THE PARMER'S STANDARD OF LIVING 59 
size of family. Thus, additional persons per family sharing the use 
of the larger values of goods means a less pronounced rise in the 
value of goods used per person than per family. 
The figures in Table 21 can not be accepted as absolute or final 
in the interpretation of the uses of income for family living pur- 
poses. It should be recalled that the additional incomes dealt with 
represent only a part, in many instances a minor part, of the total 
income available. One can not even conjecture the extent to which 
they supplement the available money income from farm business 
operations and the goods furnished by the farm for family living 
purposes. The data as presented, however, are suggestive of further 
studies dealing with the entire available income of farm families. 
INFERENCES WITH REGARD TO SPECIFIED FACTORS 
Because of the small numbers of families represented by some of 
the factors considered, the wide differences between localities, and 
the limitation of tenure status to owners in several instances, infer- 
ences or conclusions here presented can not be regarded as final. 
Results by the tabular method are suggestive of the trends of the 
relationships between the factors chosen for comparisons; but they 
do not account for the interrelation of all the factors involved in the 
situation. They fail to designate the limitations of the factors used 
and to account for the influence of many other factors not available 
for use in connection with the analyses. 
For example, the tabular summaries of the relation of schooling 
of the operator and the home maker to the standard of living do not 
account for the influence of the social relationships outside of the 
field of formal schooling oh the desires for the economic goods of 
family living. Reading at home, social contacts of all persons com- 
posing the family with persons of other families through neighbor- 
hood and other groups and the ways in which the family reacts 
psychologically to its social and economic situations are given no 
consideration. 
The tabular summaries give no suggestion as to the adequacy of 
the value of goods used during one year as a measure of the standard 
of living. The value of goods used and the percentage distribution 
of this value among the different groups of goods for the year of 
study may be very nontypical for many of the families included in 
the study. The value of goods used signifies both a cash outgo and 
the expenditure of time, energy, and often money indirectly, for 
goods furnished by the farm. The proportion of the goods furnished 
may be abnormally high or low with many families. Quantities of 
certain goods purchased during the years immediately preceding the 
year of study may cause other variations not fully accounted for. 
The availability of goods and the facilities for marketing may influ- 
ence the quantities and thus the values of goods used during the year 
of study. 
Because of the complexity of all the factors involved, the need of 
further study of larger numbers of records by more detailed statis- 
tical methods is recognized. The preceding summaries by the tabular 
method are suggestive, however, of the following inferences or ten- 
tative conclusions : 
