Group 4 and Attitude-Present Q-sort Items ...... 137

55. Point Biserial Correlations Between Group 4 and Attitude-Ideal Q-3ort Items ...... 139

56. Significant Item Differences for Group 4 Between the Present and an Ideal S ta tio n ...... 140

57. Characteristics of Sample Members Affiliated with Group 5 ...... 141

58. Point Biserial Correlations Between Group 5 and Attitude-Present Q-sort Items ...... 142

59. Point Biserial Correlations Between Group 5 and Attitude-Ideal Q-sort Items ...... 144

60. Significant Item Differences for Group 5 Between the Present and an Ideal S ta tio n ...... 145

61. Significant Item Differences Between the Present and an Ideal S tatio n ...... 147

62. Composition of Attitude Items Having Significantly Lower Means for Ideal Station Ranked in Descending Order of Significance ...... 148

63. Composition of Attitude Items Having Significantly Lower Means for Present Station Ranked in Descending Order of Significance ...... 149

viii UST OF FIGURES

Figure Page

1. Types of Definition O rientations...... 77

2. Types of Attitude Orientations ...... 78

ix CHAPTER I

STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM

Introduction

Ever since I knew anything about educational radio it has been suffering from an identity crisis. Today the question is no different from the one raised by your colleages AO years ago. Who are we? Why are we here? What is our purpose?

Robert Lewis Shayon's general observation, when applied to a specific educational radio station, aptly introduces the purpose of this investigation.

The purpose of this study is to identify and analyze orientations and attitudes toward the non-commercial educational FM radio sta­ tion of a small college.

Chapter I explains the problem in detail. It begins by consider­

ing the background of the problem by briefly recounting the history of

educational radio in the United States. Particular emphasis is focused

on the development of small college non-commercial FM stations. It ex­

plains the unique organizational problem which has contributed to the

identity crisis faced by these stations. The actual problem is then

described, followed by a justification for its investigation. Hypotheses

necessary for studying this problem are presented. The chapter concludes

with a brief summary of the design which is used to test the hypotheses.

Robert Lewis Shayon. "Educational Radio and National Purpose," Educational Broadcasting Review. I (October, 1967), p. 21.

1 Background

Educational radio*s identity problem began with the appearance of the first educational radio stations in the early 1920*s. Although most of these early stations engaged in programming, their primary pur­ pose was apparently to experiment with the physical and engineering 3 aspects of broadcasting. Although the lack of required licensing in the period makes an accurate census of all educational stations impos­ sible, it is known that 171 educational groups had obtained station licenses by 1925.^

As technical sophistication made broadcasting more expensive and the Federal Radio Commission imposed regulation upon the medium, a sig­ nificant number of educational stations, whose purposes could not justify the increased costs, disappeared from the air. In fact, by 1926 nearly C half of the educational radio stations had gone off the air! This attrition continued until educational broadcasting during the 1930's and early AO's was confined to the operations of about twenty stations.

Most of the surviving stations were licensed to large state universities £ or metropolitan municipalities, such as the City of New York. In

Robert L. H illiard. Radio Broadcasting (New York: Hastings House, 1967), p. 18. 3 Giraud Chester, Garnet R. Garrison, and Edgar E. W illis. Television and Radio (3rd ed.; New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, 1963), p . 20. A H illiard, Radio Broadcasting, p. 18. 5 Harry J. Skornia. "Educational Radio: Its Past and Its Future," Educational Television: The Next Ten Years (Stanford: Insti­ tute for Communications Research, 1962), p. 357. 6 Chester, Garrison, and W illis, Television and Radio, p. 202. essence, only the larger and more affluent educational institutions could afford the luxury of broadcasting.

When the Federal Communications Commission authorized FM broad­ casting in 1941* it reserved five channels in the 41 to 50 megahertz band for exclusive assignment to non-commercial educational applicants. This policy of reserving channels for educational stations was retained when the Commission reallocated FM broadcasting in 1945 to the 88 to 108 megahertz band. Twenty channels in the lower four megahertz of the new

FM band were reserved for non-commercial stations. However, only a few educational institutions were able to initiate FM broadcasting at this time. Technical requirements imposed on educational broadcasters by the FCC were similar to the rules for commercial stations; hence, only a few of the larger institutions were able to undertake FM broad- c a s tin g . '

In 1943 the Federal Communications Commission relaxed its non­ commercial FM rules making the development of a significant number of stations possible. The most important rule change made by the Commission was the creation of the low power educational FM station. Stations were now permitted to be licensed for less than ten watts of power making it possible for educational institutions which were previously unable to afford broadcasting to apply for non-commercial FM licenses. Small col­ leges and universities applied for a sizeable number of the FM licenses

7 H illiard, Radio Broadcasting, p. 19. g 1968 Broadcasting Yearbook (Washington: Broadcasting Publica­ tions, Incorporated, 1968), pp. B-3 - B-187. 9 H illiard, Radio Broadcasting, p. 19. 4 permitted under the relaxed rules. The small college could finally

operate a broadcast facility at a cost which could realistically be appropriated within the lim its of its institutional budget.

The growth of non-commercial educational FM radio since 194-8

has been significant. Today there are 384 authorized stations.^ A

substantial number of these are licensed to small colleges.

The Problem

While the relaxed rules have given many small colleges a radio

outlet, the average small college FM station is substantially different

from its counterpart at a major university. A radio or television sta­

tion licensed to a large university is usually considered a service

facility of the institution and is therefore administered through a

university broadcasting or telecommunications center. This center is

assigned objectives to be realized by the station. The university

normally hires a professional broadcasting staff to maintain the station

on a full-tim e basis.

However, many small colleges have neither the resources nor the

need to maintain special broadcasting centers within their institutional

framework. Therefore, the responsibility for FM stations at small col­

leges is often divided among a number of different groups. These groups

frequently have different purposes for using the station's facilities.

For example, many college stations are operated with funds appropriated

10 "Summary of Broadcasting," Broadcasting Magazine. LXXV (August 19, 1968), p. 65. 11 by the institution’s administrations. It might be assumed that admin­ istrators, who are approving a station’s budget, would want this station to reflect the public relations efforts of the school by becoming the official college radio outlet for the surrounding community. Similarly, small college stations are usually administered by the faculty of an academic department which teaches courses related to broadcasting. It is understandable that faculty members involved with such courses would conceive of the college FM station as a laboratory for student training in broadcasting techniques. In most of these stations students normally operate the facility, often without compensation. It is reasonable to expect students, therefore, to regard the station as an entertaining extra-curricular activity. Likewise, the FM listeners in the community can ask it to serve them. A broadcasting facility is committed by license to serve the public interest, and such a demand by the public is to be assumed.

No known research has attempted to determine how these various groups within a small college station’s listening range actually per­ ceive the station. The stereotyped perceptions hypothesized in the example have not been supported by research. In fact, it is not known if general student, faculty, administrative, or city perceptions toward a station even exist.

Similarly, the diversity of perceptions would probably make it difficult for any one perception to be fulfilled to the satisfaction of

David Eshelman. "About College FM Stations," NAEB Journal. XXIV (September-October, 1965), p. 4.1. 6 its advocates. This problem may be reflected in less than ideal group attitudes toward a college station.

This study will attempt to identify and analyze orientations and attitudes toward the non-commercial FM radio station of a small college.

Personal perceptions of a station may be formulated from a variety of sources. For example, the primary base for some people's opinion of a station may be determined by listening to its broadcasts. Others may base their perceptions on newspaper articles about the station. Some people may be influenced by a station's off-the-air promotion campaigns.

Comments heard about a college station w ill also shape the definitions and attitudes of some people.

Since this is a study of all significant definitions and atti­ tudes toward a small college station, no attempt w ill be made to restrict the scope of the investigation of people whose perceptions were formed

primarily from a particular source. For example, this study w ill not be

limited to definitions and attitudes of listeners. Non-listeners have

also formulated defnitions and attitudes toward the station. In fact,

an analysis of the definitions and attitudes of non-listeners may deter­

mine why they are non-listeners.

Obviously, it would be impractical to attempt to precisely

measure expressions of purpose and attitude as elicited by each person

in a station's listening area. Even an investigator with unlimited time

and financial resources to conduct such a project would probably not be

conducting a useful investigation. Mass communication systems by defini­

tion are responsible to more than single individuals. It is more impor­

tant to study group orientations toward a station instead of individual perceptions. This study, therefore, w ill be focused on the orientations of groups concerning the purpose of the station and the orientation of groups concerning attitudes toward the station.

Groups for this study must be self generating. The investigation

« ■ cannot assume that a "faculty,* "student," or "community* orientation exists toward the station being studied. Therefore, people with similar orientations w ill be grouped together after their orientations have been a s s e s s e d .

Need

The value of investigating orientations and attitudes toward a non-commercial educational FM radio station should be considered. Special consideration should be focused on the following groups who might have particular interests in the findings of such an investigation.

Station Management

If small college station managers were aware of group perceptions of their facilities, they might be better equipped to make programming and policy decisions. The managers would know why different segments of the audience think the station exists. They could also be aware of prevailing attitudes which exist toward a station. This information may be invaluable to them when they are selecting programs, formulating station policies, and conducting public relations efforts.

College Administration

Rapidly increasing operating costs make it mandatory for a small college to spend its resources as efficiently as possible. Broadcasting is generally a substantial expenditure on a small college budget. The college adm inistrator, making budgetary decisions, could use the findings of this investigation to determine the apparent reasons for operating the station. This would help him decide if the station's operational costs can be justified by its purposes. The findings would also provide a college administration with an indication of public opinion toward the station. For example, the results might reveal that the station is a public relations asset to the school. Conversely, the data might suggest that the station's public image is a liability.

Federal Communications Commission

The scarcity of available channels in the educational FM band in maqy sections of the United States has prompted the Federal Communica­ tions Commission to issue a proposed rule-making which would eliminate ten watt stations. The Commission contends that the benefits derived from ten watt stations do not justify the frequency space they are con­ suming. If this proposal is adopted, a substantial number of small col­ lege stations would have to apply for a higher power facility or leave the air. Since the costs of increasing the power of a station are sub­ stantial, it may be assumed that a number of colleges would be forced to accept the latter alternative.

Many small college stations have formally opposed the Commis­ sion's proposal, contending that their purpose justified their frequency.

However, many of the arguments suggested by these stations have been more emotional than analytical. Therefore, the findings of this inves­ tigation could help the Commission determine if people's perceptions of the purpose of ten watt small college stations warrant adopting or re­ jecting the rule-making proposal. 9

Broadcasting Educators and Scholars

A substantial number of broadcasting educators teach at small colleges having non-commercial FM stations. The limited budgets of most small institutions usually require that the broadcasting educator also serve in an advisory or managerial capacity at the station. It would be helpful to educators working in this situation to know how the station is perceived by others, so they may effectively discharge their obligation to it. Similarly, findings from this investigation would benefit other broadcasting educators who are considering the merits of beginning a FM station at a small college. Teachers of courses related to educational broadcasting at larger universities might also use this study to help them broaden their perspective of the problems confronting educational radio in the United States.

Although there are many small college FM stations, broadcasting researchers have almost ignored their existence. Chapter II analyzes the scarcity of research in this area of educational radio. This study might suggest new problems confronting small college stations which would stim­ ulate other investigations. The design of this investigation might also interest scholars of communications research methodology.

H ypotheses

Before a design can be constructed for a study, it is necessary to determine hypotheses which the investigation w ill test. The follow­ ing twelve hypotheses are partially developed from the notions of Type 12 Psychology developed by William Stephenson. They are also formulated

^W illiam Stephenson. The Study of Behavior (Chicago: Univer­ sity of Chicago Press, 1953), p. 159. 10 by the investigator's experience as manager of several small college non­ commercial educational FM radio stations.

The first six hypotheses w ill be tested to determine group defin­ itions of small college non-commercial educational FM radio stations.

All definition-related hypotheses w ill be designated with a "Dw prefix.

Similarly, the last six hypotheses w ill be tested to determine group attitudes toward the non-commercial educational FM station of a small college. All attitudes related hypotheses w ill be designated with an

"A" prefix.

D e fin itio n

D-1. People who define the station similarly may be identified and grouped with all other people possessing a similar definition.

The testing of this hypothesis will determine if people do pos­ sess similar definitions toward the station which may be legitim ately grouped together. Rejection of this hypothesis suggests that each person has a uniquely different definition orientation which cannot be aligned with the definitions of others.

D-2. The variables of station definition which make each group

orientation unique may be described for the present and for an ideal

s t a t i o n .

The testing of this hypothesis w ill determine if the station

definition variables which caused people to have a similar orientation

can be discovered. In other words, the testing of this hypothesis w ill

decide if the "uniqueness" of each group can be described. Rejection of

this hypothesis would suggest that the study is unable to determine on

what definition variables people, who think sim ilarly, agree. 11

D-3. Each group expresses a significantly different definition toward its concept of the present and its concept of an ideal station.

The testing of this hypothesis w ill determine if each of the groups is satisfied with the station as it exists today. If this hypoth- esis is affirmed, the groups are not satisfied with the way they define the station as it is today. Rejection of this hypothesis would indicate that the present station definitions offered by the groups are almost the same as they would be for an ideal station.

D-4. The variables causing a significant difference between the present and an ideal definition of the station for each of the groups may be isolated and described.

The testing of this hypothesis will determine if those definition variables which change between the present and an ideal station can be described. If this hypothesis is affirmed, then variables may be realized which might suggest changes in station policies or procedures.

Rejection of this hypothesis would suggest that this investigation is

unable to find variables which significantly change between the station

definitions expressed by the groups for the present and those for an

ideal station.

D-5. The entire sample expresses a significant difference between

its definitions of the present and an ideal station.

The testing of this hypothesis w ill determine if the composite of

all groups expresses a significant difference between its definitions of

the present and an ideal station. Acceptance of this hypothesis implies

that people in general are not satisfied with the present definition of 12 the station. Rejection of this hypothesis would indicate that the sample as a whole thinks the station is nearly ideal.

D-6. The variables causing a significant difference in defini­ tion between the present station and an ideal station can be isolated and described for the entire sample.

The testing of this hypothesis w ill determine if those defini­ tion variables which significantly change between the present and an ideal station for the entire sample can be identified. Acceptance of this lypothesis will indicate that those variables which change signif­ icantly for the entire sample cam be described. People responsible for the station would know the variables the entire sample contends are less than ideal for the station. Rejection of this hypothesis would indicate that on no variable does a significant difference exist be­ tween the present and an ideal station as viewed by the entire sample.

The study was unable to find apy variables which caused a significant difference in the entire sample's definitions between the present and an ideal station.

A ttitu d e

A-1. People whose attitudes toward the station are similar may

be identified and grouped with all other people possessing a similar

a t t i t u d e .

The testing of this hypothesis w ill determine if people do

possess similar attitudes toward the station which may be legitimately

grouped together. Rejection of this hypothesis suggests that each per­

son has a uniquely different attitude which cannot be aligned with that

of o th e rs . 13

A-2. The variables of attitude toward the station which make each group orientation unique may be described for the present and for an ideal station.

The testing of this hypothesis w ill determine if the attitude variables which caused people to have a similar orientation can be dis­ covered. In other words, the testing of this hypothesis will decide if the "uniqueness" of each group can be described. Rejection of this hypothesis would suggest that it is not possible to describe the a tti­ tude variables on which people who think similarly agree.

A-3. Each group expresses a significantly different attitude toward its concept of the present and its concept of an ideal station.

The testing of the hypothesis will determine if each of the groups is satisfied with the station as it is today. If this hypothesis is affirmed, the groups are not satisfied with the attitude which they express about the station as it is today. Rejection of this hypothesis would suggest that the attitudes of the groups about the station today are similar to what their attitudes would be toward an ideal station.

A-4. The variables causing a significant difference between the present and an ideal attitude toward the station for each of the groups may be isolated and described.

The testing of this hypothesis w ill determine if those attitude variables which change between the present and an ideal station can be described. If this hypothesis is affirmed, variables may be realized which might suggest changes in station policies or procedures. Rejection

of this hypothesis would suggest that this study is unable to find the variables which significantly change between the attitudes expressed by the groups for the present station and those for an ideal station.

A-5. The entire sample expresses a significant difference be­ tween its attitudes toward the present and an ideal station.

The testing of this hypothesis will determine if the composite of all groups expresses a significantly different attitude between the present and an ideal station. If this hypothesis is affirmed, the im­ plication would be that people in general are not satisfied with the way they presently feel about the station. Rejection of this hypothesis would indicate that the sample as a whole is satisfied with its feelings regarding the station.

Design

A detailed description of the design appears in Chapter III.

However, it w ill be briefly summarized here so that the procedure for testing the hypotheses may be explained.

A small college operating a typical non-commercial educational

FM radio station was selected as a case study institution. Open ended

interviews about the station were conducted with ten people in the

station*s listening area. The interviews were recorded and significant

statements were used to form the designs for a structured Q-sort instru­

ment concerning definitions of the station and an unstructured Q-sort

instrument concerning attitudes toward the station. These designs were

employed to generate the two Q-sorts. The Q-sorts were refined and

then administered to a structured sample of thirty-two persons. Each

person did both Q-sorts twice. The first time respondents sorted the 15 cards as they perceived the present station and the second time as they would like to perceive an ideal station.

A Linkage Analysis applied to the (J-sort data generated groups of people having similar orientations. This procedure tested hypotheses

D-1 and A-1. A point biserial correlation was then applied to the data to determine the significant characteristics of each group. This pro­ cedure tested hypotheses D-2 and A-2. Tests of significance were com­ puted between each group’s perception of the actual and an ideal sta­ tion. This procedure tested tyrpotheses D-3, D-4, A-3, and A-4. Tests of significance were then run between the entire sample’s perception of the present and an ideal station. This procedure tested hypotheses D-5,

D-6, A-5, and A-6. Appropriate conclusions were drawn from the data and recommendations suggested from these conclusions. CHAPTER II

REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE

Introduction

This chapter w ill review the literature related to the problem and research design of this investigation. It begins by reviewing the previous research related to broadcasting activities of the college used as a case study in this investigation. Significant investigations related to broadcasting at other small colleges are then analyzed. The chapter closes by reviewing studies related to broadcasting which em­ ployed research designs similar to the design used in this investiga­ t i o n .

Case Study Institution

Ohio Wesleyan University was selected as the case study institu­ tion for this investigation. A description of Ohio Wesleyan and the rationale for its selection appears in Chapter III.

Three studies have investigated broadcasting at Ohio Wesleyan.

Two of these investigations were historical, while the third was an analysis of the potential audience of Ohio Wesleyan*s FM station.

H is to r ic a l

The late W. Roy Diem and R. Clarence Hunter, both Ohio Wesleyan speech professors em eriti, published The Storv of Speech at Ohio

16 17 1 Weslevan. This book is an historical study of Ohio Wesleyan*s Speech

Department. Chapter VIII of this study, entitled "On the Air", traces the history of the college’s broadcasting activities from their begin­ ning in 1935 through 1964.. The authors used published materials such as college newspapers and yearbooks to help them prepare the history.

They also interviewed participants who were significant figures in the development of broadcasting at Ohio Wesleyan. Since Diem and Hunter were both teaching at Ohio Wesleyan before broadcasting began at the institution, they were also able to rely on their personal accounts of its development.

The findings of this investigation are interesting. A summary of the more important events in the development of broadcasting at Ohio

Wesleyan as described in the Diem and Hunter study appear in Chapter

III.

While the chapter in the Diem and Hunter book provides an ex­ cellent summary of the broadcasting activities of the college before

1964, many of the events which may directly affect the findings of this investigation occurred since The Story of Speech at Ohio Wesleyan was published. Laurence W. King included these events in his recent inten- O sive study of the development of broadcasting at Ohio Wesleyan. Since

King's study was entirely focused on broadcasting at the college, it is

1 William Roy Diem and Rollin Clarence Hunter. The Story of Speech at Ohio Wesleyan (Delaware: Speech Department of Ohio Wesleyan University, 1964), pp. 94-101. 2 Laurence W. King. "A History of Broadcasting at Ohio Wesleyan" (unpublished Senior Seminar paper, Department of Speech, Ohio Wesleyan University, 1967). 18 much more detailed than the chapter in the Diem and Hunter book. King used college newspaper articles, yearbooks, and catalogues as resource materials for this study. He also interviewed faculty members who were instrumental in the development of broadcasting at the college. This study is particularly useful because of its description of some of the problems confronting broadcasting at the case study institution at the time of this investigation.

Audience Analysis

In 1965 Carolyn W. Smith and Bruce L. Cook studied the program 2 preferences of potential listeners to Ohio Wesleyan*s FM station, WSLN.

The investigators began this study by telephoning a random sample of 284 people in the stations coverage area to determine FM set saturation and listenership. A structured sample of FM set owners was also interviewed to determine programming preferences. A survey instrument was then mailed to a ll other educational stations in Ohio to determine if WSLN represents the typical non-commercial FM radio station.

This investigation found that forty-nine per cent of the tele­ phone sample owned FM receivers. Half of these FM set owners were regu­ lar WSLN listeners. The personal interviews indicated that the five

most preferred types of programs for WSLN were news, weather, popular

dance music, sports events, and classical music in that order. The

Carolyn W. Smith and Bruce L. Cook. "A study of Educational Radio Station Programming through Analysis of Listenership, Station Practice, and Expert Opinion" (unpublished Independent Study, Department of Speech, Ohio Wesleyan University, 1965). 19 survey compearing WSLN with other non-commercial FM stations in Ohio re­ vealed that its organization and programming are very sim ilar to other small college stations.

Small College Radio Stations

In the years between 1920 and 1958 graduate students in this country alone wrote 1,456 master’s theses and doctorial disser­ tations on nontechnical aspects of broadcasting....The fact is that only 295 studies out of 1,456, roughly one-fifth of the total, seem directly related to educational radio....If you apply the criteria of recency to your evaluation of the graduate theses we were considering, you w ill find that only 57 of them were w rit­ ten between 1950 and 1958. Of these 57, roughly half were station histories and half the rest were local audience surveys. This leaves us with a residue of around 15 theses that might have some bearing on the questions people ask today....In case it has occurred to you that this review hasn't covered anything since 1957, the reason is simple. Very little has been written about educational radio since then.

Richard Forsythe's observation concerning the scarcity of recent research on educational radio may be quickly confirmed by consulting

Knower's bibliography of graduate theses and dissertations on broad­

casting.-5 This phenomenon may be attributed to the development of tele­

vision. Educational FM and television broadcasting have both developed

in the United States since 1945. Apparently, most investigators elected

to study the possibilities of television, instead of FM radio.

The void in research about educational FM is especially evident

when small college stations sire considered. Until the Federal Communica­

tions Commission authorized low power FM in 1948, small colleges were

4 Richard 0. Forsythe. "Radio Research," NAEB Journal. XXIV (November-December, 1965), pp. 39-40. 5 Frsuiklin H. Knower. "Graduate Theses and D issertations on Brosidcasting: 1963-1966* Journal of Brosuicasting. XI (Spring, 1967), pp. 153-181. 20 unable to operate on the air broadcasting stations. Therefore, these stations did not exist until after television had become the significant medium attracting the attention of most investigators.

As Forsythe has indicated, a large percentage of the educational radio investigations have been station histories and local audience sur­ veys. These types of studies are sometimes useful to practitioners and other researchers involved with the station that was investigated. For example, the two histories and the local audience survey conducted at

Ohio Wesleyan were useful background resources for this investigation.

However, most station histories and local audience surveys are generally not applicable to other situations. Therefore, histories and local audience surveys of other stations have not been included in this literature review.

Four studies appear to be relevant to this investigation. The

first two studies are general surveys of wired radio or carrier-current

stations. The other two studies are surveys of non-commercial educa­

tional FM facilities.

Carrier-Current Stations

Many small colleges, such as the case study institution, oper­

ated carrier-current stations before they went on the air with FM

facilities. Since the budgets, production facilities, and organization

of collegiate carrier-current operations are often similar to those of

small college FM stations, the relevant literature about carrier-current

stations should be mentioned.

A carrier-current or wired radio station is a radio production

facility coupled to a distribution system which transmits an AM radio 21 signal over wires. Low powered transm itters in such a system usually feed a radio signal into the power lines of buildings, such as college dormitories. Radio receivers plugged into the wall outlets in a build­ ing equipped with a transm itter can usually pick up the station. 6 Ifyron M. Curry did a descriptive study of wired-radio in 1948.

Data for his investigation was collected with a questionnaire mailed to eighty-five colleges having carrier-current stations. Additional in­ formation was obtained from interviews with students connected with campus radio stations and through personal experiences of the author.

Curry found that there was a general, though unorganized, movement toward the use of campus wired-radio systems. He also learned that the Federal

Communications Commission is tacitly encouraging these stations to ex­ periment. Curry reaffirmed that wired-radio facilities may be in­ stalled with considerably less capital than standard radio stations.

Finally, he concluded that these stations are usable for teaching appre­

ciation of the radio medium and for teaching the vocational aspects of

radio broadcasting. With the exception of FCC encouragement to experi­

ment, the conclusions drawn by Curry for carrier-current stations twenty years ago might apply to small college FM stations today.

Stephen C. Hathaway studied the purpose, technical facilities, 7 policies, and methods of operation of carrier-current stations in Ohio.

6 Ifyron Morgan Curry. "A History and Description of College Wired-Radio Systems in the United States" (unpublished M.A. thesis, University of Wisconsin, 1948). 7 Stephen Conger Hathaway. "A History and Description of Col­ legiate Carrier-Current Broadcasting in Ohio" (unpublished Ph.D. dis­ sertation, University of Michigan, 1959). 22

H istorical and descriptive data for his study was obtained from the files of colleges operating these stations, from the literature in the field, from several survey instruments, and from personal inspections of tech­ nical facilities. Hathaway found that carrier-current stations in Ohio were primarily extra-curricular activities which were initiated by two forces. The first force was a student interest in broadcasting and a student desire to participate in broadcasting within the college. The second force was a desire of college administrative officers and faculty members to provide students with the best broadcasting experiences possi­ ble within the restrictions of limited institutional budgets. It may be hypothesized that similar conclusions could be drawn from a study of small college FM stations in Ohio.

Non-Commercial FM Stations

James R. Boyle investigated the development of non-commercial g educational FM radio in Indiana between 1944 and 1963. The investi­ gator collected data from bibliographical literature, newspapers, station reports and documents, visits to stations, a questionnaire, and dupli­ cated materials describing the operation of each Indiana station. Boyle found that the extensive use of non-commercial FM in Indiana after 1945 may be attributed to the state's extensive use of radio for education

before this time. He also learned that the development of non-commercial

FM in Indiana had no specific coordination. His findings also indicate

that Indiana based programming sources sustained new FM stations in the

8 James Robert Boyle. "A H istorical and Descriptive Study of Non-commercial Educational Frequency Modulation Broadcasting in Indiana, 1944-1963" (unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University of Michigan, 1963). 23 state during their formative periods. Finally, Boyle found that college

FM stations offer variety in programming, but fail to utilize radio*s potential to provide the most meaningful educational experiences. Al­ though Boyle studied large university and public school FM stations as well as small college facilities, his investigation does provide a current indication of the development of non-commercial FM in the Mid­ west. This information is helpful in formulating a perspective for this study.

David Eshelman is one of the few investigators who has specif­ ically studied small college FM stations. In 1965 Eshelman surveyed the nature, policies, and general practices of small college FM stations in 9 the United States. Eshelman mailed a four page survey questionnaire to seventy-two colleges having enrollments between 1,000 and 5,000 stu­ dents and having a licensed FM station on campus. This instrument asked

station personnel to respond to twenty questions about their station’s

technical facilities, administration, programming, and financial posi­

t i o n .

Seventy per cent of the questionnaires were returned. The

responses indicated that half of all small college stations are licensed

to transmit with ten watts of power. The data also reveals that all

college FM stations have a faculty adviser, but only two-thirds of the

stations have ary paid student help. All the small college stations

surveyed broadcast Monday through Friday, but only sixty per cent oper­

ate on Saturday and Sunday. The response to programming questions

9 David Eshelman. "About College FM Stations," TiAEB J o u r n a l - XXIV (September-October, 1965), pp. 33-42. 2A suggest that music is the principal programming staple, with instruc­ tional broadcasting in second place. Finally, the questionnaire in­ dicates that the range of annual operating budgets for small college stations varies between $550 and $35,000. Eshelman’s survey is most helpful to this investigation because it indicates the dimensions of most small college FM radio stations in this country.

Broadcasting Studies With a Similar Design

The design of this study is based on Q-technique. The founda­ tions of Q-technique are described by William Stephenson in his book, 10 The Study of Behavior. This book discusses the theoretical implica­ tions of Q-methodology. It also describes investigations employing Q- technique which are useful models for other studies. This book was extensively consulted when the instruments for this investigation were d e s ig n e d .

Stephenson also published The Plav Theory of Mass Communica- 11 tion. The emphasis of this book, of course, is more closely aligned with the problem of this investigation than Stephenson*s first book.

The Plav Theory of Mass Onmimininati.on assumes the reader has a reason­ able understanding of Q-methodology and concentrates its attention on specific communication studies which used Q-technique designs. There­ fore, this book is more of a Q-research reader instead of an introduc­

tion to Q-methodology. However, it is useful as a source of models of mass communication studies which employ Q-technique designs.

^°William Stephenson, The Study of Behavior (Chicago: Univer­ sity of Chicago Press, 1953). 11 William Stephenson, The Play Theory of Mass Communication (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1967). 25

Stephenson*s work has inspired a number of investigators from diverse disciplines to include Q-technique in their array of research tools. For example, recent studies in psychology, sociology, and speech pathology have employed Q-technique designs. A general review of the numerous Q studies would be exhaustive and would probably not contrib­ ute to the purpose of this chapter. Therefore, this section of the

literature review w ill be restricted to an analysis of investigations

related to broadcasting which have employed Q-technique. While the use

of Q-technique is somewhat new to radio and television research, there

are a few studies which have used it meaningfully.

Six Q-technique studies related to broadcast programming w ill

be analyzed. These analyses w ill be followed by a summary of a study

which used Q-technique to evaluate the effectiveness of broadcasting

communicators. This section will close with a discussion of two in­

vestigations which employed Q-technique to measure images and attitudes

toward broadcasting institutions. The reviews of these investigations

w ill be focused on the use of Q-technique, instead of upon the findings

of the studies.

Programming

Robert R. Monaghan used Q-technique to investigate the relation­

ship between people’s preferences for television programs and their 12 actual viewing. The investigator administered a Q-sort containing

fifty program descriptions to a structured sample of twenty-six people.

Robert Richard Monaghan. "Television Preference and Viewing Behavior* (unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Michigan State University, 1964}. 26

He intercorrelated the sample*s scores by persons for each Q-sort and factor analyzed the results. This procedure identified three types of personal preferences for television programs. It also yielded three types of actual viewing behavior. However, Monaghan’s'Study found little correlation between viewer preferences for programs and actual viewer b e h a v io r.

Joseph T. Plummer employed Q-technique to determine the var­ iables of programming content and style which operate strongly in the 13 appeal of formula radio. The investigator selected Columbus, Ohio radio station WOOL as a case study. Plummer conducted thirty-five

focused interviews to determine people’s feelings about WOOL and its

programming. The data elicited by these interviews was used to develop

four Q-sorts focused on music programming, news programming, attitudes

toward radio, and general behavior patterns. These thirty-five item

sorts were administered to a sample of twenty people. Inter-correla-

tions for each set of Q-sort scores were computed over the sample by

persons and linkage analysis was used to yield types of orientations.

The findings indicate that there were four types of music orientations,

five types of news orientations, four types of attitudes toward radio,

and four types of attitudes toward general behavior patterns.

Plummer also used Q-technique to design a method for developing 1/ new television programs. In this study, the investigator conducted a

13 Joseph Thornton Plummer. "Q-Methodology in Radio Audience Research and the Analysis of Formula Radio* (unpublished M.A. thesis, The Ohio State University, 1965). U Joseph Thornton Plummer. "A Systematic Approach to Tele­ vision Program Development" (unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, The Ohio State University, 1967). 27 large sample telephone survey in Columbus, Ohio to determine audience acceptability of a proposed contemporary art program which was to be aired on educational station WOSU-TV. Two "New Program Concept" Q-sorts were then administered to a representative sample of seventy-five persons who had responded favorably to the basic program idea on the telephone survey. The data from each thirty-six item Q-sort was intercorrelated by persons and factor analyzed. The factor analysis indicated that the program should appeal to three types of people. Focused interviews were then conducted to elicit viewers* meanings and ideas for the proposed program. The focused interview responses were used to write three Q-

sort instruments concerning viewer preferences for the treatment, host, and execution of the proposed program. After these Q-sorts were admin­

istered to a sample of twenty people, the data for each sort was inter­

correlated by persons and factor analyzed. Four preference patterns

emerged from the three factor analyses. Plummer then asked a repre­

sentative sample of people to rank their preferences concerning a number

of proposed visual and script elements for the program. The study con­

cluded with an evaluation of the pilot program for the series with a

discussion in the studio and a telephone survey.

David L. Rarick used Q-technique to investigate the ways a viewer

orients himself to the visual elements of appeal in television pro- 15 grams. The investigator designed two Q-sort instruments each contain­

ing twenty-four s till photographs representing scenes from motion

15 David Lawrence Rarick. "Predicting Viewer Preferences for Visual Appeals in Television Programs" (unpublished M.A. thesis, The Ohio State University, 1967). 28 pictures and television programs. Since Rarick also wanted to study the effect of viewing preference patterns over time, these Q-sorts were administered at different sittings to a structured sample of thirty- two people. The data from each Q-sort were intercorrelated by persons and a linkage analysis was conducted. The scores from the two Q-arrays for each person were also correlated to determine viewing preference changes over time. Rarick found that viewers have six orientations to visual elements of appeal in television programs. He also concluded that viewing preference patterns remain stable over time.

The Ohio State University Speech Department was commissioned by

MGrM-TV to determine the target audiences and appeal elements for "The 16 Girl from U.N.C.L.E." series. Monaghan, Plummer, Rarick, and Dwight

A. Williams, investigators for this study, conducted thirty-two focused

interviews to determine the important variables regarding "The Girl

from U.N.C.L.E." The information elicited from these interviews was

used to write three Q-sort instruments. A Q-sort containing thirty-six

program ideas, a sixty item sort exploring the "Spy Girl" element in the

series, and a twenty-four item sort containing photographs was admin­

istered to a structured sample of sixty-four persons. The scores from

each Q-sort were intercorrelated by persons and factor analysed. The

factor analyses revealed two types of orientation toward the new program

concepts, one type toward the "Spy Girl* idea, and three types toward

the visual images suggested by the photographs.

Robert R. Monaghan, Joseph T. Plummer, David L. Rarick, and Dwight A. Williams, "Recommended Target Audiences and Appeal Elements for The G irl from U.N.C.L.E." (unpublished report submitted to MJM-TV, The Ohio State University, Speech Department, 1966). 29

Thomas E. Harries used Q-technique to investigate the factors within an individual which are associated with a particular orientation 17 to certain television programs. The investigator conducted twenty- six focused interviews to determine the factors within an individual that make him prefer certain television programs over others. The focused interview data was used to generate a seventy-six item Q-sort.

This Q-sort and Monaghan's thirty-six item program preference Q-sort 18 were administered to a sample of fifty people. Sample members were also arranged into groups based on demographic information obtained from a questionnaire. Q-sort scores for each instrument were intercorrelated and linkage analyses were used to develop type orientations. Harries found that six types of viewing preference exist. He also learned that people have four types of concepts of programming in the public interest.

Communicator Evaluation

Q-technique has also been used to evaluate broadcasting communi­

cators. William L. Cathcart employed Q-technique to investigate the

qualities or characteristics viewers find most desirable in television 19 newscasters. The investigator conducted twelve focused interviews to

obtain statements related to people's likes and dislikes in television

newscasters. The data elicited from these interviews was used to build

Thomas Edward Harries. "The Systematic Creation of a New Television Program* (unpublished M.A. thesis, The Ohio State University, 1966). 18 Monaghan. "Television Preference and Viewing Behavior". 19 William Lance Cathcart. "Viewer Needs and Desires in Tele­ vision Newscasters" (unpublished M.A. thesis, The Ohio State University, 1966 ). 30 a forty-eight item Q-sort concerning desirable qualities or character­

istics of newscasters. The thirty-two people in the Q-sort sample were asked to sort the cards as they perceived their favorite television newscaster and again as they perceived an ideal television newscaster.

Intercorrelations between people for both sets of Q-sort scores were

computed and linkage analyses were employed to 3tudy types. Correla­

tions were also computed between each person's Q-scores for his favorite

newscaster and his Q-scores for an ideal newscaster. Cathcart found

that the sample perceived five types of favorite newscasters and seven

types of ideal newscasters. However, one of these ideal types appeared

to be the dominate type of ideal newscaster for the sample.

Attitude and Image Analysis

Q-technique has been employed in attitude and image analyses of

broadcasting systems and facilities. C. Larry Hutchins used Q-technique

in his investigation of the relationship between student orientation 20 toward college and student attitude toward instructional television.

In this study, Hutchins administered two semantic differentials and a

Q-sort instrument to college students before and after they received a

semester's instruction in geography. The Q-sort was used to determine

the frames of reference students use for judging instructional television.

The sample's Q-sort scores were intercorrelated by persons and the re­

sults were factor analyzed. Hutchins concluded that Q-technique was a

20 C. Larry Hutchins. "A Study of the Relationship Between Stu­ dent Attitude Toward Instructional Television and Student Orientation to College" (unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, State University of Iowa, 1965). useful procedure for identifying groups of students with different frames

of reference.

Michael A. Flamer used Q-technique in his analysis of a radio 21 station’s image. His study is similar to part of the investigation described by this report. Flamer administered repertory grids and con­ ducted focused interviews to determine people*s attitudes toward the

community and the mass media. A seventy-two item Q-sort was constructed

from the repertory grid and focused interview data. This Q-sort was administered to a structured sample consisting of ten community leaders,

ten radio advertisers, and ten listeners. Each respondent sorted the

cards as he perceived the image of Columbus, Ohio radio station WBNS

and again as he would perceive the image of an ideal radio station.

Intercorrelations were computed between people for each set of Q-sort

scores and linkage analyses were used to identify types. Flamer found

that WBNS conveyed five types of images. He also learned that the

sample had four different types of images for an ideal station.

g l i S i

This chapter analyzed the research related to this investigation.

The literature concerning the case study institution was limited to two

histories of the college’s broadcasting activities and a survey of the

FM station’s audience. Although these three studies have limited univer­

sal application, they provide an excellent backrround for understanding

the situation investigated.

Michael Abraham Flamer. "A Systematic Approach to Image Analysis* (unpublished M.A. thesis, The Ohio State University, 1967). 32

The scarcity of relevant educational radio studies limited the section of the chapter reviewing research about small college stations to four investigations. Two of these studies were surveys of carrier-

current facilities and the other two were surveys of non-commercial FM

stations. The findings of these surveys provide a general, but some­ what vague, perspective of small college FM stations.

The chapter also reviewed the designs of broadcasting investiga­

tions which have employed Q-methodology. Since the use of Q-technique designs is relatively new to broadcasting research, only nine studies

could be cited. However, the summaries of these investigations suggest

general guidelines for designing and executing Q-technique studies

which were helpful in formulating the research design discussed in the

next chapter. CHAPTER I I I

DESIGN OF THE STUDY

Infap4\wt:Wn This chapter explains the procedures that were used to test the hypotheses stated in Chapter I. The chapter opens by describing the institution and the station to be analyzed as a case study. The selec­ tion and design of the instrument are explained. The methods employed in selecting the sample and administering the instrument are also described. The chapter then discusses the data processing methods to

be used to test the hypotheses. The chapter closes by describing the procedures to be followed for drawing conclusions and making recommenda­

tions about the data.

Institution Selected For Study

Ohio Wesleyan University was selected as the institution to be

studied. The college is located in Delaware, Ohio, a city with a popu­

lation of about 15,000. Delaware*s economy was founded on agriculture,

but industrial growth during the past decade has become significant.

Some Delaware residents are employed in Columbus, which is located twenty-

five miles south of the city.

Ohio Wesleyan is a private coeducational liberal arts college.

It has an average enrollment of about 2,500 students, employs 175

33 34 1 full-tim e faculty members, and has 20,500 living alumni. Although the college confers a few Masters degrees each year, its main emphasis is on undergraduate education.

The institution is affiliated with the United Methodist Church, but direct Church influence on the activities of the college has dimin­ ished in recent years.

Ohio Wesleyan*s involvement with broadcasting began in 1935 when students requested training in "radio speeches." In that year, Ohio

Wesleyan initiated a radio workshop with the Ohio State University sta­ tion, WOSU, in Columbus. Ohio Wesleyan students participating in this workshop helped produce Ohio School of the Air programs which were broadcast from WOSU.2

In 1937 Professor R. Clarence Hunter taught Ohio Wesleyan*s first course in radio speech. Students presented radio drama in this

course and were evaluated with the facilities of a Presto disc recorder.

There was little connection, however, between the activities of this

course and the broadcasting done through the Ohio School of the Air w orkshop.^

During the late 1930*s and through the mid-40*s programs produced

by Ohio Wesleyan were aired on WOSU and WMRN in Marion, Ohio.^ In fact,

1 The Ohio Wesleyan Catalog. 1967-68 (Delaware: Ohio Wesleyan University, 1967), p. 12.

^William Roy Diem and Rollin Clarence Hunter. The Storv of Speech at Ohio Wesleyan (Delaware: Speech Department of Ohio Wesleyan University, 1964), p. 94. 3 I b i d . . p . 95 .

^Ibid.. p. 96. 35

Ohio Wasleyan productions became so numerous that in 1943 a leased wire was permanently installed to originate WMRN programs live from the c o lle g e .

The first campus radio facility for the college was operated during the 1947-48 academic year. This facility was a carrier-current system of AM broadcasting which fed programs to the dormitories for eight hours each week. At this time the University also petitioned the

Federal Communications Commission for permission to increase the trans­ mitter power and sell advertising over the facility.'’ Apparently, the petition constituted a request to operate a commercial AM radio station at the college. The Commission denied the petition and the carrier- current system continued.

On December 19, 1951, Ohio Wesleyan President Arthur S. Flemming announced plans for the building of a ten watt non-commercial educational

FM station at the college. Dr. Frank Stanton, an alumnus of Ohio

Wesleyan and President of the Columbia Broadcasting System, appointed

two CBS employees to serve as consultants for the project. The station

was rapidly built and on April 28, 1952, WSLN commenced broadcasting on

91.1 megahertz with a fifty-hour a week programming schedule.^*

WSLN broadcast as a ten watt station in Delaware for fourteen

years. During this period it aired a variety of educational and enter­

tainment programs for the college and city audiences. Students were

operating the station but they were responsible to the faculty member

5M ., p. 97. 6 Ibid.. p. 98. 36 in the Speech Department who was called the "Director of Broadcasting," a synonym for station manager. The degree of faculty supervision over the station varied with the different faculty members who held this 7 p o s itio n .

The station was operated on a meager budget during this period and little money was available for equipment replacement. In January

1966, the original Gates BF-E-10 transm itter failed and a replacement was needed. The investigator, who was Director of Broadcasting at this time, recommended general replacement of most of the aging station equipment. He also suggested that a one kilowatt transm itter be pur­ chased to extend the station’s coverage over a larger area. These recommendations were accepted and new equipment was purchased and in­ stalled. To avoid possible interference with the Board of Education's station, WCBE, the Federal Communications Commission granted WSLN a

license to operate its new transm itter at 88.7 megahertz, instead of the former 91.1 megahertz frequency.

Television channel six, occupying 82 and 88 megahertz, is licens­

ed to WTVN-TV in Columbus. The twenty-five mile distance makes WTVN-

TV’s signal strength rather weak in Delaware. Furthermore, many tele­

vision receivers tuned to channel six also pick up signals slightly

above 88 megacycles.

Therefore, in October 1966 when WSLN went on the air with its

new transm itter on 88.7 megahertz, most television receivers in Delaware

tuned to channel six picked up both WTVN-TV and WSLN simultaneously.

7I b M ., p . 101 . 37

Since the television station was weak in Delaware and WSLN was strong, most channel six viewers saw or heard nothing but WSLN on their sets.

Needless to say, the college switchboard was jammed, stories about the station made the front page in the Delaware Gazette and there was a well attended debate about the station at a meeting of the Delaware City

Council. In fact, the situation became critical enough for Ohio Wes­ leyan* s President, Elden T. Smith, to direct the campus security force to closely watch WSLN because of numerous threats against station p ro p e rty I

As a realistic gesture of goodwill the college kept the sta­ tion off the air until alternatives to the 8S.7 megahertz frequency

could be explored. President Smith’s assistant, Howard Strauch, and

the Director of Broadcasting, were dispatched to the FCC in Washington

to meet with representatives of WTVN-TV and Commission engineers and

lawyers. The engineers decided that there would be no appreciable

interference to WCBE if WSLN were returned to former 91.1 megahertz

assignment, even with its increased power. The Commission agreed to

issue a Special Temporary Authority permitting this change, if WCBE in

Columbus approved of the plan. The Columbus Board of Education quickly

granted its approval and the FCC issued the STA.

WSLN returned to the air on 91.1 megahertz in November 1966.

There were some complaints of interference from owners of television

receivers whose sets even picked up the station at 91.1 megahertz, but

the majority of set owners were satisfied. Estimates have been made

that WSLN’s frequency shift solved 95-99 per cent of the interference

problem. Most of the remaining troublesome sets could be fixed by the 38 installation of a filter on the back of the receiver. It is especially interesting to note that the level of complaints was about the same during college vacation periods and in the summer when the station was off the airI

Before WSLN signed on for the 1967-68 academic year, President

Smith announced that the station could no longer continue operating at the high power level. Apparently, Dr. Smith had also received complaints during the summer and he decided it was in the best interest of the

institution not to further jeopardize the University’s relations with

the citizens of Delaware. This announcement prompted a controversy among students, faculty members, and adm inistrators, but the President's

decision prevailed. Therefore, the station was operated under a

Special Temporary Authority using ten watts of power during the 1967-

68 academic year. No interference was reported during this period.

Data for this investigation was collected between August 1967

and May 1968. Although the television interference problem was history

during this period, it obviously had some affect on the data.

When this study was conducted WSLN was on the air from 4:00 PM

until 11:00 PM Sunday through Friday. The station was programmed on

Saturday between 9:00 AM and 11:00 PM. The station also aired the

U niversity's one hour convocation programs on Monday, Wednesday, and

Friday mornings and did a remote broadcast from the William Street

Methodist Church in Delaware on Sunday mornings.

The Program Schedule for this period appears in Table 1. Like

many o th e r e d u c a tio n a l r a d io s t a t i o n s , la rg e segm ents o f WSLN's b ro a d c a st

day are devoted to public affairs programs and classical music. However, TABLE 1 WSLN PROGRAM SCHEDULE

Sunday Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday S aturday

9 :0 0 AM Chapel P e rs p e c tiv e *68 10:00 Church C onvocation P e rs p e c tiv e *68 11:00 Church Convocation P e rs p e c tiv e *68 STATION DOES NOT BROADCAST DURING THIS PERIOD Perspective *68*

4:00 PM Music 57 Encore Music 57 Encore Music 57 Encore Music 57 5:00 Music 28 Encore Music 57 Encore Music 57 Encore Music 28 6 :0 0 Dinner at 6 Encore Music 57 Encore Music 57 Encore Dinner at 6 L utheran OSU Voices of Great University Sports Young America 6 :3 0 Hour Forum V ista Decision '68 Hour Street Looks at Books 7 :0 0 News News News News News News News Report from U. N. German Press Student Gov*t Education on Men and 7:30 Italy Viewpoint Perspective Review Report th e Jferch M olecules U. N. A Visit to Le Francais Italian A Visit to Le Francais Italian 7 :4 5 Scope Cologne Chez Vous by E ar Cologne Chez Vous by Ear Concert The Artist & U n iv e rs ity 0WU 8 :0 0 Hour The Times R o o k stalI Forum Bookstall ChaDel *68 Basketball C u rta in Ja z z Contemporary International C ollege 0WU 9 :00 Time C asual F olkscene Music Music Festival Scene B a s k e tb a ll C u rta in Jazz Contemporary International, C ollege 9 :45 Time C asual Folkscene Music Music Festival Scene Impromptu! A ll News A ll News A ll News A ll News A ll News A ll News A ll News 10:45 F in a l F in a l F in a l F in a l ..Final F in a l F in a l 1 1 :00 . S ign Off S ign O ff Sign Off Sign Off Sign O ff S ign Off S ign O ff ♦Perspective *68 continues until 4:00 P.M. AO jazz, folk music, contemporary music and sporting events tend to diver­ sify the schedule.

The station was operated by approximately sixty-five student volunteers at the time of this investigation. Students programmed, en­ gineered, and administered the work of the station. The only compen­ sated personnel were the Director of Broadcasting and a part-time main­ tenance engineer.

In summary, WSLN is similar to many other college stations. The station's unfortunate history of television interference may make it slightly atypical and this may be revealed in the data. However, this problem should not exclude the station from being a satisfactory case study situation.

Selection of the Instrument

The problem suggests that group orientation may exist regarding definitions of the station and attitudes toward the station. Investi­ gators working with this type of a problem must avoid selecting instru­ ments which categorize people into previously conceived groups. Admin­ istering such instruments to people somewhat lim its the range of inter­ personal differences to those conceived by the study's designer. If the instrument in such a study is to be a valid index of human behavior, the respondents should be given as much latitude to express their feel­ ings as is scientifically p o s s ib le .

William Stephenson developed a methodology which satisfies the requirements stipulated by this type of a study. C. Burt summarizes 41

Stephenson*s approach:

The innovation, which Stephenson claims as Q-technique, is to de­ sign an experiment in terms of people....then to assess qualities of performance with respect to each person in turn, and then to make correlations between people.®

This is precisely the type of design required by this investiga­ tion. Basically, Q-technique involves the generation of important con­ cepts or ideas related to a subject by the type of people who are to be studied. Each important concept is developed into a statement which is printed on a card. Each person in the sample is asked to sort a deck of these cards into piles based upon the intensity of his agreement with 9 the statements printed on the cards. This procedure is known as Q- sorting. When every member of a sample has completed the Q-sort, cor­ relations are computed between the Q-sort responses. Grouping is then possible through a typal analysis procedure.

Development of the Instrument

Before Q-sorts can be designed to study orientations toward the station, it is necessary to determine the range of station definitions and the range of attitudes that may exist. An assessment of definitions and attitudes was obtained through open ended interviews conducted in

September 1967. Ten people, who should be knowledgeable about the possible existing ranges of definitions and attitudes toward the station, were selected to be interviewed. Interviewees included the University*s

William Stephenson. The Study of Behavior (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1953), p. 16.

9Ibid.. p. 17. 42

Director of News and Information, the Director of Alumni and Church Rela­ tions, the Secretary of the Board of Trustees, informed faculty members, and student leaders.

Each interviewee was told the purpose of the interview and was asked to candidly discuss the purposes, attitudes, reactions, etc. toward the station. Interviewees were asked to assess the station as they perceived it and as it was perceived by others. While a prepared list of questions was available to keep the conversation moving, inter­ viewees were normally able to supply the necessary information without too much formal structuring of the discussions. Each interview lasted between 1 and 1^- hours and a ll were tape recorded. Respondents were assured, of course, that the tapes would be erased after the significant material was extracted from them.

After all the interviews were completed, the tapes were played back and the interviewees' responses were analyzed sentence by sentence.

This analysis yielded 417 statements about the station which appeared to be significant. After an intense examination of these 417 statements for sim ilarity, duplication, and importance, three facets of station definition appeared to be operating most strongly. The people inter­ viewed were most concerned about the purpose of the station, the pro­

gramming of the station, and the intended audience for the station. The

interviewees define each of these facets in different ways as explained

in Table 2.

Since the definition elements can be categorized, they can be

used to design a structured Q-sort. All possible combinations of inter­

dependence are written into a structured Q-sort. In this case, there A3

TABLE 2 DEFINITION ELEMENTS OF AN EDUCATIONAL RADIO STATION FOR STRUCTURED Q-SORTS

A. Audience 1. Inter-student. The college station should be the transmitter in a communication system designed for reception by students of the institution. 2. Intra-college. The college station should be the transmitter in a communication system designed for reception by students, employees and local alumni of the institution. 3. Extra-college. The college station should be the transmitter in a communication system designed for reception of people in the sta­ tion^ listening area who are not affiliated with the institution. A. Composite. The college station should be the transmitter in a communication system designed for reception by all people in the station*s listening area.

1. Communicator directed-social. The primary purpose of the col­ lege station should be to provide a social outlet for people who wish to operate the station. 2. Communicator directed-pedigogic. The primary purpose of the college station should be to provide a laboratory experience for communications students of the institution. 3. Receiver directed. The primary purpose of the college radio station should be to provide a service for the receivers of this communication channel.

C. C ontent 1. Entertainment. The primary purpose of the content of the mes­ sage transmitted by the college station should be to entertain. 2. Information-instructional. The primary purpose of the content of the message transmitted by the college station should be to formally instruct and to assist in formal instructional systems. 3. Information-non-instructional. The primary purpose of the con­ tent of the message transmitted by the college station should be to informally inform. The primary purpose would be informative, but the message would not be part of a formal instructional system. a a are four definitions of the first facet, three of the second, and three of the third. Therefore, 4 x 3 x 3 = 36 combinations are possible.

An item must be written to account for each of these possibilities.

Each item was written so it could be identified with the correct com­ bination and yet could be understandable to the subjects.

The instrument was w ritten, edited, and rewritten a number of times before it was considered sufficiently refined to be administered.

A final draft of the structured Q-sort appears in Table 3.

TABLE 3 STRUCTURED Q-SORT INSTRUMENT FOR MEASURING DEFINITIONS OF AN EDUCATIONAL RADIO STATION

Item E lem ents Item Number in Item S tatem en t 1 A1 B1 C1 A social activity for college people. Volunteers broadcast music, sports events, and other enter­ tainment programs to the college students. 2 A2 B1 C1 A social activity for college people. Volunteers broadcast music, sports events, and other enter­ tainment programs to students, faculty members, adm inistrators, and other people connected with the college. 3 A3 B1 C1 A social activity for college people. Volunteers broadcast music, sports events, and other enter­ tainment programs to people in the community who are not connected with the college. A AA B1 C1 A social activity for college people. Volunteers broadcast music, sports events, and other enter­ tainment programs to everyone in the community. 5 A1 B2 C1 A laboratory where students studying radio may practice by broadcasting music, sports events, and other entertainment programs to college stu­ d e n ts . 6 A2 B2 C1 A laboratory where students studying radio may practice by broadcasting music, sports events, and other entertainment programs to students, faculty members, adm inistrators, and other people connected with the college. TABLE 3—Continued

Item E lem ents Item Number in Item S tatem en t 7 A3 B2 C1 A laboratory where students studying radio may practice by broadcasting music, sports events, and other entertainment programs to people in the community who are not connected with the c o lle g e . 8 M B2 C1 A laboratory where students studying radio may practice by broadcasting music, sports events, and other entertainment programs to everyone in the community. 9 A1 B3 C1 An audio-visual service of the college broadcast­ ing music, sports events, and other entertainment programs for the college students. 10 A2 B3 C1 An audio-visual service of the college broadcast­ ing music, sports events, and entertainment pro­ grams for students, faculty members, administrators and other people connected with the college. 11 A3 B3 C1 An audio-visual service of the college broadcast­ ing music, sports events, and other entertainment programs for people in the community who are not connected with the college. 12 M B3 C1 An audio-visual service of the college broadcast­ ing music, sports events, and other entertainment programs for everyone in the community. 13 AA B3 C1 A social activity for college people. Volunteers broadcast classes being taught over the air and other course-related programs to the college stu­ d e n ts . U A2 B1 C2 A social activity for college people. Volunteers broadcast classes being taught over the air and course-related programs to students, faculty mem­ bers, administrators, and other people connected with the college. 15 A3 B1 C2 A social activity for college people. Volunteers broadcast classes being taught over the air and other course-related programs to people in the community who are not connected with the college. 16 AA B1 C2 A social activity for college people. Volunteers broadcast classes being taught over the air and other course-related programs to everyone in the community. 46

TABLE 3—Continued

Item E lem ents Item Number in Item S tatem en t 17 A1 B2 C2 A laboratory where students studying radio may practice by broadcasting classes being taught over the air and other course-related programs to college students. 18 A2 B2 C2 A laboratory where students studying radio may practice by broadcasting classes being taught over the air and other course-related programs to stu­ dents, faculty members, adm inistrators, and other people connected with the college. 19 A3 B2 C2 A laboratory where students studying radio may practice by broadcasting classes being taught over the air and other course-related programs to people in the community who are not connected with the c o lle g e . 20 A4 B2 C2 A laboratory where students studying radio may practice by broadcasting classes being taught over the air and other course-related programs to every­ one in the community. 21 A1 B3 C2 An audio-visual service of the college broadcast­ ing classes being taught over the air and other course-related programs for college students. 22 A2 B3 C2 An audio-visual service of the college broadcast­ ing classes being taught over the air and other course-related programs for students, faculty mem­ bers, administrators, and other people connected with the college. 23 A3 B3 C2 An audio-visual service of the college broadcast­ ing classes being taught over the air and other course-related programs for people in the com­ munity who are not connected with the college.

24 A4 B3 C2 An audio-visual service of the college broadcast­ ing classes being taught over the air and other course-related programs for everyone in the com­ m unity.

25 A1 B1 C3 A social activity for college people. Volunteers broadcast concerts, lectures, news, and other informational and cultural programs to the college s tu d e n ts . TABLE 3— Continued

Item Elem ents Item Number in Item S tatem en t 2 6 A2 B1 C3 A social activity for college people. Volunteers broadcast concerts, lectures, news, and other in­ formational and cultural programs to students, faculty members, adm inistrators, and other people connected with the college. 27 A3 B1 C3 A social activity for college people. Volunteers broadcast concerts, lectures, news and other in­ formational and cultural programs to people in the community who are not connected with the c o lle g e . 28 M B1 C3 A social activity for college people. Volunteers broadcast concerts, lectures, news, and other in­ formational and cultural programs to everyone in the community. 29 A1 B2 C3 A laboratory where students studying radio may practice by broadcasting concerts, lectures, news, and other informational and cultural programs to the college students. 30 A2 B2 C3 A laboratory where students studying radio may practice by broadcasting concerts, lectures, news, and other informational and cultural programs to students, faculty members, adm inistrators, and other people connected with the college. 31 A3 B2 C3 A laboratory where students studying radio may practice by broadcasting concerts, lectures, news, and other informational and cultural programs to people in the community who are not connected with the college. 32 M B2 C3 A laboratory where students studying radio may practice by broadcasting concerts, lectures, news, > and other informational and cultural programs to everyone in the community.

33 A1 B3 C3 An audio-visual service of the college broadcast­ ing concerts, lectures, news, and other informa­ tional and cultural programs for the college stu­ d e n ts . 34 A2 B3 C3 An audio-visual service of the college broadcast­ ing concerts, lectures, news, and other informa­ tional and cultural programs for students, faculty, adm inistrators, and other people connected with the c o lle g e . 48

TABLE 3—Continued

Item E lem ents Item Number in Item s S tatem en t 35 A3 B3 C3 An audio-visual service of the college broadcast­ ing concerts, lectures, news, and other informa­ tional and cultural programs for people in the community who are not connected with the college. 36 A4 B3 C3 An audio-visual service of the college broadcast­ ing concerts, lectures, news, and other informa­ tional and cultural programs for everyone in the community.

There was a wide range of attitudes about the station expressed in the open ended interviews. This range was so great that any facet arrangement of these attitudes would be superficial. Since experi­ mental studies of attitudes cannot be easily structured, Stephenson suggests using unstructured Q instruments when working with attitude 10 variables. He does recommend, however, that unstructured instruments 11 be balanced to accomodate the distensive zero. Balancing is accom­ plished by writing an opposite item for each item in the instrument.

The open ended interviews revealed eighteen attitude concepts which can be expressed in a single word. The opposites of these eight­ een words were also written to fu lfill the balance requirements of an unstructured design. The design for the thirty-six concept unstruc­ tured Q-sort appears in Table 4*

A Q-sort item must be written to account for each of the attitude concepts. When writing items for this Q-sort, an attempt was made to

1°Ibid.. p. 223.

11Ibid.. p. 196. 49

TABLE 4

ATTITUDE ELEMENTS TOWARD AN EDUCATIONAL RADIO STATION FOR UNSTRUCTURED Q-SORTS

Element Number Element Number

1 Appreciation 19 T o leran ce

2 Resentm ent 20 Intolerance

3 L ib e ra l 21 N on-c om petitive

4 Conservative 22 Competitive

5 E xpensive 23 Independent

6 Inexpensive 24 Dependent

7 Peace 25 Appropriate

8 C o n flic t 2 6 Inappropriate

9 Envy 27 Stimulating

10 "Unenvy* 28 D ull

11 Funny 29 H elp fu l

12 Sober 30 Detrimental

13 S e lf is h 31 C onfidence

14 S e lf l e s s 32 S u sp ic io n

15 F le x ib le 33 G u ilty

16 R igid 34 In n o cen t

17 Professional 35 Sophisticated

18 A m ateurish 36 Unsophisticated 50 use some of the language extracted from the open ended interviews to in­ sure that the items would be natural and plausible positions for the respondent to express. The final unstructured Q-sort instrument appears in Table 5.

TABLE 5

UNSTRUCTURED Q-SORT INSTRUMENT FOR MEASURING ATTITUDES TOWARD AN EDUCATIONAL RADIO STATION

Item Elem ent Item Number in Item S tatem en t 1 Appreciation Its public service to the community is appre­ c ia te d . 2 Resentment It is resented because instead of serving the community, it has been a source of irritation for the community. 3 L ib e ra l It is operated by people who have liberal poli­ tical views. k Conservative It is operated by people who have conservative political views. 5 Expensive It operates on a large budget. 6 Inexpensive It operates on a modest budget. 7 Peace It calms people in the community by promoting understanding through its programming. 8 C o n flic t Its interference problem causes college-town friction in the community. 9 Envy Its staff members are respected. People who can be on the staff are lucky. 10 "Unenvy" Its staff members must take positions which are unpopular with the community. That*s a job I wouldn*t want to have. 11 Funny Its problems, like the television interference problem, are amusing. 12 Sober Its problems are mentioned and people become s e r io u s . 13 Selfish It is inconsiderate of how other people feel about matters like the television interference problem . 51

TABLE 5— Continued

Item Elem ent Item Number in Item S tatem en t

U Selfless It is concerned about the opinions of every­ one in the community. 15 Flexible It is flexible and adapts itself to the interests and needs of the community. 16 Rigid It "holds the line," by maintaining rigid and unwavering positions when dealing with the community. 17 Professional Its programming sounds professional. 18 Amateurish Its programming sounds amateurish. 19 Tolerance It creates some problems, but we can learn to live with it. 20 Intolerance It creates problems such as the television interference problem which people refuse to be inconvenienced by. 21 Non-competitive It should be considered non-competitive with other local radio stations and newspapers.

22 Competitive It is broadcasting to the public and should be considered in competition with other local radio stations and newspapers.

23 Independent It doesn't affect me. I don't listen, nor have other contact with it. 2 A Dependent Its listeners depend upon it for information and entertainment.

25 Appropriate Its operation is in harmony with the broad aims of the college. 26 Innappr opr iate It is "out of place," when the broad aims of this college are considered. 27 Stimulating Its programming is stimulating and exciting to listen to.

28 D ull Its programming is dull and boring to listen t o .

29 Helpful Its programs are helpful in keeping people up to date on college and community activities. 52

TABLE 5— Continued

Item Elem ent Item Number in Item S tatem en t 30 Detrimental Its programs are misleading which can be troublesome for the listener. 31 Confidence It broadcasts the true story when reporting e v e n ts . 32 Suspicion It will act against our interests if we re­ lax and forget about it. 33 G u ilty It should be held responsible when inter­ ference occurs. 34 In n o cen t It is blamed for problems, like the tele­ vision interference which are not its fault. 35 Sophisticated Its programming is sophisticated and re­ f in e d . 36 Unsophisticated Its programming is down-to-earth and "un- snobish.**

T ab le 5 reveals that a number of the items in this sort are con­ cerned with the television interference problem. People discussed this problem in the open ended interviews and their concerns are reflected in the wording of these Q-sort items.

It is recommended that Q-sorts be distributed along a contin- 12 uum having a minimum of ten classes. In this investigation there are thirty-six items for both the structured sorts. These thirty-six items can be conveniently sorted into eleven classes, or Q-sort piles. The distribution among these piles was arranged as shown in Table 6.

Standardized directions were prepared to insure that the cards were properly sorted along this distribution. These directions assured that each person in the sample would sort the cards properly.

l2Ibid.. p. 60. 53

TABLE 6

DISTRIBUTION OF Q-SORT CARDS

Most Agree Least Agree Pile Number 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Number of Cards 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

Selection of the Sample

Stephenson makes a strong plea for the use of structured samples for Q-technique designs.

We believe that, instead of seeking to reproduce the fiction of a "general population" by representative sample procedures, more useful data could be reached, even at this point, by employing structured samples of persons....It seems clear that when "effects* can be specified, such as those of socio-economic class, age, edu­ cational status, and the like, these should be represented in "samples" of persons and not left to the vagaries "of chance."

The structuring procedure recommended for choosing a Q-sort sample is developed by selecting the independent variables or "inde­ pendencies," and then choosing people which represent a ll possible com­ binations of these independencies. The sample size is partially deter­ mined by the number of possible combinations of independencies.

The first independency selected was Universitv-Non-university

Since the station serves both people affiliated and not affiliated with the college, this independency was included to insure representation of both groups. The "purpose" facets suggested in the structured definition

Q-design suggest that university and non-university people may strongly

disagree on the purpose of the station.

13 Ibid.. p. 193. 54

The second independency selected was Influential-N on-influentlal.

College or Community attitudes toward the station and to some extent definitions of the station may be initiated or disseminated by influ­ ential people. For example, an influential faculty member may have a great effect on the college attitude toward the station. Similarity, people in positions of responsibility for the mass media in Delaware and people in influential Delaware civic offices may be instrumental in developing city attitudes toward the station. On the other hand, if all significant orientations toward the station are to be analyzed, it is important to study people whose attitudes do not generally affect others.

For example, factory workers, housewives, or the freshman at the college, may have unique definitions and attitudes toward the station. These attitudes should be examined as they may be more prevalent in the com­ munity than some of the orientations of opinion leaders.

The third independency selected for this sample was Male-Female.

This independency was selected to insure a somewhat equal distribution

of men and women in the sample. The station presumably is programming for both sexes and the number of each group is about the same. It might be discovered that males and females have uniquely different definitions

of the station or attitudes toward the station.

Therefore, there are three independencies in this sample, and

each independency has two possibilities. A structured sample with these

characteristics would have 2 x 2 x 2 = 8 possible combinations of

s u b je c ts . According to Stephenson, Q-techniques is applicable to small 1L sample doctrine. H Besides being a theoretical issue, a small sample

% bld.. p. 72. 55 is a practical neceaaity when uaing Q-technique becauae of the time re­ quired for a reapondent to complete a aort. Therefore, four replica- tiona of the sample were judged to be an optimum number for thia inves­ tigation. This number of replications provides the structured sample of thirty-two persons described in Table 7.

TABLE 7

COMPOSITION OF THE STRUCTURED SAMPLE FOR THE Q-SORT INSTRUMENTS

Number O ccupation

U n iv e rs ity MJ.U2n.tial Male 1 A major administrative officer 2 Full Professor 3 Associate Professor 4 Assistant Professor U n iv e rs ity M i u a a t i a i Female 5 A major administrative officer 6 Full Professor 7 Associate Professor 8 I n s tr u c to r U n iv e rs ity NW -M lwntial Male 9 Senior student 10 Junior student 11 Sophomore student 12 Freshman student U n iv e rs ity Non-influential Female 13 Senior student U Junior student 15 Sophomore student 16 Freshman student Msazsfiimsl&g Mlu&a&M Male 17 Government executive 18 Madia executive 19 Media executive 20 M in iste r Non-university Influential Female 21 Social agency executive 22 Social agency executive 23 Active politicians wife 24 Church leader TABLE 7—Continued

Number O ccupation Non-university Non-influential Male 25 Retired barber 2 6 Refrigeration services 27 Recreation leader for another city 28 Plant worker Non-university Non-influential Female 29 Housewife—husband plant worker 30 Housewife—husband m inisterial student 31 Housewife—husband painter 32 T eacher

Information about the respondents is only vaguely described in

Table 7 to protect their anonymity. The investigator apologizes for

these generalities, but suggests that identification of an individual

is relatively easy in a small college located in a small city. There­ fore, extra caution was taken to insure respondent anonymity.

Administering the Instrument

The Q-sorts were administered to the sample between December

1967 and May 1968. Persons who would fit into the various categories

of the structured design were sent a letter stating the purpose of the

study and soliciting their participation. After the letters were mailed,

each member of the sample was telephoned to confirm his participation

and to arrange for an appointment to administer the instrument. Sur­

prisingly, only five people were unable or unwilling to cooperate. One

person contacted had a rather unique reason for refusing to participate.

His wife said that he did not feel he had very definite ideas about the

station because he just returned to Delaware after having spent the past

several years in the Ohio State Penitentiary! Those people who did not participate were replaced by others who fit into the same cell in the structure of the sample.

The Q-sorts were administered by the investigator and his wife.

His wife became a proficient Q-sort interviewer which expedited the gathering of data for the study.

The choice of location for administering the Q-sorts was selected by each person in the sample. Most people preferred having the inter­ viewer come to their home, while others favored doing the Q-sorts in their place of business. A few sorted the cards in the home or office of the investigator. Usually the respondent worked alone with just the interviewer in the room. However, seven of the eight college students in the sample elected to do the Q-sorts simultaneously on a Saturday m orning.

Each person in the sample sorted four decks of cards according to the prescribed instructions. The first time each respondent sorted the structured Q-sort based on his present definition of WSLN. Each per­ son then Q-sort an identical deck of cards based on his ideal definition of a college station. The third time each person sorted the unstruc­ tured attitude deck based on his present attitudes toward WSLN. The last time each respondent sorted an identical deck of attitude cards by attempting to describe his attitudes toward a college station.

Generally, respondents had little difficulty with the Q-sorts after completing the first deck. The pattern of behavior was repetitive making subsequent decks easier to sort. Only one person in the original sample was unable to complete a ll four decks. She was replaced with another female who fit into the same cell in the structured sample. 58

Completion time for the four sorts ranged from one to three hours

per respondent. The median time for completion of the instrument was about 1^- hours per person.

Data Processing Procedure

Data available from the Q-sorts is processed using the following

procedures. An identifying number was written on the back of each card

of a <£-sort. After a respondent completed each of the four sorts, the

interviewer recorded the numbers of the cards in each of the eleven piles

on a prepared data sheet. A blank data sheet appears as Table 8.

Since each data sheet contains the information collected from

one Q-sort, each person in the sample is represented by four sheets.

Stephenson has adopted the convention of assigning a raw score

to each card numerically equal to the number of the pile in which the 15 card was placed. For example, if a card were placed in pile number 5*

that card would receive a raw score of 5. Since pile number 1 contained

“most agree* cards and pile number 11 "least agree" cards, the lower

the raw score on an item, the more strongly the respondent agrees with

t h a t ite m .

The data sheets from the thirty-two persons were arranged by

Q-sorts. To facilitate easier handling of the data, the information

from each of the four sorts was transferred to a person-item matrix.

Therefore, a quick inspection of the four matrices revealed the score

any respondent gave to any item in the Q-sorts.

p . 9 . TABLE 8

Q-SORT RESPONSE

Number Type 1 2 Affiliation U NU Sex M F

1 2 3 A 5 6 7 89 10 11

VJt vD 60

After organizing the data in this manner, it was processed so each of the lypotheses could be tested. Data for hypotheses D-1 and A-1 was processed first.

D-1 People who define the station similarly may be identified and grouped with all other people possessing a similar definition.

A-1 People whose attitudes toward the station are similar may be identified and grouped with all other peoples possess­ ing a similar attitude.

Since the testing of these two hypotheses differs only in the actual data collected from the different Q-sorts, an identical procedure was employed for processing this data. It was first necessary to develop an intercorrelation matrix of the thirty-two people in the sample. The intercorrelations are obtained by the use of a computer.

Program number MR-90 from the Ohio State University Computer Center was used to compute these intercorrelations. MR-90 is a Scantran program designed for computing multiple regression. However, this program may be stopped early and asked to print out intercorrelations. A thirty- two by thirty-two intercorrelation matrix was filled in by hand from the data obtained from the computer print out sheets.

At this point Stephenson uses factor analysis for selecting mem­

bers of a sample who have a similar orientation. Factor analysis is

certainly a useful tool for this purpose. However, Louis McQuitty has developed a method of "Linkage Analysis* which he has demonstrated w ill yield the same results as factor analysis when processing Q-technique 16 data. However, the advantage of McQuitty’s method is that it requires

16 Louis B. McQuitty, "Elementary Linkage Analysis for Isolating Orthogonal and Oblique Types and Typal Relevancies," Educational and Psychological Measurement. XVII (Summer, 1957), p. 216. a few minutes of paper and pencil work, instead of the laborious process of running a factor analysis. In fact, for this study a linkage analysis may be completed more quickly than the time required to prepare the data for running a factor analysis on a computerI Therefore, McQuitty's method was used for testing hypotheses D-1 and A-1.

Before conducting a linkage analysis, however, the minimum num­ ber of people necessary to constitute a "group* must be defined. A linkage analysis w ill always group a person with at least one other per­ son. However, two people should not necessarily be considered a group simply because they are linked together by necessity. Furthermore, two people only represent six per cent of the sample. The orientation of just two people should not be considered a major orientation of the sample. Therefore, this study w ill define a group as a cluster of at least three persons.

After this grouping decision was made, linkage analyses were run on the definition-present and attitude-present data to determine if the group orientations suggested by hypotheses D-1 and A-1 exist.

The data used for testing hypotheses D-2 and A-2 was then pro­ c e s s e d .

D-2 The variables of station definition which make each group orientation unique may be described for the present and for an ideal station.

A-2 The variables of attitude toward the station which make each group orientation unique may be described for the present and for an ideal station.

The testing of these two hypotheses differs only in the data inserted into the problems. Since the procedure for processing this data is the same, these two hypotheses were examined simultaneously. 62

The hypotheses were tested by running analyses vising point bi­ serial correlation. George A. Ferguson explains point biserial corre­ l a t i o n :

Point biserial correlation is a product-moment correlation....If we assign 1 to individuals in one category and 0 to individuals in the other end calculate the product-moment correlation, the result is a point biserial coefficient....The coefficient is in no way dependent upon the weights assigned.•'

A number of rows equal to the number of groups obtained from testing D-1 were added to the bottom of the item axis of the definition- present and definition-ideal person-item matrices. For example, if A group orientations were discovered, A rows would be added after the thirty-sixth item on these matrices. Therefore, these matrices would become 40 item verses 32 person tables. In this example, row 37 would represent group 1, row 38 would represent group 2, etc. These new rows would be filled in by working across the person axis of the matrices and placing a 1 in the thirty-seventh to fortieth row representing the group to which that person belonged. Persons unaffiliated with any group would receive zeros in all four rows.

Assume, for an example, that the foilowing groupings evolved from testing hypothesis D-1.

Person Number Group Affiliation Number

1 3 2 2 3 none A 1 5 2

17 George A. Ferguson. Statistical Analysis in Psychology and Education (New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, Incorporated, 1959), p . 200. 63

Table 9 suggests how these hypothetical data would be arranged in the last four rows of the person-item matrix.

TABLE 9

HYPOTHETICAL MATRIX FOR PREPARING POINT BISERIAL CORRELATION DATA

Items Persons 1 2 3 A 5

37 0 0 0 1 0 38 0 0 0 0 1 39 1 0 0 0 0 AO 0 1 0 0 0

The new rows added to the matrices were treated as additional items. Intercorrelations were then computed between each of these new items and the thirty-sax original items. A similar procedure was fol­ lowed for preparing the two attitude matrices.

Computation of the intercorrelations was facilitated by employ­ ing a computer. The Ohio State University Psychology Department's

WHEWHI program was used for this purpose. WHEWHI is a Fortran program which w ill yield hierarchical factor structures. However, it can be

stopped early and w ill print out a complete, intercorrelation matrix.

The only intercorrelations of interest, however, are between the new

items and the thirty-six original items.

A sample of 32 people has N - 2, or 30 degrees of freedom asso­

ciated with it. For 30 degrees of freedom, the critical value of the 64 18 correlation coefficient is .296 at the .1 alpha level of significance.

This alpha level was selected because of the danger in small sample designs of accepting the null hypothesis when it was false. John G.

Peatman discusses this rationale.

When samples are not large....the choice of significance level will more often make a difference in the character of the statistical inference. This is the case because the smaller the small sample, the larger the scale of sampling variation. If a strict (small) alpha level of significance is U3ed to protect against the error of rejecting true null hypotheses, such a decision w ill be made at the cost of making it difficult to discover new facts, real ex­ perimental effects, etc. A general rule of thumb for choice of alpha is this: If in research nothing is to be lost, so to speak, and much may in the long run be gained by the rejecting of the null^^ypothesis, use a large value of alpha, such as .05 or even .1 0 .

Returning to our hypothetical example, a significant correlation between items 1 and 37 indicates that Group 1 significantly agrees or significantly disagrees with item 1. Since strong agreement is indi­ cated by low Q-sort scores, a point biserial correlation greater than minus .296 indicates that a group significantly agrees with an item.

Similarly, since strong disagreement is indicated by high Q-sort scores, a point biserial correlation greater than plus .296 indicates that a group significantly disagrees with an item. In this investigation point

biserial correlations of less than .296 indicate that the item is not

one of the characteristics which make a group unique. Therefore, the

variables of station definition and attitude which make each group unique

could be observed which tested hypotheses D-2 and A-2.

18 Sir Ronald A. Fisher. S tatistical Methods for Research Workers. 13th ed., rev.; (New York: Hafner Publishing Company, 1958), p. 209. 19 John G. Peatman. Introduction to Applied Statistics (New York: Harper and Row, Publishers, 1963), p. 281. The data needed for testing hypotheses D-3, D-4> A-3, and A-4 were then processed.

D-3 Each group expresses a significantly different definition toward its concept of the present and its concept of an ideal station.

D-4 The variables causing a significant difference between the present and an ideal definition of the station for each of the groups may be isolated and described.

A-3 Each group expresses a significantly different attitude toward its concept of the present and its concept of an ideal station.

A-4 The variables causing a significant difference between the present and an ideal attitude toward the station for each of the groups may be isolated and described.

All of these hypotheses can be confirmed or rejected by testing the significance of changes between the present and the ideal data on each item for each of the groups. The only difference between testing

D-3 and D-4 and testing A-3 and A-4 is the data used. Therefore, the procedure used for testing all these hypotheses can be described at one tim e .

The significant items which make each group unique were deter­

mined by testing D-2 and A-2.Tests were then run on each of these items

to test the significance of the difference between the mean of the present

concept scores and the mean of the ideal concept scores.

After computing these t tests, the critical values of t at the 20 .1 alpha level were checked from a table. The critical values are dif­

ferent for the various groups because the groups were of unequal size.

If the value of a computed t exceeds the critical value listed in the

20 Fisher, S tatistical Mathods for Research Workers, p. 174. 66 table, a significant difference exists between a groups present and the ideal perceptions of that item. This information was used to affirm or reject hypotheses D-3, D-4, A-3, and A-A.

The data needed for testing hypotheses D-5, D-6, A-5, and A-6 was then processed.

D-5 The entire sample expresses a significant difference be­ tween its definitions of the present and an ideal station.

D-6 The variables causing a significant difference in defini­ tion between the present station and an ideal station can be isolated and described for the entire sample.

A-5 The entire sample expresses a significant difference be­ tween the attitudes toward the present and sin ideal sta­ t i o n .

A-6 The variable causing a significant difference between the attitudes toward the present station and for an ideal sta­ tion can be isolated and described for the entire sample.

These hypotheses may be confirmed or rejected by testing the significance of changes between the present and the ideal data for each item. Since the significance tests will be identical except for the data used, the procedure for testing these four hypotheses w ill be described simultaneously.

The significance of the difference between the means of the present scores and the means of the ideal scores for each item was tested.

Since the scores of all 32 respondents w ill be included in this t test of significance, N - 2, or 30 degrees of freedom were available. The criti­ cal value of t for 30 degrees of freedom is 1.697 at the .1 alpha 21 level. Therefore, if a t test score on an item exceeds 1.697, a sig­ nificant difference exists between the entire sample's conception of the

^ Ibid. 67 item for the present station and its conception of that item for an ideal station. When these tests were computed for all 36 definition items, hypotheses D-5 and D-6 were examined. Similarly, after com­ pleting tests for all 36 attitude items, hypotheses A-5 and A-6 were e v a lu a te d .

Procedure for Conclusions and Recommendations

The twelve hypotheses were formally tested after the data was processed. Conclusions and recommendations related to the case study institution were then developed. General conclusions and recommendations applicable to other small college radio stations were described. Con­ clusions concerning the design used in this study were drawn. The in­ vestigation concluded with recommendations for further research related to the problem and the use of this design. CHAPTER IV

RESULTS OF THE INVESTIGATION

Introduction

The purpose of Chapter IV is to describe the results of this study in a meaningful manner. This chapter begins by displaying the data that was collected from the Q-sort instruments. The data obtained from the linkage analysis and the point biserial correlations are then described without extended comment.

After these general data have been displayed, data relative to each definition group is presented and discussed in detail. These group representations are followed by an analysis of the significance of the difference between the entire sample's definitions of the present and an ideal station.

Data related to each attitude group is displayed and described in detail. These small group discussions are followed by an analysis of the significance of the difference between the entire sample’s attitudes toward the present and an ideal station.

This chapter concludes with the presentation and testing of the hypotheses of this investigation.

Linkage Analysis Data

The data elicited from the individual Q-sort scores was trans­ ported to person-item matrices for convenient analysis. These matrices

68 69 are displayed in Tables 10 through 13. The cell numbers appearing in these matrices correspond to the pile numbers in which items were s o r te d .

To prepare the data for a linkage analysis, intercorrelations of persons were computed from the definition-present (Table 10) and the attitude-present (Table 12) matrices. These intercorrelations were organized into matrices which appear as Tables 14 and 15. The highest correlation in each column is underlined and the links are determined 1 from these values. The types of orientations obtained from these linkage analyses appear in Figures 1 and 2. The two people with the highest intercorrelations are linked together with a double arrow and their first and second "cousins" are clustered around them.

The tables reveal that there are twelve definitions and ten attitude types. This study previously defined a group as having a minimum of three members. Therefore, only types 1, 2, 3, and 10 w ill be considered definition groups. Similarly, types 1, 2, 3, 5, and 9 are attitude groups. The constituency of these groups may be examined by comparing the person numbers with those in the sample description listed in Table 7 in Chapter III. However, the membership of each group w ill be thoroughly-analyzed in the group analyses later in this chapter.

Point Biserial Correlation Data

Four station definition group orientations evolved from a link­

age analysis of the Q-sorts. In order to analyze the unique character­ istics of each group with point biserial correlations, it is necessary

1 Louis B. McQuitty. "Elementary Linkage Analysis for Isolating Orthogonal and Oblique Types and Typal Relevancies," Education and Psychological Measurement XVII (Summer, 1957), p. 216. TABLE 10 ITEM SCORES MATE BI THE SAMPLE ON THE OEFHHTIOH-FHESEMT Q-SORT

1 2 3 4 f 6 7 8 ? 10 11 12 13 14 I f 16 17 18 20 21 22 23 24 2? 2& 27 28 2? 30 3^ 1 6 10 5 5 5 10 2 6 3 3 5 4 4 5 7 5 8 8 3 7 6 5 8 6 6 7 7 8 3 4 4 2 6 8 6 6 4 8 1 3 3 3 5 4 5 5 7 5 8 8 4 8 6 6 8 6 6 7 8 4 3 4 6 3 4 9 6 7 6 8 7 5 6 7 6 9 8 7 10 7 8 10 5 9 7 4 10 7 7 7 9 8 6 5 11 4 3 8 7 6 3 8 2 2 1 6 6 2 2 7 6 4 5 7 1 10 3 4 9 6 5 6 8 6 9 3 10 5 5 6 1 1 5 4 4 6 4 1 2 4 3 4 5 4 5 2 3 3 4 4 5 4 5 8 3 7 4 4 2 6 5 5 3 3 4 5 3 4 4 2 1 4 4 3 4 3 5 5 4 5 4 5 4 3 7 7 6 5 3 3 1 7 2 6 4 4 7 5 6 5 6 8 5 8 7 4 8 4 3 6 5 6 3 3 6 6 4 3 6 4 5 5 8 8 1 5 4 4 2 2 3 1 2 5 3 1 2 1 2 2 2 1 2 6 1 3 2 2 1 1 5 3 4 1 5 9 8 5 8 7 6 5 4 7 7 4 6 7 6 6 5 7 6 6 7 5 6 7 6 5 6 8 7 7 6 7 4 10 8 4 8 8 5 6 3 6 8 5 6 7 5 8 4 6 7 5 7 3 5 10 5 4 4 9 7 4 5 10 2 11 7 3 9 10 7 6 6 4 10 10 7 10 7 9 9 6 7 6 8 4 5 6 7 7 5 2 5 5 6 9 9 12 8 3 10 9 3 3 6 7 8 7 7 8 5 9 3 5 7 4 8 4 2 6 3 4 2 7 6 2 7 7 5 13 6 10 5 5 8 9 8 7 5 6 9 7 8 6 8 9 7 9 6 7 11 9 8 9 8 9 7 10 11 6 3 H 7 8 6 6 8 9 7 8 5 6 10 6 9 6 7 10 6 9 6 8 9 9 7 10 8 10 8 10 6 7 7 15 4 11 6 7 10 11 8 11 7 9 11 9 10 7 11 11 9 11 7 9 8 7 11 11 8 5 11 6 10 7 8 16 7 7 7 6 7 9 8 10 6 8 10 7 9 7 7 10 9 9 6 10 9 8 10 10 8 5 9 7 9 6 6 17 7 7 2 2 8 7 9 8 5 6 7 6 8 4 6 7 6 3 6 6 10 5 5 7 7 5 2 5 7 6 5 18 6 7 3 3 8 4 7 9 6 5 7 6 6 3 5 7 5 4 6 5 8 10 4 7 9 5 4 5 7 6 4 19 5 7 4 5 10 6 10 8 7 11 8 8 7 5 8 9 2 6 7 6 8 8 6 8 9 4 4 9 7 7 8 20 4 6 5 4 7 3 9 8 6 7 8 3 6 3 3 8 5 5 7 7 6 7 2 8 7 3 3 3 7 6 7 21 10 5 8 7 9 7 9 7 8 4 8 5 9 8 6 8 10 6 10 5 10 9 6 8 9 6 4 11 8 8 7 22 11 4 8 8 9 6 8 9 9 5 8 6 8 8 6 8 6 5 10 2 8 7 5 8 10 11 5 6 8 11 6 23 10 4 9 11 11 6 11 10 11 9 9 10 11 11 9 9 10 7 11 3 7 8 7 9 10 10 5 9 9 9 8 24 8 2 11 9 9 3 10 9 9 8 9 3 10 10 3 8 11 4 9 4 9 8 3 9 11 4 4 7 8 8 7 25 6 9 5 5 5 10 5 6 5 3 5 5 5 5 7 5 9 8 4 8 7 3 8 5 5 8 10 9 2 5 5 26 6 8 6 6 4 7 5 5 4 6 3 5 5 6 6 5 4 8 4 8 6 4 7 6 6 6 8 6 2 4 6 27 3 9 6 7 6 7 7 3 6 8 6 9 7 6 10 7 4 10 5 9 6 6 9 7 6 5 9 4 10 6 6 28 3 7 7 6 1 8 6 3 2 6 4 3 3 7 6 4 4 7 2 11 5 2 9 6 7 6 10 6 1 3 10 29 5 6 3 2 6 5 4 6 5 2 3 5 3 4 5 2 3 3 5 7 4 5 4 4 4 6 5 5 4 5 4 30 5 6 1 3 5 4 4 4 4 4 2 5 4 2 4 3 3 3 5 5 4 5 4 3 6 9 6 6 5 2 3 31 4 6 4 5 6 4 6 5 7 9 5 8 4 5 8 3 4 6 6 6 5 2 6 5 3 2 1 8 5 5 7 32 2 1 5 4 2 1 6 2 3 7 4 2 1 2 1 1 1 2 3 6 2 1 1 1 2 3 6 2 4 2 6 33 9 5 7 8 6 7 5 7 7 4 6 7 6 6 5 6 6 5 9 2 7 6 5 3 5 6 3 3 6 10 3 34 9 4 8 8 4 5 5 6 8 5 4 6 6 8 4 6 6 7 9 4 5 6 6 5 3 8 7 8 6 8 5 35 7 3 9 10 7 6 7 4 10 10 7 11 7 9 9 6 8 7 8 3 7 7 7 5 4 4 6 7 5 9 7 36 9 2 10 9 3 2 5 5 9 7 4 6 6 10 2 6 7 4 8 1 3 11 3 2 3 4 2 1 8 8 9 TABUS 11 ITEM SCORES H U E BT THE SAMPLE OH THE E K F H 1 T 1 CW-IEEAL fr-6CRT Itm Ea»b« f w i a Haahr 1 -2 3 6 5 6 7 a » 10 11 12 13 U15 16 17 is m o 21 a a a 2i at a a a n iT a 1 2 10 5 8 7 11 9 2 6 6 9 1 6 8 6 5 9 9 5 6 6 5 8 9 7 8 7 7 3 6 8 7 2 2 8 6 9 5 9 7 6 6 6 8 2 7 7 5 6 6 8 6 6 11 7 7 7 11 8 8 7 3 6 5 8 3 6 9 6 9 9 10 10 10 6 9 10 8 6 9 9 5 5 11 6 9 5 5 10 8 9 6 9 6 3 5 7 11 6 6 8 7 7 5 8 8 8 5 6 6 6 6 11 5 3 6 8 2 11 6 3 9 7 7 6 10 6 1 5 6 8 5 5 6 2 3 7 6 5 1 3 3 5 3 6 3 6 6 6 3 3 7 8 6 7 6 3 6 6 7 6 6 6 10 6 5 5 3 3 5 5 6 6 2 2 6 5 3 1 3 3 3 6 3 5 8 7 3 6 2 7 7 7 6 6 6 3 7 6 6 6 6 9 3 5 6 3 8 6 9 6 6 8 5 5 5 6 8 6 6 6 6 2 6 6 3 5 3 7 6 8 7 5 5 2 6 2 2 5 1 1 1 5 6 6 2 2 6 2 1 8 3 1 2 3 3 3 6 6 5 2 1 6 9 8 5 7 6 7 6 5 6 8 5 7 7 6 6 6 7 7 6 8 6 8 8 7 6 5 6 6 6 8 11 6 6 10 7 6 8 6 7 6 5 7 10 6 6 10 3 5 6 7 7 6 7 6 7 8 6 5 5 10 8 3 8 9 5 5 11 9 3 9 6 9 7 7 9 10 8 8 11 5 6 8 9 9 7 8 3 6 10 6 8 6 6 2 5 10 10 7 6 12 8 3 11 5 5 2 3 7 11 6 3 7 2 7 3 6 11 5 7 2 6 9 5 3 6 3 3 1 7 10 7 13 6 10 5 8 8 8 9 6 7 7 9 7 10 8 8 7 6 9 7 7 9 9 8 9 9 7 7 10 9 6 9 6 U 3 8 6 10 7 8 8 5 7 7 8 7 9 7 7 8 5 8 7 6 7 11 7 10 10 9 8 9 5 7 9 5 15 5 11 6 11 11 9 11 11 7 10 10 9 10 9 11 10 3 10 7 10 6 6 11 10 8 6 11 10 6 7 7 8 16 6 7 7 10 6 8 8 8 6 7 6 6 11 10 6 8 5 7 6 9 5 7 9 11 8 6 9 9 7 7 8 5 17 5 7 2 2 6 6 6 6 6 5 5 6 9 3 7 6 6 6 5 7 9 6 5 6 6 9 6 11 7 5 6 3 18 6 7 3 5 6 3 6 6 6 5 5 6 8 2 7 6 6 6 5 5 7 5 6 6 8 10 6 8 6 5 10 19 7 7 6 5 10 5 6 5 5 10 6 8 9 5 10 9 3 5 5 8 5 3 6 6 8 6 5 9 5 3 6 5 20 7 6 5 6 6 3 2 5 5 7 2 7 8 6 6 6 8 2 6 8 2 6 5 1 10 5 3 8 2 2 3 6 21 9 5 8 5 6 6 6 8 8 5 7 6 8 6 7 8 7 6 10 5 7 6 8 5 6 9 6 5 8 7 9 6 22 10 6 8 7 5 6 5 7 8 6 6 3 7 5 7 8 7 5 10 6 8 10 3 5 6 11 5 8 8 8 10 9 23 10 6 9 7 10 5 7 9 8 11 7 8 7 6 10 10 10 7 11 5 6 6 6 7 6 5 6 5 10 8 6 10 26 11 2 10 7 6 7 3 8 7 8 3 6 8 7 6 11 6 6 9 2 2 6 3 2 6 5 6 2 7 7 8 6 25 1 9 5 8 6 10 9 3 6 7 9 2 6 8 6 5 8 9 6 6 5 5 8 9 7 8 7 6 6 6 6 7 26 3 8 6 8 3 9 8 3 5 6 8 6 6 8 5 6 8 8 6 6 6 7 7 7 7 8 8 6 6 6 5 7 27 5 9 6 9 8 7 10 10 6 9 11 9 7 9 9 6 5 10 6 10 6 6 10 8 9 5 9 6 6 6 7 8 28 3 7 7 7 2 7 7 5 5 6 5 6 7 10 5 2 1 7 3 9 3 3 9 7 7 5 10 5 2 5 3 9 29 6 6 1 3 6 6 6 2 6 3 5 5 6 3 6 6 8 3 6 6 7 2 5 5 6 7 5 7 6 6 6 30 6 6 3 6 3 5 6 6 3 3 5 5 5 2 3 3 6 3 6 5 10 6 6 6 3 6 7 8 6 6 5 1 31 6 6 6 6 8 6 6 6 3 8 6 8 5 5 8 5 2 6 5 7 5 5 6 6 6 2 1 6 5 3 11 6 32 6 1 6 1 2 1 1 3 2 2 2 5 3 6 1 1 2 1 2 7 1 2 1 2 1 3 6 3 6 1 3 33 7 5 7 6 6 7 6 6 9 6 7 6 5 6 5 7 9 6 9 6 9 7 5 5 5 7 5 6 9 8 6 9 36 8 6 8 6 3 5 6 7 9 5 6 3 2 5 6 7 10 6 8 3 10 8 6 6 6 7 5 6 9 9 5 7 35 9 3 9 6 8 6 7 9 9 9 7 10 5 6 9 9 6 7 9 3 6 8 6 8 5 1 3 5 11 9 8 6 36 8 2 10 5 1 6 3 7 7 6 3 6 1 7 2 6 7 5 8 1 3 9 2 3 5 2 2 2 7 8 3 5 TABLE 12 ITEM SCORES MADE BT THE SAMPLE ON THE ATTITUDE-PRESENT Q-SORT

------—______P«r«nn ______1 2 3 A 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 1 9 3 5 7 4 4 3 4 6 7 6 5 5 6 6 4 7 3 7 10 4 3 6 7 4 4 3 4 8 2 5 5 1 2 7 8 5 1 3 4 8 6 3 9 6 8 3 8 2 7 6 6 4 5 6 9 11 3 3 3 7 6 5 8 7 4 6 7 6 9 6 6 7 8 6 5 9 6 5 6 7 2 3 8 5 6 5 8 5 4 7 8 7 8 6 10 6 7 8 5 9 3 4 4 7 5 10 7 8 7 8 9 6 8 8 6 7 7 3 5 10 9 7 6 10 9 5 4 10 7 11 7 7 10 7 8 7 9 9 8 7 10 9 8 9 7 7 7 7 6 2 9 6 3 2 1 9 8 3 3 4 5 4 1 3 6 5 5 4 5 1 4 3 5 6 6 2 6 7 7 6 5 5 5 5 5 7 9 8 9 6 7 7 7 8 6 6 5 5 10 7 5 5 5 5 5 9 5 5 8 3 6 2 1 5 5 4 3 1 4 4 6 5 2 4 5 1 2 2 2 2 8 4 4 2 8 5 9 6 9 A 6 8 7 5 5 5 8 5 6 4 3 5 6 5 4 6 7 3 5 8 3 6 7 4 6 6 8 10 10 8 8 4 6 6 10 8 7 7 6 9 6 6 3 10 10 4 5 6 8 9 8 6 4 6 1 10 2 5 11 6 10 8 6 7 7 4 9 4 7 2 2 4 5 6 9 5 11 5 6 6 7 8 9 7 11 5 2 7 12 4 5 7 6 6 6 4 5 5 6 7 8 8 11 8 7 6 4 4 3 4 5 5 7 6 4 7 5 5 13 5 7 9 9 9 8 9 6 3 7 3 3 6 9 9 9 8 3 10 7 11 9 10 11 11 10 5 9 8 H 8 5 4 6 3 6 7 6 6 2 7 6 8 7 3 2 3 7 8 5 8 6 1 2 1 ' 3 4 6 4 15 7 7 3 6 2 3 6 9 6 7 5 7 7 7 5 2 5 5 7 9 3 5 2 3 3 2 7 6 9 16 7 7 8 7 10 9 10 4 7 9 10 8 7 7 9 11 3 9 11 7 7 8 11 8 7 10 7 7 6 17 10 7 6 7 5 7 5 7 2 8 3 9 9 5 8 5 9 6 5 8 5 8 7 7 5 7 6 6 10 18 5 3 7 4 7 6 9 5 9 5 5 2 2 5 2 7 8 6 6 4 6 9 9 7 8 7 6 7 7 19 6 2 10 4 4 2 2 10 4 3 3 3 5 4 4 5 3 1 3 6 6 7 6 2 3 4 3 4 2 20 A 8 5 5 8 5 4 2 4 3 6 6 5 7 4 7 2 4 9 2 2 6 4 5 10 4 6 1 2 21 11 A 9 3 4 8 6 2 4 5 3 4 8 2 7 9 4 4 3 3 4 3 5 6 8 5 3 6 4 22 3 8 3 9 6 3 5 11 8 6 6 6 1 10 4 3 7 6 9 1 10 7 6 5 10 5 9 10 4 23 6 11 9 4 8 6 11 6 11 7 6 1 3 6 7 6 6 10 8 8 6 6 4 4 7 7 1 3 6 24 5 A 4 9 6 4 7 5 6 2 5 10 2 8 5 4 8 3 5 4 3 2 5 6 5 7 5 4 1 25 9 1 6 2 1 3 1 5 2 4 1 9 11 6 1 4 4 3 7 5 3 1 5 1 3 2 4 5 9 26 1 10 6 10 11 9 10 10 10 10 10 10 9 6 11 8 11 6 7 9 9 11 9 10 7 8 8 10 7 27 8 5 6 7 6 7 6 7 7 6 7 11 10 4 6 6 7 7 7 11 5 7 7 6 6 6 10 8 8 28 9 7 8 5 8 7 8 8 9 8 7 4 9 6 8 7 9 8 8 4 7 6 8 9 9 8 8 11 6 29 3 2 3 3 4 2 8 3 6 1 2 4 3 3 3 1 4 2 4 9 3 4 2 3 2 3 4 3 5 30 6 6 11 10 9 11 8 8 9 11 9 8 6 8 9 10 6 10 6 6 9 10 8 10 9 8 8 9 11 31 4 4 5 5 3 4 7 5 5 5 4 5 4 4 5 3 6 4 6 4 4 7 7 6 5 5 9 7 6 32 6 6 4 11 9 7 3 6 7 10 7 5 6 9 10 7 5 8 6 3 10 6 10 9 4 9 8 5 4 33 5 9 10 4 8 6 3 3 7 5 3 4 6 5 5 8 5 5 10 7 5 4 8 6 7 9 4 4 3 34 7 4 2 8 3 5 6 4 5 6 6 7 6 3 6 3 2 6 1 6 5 5 3 3 8 3 6 5 6 35 8 6 7 8 7 8 7 6 8 8 8 9 10 5 7 6 7 9 6 6 5 5 7 6 4 6 2 6 9 36 2 3 6 5 5 6 2 6 5 4 5 5 3 3 2 6 10 7 4 5 6 4 7 4 6 5 6 8 8 TABLE 13 ITEM SCORES MADE BT THE SAMPLE ON THE ATTITUDE-IDEAL Q-SORT

------Pwrwn Hu b m i______1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 1 5 4 1 3 4 4 4 2 4 4 3 3 5 5 5 3 5 5 3 4 3 4 4 4 4 4 4 2 8 4 3 2 6 7 10 8 8 10 7 10 8 9 10 8 10 6 10 1 8 10 11 10 9 10 8 8 6 9 9 9 7 6 10 3 10 9 7 6 6 4 6 6 6 4 9 3 7 2 6 5 7 6 8 6 6 6 7 6 4 6 4 6 6 7 9 4 10 9 7 6 7 6 6 6 7 8 9 8 5 9 6 6 7 6 8 6 6 7 7 6 9 6 5 7 6 7 6 5 8 6 6 5 6 9 6 8 5 5 7 6 5 3 5 5 9 8 5 7 4 4 6 8 11 7 8 6 3 6 6 6 5 6 6 6 5 8 6 4 7 8 7 6 3 9 7 6 5 5 7 6 8 8 5 5 4 7 2 10 8 6 7 7 5 5 4 4 6 3 5 5 4 5 5 6 5 6 5 5 4 5 4 3 4 5 2 5 5 3 7 4 10 1 4 8 7 7 10 8 7 7 8 7 8 9 6 8 8 7 8 8 8 8 10 9 8 8 8 8 6 6 5 7 4 10 8 9 3 5 5 4 5 4 7 6 5 5 3 4 6 5 5 4 6 6 3 5 4 3 7 4 3 5 5 6 7 5 4 10 9 7 4 7 6 6 6 7 8 8 7 7 6 7 8 8 6 6 6 8 6 5 7 7 8 4 9 9 3 6 8 11 7 8 9 6 7 8 5 8 7 7 7 7 7 8 7 7 9 8 6 9 6 9 6 6 5 7 5 10 4 7 5 12 8 5 5 6 5 5 7 9 8 6 5 7 6 2 6 7 6 7 6 5 7 7 7 7 7 4 8 6 4 7 7 13 7 8 8 9 8 9 8 9 6 6 8 6 7 8 10 8 10 10 9 9 10 9 10 9 10 10 10 4 9 9 8 14 2 5 2 3 3 3 5 5 3 4 3 5 8 6 2 3 2 3 2 1 5 2 2 2 2 3 4 3 1 2 2 15 3 3 4 2 2 2 1 2 3 5 5 4 4 7 4 2 2 4 4 5 4 2 1 2 1 1 7 4 6 2 2 16 6 9 9 10 9 11 9 9 6 7 8 9 4 6 6 9 10 5 7 5 9 7 11 9 6 9 9 5 8 3 8 1 17 4 2 3 5 4 2 3 6 4 5 2 4 3 4 3 4 7 4 3 5 5 5 4 5 5 7 6 5 4 5 6 18 9 6 6 7 7 6 10 6 9 8 8 9 9 6 9 7 7 9 6 8 7 8 9 9 10 8 6 8 7 8 7 19 6 5 8 5 5 7 4 5 5 6 6 6 6 7 5 6 6 4 6 6 5 6 5 6 8 5 3 6 10 6 5 20 7 7 9 11 8 8 8 7 8 6 6 8 7 8 7 6 8 7 7 11 8 9 8 7 7 6 8 8 5 9 9 21 5 4 7 2 3 8 7 3 5 7 7 9 10 4 8 7 4 6 5 7 1 6 6 5 3 4 2 7 5 5 6 22 8 8 7 9 8 4 5 8 10 6 6 5 3 10 6 5 7 6 9 6 10 7 6 7 7 2 8 6 6 7 6 23 8 6 5 8 7 6 11 7 11 9 6 11 7 7 6 11 6 7 8 7 7 6 5 6 8 6 1 7 5 10 1 24 4 4 3 5 5 5 4 4 2 4 4 1 3 4 4 1 3 1 2 3 2 3 5 4 5 2 3 1 7 4 4 25 1 1 6 3 1 1 2 1 2 3 5 2 1 3 1 4 1 3 5 2 2 5 4 1 3 3 4 5 3 3 3 26 11 11 6 10 11 9 9 11 10 7 9 10 11 10 11 10 11 7 8 7 9 8 6 11 8 10 10 8 5 8 11 1 27 2 6 4 4 2 5 4 3 1 1 1 2 2 1 3 4 3 3 4 2 3 3 3 3 4 7 6 3 8 4 4 28 9 6 8 7 10 7 10 10 9 11 10 10 9 11 9 10 9 11 10 8 8 11 9 10 9 8 7 11 5 11 9 1 29 5 4 3 4 4 3 3 3 4 2 2 5 2 4 2 2 3 2 4 3 3 4 3 3 6 3 3 3 2 4 3 30 6 10 11 8 9 9 9 8 8 10 11 7 9 8 9 9 8 9 9 8 7 10 9 10 9 9 7 8 11 8 10 31 4 3 2 1 4 5 3 4 3 2 4 4 4 3 4 3 4 2 1 4 5 1 3 3 5 5 6 4 2 3 5 32 6 10 8 9 10 7 7 7 6 10 8 5 8 9 8 8 5 9 7 10 11 6 10 7 6 11 11 9 6 8 7 33 6 8 6 5 9 5 5 5 7 6 5 5 6 5 7 7 5 8 7 6 6 5 6 6 7 7 7 5 6 6 7 *■ 34 7 7 7 7 6 6 8 6 7 6 7 6 5 7 6 6 7 5 7 6 6 8 8 6 8 5 7 9 9 5 35 3 3 5 7 3 6 2 5 6 _ 4 6 4 5 4 6 4 5 6 4 5 4 5 5 2 5 6 5 9 5 5 36 4 2 5 6 6 7 6 4 6 3 4 3 5 6 3 5 5 4 5 4 7 7 4 4 7 5 6 2 7 5 6 6

Co TABLE 1*

INTERCORRELATIONS OF PHtSONS IN THE SAMPLE OVER DEFINITION FRESBfT Q-SCRT ITEMS (DECIMAL POINT CHITTED)

Person Nuaber Person Nuaber 1 2 3 * 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2 0 21 2 2 23 2* 25 26 27 28 2 9 3 0 31 32 1 221 *23 *76 *** 500 -2CT7 -020 006 -126 -505 -520 381 *1* 289 2*6 -125 -197 -393 -495 -199 -431 -610 -55* 652 630 089 * 6 8 267 238 -206 -432 2 801 50* 596 1*0 365 -172 126 -00* -016 -339 -358 105 234 235 202 -351 -381 -606 -485 -306 -465 -63* -481 685 653 266 599 066 1 02 -328 -229 3 *23 50* 576 015 010 5*0 283 -*98 -59* -056 -*61 006 0*0 * 56 138 -216 -497 -089 -391 -513 -71* -*62 -57* 531 602 522 692 -065 0*2 37 0 036 * *76 596 576 -013 -073 1 03 58* -385 -5*3 -216 -256 059 069 275 217 -409 -507 -294 -273 -471 -618 - 6 * 6 -422 350 *98 *75 739 -0*2 -015 03* 289 5 4*4 1*0 015 -013 575 -236 -232 190 -093 -613 -384 * 08 309 -088 001 3*0 289 -0*7 -171 091 021 -170 -311 43* 113 -202 001 212 6*5 -122 -377 6 500 365 010 -073 575 -28* -253 372 1*9 -392 -187 31* 28* -205 -103 -071 212 -28* -3*0 -026 060 -215 -3*7 *78 290 -097 018 507 622 -*53 -348 7 -207 -172 5*0 103 -236 -28* 302 -585 -515 375 -143 -198 -166 *87 002 035 -100 * * 8 067 -556 -410 -113 -370 -110 099 565 1*0 067 -076 6*1 2*8 8 -020 126 283 58* -232 -253 302 -*33 -3*5 -037 00* -173 -1*7 1*1 067 -285 -251 017 179 -413 -611 -512 -159 020 2*1 372 4*9 -035 017 181 6flfi 9 006 -00* -*98 -385 190 372 -585 -*33 252 -075 393 -022 050 -*55 -260 -298 065 -407 -303 258 526 288 090 011 -212 -424 -*18 139 222 -498 -299 10 -126 -016 -59* -3*3 -093 1*9 -515 -3*5 252 193 622 -215 -187 -459 -355 -380 -056 -*67 -272 107 *79 299 15* -1*8 -290 -335 -*06 -005 -059 -49* -195 11 -505 -339 -056 -216 -613 -392 375 -037 -075 193 528 -57* -517 -207 -3*7 -275 -227 1 05 -087 -O il 15* *19 181 -482 -332 027 -262 -345 -56* * 4 6 092 12 -520 -358 -*61 -256 -38* -187 -1*3 00* 395 622 528 “539 -481 -* 6 6 -360 -39* -181 -352 020 -038 389 **2 293 -4*6 -406 -270 -352 -168 -287 -10* 290 13 381 105 006 059 *08 31* -198 -173 -022 -215 -57* -539 62* 351 *41 *52 4 * 7 216 05 2 131 -096 -282 - 2 * 2 218 -039 228 -162 1 1 9 362 - 2 * 6 -*32 1* *1* 234 0*0 069 309 28* -166 -1*7 050 -187 -517 -*81 63* 213 365 2 6 0 353 2 09 1*2 09* 017 -290 -2 0 6 298 160 -106 072 123 2 * 5 - 3 * 5 -326 15 289 235 456 275 -088 -205 487 1*1 -*55 -*59 -207 - * 6 6 351 213 638 210 063 19* 1*2 -413 -520 -377 -299 216 16* 579 192 -126 -162 059 -1*5 16 2*6 202 138 217 001 -103 002 067 260 -355 -3*7 -360 **1 365 638 307 19* 076 276 -076 -407 -378 011 159 111 2*4 178 -216 -221 -222 -096 17 -125 -351 -216 ^*09 3*0 -071 035 -285 -296 -380 -275 -39* *52 260 210 307 660 537 *93 355 209 10* 175 -1*8 -320 -180 -369 180 135 101 -262 18 -197 -381 -*97 -507 289 212 -100 -251 065 -056 -227 -181 4*7 353 063 19* 660 553 616 319 356 113 212 -368 -*71 -2*8 -587 288 260 -181 -315 1 9 - 3 9 3 -606 -089 -29* -0*7 -28* *48 017 -*07 -*67 1 05 -352 216 209 19* 076 537 553 523 067 0*0 1*7 089 -458 -235 062 -2*7 -009 04* 427 060 20 -*95 -485 -391 -273 -171 -3*0 067 179 -303 -272 -087 020 052 1*2 1*2 276 *93 616 523 237 18* 111 509 -5*4 -416 -161 -305 -111 -19* C11 238 21 -199 -306 -513 -*71 091 -026 -556 -*13 258 1 07 -O il -038 131 09* -413 -076 355 319 067 237 539 516 £24 "217 -505 -6 5 6 -*81 -1 1 5 -136 -1*8 -3*0 22 -431 -*65 -717 -618 021 080 -*10 -611 526 *79 1 5* 389 -096 017 -520 -407 209 356 0 * 0 1 8 * 539 72J 507 - 4 * 2 - 5 6 5 -617 -6 2 1 01* 024 -318 - 2 2 0 23 -610 -63* -462 - 6 * 6 -170 -215 -113 -512 288 299 *19 *42 -282 -290 -377 -378 104 113 1 47 111 516 225 650 -560 -627 -479 -609 -309 -152 067 -120 24 -554 -481 -57* -422 -311 -3*7 -370 -159 090 1 5* 181 293 -2*2 -206 -299 011 175 212 089 509 224 507 6 50 -5*1 -521 -552 -372 -450 -411 -161 110 25 652 685 531 350 *34 *78 -110 020 011 -1*8 -*82 - * * 6 218 298 216 1 59 -1*8 -368 -458 -5*4 -217 -**2 -560 -5*1 670 061 562 302 272 -151 -185 26 630 653 602 *96 113 290 099 2*1 -212 -290 -332 -406 -039 160 16* 111 -320 -*71 -235 -*16 -505 -565 -627 -521 670 330 231 114 170 -002 1 02 27 089 266 597 *75 -202 -097 565 372 -*24 -335 027 -270 228 -106 579 2*4 -180 - 2 * 8 062 -161 - 6 5 6 -617 -*79 -552 061 330 350 -105 001 195 161 28 * 6 8 599 622 222 001 018 1*0 4*9 -418 -406 -262 -352 -162 072 192 178 -369 -587 -2*7 -305 -481 -621 -609 -372 562 231 350 -027 -001 043 378 29 267 066 -065 -0*2 212 507 067 -035 1 39 -005 -3*5 -168 119 123 -126 -216 180 288 -009 -111 -115 01* -309 -405 302 114 -105 -027 565 000 -128 30 238 102 0*2 -015 6*5 622 076 017 222 -059 -56* -287 362 2*5 -162 -221 135 2 6 0 04* -194 -136 024 -152 -411 272 17 0 001 -001 565 -185 -035 31 -206 -328 370 03* -122 -*53 6*1 181 -*98 -49* 4*6 -10* -2*6 -3*5 059 -222 101 -181 472 011 -1*8 -318 067 -161 -151 -002 195 043 000 -185 2 03 32 -432 -229 086 289 -377 -3*5 2*8 680 -299 -195 092 290 -*32 -326 -1*5 -096 -262 -315 06 0 238 -3*0 -220 -120 110 -185 1 02 161 373 -128 -035 203 TABLE 15 DTTEROORKELATIOKS OF PBiSOItS IN THE SAICLE OVER UTITOIE PRESENT Q-SORT ITEMS (DECIMAL POINT (KITTED)

P arao n Rwbar Paracn Ruabar 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 16 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 1 -2 7 3 256 -057 062 -248 215 -3 5 0 029 -162 -240 -099 -155 049 298 012 355 -211 109 -1 8 0 -043 -335 051 -027 262 -293 061 -155 216 -159 003 -047 2 -2 7 3 -1 2 6 -053 796 -284 030 168 -363 372 140 250 159 -139 -255 169 -128 018 -330 274 -090 -063 -203 063 -264 -120 -062 -197 -097 039 -029 309 3 256 -1 2 6 -068 -236 -061 198 -294 243 -222 -152 256 -039 008 266 -339 070 -268 -176 -233 -079 180 -161 212 046 074 -092 202 026 -196 -203 264 A -057 -053 -088 275 -177 -178 -222 -114 122 005 -277 030 059 -1 8 0 004 -152 245 003 083 -041 174 222 -020 -609 169 -170 212 -201 -060 067 037 5 062 296 -236 275 -450 -299 -013 -416 254 -077 142 -060 -003 -232 128 -076 126 -254 U i 075 -066 102 -074 -268 -193 014 -067 -224 -152 -368 119 6 -248 -284 -061 -177 -450 -106 205 183 -277 292 -264 073 -134 043 -077 070 110 -011 -171 041 007 227 019 122 169 040 066 162 -027 068 -571 7 215 030 196 -178 -299 -106 -196 008 346 -279 007 -565 132 564 -214 020 -364 215 -334 -223 -031 039 -026 138 165 312 -179 350 -197 007 -069 8 -350 168 -294 -222 -013 205 -196 011 -199 -027 -057 037 -059 -132 154 273 -036 -087 -027 014 -130 -183 -256 -017 216 138 055 -101 114 198 -116 9 029 -363 243 -114 -416 183 006 011 -373 230 -159 -018 -032 221 -315 056 037 116 -550 -113 124 064 -233 021 -002 -096 132 -109 322 071 014 10 -162 372 -222 122 254 -277 346 -199 -373 -092 254 -195 064 195 -145 -032 -186 -068 162 076 -054 -121 -030 -097 071 142 -3 7 0 009 -102 -271 132 11 -2 4 0 140 -152 005 -077 292 -279 -027 230 -092 -206 251 -426 -361 015 -039 186 074 014 119 -096 185 -164 -313 -138 -293 015 -339 227 -202 248 12 -0 9 9 250 256 -277 142 -264 007 -057 -159 254 -206 109 -221 -128 -202 044 -267 -098 341 065 041 -492 297 062 079 -QU -115 -158 053 -129 m 13 -155 159 -039 030 -060 073 -565 037 -018 -195 251 109 -333 -461 262 -123 264 -064 220 018 147 -173 118 -212 085 -413 -035 -250 231 069 252 14 049 -1 3 9 006 059 -003 -134 132 -059 -032 064 -426 -221 -333 531 -038 -026 -322 114 -112 -196 062 222 -064 325 -237 062 -093 296 -195 -059 -234 15 296 -255 266 -180 -232 043 364 -132 221 195 -361 -128 -461 331 -563 271 -444 047 -307 -390 188 -031 -165 -068 338 -303 394 -351 QU -247 16 012 169 -339 004 128 -077 -214 154 -315 -145 015 -202 262 -038 -563 -206 156 -135 203 078 -266 & -016 -168 023 -306 115 -196 206 069 074 17 -128 C70 -152 -076 070 020 223 056 -032 -039 QU -123 -026 271 -206 -435 -026 -317 160 -*27 -368 -109 342 -038 466 -267 028 -193 -072 -1 5 0 18 -211 018 -268 245 126 110 -364 -036 037 -186 186 -267 2U -322 -444 156 -435 019 -027 022 175 131 -029 -201 -002 -271 350 -011 265 £ 2 -071 19 109 -3 3 0 -176 003 -254 -011 215 -067 116 -068 074 -096 -064 114 047 -135 -026 019 -158 041 -029 047 -188 129 -152 -107 018 051 025 053 -0 9 6 20 -1 8 0 274 -233 083 443 -171 -334 -027 -550 162 014 341 220 -112 -307 203 -317 -027 -158 012 109 076 077 -152 -192 -287 -068 -198 -142 -QU 119 21 -043 -090 -079 -041 075 041 -223 074 -113 076 119 » 5 018 -198 -390 (778 160 022 041 012 -529 -043 -127 250 -352 102 £ 5 -137 064 -294 -1 8 2 22 -3 3 5 -0 6 3 180 174 -066 007 -031 -130 124 -054 -096 041 147 062 188 -266 -427 175 -029 109 -529 -121 302 -254 175 -250 120 -307 000 263 205 23 051 -203 -161 222 102 227 039 -183 064 -121 185 -492 -173 222 -031 -368 131 047 076 -043 -121 -244 -245 -0 9 6 -457 116 043 077 -165 -294 24 -027 063 312 -202 -0 7 4 019 -026 -256 -233 -050 -164 297 118 -064 -165 -016 -109 -029 -188 077 -127 302 -244 -048 182 107 -201 035 -242 -067 119 25 262 -284 046 -609 -268 122 138 -017 021 -097 -313 062 -212 325 429 -168 342 -201 129 -152 250 -254 -245 -048 -4 5 0 411 -043 420 -296 063 - U 0 26 -293 -1 2 0 074 169 -193 169 165 216 -002 071 -138 079 085 -237 -068 023 -038 -002 -152 -192 -352 175 -098 182 -450 117 -121 120 092 041 109 27 081 -062 -092 -170 014 040 312 138 -096 142 -293 -044 -413 062 338 -308 -271 -107 -287 102 -2 5 0 -457 107 411 117 -295 396 -333 -096 -355 28 -155 -197 202 212 -067 066 -179 055 132 -370 015 -115 -035 -093 -303 115 -267 350 018 -068 £ 5 120 116 -201 -043 -121 -295 -142 -004 280 015 29 216 -097 026 -201 -224 162 350 -101 -109 009 -339 -158 -250 296 394 -196 028 -011 051 -196 -137 -307 043 035 420 120 396 -142 -379 158 -422 30 -159 039 -196 •-080 -152 -027 -197 114 322 -102 227 053 231 -195 -351 206 -193 265 025 -142 064 000 077 -242 -296 092 -333 -0 0 4 -379 094 178 31 003 -029 -203 067 ■-368 068 007 196 071 -271 -202 -129 069 -059 QU 069 -072 £ 2 053 -QU -294 263 -165 -067 063 041 -096 280 158 094 -056 32 -047 309 264 037 119 -571 -069 -116 014 132 248 324 259 -234 -247 074 -150 -071 -096 119 -182 205 -294 119 -440 109 -355 015 -422 178 -056 76 to add four rows of biserial coefficients to the definition-present

(Table 10) and definitions-ideal (Table 11 ) person-item matrices. These additional rows of coefficients are shown in Table 16. A 1 under a per­ son column identifies that person as a number of the group listed in the row. A 0 indicates the person does not belong to that group.

Five attitude group orientations toward the station were gener­ ated from the linkage analysis. The five rows of biserial coefficients which w ill be appended to the attitude-present (Table 12) and attitude- ideal (Table 13) person-item matrices are displayed in Table 17. The same 1 or 0 scoring procedure is used as was employed for the defini­ tion matrices.

Intercorrelations were computed between these addition rows and every other item on the matrices. The results of these computations appear in Tables 18, 19, 20, and 21. An item is significant to a group at the .1 alpha level if the correlation between the item and the group

exceeds -.296. A correlation exceeding -.296 indicates the group sig­

nificantly agrees with the item. Conversely, a correlation exceeding

+.296 indicates significant group disagreement with the item. The con­

tent of an item may be recalled by referring to Tables 3 and 5 in Chap­

ter III. The significant items for each group, however, will be dis­

cussed in the group analyses later in this chapter.

Item Significance Test Between Present and Ideal Station for Groups

A test of the significance of difference of the means for each

item between each group*s conception of the present and an ideal station

was computed. These tests had to be computed on each item for each %

77

FIGURE 1

TYPES OF DEFINITION ORIENTATIONS

Type 1 Type 7

2 21 2A

1 25 Type 8

Type 2 8 32

27 Type 9

3 6 30

26 28 Type 10

U 19

Type 3 17 18

11 20

12 Type 11

9 10 7 31

Type U Type 12

5 29 13 U

Type 5

22 23

Type 6

15 16 FIGURE 2

TYPES OF ATTITUDE ORIENTATIONS TABLE 16

ROWS OF COEFFICIENTS ADDED TO DEFINITION Q-SORT SCORES FOR POINT BISERIAL CORRELATION COMPUTATION

Group Number P erson Number 1 2 3 A 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 U 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32

Present Station Sort

1 11 OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOIOOOOOOO 2 00110000000000000000000001110000 3 00000000111100000000000000000000 A 00000000000000001111000000000000

Ideal Station Sort

1 11000000000000000000000010000000 2 00110000000000000000000001110000 3 00000000111100000000000000000000 A 00000000000000001111000000000000

-s vO TABLE 17

ROWS OF COEFFICIENTS ADDED TO ATTITUDE Q-SORT SCORES FOR POINT BISERIAL CORRELATION COMPUTATION

Group Number P erson Number 1 2 3 A 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 *\A 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 2A 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32

P re se n t. S ta tio n S o rt

1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 A 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 5 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Id e a l Station Sort

1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 c 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 A 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 5 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

OJ o 81

TABLE 18

POINT BISERIAL CORRELATIONS BETWEEN DEFINITION GROUPS AND DEFINITION-PRESENT Q-SORT ITEMS (DECIMAL POINT OMITTED)

Group Number Item Number 1 2 3 4 1 274-9 1631 -3672 1625 2 1917 1431 -3697 2932 3 -1138 0294 -0612 1565 4 -0052 2041 -2378 0549 5 2439 -0160 -2960 0423 6 3864 2625 -2982 2176 7 -2373 -2641 3670 -0440 8 -0506 2475 0487 0487 9 0636 4392 -0449 -0449 10 -0980 2739 1072 -0834 11 -2388 -0880 4395 -0688 12 -1652 2342 3191 0355 13 0719 -0932 -1755 -0715 U 0090 1080 -2212 -0948 15 -1809 -3828 0348 0348 16 -1392 -3426 -0563 1368 17 1828 -6300 0126 -1390 18 2772 -4099 0514 -1543 19 0051 -3883 2952 -3314 20 0175 -4400 0862 0862 21 0726 -0941 -2821 0328 22 1543 0581 -0555 -2776 23 -1282 -0026 1739 -1971 2A -0475 -0636 -0215 -0559 25 0965 2857 -2931 2228 26 2273 2263 -2885 0962 27 -1323 -1317 0933 0435 28 0275 2509 -2380 0793 29 1841 -0278 -1599 0658 30 3190 2384 -1008 -0388 31 -1499 -2761 4042 0560 32 -2036 2823 2479 0391 33 -1261 4221 -0587 0755 34 0619 -0055 0242 -0242 35 -3695 0424 4652 -0930 36 -0978 -0556 1123 -0736 82

TABLE 19

POINT BISERIAL CORRELATIONS BETWEEN DEFINITION GROUPS AND DEFINITION-IDEAL Q-SORT ITEMS (DECIMAL POINT CMtTTED)

Group Number

1 2 3 4 1 -0271 0860 -1662 1158 2 0795 2264 -1703 -0824 3 -0326 -1450 1148 0313 4 0358 1303 -2037 1067 5 -0347 -0167 -2689 -0244 6 -0358 3096 -2103 -0981 7 -1170 -3666 2528 0399 8 3093 1773 -2596 1038 9 -0981 -1912 0823 -0494 10 -1510 1653 2420 -0484 11 -1756 -3982 3439 -0794 12 -0351 -1070 1236 1236 13 -0043 -C788 -0451 -1053 14 -0822 2418 -0414 -2069 15 -0839 0390 0675 -1817 16 -1562 2166 -3004 -1001 17 0412 0551 -1452 -1452 18 2491 2000 -0976 -0976 19 1849 -0749 2019 -1673 20 4169 0478 0840 1260 21 -0184 -0443 -1945 0648 22 -0172 2042 -2696 -0495 23 -1153 -2878 1868 1429 24 0533 0156 0137 -0229 25 -1252 0692 -0860 1433 26 -0350 2530 -0960 1784 27 0018 -1515 2217 0190 28 0138 2186 -0485 -0873 29 1421 0016 -0776 1481 30 1034 2860 -0946 -0946 31 0133 -4804 1875 -1406 32 0327 1312 0576 1153 33 -1589 -1759 0151 1363 -0838 0183 -0269 1450 -1660 -3813 3026 -1009 0471 -0715 0554 0923 83

TABLE 20

POINT BISERIAL CORRELATIONS BETWEEN ATTITUDE GROUPS AND ATTITUDE-PRESENT Q-SORT ITEMS (DECIMAL POINT OMITTED)

Group Number

1 2 3 4 5 1 0840 0131 3392 -2339 -0598 2 -0746 0401 0401 1393 -1972 3 -1190 1608 1054 0926 -2519 4 -2 2 2 0 1438 -1499 -2707 2173 5 -0213 -2369 -1323 -1119 0834 6 1371 0442 -1523 14C7 0918 7 -0067 2349 1193 -1126 -2566 8 -1265 0261 -0575 -1368 1237 9 -0181 1136 -1461 -0445 0849 10 1060 -1221 -1593 -0449 -1839 11 -1553 1376 -2234 2558 2108 12 1205 -1785 -C774 08C7 0807 13 2466 -3631 0058 -0072 2226 n 0274 -1047 1032 1652 -1285 15 1603 1093 0682 -0208 -2771 16 0722 -2 0 6 0 1284 -0707 -0 112 17 -1078 2708 0203 0526 0526 18 0252 0298 -3173 -1182 2601 19 -2765 1994 1181 -1345 3212 20 2143 -2548 1548 -1348 0507 21 0067 0060 -3394 1001 1479 22 1246 1116 -0832 -1592 -1592 23 2311 -1392 0113 -1641 0234 24 0527 2187 2599 -1442 -1442 25 0736 1147 0173 2718 -1732 26 -1448 -2128 1194 -0970 0582 27 -1637 1789 0880 1450 -0813 28 -0305 2351 -4 646 1612 0159 29 1128 -C719 2439 2160 -0 6 5 0 30 -0272 -3623 0016 0142 3379 31 0824 1624 -0 148 -1287 1655 32 -2362 -0611 0141 0761 -1113 33 -0498 -1058 0574 -2 112 1445 34 0919 -0614 1782 0616 -2369 35 -0820 -2077 -0063 3214 -1176 36 -2807 1277 0812 0145 -1 0 1 2 84 TABLE 21

POINT BISERIAL CORRELATIONS BETWEEN ATTITUDE GROUPS AND ATTITUDE-IDEAL Q-SORT ITEMS (DECIMAL POINT OMITTED)

Group Number Item imber 1 2 3 4 5 1 3861 0451 -0992 1236 -2360 2 -2589 -0591 0019 3205 1686 3 -1727 1393 -3249 2313 0578 4 1868 0143 -2725 -2323 -0179 5 -1879 4437 -0949 0267 -0343 6 1380 -4786 -1011 0588 -0084 7 3085 2673 -0034 -0295 -0295 8 -1703 -3411 1248 0933 2591 9 0778 0697 -0790 1447 -2258 10 -1304 0853 0246 -0118 -3139 11 -4093 0629 0629 -0783 2349 12 -2975 2535 -1209 1117 0340 13 1883 2287 -0712 -0234 0514 14 -C750 -0134 0941 2177 -2512 15 1807 -0576 -0049 0226 -1087 16 -1788 1815 1815 -3324 0931 17 -2414 5649 0293 0052 0052 18 0961 -1893 0861 1501 -0214 19 3354 -2651 -0615 -1981 2245 20 -2445 -1522 4484 0026 1689 21 -0170 -3774 -0431 3010 0927 22 1169 -0278 0657 -3003 0491 23 1030 -2584 2215 -2759 -1839 24 3207 -0639 -0019 -1713 -0169 25 0167 -2250 -0522 -0964 2623 26 -1837 3621 1113 0957 -1542 27 1723 2063 -1576 -0789 -0142 28 -0486 -1551 0122 1064 1064 29 1240 0667 ?/(IJy -3045 0277 30 1553 -4264 -2820 1490 4188 31 -1257 4115 -1781 0791 -3290 32 -2411 —0078 0921 -0058 -1925 33 -0096 -0773 0876 2503 -1605 34 0048 -1051 -0231 -2012 1054 35 -0176 -0360 0246 -0118 -0118 36 2353 -0510 0094 0071 0823 85 group individually. Since the groups were of unequal size, different levels were required to test the significance. Therefore, it would be meaningless to attempt to display this data in composite tables describ­ ing the entire sample. However, the thirty-six significance tests and the critical levels of t for each of the groups w ill be described in the group analyses.

D efinition Group Analyses

Group 1

Group Composition

TABLE 22

CHARACTERISTICS OF SAMPLE MEMBERS AFFILIATED WITH GROUP 1

Variables of Sampling Structure Person University- Influential- M ale- O ccupation Number N on-univer si ty N on-influential Female 1 University Influential Male Major adminis­ t r a t o r 2 University Influential Male Full Professor 25 Non-nmiversity N on-influential Male Retired Barber

Table 22 describes the composition of definition Group 1. The university-non-university and the influential non-influential sample

structuring variables are apparently not significant criteria for mem­

bership in this group. While two members of the group were drawn from

the university-influential population, Table 5 revealed a high correla­

tion between the major college administrator and the barber. In fact,

the .859 correlation between the administrator and the barber was the

highest correlation for any pair in the entire sample. Therefore, any 86 hypothesis about Group 1 membership being a function of university affiliation or influence is rejected.

The sampling criterion necessary for Group 1 membership is being a male. This was the only measured characteristic which was common to all persons in the group. Table 23 describes the three definitions of the present station which Group 1 significantly accepts or rejects. The definition given in item 35 most closely defines the station as these men perceive it today. Item 35 is formed by facet elements A 3 B 3 C 3 which represents the following concepts.

A. Audience

3. Extra-college

B. Purpose

3. Receiver directed

C. C ontent

3. Information-non-instructional

Group 1 th in k s th a t WSLN's programming i s d ir e c te d by th e needs of receivers who are not associated with the college. The station is fulfilling these receiver needs by offering informal educational or cul­ tural programs for the benefit of this group.

However, Group 1 significantly rejects the definitions of the present station suggested by items 6 and 30. Item 6 contains facet elements A 2 B 2 C 1 and item 30 elements A 2 B 2 C 3. Therefore, Group

1 believes that the station is not described by elements A 2 B 2 when these facets are linked with either C 1 or C 3. These elements are list­ ed as follows. 87

Significant Group Definitions TABLE 23 POINT BISERIAL CORRELATIONS BETWEEN GROUP 1 AND DEFINITION-PRESENT Q-SORT ITEMS

Item Correlation Significant Items (minimum cor. -.296) Number (Decimal omitted) Item Composition Agree or Disagree 1 2749 2 1917 3 -1138 4 -0052 5 2439 6 3864 A 2 B 2 C 1 Disagree 7 -2373 8 -0506 9 0636 10 -0980 11 -2388 12 -1652 13 0719 14 0090 15 -1809 16 -1392 17 1828 18 2772 19 0051 20 0175 21 0726 22 1543 23 -1282 24 -0475 25 0965 26 2273 27 -1323 28 0275 29 1841 30 3190 A 2 B 2 C 3 Disagree 31 -1499 32 -2036 33 -1261 34 0619 35 -3695 A 3 B 3 C 3 Agree 36 -0978 88

A* Audience

2. Inter-college

I i Eurpose

2. Communicator directed-pedigogic

SL C ontent

1. Entertainment

3. Information-non-instructi onal

Group 1 apparently does not perceive the present station as a student training laboratory producing programs for people affiliated with the college. Furthermore, the group does not feel that the station is programming entertainment or culturally enriching programs for trans­ mission in this laboratory to college audience situation. This percep­ tion of what WSLN is not doing is consistent with the groupfs defini­ tion of the station.

Table 24 describes this group's definition of an ideal station.

Apparently, the members of Group 1 do not agree on their perceptions of an ideal station because none of the thirty-six possibilities were significant. However, the men in this group do concur on definitions of what an ideal station should not be. The group disagrees that the station should be described by items 8 and 20. The group is suggesting that an ideal station would not contain the A 4 and B 2 facets unless

these were affiliated with elements other than C 1 and C 2. These sig­ nificant facets are described as follows.

A* tofltaaqg

4. Composite 89 TABLE 24

POINT BISERIAL CORRELATIONS BETWEEN GROUP 1 AND DEFINITION-IDEAL Q-SORT ITEMS

Item Correlation Significant Items (minimum cor. -.296) Number (Decimal omitted) Item Composition Agree or Disagree 1 -0271 2 0795 3 -0326 4 0358 5 -0347 6 -0358 7 -1170 8 3093 A 4 B 2 C 1 Disagree 9 -0981 10 -1510 11 -1756 12 -0351 13 -0043 14 -0822 15 -0839 16 -1562 17 0412 18 2491 19 1849 20 4169 A 4 B 2 C 2 Disagree 21 -0184 22 -0172 23 -1153 24 0533 25 -1252 26 -0350 27 0018 28 0138 29 1421 30 1034 31 0133 32 0327 33 -1589 34 ” 0838 35 -1660 36 0471 90

Purpose

2. Communicator directed-pedigogic

C* C pqteqt

1. Entertainment

2. Information-instructional

This group does not want to see a student laboratory facility which attempts to have broad appeals for everyone in the community.

Specifically, Group 1 does not want such a station if it proposes to broadcast entertainment or formal instructional programs.

Table 25 reveals that no definition item was significantly dif­ ferent between Group 1's perception of the present and its perception

of an ideal station. Apparently, Group 1 believes that WSLN is operat­

ing as an ideal college station at the present time. This belief may

be reaffirmed by the group's rejection of similar definition items for

both the present and an ideal station. Furthermore, the insignificance

of the differences between present and ideal station items suggests

that the present station definition used by this group is the same defi­

nition the group would use for an ideal station. This inference may be

informally supported by a comment made by the full professor in this

group. While sorting the Q-instruments, the professor avidly contended

that WSLN is operating as the ideal college station and he did not

think there was much difference between his perceptions of the present

and an ideal station.

The membership of Group 2 is described in Table 26. An analysis

of the variables of sampling structure are especially interesting for

this group. University or non-university affiliate is not an important 91 Significant Item Differences TABLE 25 SIGNIFICANT ITEM DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE PRESENT AND AN IDEAL STATION

Significant Differences (minimum t = - 2.920) Item Item Composition Perception having Number ______t . S m aller Mean______1 0.6546 2 1.9639 3 -0 .9 9 9 8 4 -1 .7 3 2 2 5 0.9998 6 0.9999 7 -0 .3 7 7 9 8 -1 .5 1 1 8 9 1.0000 10 0.0000 11 -1 .7 3 2 2 12 -0 .9 9 9 8 13 0.3779 U 0.3779 15 -1 .0 0 0 0 16 1.0000 17 1.7322 18 1.0000 19 0.3779 20 -2 .0 0 0 0 21 1.5118 22 1.3867 23 1.0000 24 0.2856 25 0.4803 26 0.4446 27 -1 .8 8 9 7 28 0.0000 29 -1 .0 0 0 0 30 0.5546 31 -1 .7 3 2 2 32 -0 .6 5 4 6 33 0.0000 34 2.0000 35 -1 .7 3 2 2 36 -0 .3 7 7 9 92

Group 2

Group Composition

TABLE 26

CHARACTERISTICS OF SAMPLE MEMBERS AFFILIATED WITH GROUP 2

Variables of Sampling Structure P erson University- Influential- M ale- O ccupation Number Non-university N on-influential Female 3 U n iv e rs ity Influential Male A sso ciate P ro fe s so r 4 U n iv e rs ity Influential Male Assistant P ro fe s so r 26 N on-university N on-influential Male Refrigeration s e rv ic e s 27 N on-univer sity N on-influential Male Recreation leader for another city 28 N on-univer sity N on-influential Male Plant worker variable for membership in this group. Similarly, the influential versus non-influential variable does not seem significant. However, observe non-influential university affiliated people and non-influen­ tial non-university affiliated people clustered together in this group.

The other two possible combinations, influential-non-university and non-influential-university, did not appear. This pattern suggests that people in influential positions at the college and non-influential people in the community define the station sim ilarly.

The most obvious criterion for Group 2 membership is being a male. This characteristic was common to all persons in this group.

Table 27 lists the six definitions of the present station which are significant for Group 2. In this structured design, items with

small differences in their element composition have item numbers which 93

Significant Group Definitions

TABLE 27

POINT BISERIAL CORRELATIONS BETWEEN GROUP 2 AND DEFINITION-PRESENT Q-SORT ITEMS

Item Correlation Significant Items (minimum cor. -.296) umber (Decimal omitted) Item Composition Agree or Disagree 1 1631 2 1481 3 0294 4 2041 5 -0160 6 2625 7 -2641 8 2475 9 4392 A 1 B 3 C 1 D isagree 10 2739 11 -0880 12 2342 13 -0932 14 1080 15 -3828 A 3 B 1 C 2 Agree 16 -3426 A 4 B 1 C 2 Agree 17 -6300 A 1 B 2 C 2 Agree 18 -4099 A 2 B 2 C 2 Agree 19 -3883 A 3 B 2 C 2 Agree 20 -4400 A4B2C2 Agree 21 -0941 22 0581 23 -0026 24 -0636 25 2857 26 2263 27 -1317 28 2509 29 -0278 30 2384 31 -2761 32 2823 33 4221 A 1 B 3 C 3 D isag ree 34 -0055 35 0424 36 -0556 94 are numerically close to one another. Therefore, the clustering of significant items 15 through 20 indicates that there is probably one common definition which is appearing to some degree in each of these six items. Item 17 is the most significant definition in this cluster.

This item has a -.63 point biserial correlation and an A 1 B 2 C 2 facet configuration. However, in this cluster of definitions, all A or audience elements are linked with B 1 and B 2, and C 2. The follow­ ing facet elements are represented.

A. Audience

1. Inter-student

2. Intra-college

3. Extra-college

4. Composite

EBERQ59

1. Communicator directed-social

2. Communicator directed-pedigogic

C. C ontent

2. Information-instructional

The most highly correlated point biserial, item 17, indicates that the group thinks the station is a laboratory which is transmitting formal instructional programs to students at the college level. How­ ever, the clustering effect of these items suggests that the group is unsure of the intended audience and whether the station's purpose is primarily social or pedigogic. The most definite characteristic of this perception of the station is the group's belief that the station trans­ mits primarily formal instructional programs. It is interesting that 95 the group contends that the purpose of transmitting these instructional programs is not primarily for the benefit of the listeners, but for the training or possibly social gratification of the communicators. This orientation suggests that the group believes the station exists for training students in educational or instructional radio broadcasting.

The group*s orientation becomes more clearly defined by inspect­ ing the two items on Table 27 with which Group 2 significantly dis­ agrees. Item 9 and item 33 contain the A 1 and B 3 facets. The only difference between these items is whether the content is C 1 or C 3.

These designations represent the following facet elements.

A.., ..Jtoteease

1. Inter-students

B. Purpose

3. Receiver-directed

C. C ontent

1. Entertainment

3. Information-non-instructional

Group 2*s rejection of these two definitions implies that it

feels the station is not an inter-campus communication system directed

by the tastes of student listeners. The group contends that this

orientation is not applicable regardless of whether entertainment or

non-instructional educational programs are broadcast.

Table 28 reveals that Group 2*s perception of an ideal station

is described by four items. All four of these items have A 3 as their

element for the audience facet. However, the group is unsure if the

ideal station would be defined by the B 2 or the B 3 purpose facet and 96

TABLE 28

POINT BISERIAL CORRELATIONS BETWEEN GROUP 2 AND DEFINITION-IDEAL Q-SORT ITEMS

Correlation Significant Items (minimum cor. -.296) (Decimal omitted )____ Item Composition______Agree or Disagree 1 0860 2 2264 3 -1450 4 1303 5 -0167 6 3096 A 2 B 2 C 1 Disagree 7 -3666 A 3 B 2 C 1 Agree 8 1773 9 -1912 10 1653 11 -3892 A 3 B 3 C 1 Agree 12 -1070 13 -0788 U 2418 15 0390 16 2166 17 0551 18 2000 19 -0749 20 0478 21 -0443 22 2042 23 -2878 24 0156 25 0692 26 2530 27 -1515 28 2186 29 0016 30 2860 31 -4804 A 3 B 2 C 3 Agree 32 1312 33 -1759 34 0183 35 -3813 A 3 B 3 C 3 Agree 36 -0715 97 the C 1 or the C 3 content facet. All possible combinations of B 2, B 3,

C 1 , and C 3 are represented in these four definitions. These designa­ tions represent the following elements.

A. Audience

3. Extra-college

Purpose

2. Communicator directed-pedigogic

3. Receiver directed

£j fiflfltm t

1. Entertainment

3. Information-non-instructional

The intended audience for Group 2*s ideal station would be those people not affiliated with the university. The purpose of the

station should be either to respond directly to the needs of these extra-college listeners or to provide programs for them while emphasiz­

ing the laboratory possibilities of the station. The programming of

this ideal station should be entertaining or non-instructional educa­ tional. The highest point biserial correlation on this table is item

31. Item 31 defines the ideal station as a laboratory which programs

informal educational materials to people outside the university com­

m unity.

Group 2 significantly rejects item 6 as a definition for an

ideal station. Item 6 defines the ideal station with facet elements

A 2 B 2 C 1, which are described as follows.

A j Aydfomeq

2. Intra-c ollege 98 &« Bmaafls 2. Communicator directed-pedigogic

C. C ontent

1. Entertainment

This group does not want university affiliated people to be the intended audience for the station. The group does not want a station even as a laboratory facility if its purpose is to provide entertainment programming for the college community.

Table 29 describes the definitions which significantly change between group 2’s conception of the present and an ideal station. A smaller mean indicates that the group wants more of that item in an ideal station than it finds in the present station or the group sees more of an item in WSLN than it would want to see in an ideal station.

There are six items which the group believes would be better definitions for an ideal station than for the present station. The audience facet for these items is divided between elements A 1, A3, and A h , with A 3 appearing most frequently. The group is unified on

changes in the purpose of the station as all six items contained ele­ ment B 3. The content facet was divided between elements C 1, C 2,

and C 3, with C 1 appearing most frequently. These designations repre­

sent the following element title s.

A. Audience

1. Inter-student

3. Extra-college

A. Composite 99

Significant Item Differences TABLE 29 SIGNIFICANT ITEM DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE PRESENT AND AN IDEAL STATION

Significant Differences (minimum t = - 2.132) Item Item Composition Perception having Number t S m aller Mean 1 -0 .8 8 ^ 6 2 -2 .0 6 4 2 3 -0 .6 8 8 3 4 -0 .3 0 1 5 5 -0 .9 3 0 0 6 -1 .5 0 0 0 7 0.7844 8 -0 .6 4 7 0 9 2.7456 A 1 B 3 C 1 Id e a l 10 0.3430 11 2.9815 A 3 B 3 C 1 I d e a l 12 2.2692 A 4 B 3 C 1 I d e a l 13 -0 .2 5 0 0 U -0 .4 3 1 3 15 -1 .9 6 3 9 16 -1 .2 9 9 9 17 -2 .3 3 3 3 A 1 B 2 C 2 P re s e n t 18 -2.9542 A 2 B 2 C 2 P re s e n t 19 -1 .5 0 0 0 20 -1 .4 2 9 0 21 0.3750 22 -0 .4 0 8 3 23 2.8880 A 3 B 3 C 2 I d e a l 2A 0.8165 25 0.5345 26 -1 .6 3 3 3 27 -1 .6 3 3 3 28 0.5346 29 -0 .5897 30 -0 .6 4 7 0 31 1.2911 32 1.4142 33 2.7137 A 1 B 3 C 3 I d e a l 34 -0 .5 8 9 7 35 3.5387 A 3 B 3 C 3 Id e a l 36 1.1180 100

P u rp o se

3. Receiver directed

C. C ontent

1. Entertainment

2. Information-instructional

3. Informational-non-instructional

These significance tests reaffirm the differences in Group 2's perception of the present and an ideal station. The receiver directed purpose facet, for example, is one of the facets for an ideal station.

Conversely, there are two items in which Group 2 scored a significantly lower mean for the present station. The group is saying that it does not want either of these two items to define its ideal station. Item

17 had a facet structure of A 1 B 2 C 2 and item 18 had a structure of

A 2 B 2 C 2. These designations are described as follows.

At Ah4*,W

2. Intra-c ollege

2. Communicator directed-pedigogic

C. C ontent

2. Information-instructional

The significance of these differences suggests that the group does not want an ideal station to be as involved with formal instruc­ tional programming as the present station. This is consistent with

Group 2’s perception of the present and the ideal station. Similarly, the group wants an ideal station to concentrate less on inter-student 101 and intra-college audiences. This finding is also consistent with the analysis of the group's perceptions of the present and an ideal station.

In summary, Group 2 believes the present station exists as a laboratory or social outlet for the communicators. The group thinks these communicators produce formal instructional materials for the sta­ tion. While unable to precisely define the audience, the group tends to believe the intended audience is the students at the college.

An ideal station for Group 2 would provide entertainment and informal educational programs to people not affiliated with the univer­ sity. This station would be primarily listener directed, although it could be a laboratory, if the same audience were served.

Group 3

Group Composition

TABLE 30

CHARACTERISTICS OF SAMPLE MEMBERS AFFILIATED WITH GROUP 3

V a ria b le s of Sampling Structure P erso n University- Influential- M ale- O ccupation Number N on-university N on-influential Female 9 U n iv e rs ity N on-influential Male S en io r 10 University Non-influential Male J u n io r 11 U n iv e rs ity N on-influential Male Sophomore 12 U n iv e rs ity N on-influential Male Freshman

Specific variables of sampling structure appear to be the sig­ nificant criteria for membership in Group 3. Table 30 suggests that this orientation is restricted to university-non-influential-males.

Students happened to be selected to fill this cell in the structured 1 0 2 design. Therefore, Group 3 also suggests the male student orientation toward the station.

Group 3 expresses four significant definitions of the present station. An examination of items 2, 3, 5, and 6, in Table 31 reveals that the group believes the stations intended audience is either described by elements A 1 or A 2 and the station's purpose by B 1 or

B 2. The four possible combinations of these elements are represented in these four items. The content facet is most clearly defined for this group. The group's members unanimously agreed that the content of WSLN is represented by C 1. The titles of the facets described by these symbols are described as follows.

A. Audience

1. Inter-student

2. Intra-college

£* EBEBft9.9

1. Communicator directed-social

2. Communicator directed-pedigogic

C. C ontent

1. Entertainment

Group 3 believes that the present station presents entertain­

ment programs to the college students or possibly to all people affil­

iated with the institution. However, the primary purpose of this sta­

tion is to fu lfill a social or pedigogic need of those who operate the

facility. In essence, the students in this group apparently perceives

the station as a student activity for transmitting entertainment pro­

grams to students and others affiliated with the college. 103

TABLE 31 POINT BISERIAL CORRELATIONS BETWEEN GROUP 3 AND DEFINITION-PRESENT Q-SORT ITEMS

Item Correlation Significant Items (minimum cor, -.296) Number (Decimal omitted) Item Composition Agree or Disagree 1 -3672 A 1 B 1 C 1 Agree 2 -3697 A 2 B 1 C 1 Agree 3 -0611 4 -2378 5 -2960 A 1 B 2 C 1 Agree 6 -2982 A 2 B 2 C 1 Agree 7 3670 A 3 B 2 C 1 D isag ree 8 0487 9 -0449 10 1072 11 4395 A 3 B 3 C 1 Disagree 12 3191 A 4 B 3 C 1 D isag ree 13 1755 14 2122 15 0348 16 0563 17 0126 18 0514 19 2952 20 0862 21 -2821 22 -0555 23 1739 24 -0215 25 -2931 26 -2885 27 0933 28 -2380 29 -1599 30 -1008 31 4042 A 3 B 2 C 3 D isag ree 32 2479 33 -0587 34 0242 35 4652 A 3 B 3 C 3 D isag ree 36 1123 10A

However, Group 3’s definition of the present station is not based on the entertainment content element. Three of the station defin­ itions which were significantly rejected by this group included the C 1 element. Four of the five rejected definitions contained the A 3 ele­ ment, while the remaining item included A A. B 2 and B 3 were about equally divided among the five rejected definitions. These designa­ tions represent the following ideas.

A. Audience

3. Extra-college

A> Composite

Ej Purpose

2. Communicator directed-pedigogic

3. Receiver directed

C. C ontent

1. Entertainment

2. Information-non-instructi onal

These rejected definitions indicate that Group 3*s conception of the present station is primarily determined by the intended audience.

The group contends that the intended audience for the station does not include people unaffiliated with the college or everyone in the com­ munity. This contention reaffirms the group*s positive definition that the station audience is college affiliated.

The group also reaffirms its belief that the purpose of the station is for the communicator instead of the receiver. The receiver directed element, B 3, was present in four of the five definitions with which Group 3 significantly disagrees. The group most significantly 105 disagrees with definition 35. This item defines the present station as a receiver directed facility which is programming informal educational or cultural materials to people unaffiliated with the college.

Item 16 on Table 32 lists Group 3's definition of an ideal station. This item is rebuilt on facet element combination A A B 1 C 2 which represents the following ideas.

A. Audience

A• Composite

B. Purpose

1. Communicator directed-social

C. C ontent

2. Information-instructional

Group 3's ideal station would be operated by students as an extra-curricular social activity. This station would program formal instructional materials to everyone in the community.

The definitions for an ideal station contained in items 11 and

35 would be rejected by Group 3. Audience element A 3 and purpose ele­ ment B 3 are built into both of these items. The two definitions differ

only on content since item 11 specifies C 1, while item 35 uses C 3.

These element designations are listed as follows.

A* AMflfaMW

3. Extra-college

B. P urpose

3. Receiver directed C. C ontent 1. Entertainment 3. Information-non-instructional 106

TABLE 32

POINT BISERIAL CORRELATIONS BETWEEN GROUP 3 AND DEFINITION-IDEAL Q-SORT ITEMS

Correlation Significant Items (minimum cor. -.296) (Decimal omitted) Item Composition Agree or Disagree 1 -1662 2 -1703 3 1148 4 -2037 5 -2689 6 -2103 7 2528 8 -2596 9 0823 10 2420 11 3439 A 3 B 3 C 1 Disagree 12 1236 13 -0451 H -0414 15 0675 16 -3004 A 4 B 1 C 2 Agree 17 -1452 18 -0976 19 2019 20 0840 21 -1945 22 -2696 23 1868 2A 0137 25 -0860 26 -0960 27 2217 28 -0485 29 -C776 30 -0946 31 1875 32 0576 33 0151 34 -0269 35 3026 A 3 B 3 C 3 Disagree 36 0554 107

An ideal station for this group would not exist to serve the needs of people who are unaffiliated with the college. The group would not be interested in such a station if the programming was directed by the entertainment or non-instructional educational needs of these non­

college listeners.

Table 33 lists four items which were significantly different in Group 3's perception of an ideal station compared with its percep­ tion of the present facility. The items are somewhat mixed in their

facet structure because no definite pattern appears to have developed.

In fact, only elements A k , B 1, and G 1 were missing from these arrays. Therefore, the following elements were present in these items.

A* Aa&enc.s

1. Inter-student

2. Intra-college

3. Extra-college

P u rp o se

2. Communicator directed-pedigogic

3. Receiver directed

C. C ontent

2. Information-instructional

3. Information-non-instructional

The large number of elements suggests that Group 3 has no

specific rationale for its significant differences between the present

and an ideal station. Apparently, the group would like all of these

elements operating more intensely in an ideal station. 108

Significant Item Differences TABLE 33 SIGNIFICANT ITEM DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE PRESENT AND AN IDEAL STATION

Significant Differences (minimum T = - 2.353) Item Item Composition Perception having Number t S m aller Mean 1 -1 .0 9 3 2 2 - 1 .4 0 0 0 3 -1 .1 2 7 5 4 -0 .7 7 4 6 5 -0 .7 2 7 6 6 -0 .4 8 0 3 7 0.2641 8 0.4407 9 -3.0000 A 1 B 3 C 1 Present 10 -1 .0 9 5 5 11 0.0000 12 0.8075 13 -1 .5 6 7 0 U -0 .5 7 7 3 15 0.0000 16 1.1947 17 2.4503 A 1 B 2 C 2 Id e a l 18 1.7322 19 2.6117 A 3 B 2 C 2 Id e a l 20 0.3647 21 0.5223 22 3.6564 A 2 B 3 C 2 Id e a l 23 1.1275 24 0 .6 6 2 2 25 -0 .9 0 4 5 - 26 -0 .9 5 0 6 27 -1 .2 6 0 2 28 -1.7321 29 -0 .7747 30 -0.2641 31 0.9259 32 0.7567 33 -0 .4 2 0 0 34 0.0000 35 3.0000 A 3 B 3 C 3 Id e a l 36 2.3241 109

Group 3 gave the definition described in item 9 a significantly smaller mean in the present station perception. This indicates that the group wants to see less of this item in an ideal station. Item 9 is constructed from A 1 B 3 C 1 which represents the following concepts.

A. Audience

1. Inter-student

B. Purpose

3. Receiver directed

C ontent

1. Entertainment

This group apparently wants less emphasis on an entertainment program service directed by the desires of student listeners. This is particularly interesting because the membership of this group consists of four male students.

In summary, Group 3 believes that WSLN is programming enter­ tainment to a student or college affiliated audience to fu lfill a com­ municator directed social or pedigogic purpose. An ideal station for the group would also be a social activity for the communicators. How­ ever, Group 3 would like an ideal station's programming to be directed toward instructional purposes for everyone in the community.

Table 34 suggests that a specific combination of sampling structure variable is required for Group 4 membership. All members in

this group were drawn from the non-university—influential—male cell

in the sample design. This phenomenon suggests that influential men

in the community have a common perception of the station which is dif­

ferent from the perceptions of others. 110

Group A

Group Composition

TABLE 3A

CHARACTERISTICS OF SAMPLE MEMBERS AFFILIATED WITH GROUP A

Variables of Sampling Structure P erso n University- Influential M ale- O ccupation Number N on-university N on-influential Female 17 N on-university Influential Male Government E x ecu tiv e 18 N on-university Influential Male Media Executive 19 Non-university Influential Male Media Executive 20 Non-university Influential Male M in iste r

Table 35 lists only one significant definition which Group A applies to the present station. The group defines the station with the A 3 B 2 C 2 facet elements which represent the following ideas.

Aj AM&aaag 3. Extra-college

B. Purpose

2. Communicator directed-pedigogic

C. C ontent

2. Information-instructional

This combination of elements describes a laboratory station which programs instructional materials to people who are not affiliated with the college. It is interesting to observe that Group A t whose members are unaffiliated with the oollege, believes the station is pro­ gramming primarily to people who are unaffiliated with the institution.

There were no significant definition of an ideal station ex­ pressed by Group A • Apparently the members of this group define the 111

Significant Group Definitions

TABLE 35

POINT BISERIAL CORRELATIONS BETWEEN GROUP 4 AND DEFINITION-PRESENT Q-SORT ITEMS

Item Correlation Significant Items (minimum cor. -.296) Number (Decimal omitted) Item Composition Agree or Disagree 1 1625 2 2932 3 1565 A 0549 5 0423 6 2176 7 -0440 8 0487 9 -0449 10 -0834 11 -0688 12 0355 13 -0715 14 -0948 15 0348 16 1368 17 -1390 18 -1543 19 -3314 A 3 B 2 C 2 Agree 20 0862 21 0328 22 -2776 23 -1971 24 -0559 25 2228 26 0962 27 0435 28 0793 29 0658 30 -0388 31 0560 32 0391 33 0755 34 -0242 35 -0930 36 -0736 112

TABLE 36

POINT BISERIAL CORRELATIONS BETWEEN GROUP 4 AND DEFINITION-IDEAL Q-SORT ITEMS

Item Correlation Significant Items (minimum cor. -.296) Number (Decimal omitted) Item Composition Agree or Disagree 1 1158 2 -0824 3 0313 A 1067 5 -0244 6 -0981 7 0399 8 1038 9 -0494 10 -0484 11 -C794 12 1236 13 -1053 14 -2069 15 -1817 16 -1001 17 -1452 18 -0976 19 -1673 20 1260 21 0648 22 -0495 23 1429 24 -0229 25 1433 26 1784 27 0190 28 -0873 29 1481 30 -0946 31 -1406 32 1153 33 1363 34 1450 35 -1009 36 0923 113 present station sim ilarly, but have different conceptions of an ideal facility. Since there was little group agreement on the ideal items, none of the point biserial correlations between these items and the group were significant.

Table 37 lists two definitions which significantly changed be­ tween Group A* s perception of the present and its perception of an ideal station. The group expects the facets forming these two items to be operating stronger in an ideal station than they appear in the pres­ ent station. Item 27 had the higher of the two correlations with the group and contained facet elements A 3 B 1 C 3. Item 6 was composed of A 2 B 2 C 1. These designations represent the following elements.

A. Audience

2. Inter-college

3. Extra-college

B. Purpose

1. Communicator directed-social

2. Communicator directed-pedigogic

£. fianfcagt

1. Entertainment

3. Information-non-instructional

The significance of item 27 suggests that the group would like

an ideal station to offer more non-instructional educational programs

for people unaffiliated with the college. This item also indicates that

an ideal station would be more of a social outlet for those participat­

ing in the station's activities. Item 6, however, implies that the

group thinks an ideal station should be more of a laboratory for the S£gqi£igant.Jt3ffl,.I&ff eggnogs TABLE 37 SIGNIFICANT ITEM DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE PRESENT AND AN IDEAL STATION

Significant Differences (minimum t = - 2.353) Item Item Composition Perception having Number t S m aller Mean 1 -1.1921 2 0.7746 3 0.2641 4 0.0000 5 -1 .7 3 2 5 6 2.4503 A 2 B 2 C 1 Ideal 7 -0 .5 7 7 3 8 -1 .4 1 4 2 9 -0 .5 2 2 3 10 -1 .7 3 2 5 11 -0 .7 7 4 7 12 -0 .3 7 7 9 13 0.0000 U 1.1921 15 0.9649 16 2.0496 17 0.3333 18 0.0000 19 0.0000 20 0.3333 21 1.0000 22 -1 .5 6 7 0 23 -1 .0 0 0 0 24 0 .7 7 4 6 25 0.0000 26 - 0.7 7 4 6 27 3.0000 A 3 B 1 C 3 Id e a l 28 1.0955 29 - 0 .5 2 2 2 30 0.0000 31 1 .4 1 4 2 32 0.0000 33 -0 .5 7 7 3 34 -1 .2 1 2 7 35 0.3973 36 1.0000 115 communicators. The elements structuring this item also indicate that more entertainment programs for college affiliated people should be aired. Apparently Group A contends that all of these elements would be operating more intensely in an ideal facility.

In summary, Group A believes that the primary purpose of the present station is to provide a laboratory experience for students while transmitting formal instructional programs to those in the com­ munity who are unaffiliated with the college. The people in this group do not concur on a group definition for an ideal station. However,

some inferences concerning an ideal facility can be made by analyzing the group*s significance tests.

The significance of the differences in definition item mean

scores between the sample perception of the present station and its perception of an ideal station are listed in Table 38. It must be

emphasized that these t values reflect differences in the two percep­

tions and must not be construed as a basis of a sample orientation.

However, these t scores may be employed as an indication of the items which the sample would change to make the present station more like an

ideal facility.

Table 39 lists the six definition items which have signifi­

cantly lower means on the ideal perception compared with the present

perception.

The greater the t score on these items, the greater the mean

difference toward an ideal station. These items are listed in descend­

ing order of significance. 116

Sample Analysis

TABLE 38 SIGNIFICANT ITEM DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE PRESENT AND AN IDEAL STATION

Significant Differences (minimum t = - 1.695) Item Composition Perception having S m aller Mean 1 -2 .1 0 5 3 A 1 B 1 C 1 P re s e n t 2 - 2.4121 A 2 B 1 C 1 P re s e n t 3 - 1.0000 4 “ 1.3841 5 “ 2.2042 A 1 B 2 C 1 P re s e n t 6 -1 .1 3 9 8 7 -0 .4 3 6 3 8 -1 .7515 A 4 B 1 C 1 P re s e n t 9 -1 .2 8 3 3 10 -1 .1 3 8 4 11 -1.4671 12 0.4978 13 -0 .3 0 6 6 U 0.6412 15 0.5752 16 1.8585 A 4 B 1 C 2 I d e a l 17 0.5374 18 0.5969 19 1.8382 A 3 B 2 C 2 Id e a l 20 1.4027 21 2.4447 A 1 B 3 C 2 Id e a l 22 1.4352 23 3.8067 A 3 B 3 C 2 I d e a l 24 2.5857 A 4 B 3 C 2 Id e a l 25 -0 .9823 26 -1 .8 1 9 4 A 2 B 1 C 3 P re s e n t 27 -2 .3 5 0 8 A 2 B 1 C 3 P re s e n t 28 -0 .3 4 3 4 29 -0 .9 9 0 4 30 -0 .8 7 5 4 31 -0 .1 1 0 5 32 1.2186 33 -0 .3 7 2 9 34 - 0.8668 35 0.3158 36 2.6871 A 4 B 3 C 3' Id e a l 117

TABLE 39

COMPOSITION OF DEFINITION ITEM3 HAVING SIGNIFICANTLY LOWER MEANS FOR IDEAL STATION RANKED IN DESCENDING ORDER OF SIGNIFICANCE

Item Item Composition Number Audience Purpose Content 23 Extra-college Receiver Information- instructional 36 Composite Receiver Inf ormat i on-non- instructional 24 Composite R eceiver Information- instructional 21 Inter-student R eceiv er Information- instructional 16 Composite Communicator-social Information- instructional 19 Extra-c oliege Communicator-pedigogic Information- instructional

The sample apparently is advocating more programming for an intended audience which is outside the college community or at least compromising by programming for everyone. The sampled ideal station would be more directed by the needs of the listeners than is the pres­ ent station. Furthermore, the sample wants an ideal station to engage in more inform ation-instructional or formal educational programming than the present station is doing.

Table 40 lists the six definition items which have significantly lower means on the sample’s present station perception compared with the

ideal station perception.

The greater the t scores on these items, the greater the mean

difference toward the present station. Therefore, the items which are 118 most significant are least desirable in this sample * s perception of an ideal station.

TABLE AO

COMPOSITION OF DEFINITION ITEMS HAVING SIGNIFICANTLY LOWER MEANS FOR PRESENT STATION RANKED IN DESCENDING ORDER OF SIGNIFICANCE

Item Item Composition Number Audience Purpose Content 2 Intra-college Communicator-social Entertainment 27 Intra-college Communicator-social Information-non- instructional 5 Inter-student Communicator-pedigogic Entertainment 1 Inter-student Communicator-social Entertainment 26 Intra-college Communicator-soc ia l Information-non- instructional 8 Composite Communicator-pedigogic Entertainment

The sample would like an ideal station program to concentrate less on intra-college or inter-student audiences.

This finding concurs with the statement listed in Table 30 that

the sample wants an ideal station to seek an audience outside the in­

stitution more than the present station has done. The sample hopes

that an ideal station would concentrate less on communicator directed

social and pedigogic purposes than is presently being done. This sup­

ports the statement that the sample wants an ideal station to be more

directed by the needs of the listeners. The sample would also like an

ideal station to concentrate less on entertainment and information-non-

instructional or cultural programming than the present station has done.

This ideal supports the contention that the sample would like more for­

mal instructional programming in an ideal station. 119

M tiW e Q?anP..,.An

Group 1

Group Composition

TABLE 41

CHARACTERISTICS OF SAMPLE MEMBERS AFFILIATED WITH GROUP 1

Variables of Sampling Structure P erson University- Influential M ale- O ccupation Number N on-univer s ity N on-influential Female 7 University Influential Female A sso c ia te P ro fe s so r 14 U n iv e rs ity Non-influential Female Junior

.15. - U n iv e rs ity N on-influential Female Sophomore 19 Non-university Influential Male Media ''ecutive 25 Non-university Non-influential Male Retired Barber 29 N on-univer sity N on-influential Female Housewife- husband plant w orker

The first attitude group formed by the linkage analysis is

described in Table 41. The variables used for selecting the sample

were obviously not criteria for membership in this group. There were

eight possible combinations of variables in the sampling structure and

five of them appeared in this group of six people. Therefore, there

are no university, influence, or sex characteristics which may be gen­

eralized to the group. This phenomenon is particularly significant be­

cause the formation of the first group in a linkage analysis is begun

with the two people who correlate higher than any other pair in the

sample. Apparently this strong agreement is not a function of these

sampling variables. 120

Significant Group Attitudes TABLE 42 POINT BISERIAL CORRELATIONS BETWEEN GROUP 1 AND ATTITUDE-PRESENT Q-SORT ITEMS

Item Correlation Significant Items (minimum cor. -.296) Number (Decimal omitted) Item Composition Agree or Disagree 1 0840 2 -0746 3 -1190 4 -2220 5 -0213 6 1371 7 -0067 8 -1265 9 -0181 10 1060 11 -1553 12 1205 13 2466 14 0274 15 1603 16 0722 17 -1078 18 0252 19 -2765 20 2143 21 0067 22 1246 23 2311 24 0527 25 C736 26 -1448 27 -1637 28 -0305 29 1128 30 -0272 31 0824 32 -2362 33 -0498 34 0919 35 -0820 36 -2807 121

There were no significant attitude items for the present sta­ tion expressed by Group 1. The linkage analysis indicates that the members of this group correlate highly on the array of attitude items, but no dimension of this attitude was particularly unique when compared with the rest of the sample. This group's lack of significant attitude items may be an attitude orientation in itself. Group 1's apparent indifference toward the present station may represent the feelings of a substantial group in the population.

The group expresses several significant dimensions of its a tti­ tude toward an ideal station as displayed in Table 43. The group be­ lieves that an ideal station would engender both funny and sober feel­ ings from those in the community. It is interesting that these antonyms were both significant. An explanation for this phenomenon might sug­ gest that Group 1 wants an ideal station to provide variety in its pro­ gramming so both the emotions of humor and soberness would be stim ulated.

If a choice of the alternatives of humor or soberness is requested, item

11, funny, correlated much more highly than item 12, sober.

Group 1 selected four items with which it would disagree con­

cerning an ideal station. This group would definitely not appreciate

an ideal station as it ranked most highly in the disagree column. The

group does not think an ideal station would promote peace or tranquility

in a community. Furthermore, this group would not be tolerant of an

ideal station, nor would it be dependent upon it.

These dimensions of an attitude toward an ideal station might be

difficult to explain. However, there are two plausible explanations

for this situation. First, it is possible that the members have an 122

TABLE A3

POINT BISERIAL CORRELATIONS BETWEEN GROUP 1 AND ATTITUDE-IDEAL Q-SORT ITEMS

Item Correlation Significant Items (minimum cor. -.296) Number (Decimal omitted) Item Composition Agree or Disagree 1 3861 Appreciation Disagree 2 -2589 3 -1727 A 1868 5 -1879 6 1380 7 3085 Peace Disagree 8 -1703 9 0778 10 -130A 11 -A093 Funny Agree 12 -2975 Sober Agree 13 1883 1A “ 07 50 15 1807 16 -1788 17 -2A1A 18 0961 19 335A Tolerance Disagree 20 -2AA5 21 -0170 22 1169 23 1 030 2A 3207 Dependent Disagree 25 0167 26 -1837 27 1723 28 -0A86 29 12A0 30 1553 31 -1257 32 -2A11 33 -0096 3A 00A8 35 -0176 36 2353 123 unfavorable attitude toward educational broadcasting with stuffiness, dullness, etc. Therefore, the group may believe that it would not like what is supposed to be considered an ideal station.

A second explanation for this unusual array of ideal items may be peculiar to the case study institution. Relations between Ohio

Wesleyan and the citizens of Delaware have not been particularly con­ genial. Group 1 may be suggesting that it considers an ideal station a facility on which to vent its emotions about the institution. In other words, the group believes that the station should be a specific target through which to attack the institution. The complaints of tele­ vision interference when WSLN was off the air are examples of this type of behavior.

T able L h lists those items on which there was a significant dif­ ference between Group 1*s attitude toward the present and an ideal sta­ tion. The attitude dimensions of "unenvy," selflessness, flexibility, professional, stimulation, and confidence, changed significantly toward the ideal station. In essence Group 1*s attitude was moving toward a more socially desirable station for an ideal facility. This attitude

shift is reaffirmed by observing that the significant attitude concepts

of conflict and unsophi3tication were significantly more prevalent in

Group 1 's perception of the present station than in its perception of

an ideal station. However, tolerance was also rated significantly more

favorably in the present than in an ideal statement. This phenomenon

may further suggest that Group 1 does not want to be tolerant of an

ideal station. As bizarre as this hypothesis may appear, it would be a rational explanation to some of the public relations problems which

have confronted WSLN. 124

Significant Item Differences TABLE 44 SIGNIFICANT ITEM DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE PRESENT AND AN IDEAL STATION

Significant Differences (minimum t = - 2.015) Item Item Composition Perception having Number t S m aller Mean 1 1.1851 2 -1 .5 9 9 4 3 0.4060 4 -1 .4 5 0 9 5 1.5472 6 -1 .1 0 3 3 7 0.2910 8 -2 .8 8 8 6 Conflict Present 9 0.7453 10 2.3907 "Unenvy" Id e a l 11 -3 .1 5 8 8 Funny Present 12 0.5649 13 0.7905 14 2.0703 S e lf l e s s I d e a l 15 3.2638 Flexible Id e a l 16 1.5812 17 2.7937 Professional I d e a l 18 -1 .7 0 1 4 19 -3.9103 Tolerance P re s e n t 20 -1 .6 3 0 7 21 -0.3071 22 -0 .2 2 2 4 23 0.0000 24 0.5583 25 1.5812 26 -0 .5 9 0 6 27 4.5402 Stimulating Id e a l 28 -1 .7 7 2 0 29 0.5198 30 -1 .3 4 8 5 31 2.9533 C onfidence Id e a l 32 1.3999 33 0.7558 34 -1 .9 7 6 5 35 -1 .2 3 8 4 36 -2.0871 Unsophisticated Present 125

In summary, Group 1 is composed of six persons who do not share similar cells in the sampling structure. This group apparently possess a common attitude toward the present station of "No opinion," as no dimensions of its attitude were significant. However, the group appears to have an unfavorable attitude toward an ideal station. This finding may be because the group has an unfavorable attitude toward educational broadcasting, or because members in this group wish to use the station as a vehicle to vent their feelings toward the institution.

Group 2

Group Composition

TABLE 45

CHARACTERISTICS OF SAMPLE MEMBERS AFFILIATED WITH GROUP 2

V a ria b le s of Sampling Structure P erson University- Influential- M ale- O ccupation Number Non-university N on-influential Female 1 University Influential Male Major administrator 3 University Influential Female I n s tr u c to r 17 N on-univer sity Influential Male Government e x e c u tiv e 26 N on-university N on-influent ial Male Refrigeration s e rv ic e s 27 N on-university N on-influential Male Recreation leader for another city

Table 45 lists the members of Group 2. An analysis of the sample structure variable for the members of this group reveals no particular pattern. There are four males versus one female in this group, but the group is about evenly divided in the other two sampling 126 categories. Therefore, it is assumed that the attitudes expressed by this group cannot be attributed to any combination of sampling vari­ ables. If any generalizations can be made about the membership of this group, they mast be based on other criteria.

The point biserial correlations for Group 2*s attitude toward

the present station are listed in Table 46. Two dimensions of this

group*s attitude are significant. Group 2 feels that the present sta­

tion is selfish and detrimental to the community. This attitude toward

the station may have been formed when WSLN was experiencing the tele­

vision interference problem. This is the suspected cause of this a tti­

tude as three of the five persons in this group openingly took posi­

tions against the station when the interference occurred. In fact, one

member of this group has repeatedly attempted to either lim it the sta­

tion's activities or to remove WSLN from the campus. Apparently, other

people have a similar orientation toward the station and this is the

basis of the Group 2*s attitude.

More dimensions of Group 2*s attitude can be analyzed by

studying its attitude toward an ideal station. The highest point bi­

serial correlation implying agreement is on the inexpensive item. The

group is consistent on this dimension as it also disagrees that the

ideal station should be expensive to operate. The group also wants an

ideal station to be non-competitive. This desire for a non-competitive

facility is consistent with the group’s disagreement with the concept

of professionalism. However, the group disagrees with the notion that

an ideal station is inappropriate at the college. This group, however,

doubts that it w ill feel confident toward an ideal station. The group 127 Significant Group Attitudes TABLE 46 POINT BISERIAL CORRELATIONS BETWEEN GROUP 2 AND ATTITUDE-PRESENT Q-SORT ITEMS

Item Correlation Significant Items (minimum cor. -.296) Number (Decimal omitted) Item Composition Agree or Disagree 1 0131 2 0401 3 1608 4 1438 5 -2369 6 0442 7 2349 8 0261 _ 9 1136 10 -1221 11 1376 12 -1785 13 -3631 Selfish Agree 14 -0147 15 1093 16 -2060 17 2708 18 0298 19 1994 20 -2548 21 0060 22 1116 23 -1392 24 2187 25 1147 26 -2128 27 1789 28 2351 29 -0719 30 -3623 Detrimental Agree 31 1624 32 -0611 33 -1058 34 -0614 35 -2077 36 1277 128 also feels that there w ill be conflict associated with the station and it w ill be somewhat detrimental to the college.

A compilation of these attitude dimensions is difficult. How­ ever, it may be generalized that this group wants a non-professional non-competitive laboratory facility which would be inexpensive to main­ tain. Members of the group do not expect to have much personal con­ fidence in the programming of the station and expect that it will create some conflict which may be detrimental to the institution. How­ ever, the group does feel that such a station is appropriate, even con­ sidering the problems which the group suspects w ill be associated with the station.

The mean scores were significantly lower for Group 2’s attitude toward the dimensions of selfish and intolerance for the present sta­ tion than they were for an ideal station. The group members apparently want an ideal facility to be less selfish so they may feel less in­ tolerant of it. Table 48 reveals that the group wants an ideal station

to be more flexible and more stimulating than it has found the present

station. Group 2 would also like to be more dependent upon an ideal

station and would want to envy it more than it envies the present sta­

tion. Recall that Table 48 represents significant shifts on these

items. However, as Table 47 reveals, many of the items did not shift

significantly enough to become an attitude dimension for the group's

ideal station.

In summary, Group 2 is composed of a variety of different people.

These people believe that the present station is selfish and detrimental

to the community. Ideally, they would like an inexpensive, non-profes­ sional station at the campus. They realize that such a station would 129

TABLE 47

POINT BISERIAL CORRELATIONS BETWEEN GROUP 2 AND ATTITUDE-IDEAL Q-SORT ITEMS

Item Correlation Significant Items (minimum cor. -.296) Number (Decimal omitted) Item Composition Agree or Disagree 1 0451 2 -0591 3 1393 4 0143 5 4437 Expensive Disagree 6 -4786 Inexpensive Agree 7 2673 8 -3411 C o n flic t Agree 9 0697 10 0853 11 0629 12 2535 13 2287 U -0134 15 -0576 16 1815 17 5649 Professional D isagree 18 -1893 19 -2651 20 -1522 21 -3774 N on-c ompetitive Agree 22 -0278 23 -2584 24 -0639 25 -2250 26 3621 Inappropriate Disagree 27 2063 28 -1551 29 0667 30 -4264 Detrimental Agree 31 4115 C onfidence D isag ree 32 -0C78 33 -0773 34 -1051 35 -0360 36 -0510 130

Significant Item Differences TABLE 48 SIGNIFICANT ITEM DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE PRESENT AND AN IDEAL STATION

Significant Differences (minimum t = - 2.132) Item Item Composition Perception having Number t S m aller Mean 1 1.6000 2 -1 .3 2 3 4 3 0.2325 4 0.5828 5 -1 .0 0 0 0 6 0.0000 7 1.0367 8 -1 .6 2 5 0 9 3.1625 Envy I d e a l 10 -1 .4 1 4 2 11 0.0000 12 -1 .9 6 3 9 13 -2 .9 5 4 2 S e lf is h P re s e n t U 1.4255 15 2.4495 Flexible Ideal 16 1.2473 17 1.6165 18 -1 .1953 19 0.1516 20 -4 .4313 Intolerance P re se n t 21 1.1586 22 0.2721 23 1.3241 24 3.0551 Dependent I d e a l 25 1.7569 26 1.6771 27 2.9157 Stimulating Ideal 28 -0 .4 0 8 3 29 0.0000 30 -0 .7 8 4 4 31 2.0583 32 -2 .0 5 8 3 33 -0 .9 3 0 0 34 -1 .7 5 4 2 35 0.8018 36 0.8451 131 cause some conflict and would be somewhat detrimental to the institu­ tion, but they feel it is still appropriate.

The members of Group 3 are described in Table 49. Specific sampling variable combinations are apparently not criteria for member­ ship in this group because the five group members come from five differ­ ent cells in the sample design. Therefore, membership in Group 3 is based on factors other than university affiliation, influence, or sex.

Group 3

Group Composition

TABLE 49

CHARACTERISTICS OF SAMPLE MEMBERS AFFILIATED WITH GROUP 3

V a ria b le s of Sampling Structure P erson University- Influential M ale- O ccupation Number N on-university N on-influent ia l Female 4 U n iv e rs ity Influential Male A s s is ta n t P ro fe s so r 5 U n iv e rs ity Influential Female Maj or Administrator 12 U n iv e rs ity N on-influential Male Freshman 20 Non-university Influential Male M in iste r 32 Non-university N on-influent ial Female Teacher

Table 50 lists the significant dimensions of Group 3*s attitude toward the present station. The most significant point biserial corre­ lations signifying Group 3*s agreement were on the "dull* item. The group also thinks the present station is amateurish and non-competitive.

Furthermore, this group disagrees with the item which suggests an appre­

ciation of the station. 132 Significant Group Attitudes TABLE 50 POINT BISERIAL CORRELATIONS BETWEEN GROUP 3 AND ATTITUDE-PRESENT Q-SORT ITEMS

Item Correlation Significant Items (minimum cor. -.296) Number (Decimal omitted) Item Composition Agree or Disagree 1 3392 Appreciation Disagree 2 0401 3 1054 4 -1499 5 -1323 6 -1523 7 1193 8 -0575 9 -1461 10 -1593 11 -2234 12 -0774 13 0058 14 1032 15 0682 16 1284 17 0203 18 -3173 Amateurish Agree 19 1181 20 1548 21 -3394 Non-competitive Agree 22 -0832 23 0113 24 2599 25 0173 26 1194 27 0880 28 -4 6 4 6 Dull Agree 29 2439 30 0016 31 -0148 32 0141 33 0574 34 1782 35 -0063 36 0812 133

In e sse n c e , Group 3 f in d s WSIW's programmingrather amateurish and dull. It is not competitive with other radio stations and the group does not appreciate it.

There were only two dimensions of Group 3*s attitude toward an ideal station which were significant. Table 51 suggests that the group members agree that an ideal station would be liberal and disagree that they would feel intolerant toward it. Although the group did not have enough significant items to make generalizations about its attitude to­ ward the ideal station, these concepts are somewhat meaningful when the group*s concepts of the present station are recalled. The dullness and amateurishness of the present station are in contrast to the liberal nature and tolerant feelings of the group toward an ideal station.

The most significant scores on Table 52 were on the dull item and on the inexpensive item. The group had a lower mean score for each of these items in the present station Q-sort. The group, therefore, wanted an ideal station to be more expensive and less dull. This find­ ing is reenforced by the significant difference of the expensive item toward an ideal station.

Group 3 also wants an ideal station to be less amateurish and more professional. Furthermore, the group resents the present station.

The group found more conflict in the present station than it would want in an ideal station.

The group apparently wants to appreciate the ideal station. It wants the station to have the money necessary to provide a flexible pro­ fessional format. However, the members of this group do not want the station to create as much conflict as the present station has caused, nor do they want an ideal station to be as dull as the present facility. 134

TABLE 51

POINT BISERIAL CORRELATIONS BETWEEN GROUP 3 AND ATTITUDE-IDEAL Q-SORT ITEMS

Correlation Significant Items (minimum cor. -.296) (Decimal omitted) Item Composition Agree or Disagree 1 -0992 2 0019 3 -3249 Liberal Agree 4 -2725 5 -0949 6 -1011 7 -0034 8 1248 9 -0790 10 0246 11 0629 12 -1209 13 -0712 U 0941 15 -0049 16 1815 17 0293 18 0861 19 -0615 20 4484 Intolerance Disagree 21 -0431 22 0657 23 2215 24 -0019 25 -0522 26 1113 27 -1576 28 0122 29 2444 30 -2820 31 -1781 32 0921 33 0876 34 -0231 35 0246 0094 135

Significant Item Differences TABLE 52 SIGNIFICANT ITEM DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE PRESENT AND AN IDEAL STATION

Significant Differences (minimum t = - 2.132) Item Item Composition Perception having Number t Smaller Ms an 1 3.1378 Appreciation I d e a l 2 -3.2550 Resentment P re s e n t 3 2.8284 4 0.2407 5 2.6666 E xpensive I d e a l 6 “ 4.0000 Inexpensive P re se n t 7 1.3270 8 -3.9201 Conflict P re s e n t 9 0.5897 10 -1 .8 2 5 8 11 -2 .1 0 8 3 12 -0 .3 4 3 0 13 0.3015 n 1.1239 15 3.4745 F le x ib le Id e a l 16 0.0000 17 3.2072 Professional Ideal 18 -3.0292 Amateurish Present 19 -1 .2 0 6 0 20 -1 .7 0 0 8 21 -1.5811 22 -1 .0367 23 -0 .8 8 5 6 24 1.6059 25 1.0415 26 -0 .4 0 8 2 27 1.9756 28 -4 .0 0 0 0 D ull P re se n t 29 0.7669 30 0.8018 31 1.4715 32 -0 .7 8 4 4 33 -1 .0 0 0 0 34 -1 .5 0 0 0 35 2.0925 36 0.8846 136

In summary, Group 3 is composed of a heterogeneous group of people. These people find the present station to be dull, amateurish, and non-competitive. They do not appreciate it. They want an ideal station to be liberal and tolerant. The group has a significant number of attitude items which change from its concept of the present station to its concept of an ideal facility.

Group 4

Group Composition

TABLE 53

CHARACTERISTICS OF SAMPLE MEMBERS AFFILIATED WITH GROUP 4

Variables of Sampling Structure P erson University- Influential M ale- O ccupation Number N on-amiver sity N on-influential Female 13 U n iv e rs ity N on-influential Female S en io r 18 Non-university Influential Male Media executive 31 N on-university N on-influential Female H ousewife-husband i s p a in te r

The three members of Group 4 listed in Table 53 each come from different cells in the sampling structure. The variables of university affiliation, influence, and sex do not link the senior student, media

executive, and housewife together in a meaningful way. However, the

linkage analysis indicates that these three people do have a similar attitude toward the station. Apparently they are tied together by vari­ ables other than those selected for the sample's structure.

Table 54 lists only one significant attitude item for Group 4«

Item 35 is termed "sophisticated," and Group 4 disagrees with applying 137

Significant Group Attitudes TABLE 54 POINT BISERIAL CORRELATIONS BETWEEN GROUP A AND ATTITUDE-PRESENT Q-SORT ITEMS

Item Correlation Significant Items (minimum cor. -.296) Number (Decimal omitted) Item Composition Agree or Disagree 1 -2339 2 1393 3 0926 A -2 7 C7 5 -1119 6 1407 7 -1126 8 -1368 9 -0445 10 -0449 11 2558 12 08C7 13 -0072 14 1652 15 -0208 16 -0707 17 0526 18 -1182 19 -1345 20 -1348 21 1001 22 -1592 23 -1641 24 -1442 25 2718 26 -0970 27 1450 28 1612 29 2160 30 0142 31 -1287 32 0761 33 -2112 34 0616 35 3214 Sophisticated Disagree 36 0145 138 this concept to the present station. The group apparently considers the present station unsophisticated. There are no other dimensions of the group's attitude which are sufficiently different from the re­

sponses of the rest of the sample to generate other significant point

biserial correlation.

Group 4's attitude toward an ideal station has five significant

dimensions. This group's ideal station would be rigid, as suggested by

item 16. The group thinks an ideal station should be competitive and

logically disagrees that it should be non-competitive. The group also

does not want to resent an ideal station.

In essence, Group A would like an ideal station to be strong by

being rigid and competitive. However, this station should also be help­

ful to its listeners and should not be resented by the community.

Table 56 lists the five items on which the members of Group A

expressed a significant difference in their attitude between the present

and an ideal station. The group's mean score for item 15, flexible, was

smaller for an ideal station. Therefore, Group A believes that an ideal

station would have more flexibility.

The other four significant items had smaller mean scores for the

present station indicating that the group wants these items operating

less strongly for an ideal station than they exist in the present station.

These items, listed in descending order of significance, were conflict,

non-competitive, inappropriate, and intolerance.

This array of items suggests that the group wants an ideal sta­

tion which has more flexibility than the present facility. However, this

ideal station should also be more competitive and more appropriate for 139 TABLE 55

POINT BISERIAL CORRELATIONS BETWEEN GROUP 4 AND ATTITUDE-IDEAL Q-SORT ITEMS

Item Correlation Significant Items (minimum cor. -.296) Number (Decimal omitted) Item Composition Agree or Disagree 1 1236 2 3205 Resentment Disagree 3 2313 A -2323 5 0267 6 0588 7 -0295 8 0933 9 1447 10 -0118 11 -0783 12 1117 13 -0234 U 2177 15 0226 16 -3324 Rigid Agree 17 0052 18 1501 19 -1981 20 0026 21 3010 Non-competitive Disagree 22 -3003 Competitive Agree 23 -2759 24 -1713 25 -0964 26 0957 27 -0789 28 1064 29 -3045 Helpful Agree 30 1490 31 0791 32 -0058 33 2503 34 -2012 35 -0118 36 0071 Significant Item Differences TABLE 56 SIGNIFICANT ITEM DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE PRESENT AND AN IDEAL STATION

Significant Differences (minimum t = - 2.920) Item Item Composition Perception having Number t S m aller Mean 1 -0 .3 7 7 9 2 -1 .7 9 6 0 3 -0 .9998 4 -0 .4999 5 1.7322 6 -1 .0 0 0 0 7 1.7322 8 -5 .0 0 0 0 Conflict Present 9 0.0000 10 -1 .0 0 0 0 11 0.6933 12 -0 .2294 13 0.0000 U 1.3867 15 3.4644 F le x ib le Id e a l 16 1.3093 17 1.5118 18 -1 .2 9 9 0 19 -2.4997 20 -3.0506 Intolerance Present 21 -4.9988 Non-competitive P re se n t 22 0.0000 23 0.1643 24 1.1094 25 1.3093 26 -4 .9988 Inappropriate Present 27 2.6456 28 -1 .5118 29 1.5118 30 -0 .5 5 4 6 31 1.7322 32 -0 .2 7 7 3 33 -1 .8 3 5 2 34 -1 .7 3 2 2 35 2.5234 36 0.2294 U 1 the institution. Furthermore, it should create less conflict than the present station has created, so the group could be more tolerant of it.

In summary, Group 4 is composed of three people who have dif­ ferent sampling characteristics. The attitude toward the present sta­ tion expressed by this group is somewhat undefined, but the group does not think the station is sophisticated. The group believes that an ideal station would be strong by being rigid and competitive, while it is also being helpful to its listeners.

Group 5

Group Composition

TABLE 57

CHARACTERISTICS OF SAMPLE MEMBERS AFFILIATED WITH GROUP 5

Variables of Sampling Structure P erson University- Influential M ale- O ccupation Number N on-university N on-influential Female 3 University Influential Male A sso c ia te P ro fe s s o r 22 N on-university Influential Female Community Serv­ ices Executive 2A Non-university Influential Female Church Leader

The three people described in Table 57 are affiliated with

Group 5. All members of this group are influential people as defined by the sampling variable. However, these people are not similarly linked by the university affiliation or sex variables. Therefore, the attitudes expressed by Group 5 may suggest the attitudes of a group of somewhat heterogeneous, but influential people in the population. U 2

Significant Group Attitudes TABLE 58 POINT BISERIAL CORRELATIONS BETWEEN GROUP 5 AND ATTITUDE-PRESENT Q-SOKT ITEMS

Item Correlation Significant Items (minimum cor. -.296) Number (Decimal omitted) Item Composition Agree or Disagree 1 -0598 2 -1972 3 -2519 A 2173 5 0834 6 0918 7 -2566 8 1237 9 0849 10 -1839 11 2108 12 0807 13 2226 14 -1285 15 -2771 16 -0112 17 0526 18 2601 19 3212 Tolerance Disagree 20 0507 21 1479 22 -1592 23 0234 24 -1442 25 -1732 26 0582 27 -0813 28 0159 29 -0650 30 3379 Detrimental Disagree 31 1655 32 -1113 33 1445 34 -2369 35 -1176 36 -1012 143

There are two dimensions of Group 5's attitude which are sig­ nificant for the present station. The group disagrees with item 19, which suggests tolerance toward the station. Apparently, this group feels intolerant toward the present station. However, Group 5 also disagrees with item 30, which implies that the station is detrimental to the community.

In essence, the members of Group 5 feel personal intolerance toward the station. On the other hand, they believe that the station is not really detrimental to the community.

Unfortunately, these were the only significant dimensions of

Group 5*3 attitude toward the present station. However, Group 5 should have the least defined attitude because it was the last group to be formed by the linkage analysis.

Table 59 lists three attitude iteks which Group 5 considers significant for an ideal station. The group wants to have confidence in an ideal station. The members of the group, however, wouldn*t want

to feel envious of the station or its staff. The group does not be­ lieve that an ideal station would be detrimental to the community.

In essence, Group 5 wants to place its confidence in an ideal

station, but the group does not want to feel inferior or envious of

the facility. The notion of strong station-audience rapport might be

suggested here. Furthermore, the group does not think an ideal facility

should be detrimental to the community it serves.

There were significant differences between five dimensions of

Group 5*s attitude toward the present station and the corresponding

dimensions of its attitude toward an ideal station. These dimensions 1 kk

TABLE 59

POINT BISERIAL CORRELATIONS BETWEEN GROUP 5 AND ATTITUDE-IDEAL Q-SOHT ITEMS

Correlation Significant Items (minimum cor. -.296) (Decimal omitted) Item Composition Agree or Disagree 1 -2360 2 1686 3 0578 4 -0179 5 -03 A3 6 -0084 7 -0295 8 2591 9 -2258 10 -3139 "Unenvy" Agree 11 2349 12 0340 13 0514 U -2512 15 -1087 16 0931 17 0052 18 -0214 19 2245 20 1689 21 0927 22 0491 23 -1839 2k -0169 25 2623 26 -1542 27 -0142 28 1064 29 0277 30 4188 Detrimental Disagree 31 -3290 Confidence Agree 32 -1925 33 -1605 3 k 1054 35 -0118 0823 ■Sitemffaatrt, Item..BitffiMgnsgq TABLE 60 SIGNIFICANT ITEM DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE PRESENT AND AN IDEAL STATION

Significant Differences (minimum t = - 2.920) Item Item Composition Perception having Number t Smaller Ifean 1 1.3093 2 -2 .8 7 2 9 3 -0 .7 5 5 9 4 1.9998 5 1.2572 6 -1 .0 0 0 0 7 1.0000 8 -1.7321 9 2.0000 10 0.0000 11 0.0000 12 0.0000 13 1.7322 14 1.7322 15 0.8661 16 -0 .4 9 9 9 17 7.9934 Professional Id e a l 18 0.0000 19 -0 .1795 20 -5.1966 Intolerance P re se n t 21 0.0000 22 -1 .7 3 2 2 23 0.3779 24 0.7558 25 -1 .0 0 0 0 26 0.5546 27 5.1966 Stimulating Ideal 28 -1 .3093 29 O.0OOO 30 0.0000 31 4.0000 C onfidence Id e a l 32 -0 .3 7 7 9 33 0.6546 34 -2 .7 4 9 8 35 3.9991 Sophisticated Ideal 36 0.5546 U 6 w ill be discussed in descending order of significance. First, the group feels that an ideal station would be more professional than the present facility. The group also believes that an ideal station would be more stimulating than the present facility. The group*s members also think they would have more confidence in an ideal station and that an ideal facility would be more sophisticated. However, group 5 feels that it is more intolerant of the present station than it would be of an ideal station.

In summary, Group 5 is composed of three influential people.

These people are not tolerant, of the present station, but do not think it is detrimental to the community. They want to place their confidence in an ideal station, but do not want to be envious of it.

They also do not believe an ideal station would be detrimental to the community. The group also has five attitude dimensions which signif­ icantly change between its perceptions of the present and an ideal s t a t i o n .

The significance of the differences in item scores between the sample’s attitude toward the present station and its attitude toward an ideal station are listed in Table 61. It must be emphasized that these scores reflect differences in the two attitude perceptions and they must not be used as a basis of forming a sample orientation. However, these t scores can be employed as an indication of the items which the sample would change to make the present station more like an ideal f a c i l i t y . Table 62 lists the twelve attitude items which have significantly lower means on the ideal perception compared to the present perception of the station. 147

Sample Analysis TABLE 61 SIGNIFICANT ITEM DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE PRESENT AND AN IDEAL STATION

Significant Differences (minimum t = - 1.695) Item Item Composition Perception having Number t Smaller Mean 1 4.3737 Appreciation Id e a l 2 -5 .4539 Resentm ent P re se n t 3 0.5086 4 0.1557 5 4.0307 Expensive Id e a l 6 -3 .8 9 1 8 Inexpensive P re se n t 7 3.5919 Peace Id e a l 8 -7 .3833 Conflict Present 9 3.0525 Envy I d e a l 10 -0.1557 11 -1 .1077 12 -0 .6 4 1 8 13 -0 .1 8 2 9 n 4.5340 S e lf le s s Id e a l 15 7.1633 F le x ib le Id e a l 16 0.8355 17 6.6389 Professional Ideal 18 -4 .1 9 1 5 A m ateurish P re se n t 19 -3 .6 4 9 8 Tolerance Present 20 -5.5481 Intolerance Present 21 -1.0277 22 -1 .0 6 7 5 23 -1.5771 24 3.2971 Dependent Ideal 25 2.4323 Appropriate Id e a l 2 6 -1 .3 1 6 9 27 7.2719 Stimulating Ideal 28 -4 .7 4 0 5 D ull P re se n t 29 1.0675 30 -0 .6 8 3 0 31 5.0268 Confidence Ideal 32 -2 .3 7 3 4 S u sp icio n P re s e n t 33 -1 .4 3 4 2 34 -5.7061 In n o cen t P re s e n t 35 5.2526 Sophisticated Ideal 36 0.7321 TABLE 62

COMPOSITION OF ATTITUDE ITEMS HAVING SIGNIFICANTLY LOWER MEANS FOR IDEAL STATION RANKED IN DESCENDING ORDER OF SIGNIFICANCE

Item Number Item Composition 27 Stimulating 15 F le x ib le 17 Professional 35 Sophisticated 31 C onfidence u S e lf le s s 1 Appreciation 5 E xpensive 7 Peace 24 D ependent 9 Envy 25 Appropriate

The greater the significance, the greater the mean difference toward an ideal station. These items are listed in descending order of significance.

The sample is apparently advocating more stimulating and flex­ ible programming from an ideal station. The members of the sample would want an ideal station to be more professional and sophisticated.

They would like to be able to put more confidence in an ideal station and would like to appreciate it more than they appreciate the present station. They would like an ideal facility to promote peace in the community and be selfless in its goals. These last two items were prob­ ably generated by the television interference problem associated with the present WSLN. 149

It is interesting that the sample would like an ideal station to be more expensive than the present station has been. Apparently, the sample is acquainted with the financial problems associated with educational, radio and assumes that greater financial allocations w ill improve the station.

The sample would also like to be more dependent upon an ideal station than they are on the present facility. In fact, they would like to look up to, or envy, an ideal station more than they do the present station. Finally, the sample would consider an ideal station more appropriate for the college than they find the present station.

Table 63 lists the nine items which have significantly lower means on the sample's present station perception compared to the ideal perception.

TABLE 63

COMPOSITION OF ATTITUDE ITEMS HAVING SIGNIFICANTLY LOWER MEANS FOR PRESENT STATION RANKED IN DESCENDING ORDER OF SIGNIFICANCE

Item Number Item Composition 8 C o n flic t 34 In n o cen t 20 Intolerance 2 R esentm ent 28 D ull 18 Amateurish 6 Inexpensive 19 T o leran ce 32 S u sp ic io n 150

The greater the significance, the greater the mean difference toward the present station. Conversely, the items which are most sig­ nificant are least desirable in an ideal station.

The sample would have less conflict associated with the ideal station than has been associated with the present station. This item was probably also generated from the problems WSLN had with television interference and therefore involves external conflict, rather than con­ flic t in programming. The sample would want an ideal station to be less innocent than the present station has been. The significance of this item can be attributed to the defensive nature of the present station. The station has been defensively claiming innocence concern­ ing the interference problem, and the sample would like less of this attitude reflected in an ideal station. Item 20, intolerance, and item 19, tolerance, are both less desirable for an ideal station. An explanation for this phenomenon is difficult. Possibly, the sample wants to be less concerned about feeling tolerance and intolerance to­ ward the station and to concentrate on other items. The sample wants to feel less resentment against an ideal station than it feels about the present station. This item was undoubtedly generated by the tele­ vision interference difficulty. The sample wants the station's pro­ gramming to be less dull and more professional. This finding is con­ sistent with the sample's desire to have an ideal station more stimu­ lating and professional. The station wants an ideal station to be less inexpensive than the present station has been. This supports the sample's feeling that more money should be spent on an ideal station.

Finally, the sample wants to be less suspicious of an ideal station 151 than it is of the present station. Apparently, the sample wants to place more trust in an ideal facility.

Testing the Hypotheses

Each of the twelve hypotheses of this investigation can now be tested using the data described in this chapter. The hypotheses w ill be stated and accepted or rejected with the information learned from this investigation.

D e fin itio n

D-1. People who define the station may be identified and grouped with all other people possessing a similar definition.

Accepted. The use of McQuitty*s Elementary Linkage Analysis pro­ duced clusters of people who have similar orientations. This investiga­ tion defined a group as a cluster containing a minimum of three persons.

The linkage analysis produced four such groups. Therefore, this hy­ pothesis is accepted.

D-2. The variables of station definition which make each group orientation unique may be described for the present and for an ideal station.

Rejected. The use of point biserial correlations produced signif­ icant group definitions of the present station for all four groups. The point biserial correlations produced significant group definitions for three of the groups concerning their perception of an ideal station.

However, there were no significant group definitions for group 4 'a per­ ception of an ideal station. Therefore, the investigation is incon­ clusive concerning Group 4 'a definition of an ideal station. Although there may be nothing unique about Group 4 'a definition of an ideal facility, since no data was elicited, this hypothesis was rejected. 152

D-3. Each group expressed a significantly different definition toward its concept of the present and its concept of an ideal station.

Rejected, t tests indicating significant differences between the means of each item for the present station and each item for the ideal station were computed. There were significant differences on some items for Groups 2, 3, and However, there was no significant difference between any of the mean scores for Group 1*s items. Group 1 apparently does not think the present station is significantly differ­ ent from an ideal station. Therefore, this hypothesis is rejected.

D-U. The variables causing a significant difference between the present and an ideal definition of the station for each of the groups may be isolated and described.

Accepted, t tests indicating significant differences between the means of each item for the present and for an ideal station were computed. Since this was an item analysis, a measure of significance was obtained on each variable. The items or variables which were sig­ nificantly different for the three groups having significant differences were thereby identified. Therefore, the hypothesis is accepted.

D-5. The entire sample expresses a significant difference be­ tween its definitions of the present and an ideal station.

Accepted, t tests indicating significant differences between the means of each item for the present and for an ideal station were com­ puted over the entire sample. There were significant differences on twelve items. Therefore, this hypothesis is accepted.

D-6. The variables causing a significant difference in defini­ tion between the present station and an ideal station can be isolated and described for the entire sample.

Accepted, t tests indicating significant differences between the means of each item for the present and for an ideal station were 153 computed over the entire sample. Since this was an item analysis, a measure of significance was obtained on each variable. There were twelve variables which were identified to be significantly different between the present and an ideal station. Therefore, this hypothesis is accepted.

A ttitu d e

A-1. People whose attitudes toward the station are similar may be identified and grouped with all other people possessing a similar attitude.

Accepted. The use of McQuitty's Elementary Linkage Analysis produced clusters of people who have similar attitudes. This investi­ gation defined a group as a cluster containing a minimum of three per­ sons. The linkage analysis produced five such groups. Therefore, this hypothesis is accepted.

A-2. The variables of attitude toward the station which made each group orientation unique may be described for the present and for an ideal station.

Rejected. The use of point biserial correlations produced sig­ nificant group attitudes of the station for Groups 2 through 5. How­ ever, there were no significant group attitudes for Group 1*s percep­ tion of the present station. Therefore, the investigation is incon­ clusive concerning Group 1's attitude toward the present station. There were significant point biserial correlations for all group attitudes toward an ideal station. However, since there was no significant item

for Group 1's attitude toward the present station, this hypothesis is r e je c te d .

A-3. Each group expresses a significantly different attitude toward its concept of the present and its concept of an ideal station. 154

Accepted, t test indicating significant differences between the means of each attitude item for the present station and the corres­ ponding attitude item for the ideal station were computed. There were significant differences on some items for all of the groups. There­ fore, this hypothesis is accepted.

A-4. The variables causing a significant difference between the present and an ideal attitude toward the station for each of the groups may be isolated and described.

Accepted, t tests indicating significant differences between

the means of each item for the present and for an ideal station were

computed. Since this procedure was an item analysis, a measure of sig­

nificance was obtained on each variable. The items or variables which

were significantly different for all groups were thereby identified.

Therefore, this hypothesis is accepted.

A-5. The entire sample expresses a significant difference be­ tween its attitudes toward the present and an ideal sta­ t i o n .

Accepted, t tests indicating significant differences between

the means of each item for the present and for an ideal station were

computed over the entire sample. There was a significant difference on

twenty-one of the items. Therefore, this hypothesis is accepted.

A-6. The variables causing a significant difference between the attitudes toward the present station and for an ideal sta­ tion can be isolated and described for the entire sample.

Accepted, t test indicating significant.differences between the

means of each item for the present and for an ideal station were com­

puted over the entire sample. Since this was an item analysis, a measure

of significance was obtained on each of the variables. There were 155 twenty-one variables which were identified to be significantly different between the present and an ideal station. Therefore, this hypothesis is accepted.

Sum m ary1

This chapter described the results of investigation. The forma­ tion of the four definition and five attitude groups from a linkage analysis was described. The point biserial correlations for percep­

tions of the present and an ideal station for each of the nine groups were displayed. Tests of the significance of the difference were

applied to all items between each group's perception of the present and

its perception of an ideal station. Tests of significance of the dif­

ference were also computed for all items between the entire sample's

perception of the present and its perception of an ideal station. The

chapter concluded by testing the hypothesis of this investigation. The

next chapter w ill use these data to attempt to draw conclusions and

make recommendations pertinent to the problem. CHAPTER V

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Introduction

This chapter draws conclusions based on the .findings of the investigation. It also suggests recommendations which may assist small college radio station personnel and other investigators contemplating the use of sim ilar research designs. The chapter commences with the presentation of conclusions and recommendations which are specifically applicable to the case study institution. General conclusions appli­ cable to most small college radio stations are then suggested. The conclusions precede a list of recommendations for these stations. The chapter closes with conclusions about the design used in this investi­ gation. Recommendations about this design are made which may suggest a need for further investigation.

Case Study Institution

This section summarizes the orientations of the four definition groups. Each summary is followed by a description of the conclusions applicable to that group. Recommendations are made which w ill attempt to suggest a procedure for bringing the group's present perception closer to its ideal perception. A similar procedure is employed for the five attitude groups.

156 157

The significance of the difference between the entire sample's perception of the present and its perception of an ideal station is summarized. These summaries are followed by conclusions and recom­ mendations about these differences. This section of the chapter con­ cludes with general recommendations for Ohio Wesleyan which should bring all the present group perceptions closer to their respective ideal perceptions.

Definition Groups

(&OUBJ.

Summary—The three males in Group 1 perceive the present sta­ tion as programming informal educational materials to people who are unaffiliated with the college. These men feel the present station is guided by the needs of its listeners. This group has no significant perception of an ideal station, except that it would not be a labora­ tory facility broadcasting formal instructional materials to everyone in the community. However, the group failed to express any significant differences between its perception of the present station and its per­ ception of an ideal station. This suggests that the group's percep­ tion of an ideal station is similar to its perception of the present f a c i l i t y .

Conclusion—Group 1 is satisfied with the present station.

Therefore, the station should not be significantly changed from the present orientation held by this group.

Recommendation—Group 1 wants the station programming to be dic­ tated by receivers who are unaffiliated with the college. Therefore, 158 these extra-college listeners should be periodically surveyed to insure that the programming is satisfying their needs.

Group 2

Summary—The five influential university or non-influential non-university males in Group 2 perceive the present station as pro­ gramming formal instructional materials to college students. The group feels the present station is operated as a laboratory facility. How­ ever, Group 2 believes that an ideal station would program entertain­ ment or informal educational programs for an audience which is unaf­ filiated with the college. The group thinks that an ideal station would be guided by the needs of these listeners.

Conclusion—The members of Group 2 would like the station's intended audience to be changed from predominately college students to people unaffiliated with the institution. They would also like the station's policies to be determined by receiver needs instead of stu­ dent laboratory considerations. Group 2 wants the station's program­ ming to emphasize entertainment or informal educational shows instead of instructional programs. This last request is particularly interest­ ing because a relatively small percentage of the present station's broadcasting time is now devoted to instructional programming. Either the members of Group 2 are only aware of the instructional programs which are broadcast, or they are non-listeners and are uncertain about the station's programming.

Recommendation—Since the group wants the station's programming to be directed by the needs of listeners who are unaffiliated with the college, these extra-college listeners should be periodically surveyed 159 to insure that the programming is satisfying their needs. These sur­ veys should be focused on the entertainment programming preferences of these listeners. An intensive promotion campaign should be initiated to make these listeners aware of the station*s programming. The group's conception of the present station emphasizing instructional programming suggests that the group is not too familiar with the station's schedule. fiTQHP, .3

Summary—Group 3 is composed of four university affiliated non- inf luential males who are students at the college. These students be­ lieve the present station programs entertainment shows to a predominately college student audience. The group thinks the present station is operated as a social extra-curricular activity. However, Group 3 be­ lieves that an ideal station would program formal instructional materials for all people in the listening area. This ideal facility would con­ tinue to be operated as a social extra-curricular activity.

Conclusion—The group would like the intended audience for the station broadened to include everyone in the community. The students in this group would like to see the programming changed from predominate­ ly entertainment to a format focused on formal instructional programs.

However, the group wants the social purpose for having the station re­ ta in e d .

Recommendation—The college should determine the type of instruc­

tional programs which would interest many people in the listening audience.

The content for these instructional programs would be developed by the various departments responsible for the instruction and the programs would be produced by the social group operating the station. 160 teqaELA

Summary—The four influential non-university males in Group U think the present station programs formal instructional materials to an audience which is not affiliated with the university. The group believes the station is operated to provide students with a laboratory experience in broadcasting. Group 4 has no significant perception of an ideal sta­ tion. However, the group believes that an ideal station would have more entertainment and informal educational programs than the present station has aired. It also thinks an ideal station would direct its attention more toward a college affiliated audience than has been done in the past.

Conclusion—This group is composed of people unaffiliated with the college who believe the station is programming to unaffiliated people. The group members think the station emphasizes instructional programming, which suggests they are unfamiliar with other types of programs offered by the station. The group did not have a significant definition of an ideal station making it difficult to suggest specific recommendations for station improvements.

Recommendation—The station should continue to program its present format for this group. However, new programs should be intro­ duced and Group A %s reactions to these shows should be studied. This tria l and error method may suggest a pattern which would be useful in determining the programming preferences of this group.

Attitude Groups g £ O U g _ L

Summary——The six people in Group 1 cannot be identified by a particular combination of sampling variables. The group has no 161 significant attitude dimensions toward the present station, indicating a "no opinion* orientation. However, the members of this group would not appreciate an ideal station because they feel they would be neither dependent upon it, nor tolerant of it. They also believe that their ideal station would not promote peace in the community.

Conclusion—This group is expressing no apparent opinion of the present facility but has a decidedly negative opinion of an ideal sta­ tion. This negative opinion of an ideal station may be caused by several factors. For example, Group 1 may be expressing a fear of the unknown ideal station. The members of this group may feel threatened by an "ideal* station in their community. It is also possible that they resent Ohio Wesleyan and would use an ideal university station as a target for these resentments.

Recommftndation--The college should determine the specific causes for Group 1's disenchantment with an ideal station. These causes might be determined through open-ended interviews with a sample of people possessing Group 1's attitudes. The data elicited from these inter­ views should suggest the steps the college could take when modifying the station or its policies. The members of Group 1 should also be reassured that the station w ill not deliberately act against their in­

terests. Furthermore, the college must sincerely convince this group

that it wants to develop a station which w ill be acceptable to most

people in the community.

Group 2

Summary——The five members of Group 2 cannot be identified by a

particular combination of sampling variables. They believe the present station is selfish and detrimental to the community. Similarly, the group would have little confidence in an ideal station because the members believe that it would also be detrimental and create conflict in the community. Furthermore, these people feel that an ideal station should be as inexpensive, non-competitive, and non-professional as p o s s ib le .

Conclusion—This group is very skeptical of the station's possi­ b ilities. Its members have developed a somewhat cynical attitude which suggests the station is detrimental and will never improve. Apparently they feel that if a station must exist, it should have as little impact on the community as possible.

Recommendation—The college should be most concerned about this expression of attitude toward its station. An assessment of the preva­ lence of this orientation in the population should be made. Such an assessment should also determine if this attitude is specifically directed toward the university as an institution. If it is a reflection of a prevalent attitude toward the college, the University Relations

Office should study the causes of this attitude and determine what in­ stitutional amends might be initiated.

However, if the station is the specific target of this negative attitude, a study should be conducted to determine the specific causes for the group's disenchantment with WSLN. The data elicited from this investigation should suggest appropriate measures which could improve the station's image with this group. For example, if Group 2 developed this negative attitude because of the television interference problem, the college should explain to these people that the station has solved 163 the problem and is now sincerely interested in promoting community good w i l l .

Group 3

Summary—The five members of Group 3 cannot be identified by a particular combination of sampling variables. They do not appreciate the present station because they feel its programming is dull, amateurish and non-competitive. While their perception of an ideal station is less precisely defined, they feel it should be liberal and they do not expect to be intolerant of it. The group wants an ideal station to be more expensive, more professional, and more flexible than the present facility has been.

Conclusion—Although Group 3 does not appreciate the present station, it does not feel particularly hostile toward it. The group wants to feel tolerant of an ideal facility and is able to make sugges­ tions for obtaining this ideal. In essence, the group is not pleased with the present facility, but wants to have a positive attitude toward an ideal station.

Renommftndation—The station should modify its programming so it w ill appear less dull and amateurish to this group. A survey of group programming preferences should be conducted to determine the types of shows members of this group would like to hear. Since the group appar­ ently believes that larger appropriations for programming are needed,

station personnel should seek funds to cover reasonable increases in production costs. A follow-up study should also be planned to determine

Group 3*s acceptance of this new programming. 164 Group L

Summary—The three members of Group 4 cannot be identified by a particular combination of sampling variables. They failed to express any definite attitude toward the present station, except that they find it unsophisticated. However, the group's members would like an ideal station to be rigid, competitive and helpful to its listeners. They would not expect to resent such a station.

Conclusion—The group finds the present station unsophisticated, but seeks a station which is apparently rigid, competitive, and helpful.

This combination of attitude dimensions suggests that the group per­ ceives an ideal station as being an unwavering rigid institution which is very stable. The group also expects an ideal station to earn its audience by being competitive. However, the group feels the station must be basically interested in helping its listeners.

Recommendation—The station should formulate definite policies and procedures by which it w ill operate. Strict adherence to these

policies should give the station the rigidness requested by this group.

The station should also become more competitive by actively promoting

existing programs and introducing new shows which should be of interest

to a significant number of listeners. Finally, the station should be­

come more helpful to its listeners through its programming and through

conscientious community envolvement.

Group 5

.Summary—Although the three influential people in Group 5 are

not tolerant of the present station, they do not feel the facility is

detrimental to the community. Similarly, they do not expect an ideal 165 facility w ill be detrimental. However, they want to have more con­ fidence in an ideal station and do not expect to be envious of it.

Conclusion—The members of this group apparently consider the station a personal nuisance. These people apparently cannot personally tolerate the station, but they don’t feel its presence is actually detrimental to the community. However, they expect to have confidence in an ideal station and want to have a positive attitude toward it.

Recommendation—The station should investigate the reasons for

Group 5's intolerance of the present facility. This investigation should also determine procedures the station should initiate to merit the confidence of the group. The college might be particularly inter­ ested in adopting these procedures because all the members of Group 5 are influential people.

Significant Item Differences for Sample

Conclusions and recommendations can be made about the items whose means were significantly different between the sample's per­ ception of the present and its perception of an ideal station. These

items are not indicative of an "all sample" orientation, but represent the dimensions of definition and attitude which the sample would change

to make the present station more like an ideal facility. Conclusions and recommendations are suggested in this perspective.

Definition Items

Summary—The sample would like more programming directed to

people who are not affiliated with the college. However, the sample would apparently be satisfied with more programming which was intended 166 for all people in the listening area. The members of the sample would like this programming to be more directed by the needs of the listeners and more devoted to formal instructional materials. Conversely, the sample wants less programming for students or people affiliated with the college. It also believes the facility should be operated less as a social activity for the communicators. Finally, the sample wants less entertainment and informal educational programming on the station.

Conclusion—The sample would like more consideration given the audience which is unaffiliated with the institution. The station's programs should be selected more by the needs of this audience. Finally, the audience should be offered more formal instructional programs.

Recommendat1on—The programming preferences of a ll potential

listeners in the station's coverage area should be studied. Special attention should be given to the preferences of those listeners who are unaffiliated with the college. Special consideration should also be

given to requests for instructional programs on the station. The re­

sults of this survey might suggest programming changes which w ill insure

that the needs of the station's listeners are more adequately served.

Attitude Items

Summary—The sample thinks the station's programming should be

more stimulating, flexible, professional, and sophisticated. Conversely,

the sample members think the programs should be less dull. The sample

wants to have more confidence in the station, would like to be more

appreciative of it, and hopes to depend on it more. The sample would

also like to be more envious of the station. Conversely, the sample

would like to resent the station less and be less suspicious of it. 167

The members of the sample also want less conflict from the station and expect it to appear less innocent. Finally, the sample thinks an ideal station would be more appropriate for the college and that more money should be appropriated for its operation.

Conclusion—The sample is expressing a positive desire for a better station. It wants the programming to improve and it hopes to feel "closer" to the station. The sample also thinks the station will be more appropriate for the college and that it should have a larger budget allocation.

Recommendation—The station should enliven its programming so that it is more stimulating, professional, and sophisticated. The sta­ tion should also foster audience loyalty and dependence through its programming and public service efforts in the community. The college should support the station to a greater extent to make these recom­ mendations a reality.

General Recommendations

The preceding recommendations have evolved from data relevant to a particular group or test. These recommendations are probably ideal solutions for solving the problems confronting the groups. However, these group recommendations overlap and it would be inefficient and ex­ pensive for the college to attempt to implement each suggestion individ­ ually. Therefore, the following general recommendations are made to the college. The implementation of these general recommendations should efficiently initiate many of the individual group recommendations. Each

of the four general recommendations w ill be listed and followed by a discussion of the rationale for making it. 168

1. The administrative base of responsibility for this station should be broadened.

The station is presently administered by Ohio Wesleyan's Speech

Department. WSLN was originally placed under this departments juris­ diction since this department teaches the broadcasting curriculum and can use the station as a laboratory. This curricular purpose for WSLN has been the apparent basis for the financial support and faculty super­ vision the station has received from the college.

However, the study indicates that people in the sample do not consider the station's pedigogic purpose as important as its other functions. This finding was evident on both the individual group and the sample analyses. Several groups defined this laboratory function as a secondary purpose for an ideal station, but none of the groups ranked it with their strongest definition. However, if the Speech De­ partment continues to administer the station, it is reasonable to assume that a laboratory orientation w ill continue to be emphasized.

At Ohio Wesleyan educational media are distributed by Audio-

Visual Services, a division of the University Library. Audio-Visual

Services operates language laboratories, programs music appreciation assignments, shows films, etc. In essence, it is responsible for most

of the institution's educational media and its services are available to all departments of the college. Audio-Visual's equipment and materials are also available for student and faculty use during non-

instructional periods.

Therefore, Audio-Visual Services would be a logical administra­

tive home for WSLN. The station would be available to all people want­

ing to use the facility for formal instruction or informal educational 169 purposes. This would satisfy the definitions of an ideal station per­ ceived by definition Groups 1 and 3. The station could also be used by students for entertainment purposes during non-instructional periods.

This would satisfy Group 2's perception of an ideal station.

Ohio Wesleyan could also realize other advantages by trans­ ferring the responsibility for the station to Audio-Visual Services.

While these other advantages are not specifically germane to the prob­ lem of this investigation, several of them are briefly mentioned to make this recommendation complete. For example, programming the station with some of the materials currently played on the Audio-Visual Center*s listening carols would reduce the traffic in the Center. The station could also make these audio materials available when the center was closed. Furthermore, transferring this responsibility to the Audio-

Visual Services would provide better technical supervision for the sta­ tion. The services of Audio-Visual personnel have been used by the sta­ tion for technical maintenance in the past. Transferring the technical responsibility for WSLN to Audio-Visual should insure that the station would be run competently.

However, to insure that all the objectives of the station are adequately achieved, major station policy decisions should be made by an advisory board. Representatives of the major perceptions or inter­ ests of the station would be appointed to this board. For example, the

Speech Department faculty member who teaches the broadcasting curriculum would represent the pedigogic interest of the station. A student might represent the entertainment perception. A representative of one of the departments using the facility for instructional purposes might speak 170 for the instructional orientation. In essence, this group would insure that all interests were treated as equitably as possible. However, the responsibility for the daily operation of the station would remain with the Director of Audio-Visual Services. This delegation of responsibility would insure that all perceptions were fairly treated, but would not create the impractical situation of operating a radio station by a com­ m itte e .

2. Develop a systematic plan for regularly assessing listener programming preferences.

Two of the definition groups believe the operation of an ideal station would be guided by the programming preferences of listeners. The station has not been particularly sensitive to listener preferences in the past. This insensitivity is reflected in the attitudes of all the groups toward the present station’s programming. Therefore, if the sta­ tion is to become more receiver directed and if it intends to improve audience attitudes toward its programming, an index of audience program­ ming preferences is needed.

This index, however, should not simply be an after-the-fact in­ dication of general audience size. A rating service type of statistic would be insensitive to different group orientations. It is also more efficient to determine programming preferences before producing a series instead of simply measuring audience size after the programs have been aired. However, a follow up investigation is helpful to determine whether listeners support the programs they request. Therefore, the programming research should study both group preferences and listening p a t t e r n s . 171

This research should be done on a regular basis to keep the station in touch with its audience. A random sample of the population should be studied in the first investigation. Assuming that an instru­ ment can be developed for quickly classifying people into known Q-sort clusters, this study should identify the group orientation of each per­ son questioned. Subsequent studies could be more economically and efficiently designed by focusing on persons possessing specific orienta­ tions. For example, an interview schedule concerning instructional programming might be restricted to members of Group 3 who want an in- structionally oriented station and who would probably listen to these types of programs. Therefore, by group sampling more information may be obtained about each programming orientation for a given amount of tim e .

This type of research could also be a pedigogic experience for students studying broadcasting at the college. The application of these research techniques would assist these students in obtaining an appreciation of the use of feedback in a communications system. The use of student assistance with this research would also reduce the cost of the investigations.

3. Selective promotion should be used for the station and its program s.

An analysis of the group definitions indicates that some groups are unaware of the programming offered by the station. For example, several groups want an ideal station to initiate types of programs which are presently being carried. This •unawareness of programming may par­ tially account for attitude Group 1's indifference and attitude Group 2 and 3's antagonistic feelings toward the station. People who have listened to WSLN for a number of years agree with these groups that the attitude dimensions such as amateurish, dull and unsophisticated may have been very applicable at one time. However, these people have noticed improvements in the station's overall performance in the few years immediately preceding this investigation. The members of Groups

1 ,2 and 3 may have listened to WSLN, found its programming inferior and have chosen to ignore the station for the past several years. Their attitudes are, therefore, reflections of the station in its less sophis­ ticated era. This situation suggests that the station has failed to reach these people with the story of its improved programming service.

In the past the station has aimed its program publicity at an undefined general audience. To reach this general audience the station's schedule is published in the newspaper, a bi-monthly program guide is distributed, and promotional announcements are broadcast. Occasionally the station w ill run a poster campaign or purchase some newspaper space when a special event is being promoted. However, the investigation indicates that this approach to promotion has not had a significant effort on some of the groups.

Therefore, instead of continuing to receive unsatisfactory re­ sults from general audience promotion, the station should begin selec­ tive promotion for people who have a particular orientation toward the station. If an instrument can be designed for identifying people who

have a specific Q-sort orientation, then special promotion material may

be sent to those individuals whose orientation suggests they would be

interested in certain programs. After the initial lists of people affiliated with each orientation Eire compiled, the university's data 173 processing department can readily deliver the names and addresses of any group which is to receive special promotion. This approach to sta­ tion promotion should be more efficient than attempting to reach more people of each orientation simply by increasing the circulation of general audience promotional m aterials.

4. A public relations program should be initiated to improve group attitudes toward the station.

The findings of the attitude instrument indicate that no group has a favorable opinion of the present station. Furthermore, the re­ sults indicate that Group 1 and 2 do not believe they would have a particularly favorable opinion of an ideal facility. The data suggests that this poor image may be attributed to inferior programming, the television interference problem, and the station's apparent disregard for various segments of the listening audience. However, the station must overcome this image problem as well as correct the causes of the problem before it can expect to be accepted by a significant number of listeners. For example, the television interference problem has been corrected, but memory of the difficulty still affects the attitudes of some people toward the station.

It is recommended that a public relations effort be launched to improve WSLN's image. It w ill be necessary to first diagnose the exact cause of discontent before corrective measures can be intelligently undertaken. A selective group approach would be an economical method

of diagnosing and solving image problems. If an instrument can be de­

signed which can quickly identify people by attitude orientation, selec­

tive public relations efforts can be designed for each group. This 17 A group approach would probably make people believe that the station is sincerely interested in them and their problems.

Small College Radio Stations

The information learned about the case study institution may be applicable to other small colleges having non-commercial educational FM radio stations. Some general conclusions and recommendations may be suggested from data obtained from the Ohio Wesleyan situation. However, specific conclusions applicable to other colleges cannot be defensively suggested from data collected about a single case study institution.

Therefore, only conclusions and recommendations which have general applicability w ill be suggested.

Each of the three general conclusions w ill be stated followed by their rationale. The three recommendations will be presented in a sim ilar manner.

Conclusions

1. Definitions and attitudes toward small college radio stations may be identified and studied using group analysis procedures.

Acceptance of hypotheses D-1 and A-1 suggests that people often have sim ilar perceptions and attitudes toward a small college FM radio station. The percentage of the sample which clustered into groups in­ dicates that this pattern is operating strongly. It is, therefore, reasonable to assume that people's perceptions and attitudes toward a

station are not completely unique. Conversely, it cannot be assumed that only one common orientation or attitude permeates an entire lis­ tening area. 175

Therefore, this investigation concludes that people do cluster into orientation and attitude groups. This finding is particularly important to colleges operating FM radio stations who could never satisfy their audiences if all listeners had a unique perception and attitude. However, a college can reasonably expect that a few clusters representing the major perceptions toward its station can be satisfied.

Therefore, identifying, analyzing and responding to the needs of these groups is a meaningful procedure to employ when determining station policies or procedures.

2. Group orientations and attitudes toward small college FM radio stations do not follow traditionally presumed patterns.

An analysis of the group compositions for this investigation reveals that groups do not normally cluster around traditionally pre­ sumed variables. Generally, there are no student, faculty, administra­ tion, or town orientations toward a station. Similarly, there are no traditional variables which appear to be significant criteria for attitude grouping. Therefore those responsible for small college FM radio stations should avoid comparing listeners on these grouping cri­ teria. More sophisticated grouping techniques, such as the linkage analysis used in this study must be employed to identify people having a similar perception.

Furthermore, traditional notions of the orientations of various

types of people must be rejected. Students are allegedly supposed to

favor entertainment programming directed to college student audiences.

However, the one definition group having a large number of students ex­ pressed a desire for more formal instructional programs. Similar exam­

ples could be suggested for other types of people. 176

Therefore, this study concludes that traditional notions of audience grouping are invalid indices of listener orientation toward a small college radio station. People possessing similar orientations must be identified by investigation.

3. Groups usually have unfavorable perceptions of small college educational FM stations.

Regardless of group orientation, people are generally not satisfied with small college stations. In a research design they may express their negative feelings toward a station in several ways.

F irst, there are normally significant differences between group per­ ceptions of the present and an ideal station. This observation is supported in this study by observing the different dimensions of defin­ ition and attitude for the present and ideal stations. It may also be affirmed by analyzing the large number of items having significantly different mean Q-sort scores between the present and ideal stations.

Second, some groups have a negative attitude toward an ideal station. For example, the findings of this investigation indicate that

Groups 1 and 2 had a negative attitude toward an ideal station at Ohio

Wesleyan. This negative attitude toward an ideal facility was strong enough at the case study institution for the finding to be generalized with some confidence. The term "educational radio station" may be par­ tially responsible for this situation. People may believe that even

ideal radio stations labeled "educational" would be stuffy and uninter­ esting. This belief might also be applicable to large university sta­ tions. However, the term "educational" applied to a small college sta­ tion may also suggest the laboratory purpose of the facility. People who express a negative attitude toward an ideal station may feel that 177 a station which trains students can never offer programming comparable to that of commercial stations operated by experienced professional broadcasters.

A comparison of present and ideal perceptions toward a station is useful to a college station manager because it provides him with specific information concerning discrepancies between the two percep­ tions. He may use this information to develop plans for improving his station’s image or programming.

Therefore, this investigation concludes that groups usually have unfavorable perceptions of small college stations, but a comparison of present and ideal stations may suggest ideas for improving these perceptions.

Re c omroendat i on s

1. Develop an institutional philosophy about the station which is based on serving different groups of people.

This investigation concluded that people affiliated with the

college have different perceptions of the institution’s radio station.

A student, facility member, or administrator describing "the purpose"

of the station is usually suggesting his perception of the facility.

Therefore, the institutional purpose of a small college radio station

should be partially based on the major group perceptions of this sta­

tion which are prevalent among those people affiliated with the college.

It may be suggested that a college has little obligation to

serve those who are unaffiliated with the institution. A budgetary

argument might support this contention. However, the Communications

Act of 193/+ requires radio station licenses to serve the public interest. 178

The "public" in this status certainly includes people living beyond the boundaries of the csunpus. Therefore, the college should extend the policy of serving groups with different perceptions to those people who are unaffiliated with the school.

This investigation recommends that small colleges adopt a philosophy toward their radio stations which is based on service to all major perception groups within the listening area.

2. Investigate the orientations and attitudes which exist toward the institution’s station.

Each station should initiate an investigation of the composition and characteristics of the groups in its listening area. The findings of this research could form the basis of subsequent policy and pro­ gramming decisions If a "group philosophy" toward station management is adopted. The design for this investigation could be similar to the

Q-technique used to study the group perceptions at Ohio Wesleyan.

However, it is presumed that any design w ill be modified to accomodate the needs of different institutional situations.

The cost of this study may be recovered from the more efficient use of the station's facilities. For example, the findings may suggest streamlining the administrative practices of the station, eliminating inferior or duplicate programs, or obtaining more impressive results from a publicity bxdget. The study may also be an investment in college public relations. The execution of the investigation implies that the college cares about people, which may help improve unfavorable a tti­ tudes toward the station.

3. The college should be prepared to implement the results of the investigation. 179

The investigation suggested in Recommendation 2 is only an acade­ mic exercise unless the college intends to implement the recommendation suggested by the findings. While it might be nice to know something about these groups, the only real justification for this study would be the implementation of recommendations suggesting changes in station policies or programming. While realistic budgetary and personnel con­ siderations may temper the recommendations, the college must be willing to initiate these suggestions as fully as possible.

Changes in administrative responsibility for the station will probably be recommended by the investigation. Most small college sta­ tions are administered through a single academic department. Since faculty members in this department usually teach the radio and tele­ vision curriculum offered by the college, the station may be used pri­ marily as a broadcasting laboratory. However, the study will probably indicate that several major orientations toward the station exist. It is doubtful if all these diverse orientations can be equitably served if the station continues to be administered by a single department. For example, this investigation recommended that Ohio Wesleyan transfer responsibility for the station from the Speech Department to Audio-

Visual Services. All perceptions could be more adequately accommodated if this change were initiated. In essence, the results of most insti­ tutional investigations w ill probably indicate that more than one sta­ tion orientation exists. Since most small college stations are admin­ istered by a single academic department, institutions should be prepared to make adjustments which w ill broaden the administrative base of these s t a t i o n s . 180

A college station should also be prepared to initiate programming changes. The result of the investigation may indicate significant dif­ ferences between the sample*s perceptions of the present and an ideal facility. The station may find particular differences on items concern­ ing programming. For example, the case study institution found that the audience was not particularly enthusiastic about its informal educational programming. The study indicated that the audience wanted more instruc­ tional programs. The station*s management must be willing to make rea­ sonable programming changes if it is sincerely interested in serving the various groups.

After the necessary programming changes have been introduced, the college should launch a public relations effort to counter unfavor­ able stereo-type images of educational radio stations. This public relations program must convince the community that educational radio is not dull or uninteresting. It should also suggest that student operated stations do not necessarily deliver a programming product which is in­ ferior to that of commercial radio stations.

Finally, the college should implement other recommendations peculiar to its situation. For example, Ohio Wesleyan must conduct a more intensive public relations effort to offset the bad image of WSLN generated by the television interference problem. Other colleges will also have unique problems which w ill generate specific recommendations concerning their stations.

The Design

A primary contribution this investigation hopes to make is to determine the applicability of using this type of design to study people’s 181 perceptions and attitudes toward mass communication facilities. Specifi­ cally, this study may suggest some of the advantages and lim itations of using Q-technique for solving practical problems related to broadcasting stations. Therefore, conclusions concerning these advantages and lim ita­ tions w ill now be discussed. These conclusions suggest some recommenda­ tions which should be made to other investigators concerning modifications of this design and the need for other studies. These recommendations and their rationale w ill follow the presentation of the conclusions.

Conclusions

A dvantages

1. The design yields the qualitative information needed for studying group perceptions and attitudes.

This investigation attempted to measure perceptions and a tti­ tudes. Although Q-technique is not the only instrument which provides an index of perception and attitude behavior, it does deliver the necessary qualitative data. Therefore, it is a useful tool for in­ vestigations of this nature.

2. The design elicits detailed information about the perceptions and attitudes of each person in the sample.

Much of Stephenson*s work was concerned with intra-personal differences and this is reflected in Q-technique. Therefore, the scheme a person employs for describing his relationship with a small college radio station can be fairly precisely defined. The study of these

intra-personal relationships is relatively new to broadcasting research.

Much of the previous research has focused on obtaining a little data about a large number of individuals, instead of intensely studying a

few subjects. Findings from investigations using these in-depth designs 182 may greatly assist the mass media practitioner in learning more about the characteristics and attitudes of the members of his audience.

3. The design yields groups or clusters of people who think s i m i l a r l y .

There are lim its to the usefulness of studying individual per­ ceptions in mass communications research. Mass communicators cannot be expected to attempt to serve the individual needs of each person in their audiences. Conversely, this investigation indicates that the members of an audience should not be identified by a single perception.

Identifying and responding to the needs of the major group orientations existing in an audience is a compromise between these extremes. This design is useful because it can group people who possess similar per­ ceptions and can usually identify the variables which make each percep­ tion unique. Using this design insures that group membership is not determined by variables which are irrelevant criteria for identifying similar people.

Disadvantages

1. This design can yield little quantitative data.

A Q-sort is not an efficient instrument for obtaining quantita­ tive data. The significant amount of time required to administer Q-sort instruments usually restricts the sample size to a small number of cases.

Fred N. Kerlinger explains this problem:

One can rarely work with sufficiently large samples in Q. It is not a method well-suited to cross-sectional or large sample pro­ cedures. One does not draw a random sample of persons for study with Q. While Stephenson argues the point vigorously, there is no escaping the inability of the investigator using Q to generalize to populations of individuals. Q therefore always requires cross- 183

sectional supplementation. No matter how promising Q results may be, one cannot escape the necessity of testing theory on larger numbers of individuals.'

Therefore, broadcasting investigators using Q-technique have had to resign themselves to small samples. In this investigation, thirty- two subjects represented fifteen thousand people. The sample to popu­ lation ratio would become even greater if a metropolitan newspaper or television station were studied.

The representativeness of a Q-technique sample is also at issue.

Since no instrument is presently available for cross sectional supple­ mentation, all a Q-technique investigator can confidently report about his findings is that certain groups having stated characteristics are present in a population. The researcher does not know the relative strengths of each group's perception in the population, nor does he know if other unidentified groups may be present. These lim itations make the value of the instrument for mass communications research some­ what questionable.

Another problem with small samples concerns the use of statistics.

The required coefficient for significance for a specific alpha level is much greater for a small sample. Therefore, the investigator must either be content with only a few findings, appreciably increase the sample size, or compromise with a lower level of significance. The third alternative was selected in this study to prevent erroneously accepting the null hypothesis when it was false. However, by selecting this alternative- less, statistical confidence may be placed in the results.

1 Fred N. Kerlinger, Foundations of Behavioral Research (New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, Inc., 1964), p. 594. 184

2. An unstructured Q-instrument asks respondents to make rank order decisions about different variables.

The unstructured Q-instrument used in the attitude investigation requires people in the sample to rank different attitude concepts.

While no difficulty was encountered with respondents using this unstruc­ tured instrument, the assumption underlying this type of instrument should be considered. For example, in this instrument the respondents were asked to decide if the station was more conservative or more detrimental.

The rationale for ranking these different concepts is questionable.

Most people are not accustomed to ranking completely different variables.

An instrument which used a number of bi-polar scales representing dimen­ sions of a person's attitude would be a more logical approach to a tti­ tude analysis.

3. Q-sort items are not independent of one another.

S tatistical operations and tests assume that a response to an 2 item is not affected by responses to other items. This assumption can­ not be made about Q-technique. When a card is placed in a Q-sort pile,

one possibility for sorting the remaining cards in the deck is immedi­ ately eliminated. Each subsequent card sorted further restricts the

choices for sorting the remaining cards. Therefore, the items are not

independent of one another. This lack of independence influences the

statistical findings of investigations using Q-technique. Researchers

might wish to consider other instruments which are not confronted with

this forced-choice problem.

2I b id . 185

4. The design does not account for people who do not cluster around any of the groups.

This type of investigation studies people whose measurable be­ havior is similar to that of other people. This group approach provides useful data for people in charge of mass media facilities such as small college radio stations. However, this design does not study those

■strays" whose Q-sort scores do not affiliate them with any group.

These "strays" may constitute a significant percentage of a Q-technique sample. For example, only half the people in the sample of this inves­ tigation were affiliated with a definition group and only sixty-nine per cent were linked with an attitude group. It is unknown if the other people in the sample became "strays" because they represent iso­ lated perceptions or whether the variables which make them similar to other people were excluded from the Q-sort instrument. However, a de­ sign which systematically excludes a significant percentage of an in­ vestigation's sample from analysis is not particularly useful for re­ search related to broadcasting.

5. The type and extent of respondent contact with the station is unknown.

This investigation can describe the definitions and attitudes toward the station for each person in the sample. However, it has not determined the contacts which influenced the formation of these defini­ tions and attitudes. For example, it is not known if a person's primary

source of information about the station was from personal listening, reading about the station, or from talking with others about the facility.

This information would be particularly helpful to those responsible for

the station. For instance, the station manager might consider a 186 recommendation for ideal programming differently if this recommendation came from a group composed predominately of li. ieners instead of a group composed predominately of non-listeners. While all group defini­ tions and attitudes are important to this study, it would be useful to know the type and extent of contact each person has had with the f a c i l i t y .

Rec ommendati ons

1. A quantitative instrument should be developed for quick and economical identification of the orientations held by a large number of people.

This study has demonstrated a procedure for disclosing the major orientations and attitudes which exist in the listening area of a small college FM radio station. The investigation employed Q-technique to study a small sample. It would be useful to estimate the prevalence of each orientation in the community by replicating this investigation on a larger sample. However, if Q-sorts were used, a significant in­ crease in sample size would be impractical. Therefore, an instrument is needed which can quickly classify people into established orienta­ tion groups. This instrument would be based on known group orienta­ tions which were previously established by a small sample using Q- te c h n iq u e .

Development of this instrument would begin by administering a

Q-sort concerning radio station orientations or attitudes to a care­ fully selected small sample of people. The group orientations generated

by the processed Q-sort data would be used to develop a short type of

instrument. This survey instrument would then be administered to the

same sample which did the Q-sorts. Correlations would be run between 187 the Q-generated group orientation scores and the survey instrument group orientation scores. Low correlations would suggest the inability of the survey instrument to define a group orientation. These deficiencies would be noted and the instrument would be appropriately revised. The revised instrument would then be readministered to the sample and correlations would be run between the new instrument's scores and the

Q-generated scores.

If an orientation identification instrument can be developed, the correlations between the Q-sort data and the survey data should be­ come significant after a number of refinements. The investigator should check his findings by replicating the entire procedure with several different samples.

If this instrument was developed, future investigations could administer Q-sorts to a small sample, build a survey instrument from this data and apply the survey instrument to a larger sample. There­ fore, the researcher would have both qualitative and quantitative data on each orientation group.

2. A national study should determine if common perceptions and attitudes toward small college FM radio stations prevail at most institutions.

This investigation made several conclusions and recommendations applicable to other college radio stations. However, the design used limited the scope of this investigation to the case study institution.

Similar orientations and attitudes may be prevalent at other institutions. If research confirms this hypothesis, small college sta­ tions could begin to meaningfully cooperate on matters vital to their interests. For example, the stations could use these findings to 188 demonstrate their national importance to the Federal Communications Com­ mission. This demonstration is particularly important to these stations since a substantial number of them may leave the air if the Commission's proposed rule-making to eliminate ten watt stations is adopted. Sta­ tions could also begin to exchange programs which would have appeal to particular orientations in their audiences.

It would be impractical to use the design employed in this in­ vestigation for a national study. However, a national study should commence with the building of a Q-sort instrument in a sim ilar manner to the procedure used for constructing the Q-sorts for this investiga­ tion. The Q-sorts would then be administered to a small sample of per­ sons carefully selected from throughout the country. If the Q-sort data indicates the prevalence of national group perceptions and a reliable survey instrument can be developed, a survey would then be administered to a larger sample. This instrument would determine the relative strength of each national group perception. General conclu­

sions and recommendations would be suggested from these data.

3. This investigation should be replicated with a semantic differential instrument.

The lim itations of Q-technique have imposed many stipulations

on the findings of this study. Some of these stipulations could be

overcome by replicating the study with a semantic differential instru­

m ent.

The semantic differential has been used in many attitude studies

and would be an excellent instrument for the attitude assessments of this

investigation. Franklin D. Sabah demonstrated that the semantic 189 3 differential may also be used to measure station images. Sabah was concerned with composite audience images of television stations. How­ ever, Kerlinger suggests that semantic differential scores may be inter­ correlated and McQuitty's Linkage Analysis used to generate types.^

Therefore, types could be analyzed in a similar manner to the proce­ dure used in this investigation.

Using the semantic differential would eliminate some of the problems associated with Q-technique. First, the instrument could be comfortably administered to a larger sample. Second, respondents in the sample would not be asked to make rank order decisions about dif­ ferent attitude variables. Third, the items in the instrument would be more independent of one another. The problem of ignoring people who are unaffiliated with any particular group would still be present.

However, since a larger sample could be used, more of the groups which exist in the population might become evident. Some of the "strays'' would be eliminated because they would be affiliated with some of these newly generated groups.

A questionnaire should also be administered to people completing the semantic differential instruments. This questionnaire would be used to determine the type and extent of contact each respondent has had with the station. Information elicited from this questionnaire would be helpful in formulating conclusions and recommendations about the data generated by the semantic differentials.

3 Franklin David Sabah, "The use of the Semantic D ifferential Technique in the Analysis of the Images of Three Columbus Commercial Television Stations" (unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, The Ohio State University, 1960).

^Kerlinger, Foundations of Behavioral Research, p. 575. SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY 191

Auer, J. Jeffery. An Introduction to Research in Speech. New York: H arper and Row, P u b lis h e rs , 1959.

Bauer, Raymond A. "The Initiative of the Audience." Journal of Adver­ tising Research. Ill (June, 1963).

Borko, Harold. Computer Applications in the Behavioral Sciences. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1962.

Boyle, James Robert. "A H istorical and Descriptive Study of Noncom­ mercial Educational Frequency Modulation Broadcasting in Indiana, 1944-1963." Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Univer­ sity of Michigan, 1964.

Cathcart, William lance. "Viewer Needs and Desires In Television News­ casters." Unpublished M.A. thesis, The Ohio State University, 1966 .

Chase, Clinton I. Elementary Statistical Procedures. New York: McGraw- H ill Book Company, Inc., 1967.

Chester, Giraud; Garrison, Garnet R.; and W illis, Edgar E. Television and Radio 3rd ed. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, 1963.

Clark, Kenneth R. "Ten Watts Searching for an Audience." NAEB J o u r n a l. XXIV (May-June, 1965), pp. 8-13.

Crane, Edgar, and Maclean, Malcolm S., Jr. "Five Dimensions of •Style1 in Educational TV Programs." AV Communications Review. X (May- June, 1962), pp. 158-168.

Curry, M/ron Morgan. "A History and Description of College Wired-Radio Systems in the United States." Unpublished M.A. thesis, Uni­ versity of Wisconsin, 1948.

DeFrank, Thomas M. "Administrative Regulation of the College News­ papers." Editor and Publisher. (March 11, 1967), pp. 14-62.

Diem, William Roy, and Hunter, Rollin Clarence. The Storv of Speech at Ohio Wesleyan. Delaware: The Speech Department of Ohio Wesleyan University, 1964.

Eshelman, David. "About College FM Stations." NAEB Journal. XXIX (September-October, 1965), pp. 33-42.

______. "The Emergence of Educational FM." NAEB Journal. XXVI (March-April, 1967), pp. 34-38.

Federal Communications Commission. "The Evolution of FM Radio: 1951- 1956." Journal of Broadcasting. VII (Fall, 1963), pp. 305-322. 192

Ferguson, George A. S tatistical Analysis in Psychology and Education. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, Inc., 1959.

Festinger, Leon, and Katz, Daniel. Research Methods in the Behavioral Sciences. New York: The Dryden Press, 1953.

Fisher, Sir Ronald A. Statistical Methods for Research Workers. 13th ed., rev. New York: Hafner Publishing Company, Inc., 1958.

Flamer, Michael Abraham. "A Systematic Approach to Image Analysis.* Unpublished M.A. thesis, The Ohio State University, 1967.

Forsythe, Richard 0. "Radio Research." NAEB Journal. XXIV (November- December, 1965), pp. 38-48.

Guy, John. "Nation's First 10-Watter Increases Power." NAEB Journal. XXII (September-October, 1963), pp. 51-53.

Harries, Thomas Edward. "The Systematic Creation of a New Television Program." Unpublished M.A. thesis, The Ohio State University, 1966.

Hathaway, Stephen Conger, Jr. "A History and Description of Collegiate Carrier-Current Broadcasting in Ohio." Unpublished Ph.D. dis­ sertation, University of Michigan, 1959.

H illiard, Robert L. Radio Broadcasting. New York: Hastings House, Publishers, 1967.

Hutchins, C. Larry. "A Study of the Relationship Between Student Attitude Toward Instructional Television and Student Orienta­ tion to College." Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, State Uni­ versity of Iowa, 1965.

Hyman, Herbert. Survey Design and Analysis. Glencoe: The Free Press, Publishers, 1955.

Jennings, Ralph M. "The Potentials of National Educational Radio." NAEB Journal. XXV (September-October, 1966), pp. 45-56.

Kerlinger, Fred N. Foundations of Behavioral Research. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, Inc., 1964.

King, Laurence W. "A History of Broadcasting at Ohio Wesleyan." Un­ published Senior Seminar Paper, Ohio Wesleyan University Speech Department, 1967.

K ittross, John M. "Meaningful Research in ETV." The Farther Vision. Edited by Allen E. Koenig and Ruane B. H ill. Madison: Uni­ versity of Wisconsin Press, 1967. 193

Knower, Franklin H. "Graduate Theses and Dissertations on Broadcasting: 1963-1966." Journal of Broadcasting. XI (Spring, 1967), pp. 153-181.

Lazarsfeld, Paul F., and Rosenberg, Morris. The Language of Social Research. Glencoe: The Free Press, Publishers, 1955.

Lef.kowith, Edwin Frank. "A Method for the Analysis of Theory and Practice Concerning the Programming of a Local Radio Station." Unpublished M.A. thesis, Pennsylvania State College, 1952.

McCormick, Thomas C., and Francis, Roy G. Methods of Research in the Behavioral Sciences. New York: Harper and Brothers, Publishers, 1958.

Maclean, Malcolm S., Jr. "Critical Analysis of 12 Recent Title VII Research Reports." AV Communications Review. X (May-June, 1962), pp. A-102 - A-118.

McQuitty, Louis B. "Elementary Linkage Analysis for Isolating Ortho­ gonal and Oblique Types and Typal Relevancies." Educational and Psychological Measurement. XVII (Summer, 1957), pp. 207-229.

Mead, James L. "A Study of a Low-Power School Radio Station: WOAK." Unpublished Ed.D. dissertation, Wayne State University, 1965.

Monaghan, Robert R. "A Systematic Way of Being Creative." The Journal of Communication. XVIII (March, 1968), pp. 4 7- 5 6.

______. "Creative Strategies in Audience Analysis." Educational Broadcasting Review. II (April, 1968), pp. 29-37.

______. "Directions of Leadership for the Future." The Ohio CPA. XXVI (No. 2, 1967), pp. 63-67.

______. "Television Preference and Viewing Behavior." Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Michigan State University, 1964.

______; Plummer, Joseph T.; Rarick, David L.; and Williams, Dwight A. "Recommended Target Audiences and Appeal Elements for The G irl from U.N.C.L.E.* Unpublished report submitted to M1M-TV, The Ohio State University Speech Department, 1966.

1968 Broadcasting Yearbook. Washington: Broadcasting Publications, Incorporated, 1968.

Peatman, John G. Introduction to Applied S tatistics. New York: H arper and Row, P u b lis h e r s , 1963.

Plummer, Joseph Thorton. "A Systematic Research Approach to Television Program Development." Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, The Ohio State University, 1967. 194

. "Audience Research in Television Program Development." Educational Broadcasting Review. II (June, 1968), pp. 23-30.

______. "Q Methodology in Radio Audience Research and the Analysis of Formula Radio." Unpublished M.A. thesis, The Ohio State University, 1965.

Rarick, David Lawrence. "Predicting Viewer Preferences for Visual Appeals in Television Programs." Unpublished M.A. thesis, The Ohio State University, 1967.

Reid, J. Christopher. "An Investigation of Student Attitudes Toward Instructional Television and Other University Experiences." Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University of Missouri, 1965.

Sabah, Franklin David. "The Use of the Semantic D ifferential Technique in the Analysis of the Images of Three Columbus Commercial Television Stations." Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, The Ohio State University, 1960.

Shayon, Robert Lewis. "Educational Radio and National Purpose." Educational Broadcasting Review. I (October, 1967), pp. 21-24.

Skornia, Harry J. "Educational Radio: Its Past and Its Future." Educational Television; The Next Ten Years. Stanford: The Institute for Communications Research, 1962.

Smith, Carolyn W., and Cook, Bruce L. "A Study of Educational Radio Programming Through Analysis of Listenership, Station Practice, and Expert Opinion." Unpublished Independent Study, Ohio Wesleyan University Speech Department, 1965.

Stephenson, William. "Application of Q-method to the Measurement of Public Opinion." The Psychological Record. XIV (July, 1964), pp. 265-273.

______• "Ideal Types." The Psychological Record. XII (January, 1962), pp. 9-16.

♦ "Public Images Toward U tilities." Journal of Advertising Research. Ill (December, 1963), pp. 34-39.

______. The Play Theory of Mass Communication. Chicago: The Uni­ versity of Chicago Press, 1967.

______. The Study of Behavior. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1953.

Stone, Philip J.; Dunphy, Dexter C.; Smith, Marshall S.; and Ogilvie, Daniel M. The General Inquirer. Cambridge: The M.I.T. Press, 1966. 195

"Summary of Broadcasting." Broadcasting Magazine. IXXV (August 19, 1968), p. 65.

The Ohio Wesleyan Catalog. 1967-68. Delaware: 6hio Wesleyan University, 1967.

Travers, Robert M. W. An Introduction to Educational ResearchJ New York: The Macmillan Company, 1958.

VanDalen, Deobold B., and Meyer, William J. Understanding Educational Research. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, Inc., 1962.