You are not currently logged in.
Access JSTOR through your library or other institution:
If You Use a Screen ReaderThis content is available through Read Online (Free) program, which relies on page scans. Since scans are not currently available to screen readers, please contact JSTOR User Support for access. We'll provide a PDF copy for your screen reader.
The Culture of Poverty Debate: Some Additional Data
Barbara E. Coward, Joe R. Feagin and J. Allen Williams, Jr.
Vol. 21, No. 5 (Jun., 1974), pp. 621-634
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/799638
Page Count: 14
You can always find the topics here!Topics: Poverty, Cultural studies, Cultural values, Personality traits, Social issues, Ethnic groups, Statistical significance, Cultural attitudes, Psychometrics
Were these topics helpful?See somethings inaccurate? Let us know!
Select the topics that are inaccurate.
Since scans are not currently available to screen readers, please contact JSTOR User Support for access. We'll provide a PDF copy for your screen reader.
Preview not available
In this paper we briefly review relevant research on the culture of poverty and set our findings within the general context of culture of poverty arguments. Data from a community survey in a Southwestern city are analyzed using Oscar Lewis' four major culture of poverty dimensions: 1) the individual, 2) the family, 3) the slum community, and 4) the community's relation to society. In our study a sample of 271 black respondents was divided into two groups, here termed the "poor" and the "non-poor." In noting all the broad traits studied in all dimensions taken together, some support for Lewis' culture of poverty was found in less than half of the cases; and in several cases our findings were in direct opposition to culture of poverty predictions. In addition, we have suggested that the majority of those traits that did lend support to Lewis' argument might be better classified as situational conditions of poverty rather than as a part of a bonafide "culture" of poverty. The findings of this paper may call into question the use of the "culture of poverty" perspective as a basis for policy decisions.
Social Problems © 1974 Oxford University Press