CONSUMER PREFERENCES IN PURCHASE OF MEAT 6 
N. D., Jacksonville, Fla., Lincoln, Nebr., Minneapolis, Minn., New 
Haven, Conn., New Orleans, La., Oklahoma City, Okla., Philadelphia 
and Pittsburgh, Pa., San Francisco, Calif., and Washington, D. C. 
POPULATION GROUPS 
Variations in meat-consumer practices arise through such differ- 
ences as race, nationality, and income. In order that these variations 
might be disclosed, it was necessary to interview families of different 
population groups and to analyze the questionnaires from these 
groups separately. 
The population groups and group subdivisions of importance in the 
16 cities were as follows: 
American white group: Foreign groups: 
Poor class. English. 
Middle class. Finnish. 
Well-to-do class. French. 
Wealthy class. German. 
Colored group: Italian. 
Poor class. Jewish 
Middle class. Polish. 
Russian. 
Scandinavian. 
Foreign families which had retained to marked extent the habits 
and customs of other countries were chosen. This was the primary 
distinction between the American white group and the foreign 
groups. 
. As the standard of living varies according to income and social 
position, the four subdivisions were made within the American white 
group. 
POOB CLASS 
The poor class consisted of families 2 living in the poorest white 
sections of the cities and whose family incomes were very limited. 
MIDDLE CLASS 
The middle class was the artisan group. Families of this class 
lived in modest homes in the poorer white residential sections of the 
cities. 
WELL-TO-DO CLASS 
Salaried and professional workers and their families made up the 
larger portion of the well-to-do group. Such families had fair incomes 
and found it possible to maintain some social position. 
WEALTHY CLASS 
Wealthy families were those with incomes sufficiently large to live 
in the most exclusive sections of the cities and to employ servants. 
It is worth while to emphasize that the distinction on which these 
four classes was based was one of standard of living rather than abso- 
2 Two people or more living together were taken as the family unit. The word "family " is not used 
here in the sense of the natural family, but rather as a group of persons living together and constituting 
the membership of the household. For the purposes of this survey the words ' ' family ' ' and ' ' household ' ' 
may be regarded as interchangeable, unless the context indicates otherwise. No boarding houses were 
included under this classification. Families with one or two persons boarding with them were classed as 
families and not as boarding houses. • ....... 
