FAMILY LIFE

Otago Daily Times, Issue 21600, 22 March 1932, Page 16

FAMILY LIFE

EIGHT PAGES OF QUESTIONS

PSYCHOLOGISTS AND THE 8.8. C. (From Our Own Correspondent.) LONDON, February 2. A questionnaire to be issued by the British Broadcasting Corporation has caused some criticism. The document, which is to be issued ,on request from listeners, is in connection with a series of talks by Sir William Beveridge, principal of the London School of Economics. Not only is it sought to find out how husband and wife met; how they arrange their money matters; and whether the wife has any income other than what her husband allows her, but whether husband or wife was ever married before. Beyond that, the “cause of ending (death or otherwise) “of the union is asked for, and in regard to the former partner, the question is put: “If related or not.”

It is also sought to know, in regard to the parents of both husband and wife, whether they arc living together or are separated. Again : “If an allowance is being made to any child or relation away from home, give particulars.” Information wanted by the London School of Economics independently of the 8.8. C., although the questions appear on the same form, includes; “ What are the chief difficulties arising in family life, and what are the forces tending either (a) to bind the family more closely, (b) to loose the ties between its members.” SIR W. BEVERIDGE EXPLAINS.

Sir William Beveridge has been interviewed on the subject. He said that the investigation was a joint one between the 8.8. C. and the London School of Economics. “ The 8.8. C. want not. merely to talk to their listeners, but are interested in discussing questions with them, and they have tried various questionnaires before on a small scale. This time they came to me and said they were prepared to do something on a big scale about family life if the School of Economics thought it worth while to get out the questionnaire and tabulate the results.

“There are many things to learn about the family which are not disclosed by the census or the registrar-general’s return, and I said we would take it up. We invented the form together, and it has bon approved by the various authorities of the 8.8. C. “ The information will be anonymous. That is to say, no name will appear anywhere on the form. You can, if you like, put your name, initials, or address on the envelope, but as soon as they arrive the form and the envelope will be separated and never brought together again, so that there will be no chance of anybody knowing to whom a form relates.” Sir William agreed that the schema

might arouse opposition, but held that as it was quite voluntary there could be no real objection to it.

Sir William said he realised;that the success of the experiment depended upon how many people replied'to the questionnaire. If the response justified proceeding with an analysis of the leturns this would take some months to carry through. “8.8. C. FOLLY.” The Daily Telegraph writes on the subject with editorial anger, calling it a 8.8. C. folly, and an inquisition into family Ife. . “Any answer to all this of the slightest value would continue over pages,” says the Telegraph. “ Here we have the inherent irrationality of the scheme displayed. If these questions were adequately answered by an adequate number of people, Sir William Beveridge and any staff he could assemble would not work out the results this side of eternity. “ Why the 8.8. C. should spend money in subsidising even partially these irrationalities is officially answered by the grotesque inconsequence that the scheme was part of an ‘ adult education campaign.’ The 8.8. C. should have better judgment than this.” AMERICAN METHODS. “In this elaborate enterprise the 8.8. C. have clearly taken a leaf out of the books of the American psychologists,” comments The Times with less seriousness than its contemporary. “ If an American professor of psychology gets the idea that red hair is due to a parental fondness for carrots, he does not try, like his old-fashioned English colleagues, to spin out a solution from his inner consciousness in front of a fire. The printing presses are set in motion; forms are sent out to all redhaired citizens of the United States of America inviting them to give details of the diet of their fathers and their fathers’ fathers; and, while he is on the subject of red hair, the professor thinks he may as well ask: (a) Are you freckled?; (b) Is your complexion good? It is not surprising that Sir William Beveridge, the anthologist of ‘ Thoughts on Women,’ should now try to turn this powerful weapon of research on to the family. “ Nor need it be resented, as it has been in some quarters, as an ‘ amazing inquisition.’ The critics are barking up the wrong tree. The case against the authorities of the 8.8. C. in their latest project is not that they are inquisitors (for no one need answer—or even receive —their eight page's of questions), but that they are busybodies. Moreover, so far as any practical results are concerned, they are ineffective busybodies. All newspaper experience of voluntary questionnaires of this kind goes to show that they are answered mainly by the humorists or by the cranks. It would be of greater interest, at a time when the 8.8. C. are said to be torn by internal convulsions between the oldfashioned and the modern, to know which side of the controversy this latest project represents. Is it inspired, in fact, by the bright young innovators or by the champions of family life?”