46

(i) INTRODUCTION

The purpose of this inquiry was to find out what proportion of housewives listened regularly and occasionally to the Kitchen Front Broadcast; and whether the time of the broadcast, 8.15 a.m., was convenient for housewives; whether more housewives would listen if the talk were at a different time, and what times would suit them best.

A sample of 2777 housewives was contacted. However, not all of these had wirelesses, or wirelesses that were in working order, so that the interview was carried out only 2145 housewives.

Housewives were first asked whether they had a wireless and whether it was in working order. If the wireless had been out of order for a month or more the subsequent questions were not asked.

It was found that there were marked differences between different groups in respect of whether or not there was a wireless in working order in the house. This means that the possible audience for the Kitchen Front program is not in every respect representative of the population of housewives.

The figures given below show the percentages of different groups who had, and had not, wirelesses in working order.

Income Group

Type of District

Region

It will be seen that the possible audience for the Kitchen Front at the time of the inquiry differed from the population of housewives in the following ways:

(l) Class D is markedly under represented and the lower income groups are, in general, less fully represented than the higher income groups.

(2) Country housewives are rather better represented than town housewives.

(3) Wales, the south and south-west of England and East Anglia are relatively well represented. Scotland is under represented.

The figures given in this report should be taken as representative of the possible Kitchen Front audience and are not necessarily representative of housewives in general, since where there was no working wireless no interview was carried out.

47

(ii) SUMMARY OF RESULTS

Based on a sample of 2.145 housewives with wirelesses in working order

Incidence of Listening

Listen%

Once a week or more 39.9

Less than once a week 19.1

Never Listen %

Is the time convenient ?

(asked of whole sample)

Yes

44.3

Would not listen at any time

15.5

Satisfied

44.3

39.8 Cannot listen well

2.8 doubtful

Would Prefer Another time

Not interesting

20.2

15.5 + 4.7

Doubtful

0.9

(first preference only)

(20.8% miss talk through inconvenience of time)

48 49

(iii) INCIDENCE OF LISTENING TO KITCHEN FRONT BROADCAST

Housewives were asked “Do you ever listen to the Kitchen Front broadcast at 8.15 in the morning?” “How often do you listen?”.

These results may be compared with those of a survey made in September, 1941 (Wartime Social Survey New Series 3). As in the present inquiry, results are based on households possessing wireless sets.

It should be noted that in the present inquiry interviewers were instructed to classify as “Never” all housewives who never listened now, including those who had given up listening.

The 1942 figures show roughly 3% less listening regularly and 3% more never listening. The possible error due to sampling on the 41% of the present inquiry is 2.1%. It may therefore be said that there is virtually no change.

Breakdown by urban and rural areas shows no statistically significant differences in the incident of listing.

An analysis made by region showed that the incidence of listening is lower in London than in other regions. Results for London were as follows:

The figures given here were derived from percentages given in that report as follows:

Part 2

Of those who listened now:

48.8% listened several times a week: 48.8% of 62.4% = 30.4% of sample

20.0% listened about once a week: 20.0% “ “ = 12.5% “ “

31.2% listened less than once a week: 31.2% “ “ = 9.5% “ “

Analysis by income groups is as follows:

The two middle groups show a very slightly higher incidence of listening than Class D. The sample in the case of Class A is small, but it is clear that a relatively low proportion of housewives in this class listen more than once a week. It is doubtful whether or not the proportion who never listen is very much higher than the average, this result being subject to a wide margin of error.

Breakdowns by number in family and by housewives with, and without children, show only small differences.

50

(iv) QUALITY OF ATTENTION GIVEN TO KITCHEN FRONT BY THOSE WHO LISTEN

In order to assess the quality of the attention given to the broadcast, housewives who listened were asked what they were usually doing at this time, and whether or not they found they could listen at the same time.

Answers to the first question were as follows:-

What housewives are usually doing at 8.13 a.m.

Analysis by urban and rural areas shows no statistically significant differences.

A breakdown by income group shows that rather a higher proportion in Classes A and B are having breakfast at this time, 43% (A and B together) as against 32.3% in Class C and 28% in Class D. The lower income groups show higher proportions occupied in other ways, particularly in getting children off to school and attending to babies. 11.7% in Class C and 15.4% in Class D gave this answer as against 5.1% in Classes A and B.

It will be seen that about a third of those who listen to the Kitchen Front programme are having breakfast while they listen, and rather more than half are occupied with various household duties.

The degree of attention that can be given to the talk must depend on what the housewife is doing, and the answers most frequently given are broken down by whether the housewife says she can listen “quite well” or “not very well” at the same time in the table below.

It will be seen that about 80% of those who are having breakfast say they are able to listen to the talk quite well. Of these doing various domestic jobs, more than half say they are able to listen quite well, and only about half of those attending to children say they are able to.

The results for all housewives asked is as follows:-

Thus about two-thirds of all housewives who listen say they can listen quite well at the same time as doing whatever they are usually doing at this time in the morning.

51 52

(v) REASONS FOR NEVER LISTENING

Those housewives who never listened to the Kitchen Front were asked the reasons for this:-

Reasons for not listing

Thus 70% of those who never listen say that this is because the time is inconvenient for various reasons. Or to put it in another way, 29% of all housewives with wireless say they are prevented from listening at all by the inconvenience of the time.

It will be remembered that 27.9% of those who did listen sometimes (see previous section) said that they were unable to listen very well owing to the other things that they had to do at this time of day. This represents 15% of all housewives with wireless.

Thus, altogether about 44% of those interviewed, according to their own attentions, were prevented to a greater or lesser extent from giving as much attention as they might otherwise to the programme because of the time of day it was broadcast.

However, the results above should be accepted with some reservations in mind. “Inconvenient time”, “too busy”. And some other answer may not necessarily mean that the housewives would listen if the talk were at a more convenient time. They may, in fact, be “excuses” for not listening, or a polite way of saying “I don't bother”, or “I'm not interested”.

It was realized that these results were likely to be ambiguous to some extent, and therefore a further question was put; “How often do you listen to the wireless between 8 and 8.30 a.m.?”. Interviewers were told that they might ask this question at any time during the interview that was appropriate, and it might in some cases have been tactless to ask it directly after the housewife had given her reason for not listening to the Kitchen Front.

The results were as follows:

% of those never listening to Kitchen Front who have the wireless on between 8 and 8.30 a.m.

It will be seen that 69% never listen at this time of day, and this figure compares closely with the 70.2% who gave inconvenience of time as their reason for not listening.

It would appear on the surface of it, therefore, that the reasons given for not listening, where the time was said to be inconvenient, were genuine reasons and not in the nature of excuses. However, a breakdown by region of answers to both questions shows that this conclusion is not altogether correct.

Results are shown below for Scotland and the Southern region, and for all regions.

Reasons for not listening to Kitchen Front

% of those listening to Kitchen Front have wireless on between 8 and 8.30 a.m.

Although the number answering in Scotland is very small, the differences are sufficiently marked to have statistical significance.

It will be seen that a relatively high proportion in Scotland said that they were not interested, and a relatively low proportion in the Southern region gave this answer.

However, a higher proportion in the Southern region had the wireless on at this time than in any other region.

It appears therefore that in the Southern region housewives were more inclined to give the “polite” answer or excuse, and that in Scotland they were more candid.

In the other regions either the same or greater proportion never had the wireless on between 8 and 8.30 a.m. and gave the reason that the time was inconvenient.

The same tendency to give the polite answer was found in rural areas as compared with urban, but it should be noted that the majority of country housewives interviewed were included in the Southern region.

In rural areas 55.2 ± 8.2% of housewives had the wireless on between 8 and 8.30, and 73.1% gave their reason for not listening to the Kitchen Front as inconvenience of the time.

However, it should be borne in mind that the Kitchen Front is a programme which demands a rather higher degree of attention than some other programme broadcast 8 and 8.30 and it may be easier to listen to some of these other programmes whilst carrying out various household tasks.

Differences in the sorts of reasons given by housewives in different income groups are barely significant, with the exception of “getting children off to school” or “attending to baby”. This answer was given by 3.3% in Classes A and B (together), 15.2% in Class C and 20.2% in Class D.

A higher proportion of housewives in Classes A and B, who did not listen to the Kitchen Front, had the wireless on between 8 and 8.30.

% of those who never listen to the Kitchen Front who listen to wireless between 8 and 8.30

There are no statistically significant differences in the reasons for not listening given by housewives with large and small families, or in the proportions who listen between 8 and 8.30 a.m.

The only difference sufficiently marked to be significant between the reasons given by housewives with and without children is that housewives with children are getting their children off to school washing their babies at the time of the broadcast.

53 54 55

(vi) The time of the programme

In order to sum up answer given to previous questions with regard to the time of the Kitchen Front programme, housewives with wireless sets in working order were asked to state whether or not the time of the programme was convenient for them *

Results were as follows:

It was pointed out in Section IV that altogether 44% of housewives interviewed were either prevented from listening altogether, or were unable to give their whole attention to the talk owing to the domestic tasks that they had to be doing at this time of day.

This result was based on umprompted answers given to the question “Why do you never listen”, and on housewives statements as to how they were able to listen at the same time as doing other things, and may be compared with 40.2% who said that the time was inconvenient.

Analysis by urban and rural areas shows a rather lower proportion in rural areas saying that they would not listen in any case, and a higher proportion saying that the time is inconvenient.

% of all housewives with wireless

Breakdown by region is as follows:

% of all housewives with wireless

It has already been pointed out that the majority of rural interviews were carried out in the south, south-west and East Anglia, and it will be seen that the results for this region are similar to those for country housewives as a whole.

Although the sample for Scotland is small it is clear that Scotland differs from other regions in that a relatively high proportion say that they would not listen at any time. London also shows a relatively high figure giving this reply.

The north of England and the Midlands show a relatively high proportion satisfied with the time of the programme. Otherwise, regional differences are not very marked.

Analysis by income groups reveals that a rather lower proportion in Class A (30.4 ± 7.8%) find the time convenient than in other classes. It is possible, but not certain, that a rather higher proportion in this class would not listen whatever the time, the figure for this answer being 21.8 ± 7%.

Otherwise there are no statistically significant differences between the different income groups.

Breakdowns by number in family and by housewives with and without children showed no statistically significant differences.

It will be remembered that this question was asked of all housewives with wireless and the answer "would not listen whatever the time” was given spontaneously.

To supplement these results a further question was asked of housewives who that the time was inconvenient; “Would you listen (or listen more often) if it we re at a more convenient time?”.

% of those for whom time was inconvenient

No differences sufficiently marked to have statistical significance are revealed by breakdown of these results into different groups.

The 11.7% who would not listen, or listen more often represents 4.7% of those with wireless sets. In answer to the previous question “Is the time convenient?” 15.5% said that they would not listen whatever the time. Thus about 20% of the possible audience to the Kitchen Front is not interested and therefore not affected by the time of the programme.

From these results the following table, summing up the situation, may be constructed.

% of all housewives with wireless

This may be compared with the incidence of listening:

Whilst 41% never listen only 20% would not listen whatever the time and thus 21% of housewives with wireless are missing the Kitchen Front talk because of the time at which it is given.

Of the remaining 60% about two-thirds fine the time convenient and the remainder listen sometimes, in spite of the inconvenience of the time.

Housewives who found the time inconvenient and would listen, or listen more often, if the talk were at another time were asked what times would suit them best and second best.

A wide variety of answer were given, those occurring most frequently being 9 to 9.30 a.m., 10 till 11 a.m. and 1 to 2 p.m. However, these times account for only 35% of the answer received for the first preference.

Detailed results were as follows:

% of those would listen, or listen more often if talk were at a more convenient time

It will be seen that the trend is reversed in the case of second choices as between morning, afternoon and evening; morning being the most popular first choice and evening the most popular second choice.

The numbers answering are too small for regional breakdowns to give statistically significant results.

There are no statistically significant differences between different income groups or age groups.

Of housewives with large families and with children a slightly higher proportion chose times in the morning and a slightly lower proportion times in the evening, than of housewives with small families and with no children.

Times preferred for Kitchen Front talk by housewives for whom time was inconvenient

(vii) Sample
Total: 2777 housewives

56

(viii) The Questionnaire
Wartime Social Survey
New Series RegionalH.5

Interviewer......... Town......... Date.........

Region: 1 2 3 4 5 6 8 9 10 11 12

Urban....1

Rural....2

Age:

Under 35....1

35-50....2

Over 50....3

Class

A....1 No. of children Under 5

B....2 No. of children 5-14

C....3 No. of adults (over 14)

D 4 Total No. in family

No. of boarders

No. of servants

THE KITCHEN FRONT

1. Has the family a wireless in working order?

(if wireless has been out of order a month or count as “Yes")

If NO go on to Salvage. If YES continue

Yes....1

No....1

2. Do you ever listen to the Kitchen Front broadcast at 8.15 a.m.

How often?

Once a week or more....1

Less than once a week....2

Never....3

If Listen:

3. What are you usually doing at this time?

4. Do you find you can listen at the same time?.........

Quite well....1

Not very well....2

5. Why do you never listen?.........

If never Listen

6. How often do you listen to the wireless between 8 and 8.30 a.m.?

Once a week or more....1

Less than once a week....2

Never....3

7. Is the time convenient for the housewife?

(Ask only if answer is not already given, but record information here for every housewife)

Yes....1

No....2

Would not listen whatever the time 3

If no to Q.7.

8. Would you listen (more often) if it were at a more convenient time?

Listen always now....1

Yes....2

No....3

9. What time would suit you

(a) best....

(b) second best....

Reception of Questionnaire:

Willing and interested....1

Willing: neutral....2

Wiling but not interested....3

Obstructive....4

58

(i) Introduction

The Sample

2218 housewives were interviewed. These were selected in representative proportions from different income groups, regions and urban and rural areas.

Investigations were instructed to select streets or blocks of flats in which they expected to find housewives representative of the different income groups, and to visit every tenth house of flats.

If the housewife was not at home two further calls were made at different times of day, and if on the third call the housewife was out, the investigator carried out the interview with the housewife next door or the nearest housewife who was at home.

The sample includes a proportion of working housewives.

Details of the sample are given on page 25. Slight discrepancies in the sample figures given beneath tables in the report itself are due to a few forms being unclassified in some respects.

Purpose of the Inquiry

The questionnaire is given on page 26.

The questions about the Kitchen Front were asked in order to find out to what extent the present time at which the talk is broadcast was satisfactory for housewives, and if not, what times they would prefer.

Similar questions were asked in our inquiry carried out in October, 1942, and the results are compared in this report.

The questions about other advertising media; newspaper advertisements, films and demonstrations were asked with the purpose of assessing the degree of attention given to these advertisements by housewives.

An attempt was made not only to measure the proportions who took some notice and who took no notice of these sorts of publicity, but also to find out to what extent the message of the Ministry of Food were understood by housewives and their opinion of the things they were advised to do.

An inquiry including questions about these types of advertising media was carried out by the Wartime Social Survey the February, 1942, and although the questions are not in all cases identical, they are sufficiently similar for the results to be compared, and changes, if any, observed.

Summary

Kitchen Front

Newspaper Advertisements

16.6% repeated the name “Food Facts” when asked what the heading was. About one third were able to say something about an advertisement that had interested them.

Films

Of those who had seen films 44.6% remembered the subject of the last one seen.

Of those who had seen flashes 58.6% remembered the subject of the last one seen.

Of those who had seen slides 23.5% remembered the subject of the last one seen.

Demonstration

8.5% had attended food demonstrations.

Of those who had attended them 67.8% said they had found them useful and 19.0% that they had not found them useful.

59 60

(ii) The Kitchen Front

Housewives were first asked whether or not they had a wireless in working order. Only those who had wireless sets in working order, or wireless sets which had been out of order for less than a month only, were asked about the Kitchen Front programme.

No considerable difference were found in the proportion having wireless sets as compared with the inquiry on the subject made by the Wartime Social Survey in October, 1942.

Breakdown by income group shows the same marked trend as in October, 1942

Breakdown by age shows slight difference:

(No analysis by age-groups was made of the earlier results)

Those with wireless were asked: “At what time during the day would you be prepared to sit down for five minutes and listen to a Kitchen Front talk?"

As in previous inquiry a wide variety of times ranging from early morning to late evening were suggested.

The time most frequently mentioned was 8.15 a.m., the present time of the programme. 21.6% of those with wireless gave this answer. There is a considerable difference in the result of this open question, where housewives were free to choose any time of the day, and the replies received to the question in the previous inquiry: “Is the time convenient?” 44.3% said that the time was convenient.

It is clear from this difference that a considerable proportion of those housewives who said that the time suited them, if given a free choice, would have found some other time better still, and had the question been framed: (is there any time that would suit you better?", the result might be expected to differ.

TIMES AT WHICH HOUSEWIVES WOULD LIKE TO HEAR KITCHEN FRONT PROGRAMME

After the present time of the programme up till 11 a.m. is second in popularity. 11% chose 1 to 3 p.m. and about the same proportion 6 to 8 p.m.

The 22.4% who said they would not listen at any time compares with 20.2% who were not interested in the previous inquiry.

In the table given below those who prefer to have the programme at 8.15, and those who would not listen in any case are excluded, and the percentages are based on the remainder, i.e. those who would prefer the time to be changed.

Arranged in this way the results may be compared with answers to the question “What time would suit you best?", (first choice) asked only of those who said the time was inconvenient in the October survey.

TIMES AT WHICH HOUSEWIVES WOULD PREFER TO LISTEN TO KITCHEN FRONT PROGRAMES

(Other than 8.15)

The rather higher proportion in the January survey answering “before 9 a.m.” may perhaps be accounted for by the difference in the samples.

The October sample includes only those who said that the present time of the programme was inconvenient, whereas the January sample includes all those who mentioned any time other than 8.15 a.m. Some of those who mentioned times near 8.15 a.m. (and before 9 a.m.) but not actually 8.15 a.m. might have considered that any time round about 8 a.m. would do for them, and such people would not have been included in the 739 of the earlier sample.

Analysis by income group and age, as in the earlier inquiry, show no statistically significant differences.

Those who said they would not listen whatever the time of the programne, 22.4% of the sample, were asked their reasons for this. These were as follows:

REASONS FOR NOT LISTENING

61 62 63

(iii) NEWSPAPER ADVERTISEMENT

Housewives were asked: “Do you usually read the Ministry of Food's advertisements in the newspapers?"

("Occasionally” was defined as advertisements read two or three times only, and “usually” as more often).

These results may be compared with those of an inquiry made by the Wartime Social Survey in February, 1942.

In this inquiry housewives were asked: “Have you seen any of the Food Facts notices about food matters in the papers or magazines?"

Results were as follows:

In the present inquiry is was found that 74.6% of housewives said they read the advertisement either regularly or occasionally, which figure compares closely with the 74.3% who said they had seen the advertisements in February, 1942.

However, it should be remembered that the questions were worded differently and the closeness of the results does not necessarily mean that Food Facts are actually read by no greater a proportion than a year ago. Those who said they had seen Food Facts may not all have read them, or read them on more than one occasion. And some of those who in the present inquiry said they never read them may have seen them in reading the newspaper.

The earlier inquiry was intended to test housewives' awareness of the Food advertisements; the present to assess the degree of attention given to them.

The higher income group show more attention to the Food Facts notices than the lower.

The proportion never reading them is markedly higher in classes C and D than in Classes A and B.

The same trend was observed in the earlier inquiry.

Analysis by age groups shows a rather higher proportion in the oldest never reading Food Facts.

The results of the 1942 inquiry show the same tendency for the oldest group to be less attentive to the advertisements.

Analysis be region is as follows:

Scotland and the North show a lower proportion reading Food Facts than other regions, the Southern Region shows the highest. Regional results for the 1942 inquiry were as follows. It will be seen that the regional breakdown is more detailed, the sample being large enough (5739) to include an adequate number of interviews in each of ten regions.

As in the present inquiry Scotland shows a relatively low proportion giving a positive answer. The results for London also compare closely with the present survey, approximating in both to the proportions for the country as a whole.

If the two Midland regions and South Wales are considered together a very slight change is seen in the direction of greater interest. (This is just but barely significant).

Difference may be seen in the North and in the South. The question as put in the present inquiry demands from the housewife rather more careful consideration. She has to say whether she reads the advertisement usually, occasionally or never. In the earlier inquiry it was only necessary to say whether or not she was aware of them and seen them.

Whereas in 1942 a greater awareness was found in the North than in the South, the more exact question of the present survey reveals that a lower proportion in the North than in the South actually read the advertisement.

In order to measure more realistically the degree of attention given to Food Facts by those who sometimes or usually read them, these housewives were asked: “What heading do you look for at the top of these?”

Interviewers were instructed not to mention the name “Food Facts” at any time in the interview before this question was answered.

Over half of those who said they read the advertisements were unable to name any title, and rather less than a quarter gave the correct reply.

This very high negative result may in part be due to the fact that some recent advertisements have had different titles, and housewives may have tried to think of the more recent ones, which are varied and therefore more difficult to remember.

This question was followed up by: Was there anything in recent advertisements which seemed to you particularly interesting or important? “What?"

45.8% of the housewives who read the advertisements usually or occasionally (or 34.2% of the whole sample) mentioned advertisements which had interested them. These were as follows:

The percentages given add to more than 100, because a few of the housewives giving positive replies mentioned more than one advertisement.

If considered as percentages of the whole sample, and with reference to the proportions reading the advertisements at all, it is seen that about a third of the housewives (a higher proportion than knew the title of the advertisements) had found a recent one interesting.

The results of these two questions, the first one about the headline, and the other about the contents of the advertisements, show that answers to the first question may be misleading.

Whereas nearly half the housewives claim to read the advertisements “usually”, and another quarter “occasionally", only 17% are able to repeat the usual title correctly, and only 34% to name subjects that had interested them.

However it should be remembered that housewives are every day confronted with a number of different exhortations and messages. Inability to repeat a specific message may therefore be quite consistent with some degree of Assimilation of the contents.

64 65 66 67

(iv) Films, “Food Flashes” and Food Slides

Ministry of Food films, “Food Flashes", and Slides were considered separately. It was realised that housewives might have some difficulty in distinguishing between them, and interviewers were instructed to explain the difference in order to help them decide.

Interviewers note that some housewives did have this difficulty and also that there was some confusion between Ministry of Food films and films produced by other Government departments or organisations.

These facts should be borne in mind in considering the results given below.

Housewives were asked: “have you ever seen any of the Ministry of Food's films, “Foods Flashes” or “Food slides?”.

Extent to which housewives remembered seeing films, etc.

The question was preceded by a question asking them how often they went to the cinema. The percentage going to the cinema is show in the tables below.

Nearly 30% remember having seen Food Flashes. The proportions remembering films and slides were lower.

The results for slides may be compared with those of the Food Problems inquiry carried out in February, 1942.

Fewer housewives said they had seen Food Slides in the present inquiry than in the earlier one.

This may be accounted for by the facts that Food Slides are now less frequently shown, and only shown in the smaller cinemas. They have been superseded by Food Flashes, and these are more frequently remembered.

If percentage are based on the number of cinema goers only, and those who never go are excluded, results for the three types of film are as follows:

Breakdown by income groups gives the following results.

Proportion of cinema goers as well as of the whole sample are shown, as owing to the difference in the proportions of those who never go to the cinema in the different classes, the figures based on the whole sample are otherwise misleading.

It will be seen that in Class A a relatively low proportion, and in Class D a relatively high proportion never go to the cinema. The figure for Class B and C are similar.

In consequence of the difference in cinema going habits, a higher proportion of housewives in Class A and a lower proportion of those in Class D had seen Food films and “Food Flashes”.

However, percentage based on cinema goers only show that the incidence of noticing or remembering food films and flashes does not differ as between the different income groups.

It should be noted that the sample of cinema goers in Class A is very small and the margin of error wide.

In the case of Food Slides, the proportion of the whole sample who said they had seen these does not differ in different income groups in spite of the difference in cinema going habits. Perhaps this may be accounted for by the facts that the slides are now only shown in small and cheaper cinemas. This influence would tend to balance the figure in the other direction.

In the inquiry made in February, 1942, there were no statistically significant difference in the proportions who had seen and not seen cinema slides in the different income groups.

Breakdown by age group shows a much higher proportion of cinema goers in the youngest and middle groups than in the oldest group, and consequently more housewives in these two groups had seen the various sorts of films.

It was found also in the 1942 inquiry that a slightly lower proportion of housewives in the oldest group than in the younger groups had seen Food Slides.

If results are based on cinema goers only, the proportion of cinema goers in the oldest group who said they had seen Food films and Food Flashes is slightly lower than other groups.

In the case of Flashes 35.6% of cinema goers in this group as against 42.2% of all cinema goers said they had seen them. In the case of films the difference is less marked.

Analysis by urban and rural areas shows a relatively low proportion of cinema goers in rural areas, and consequently a lower proportion of all housewives who had seen the food films, etc.

However, there are no statistically significant differences in the proportions of cinema-goers who had seen and had not seen the films in urban and rural areas.

Regional differences are very marked. These must depend to a great extent on the frequency with which the different types of films are shown in different parts of the country, as well as the frequency with which they are remembered.

Scotland shows a higher and the Midlands a rather lower proportion of cinema goers in the sample. The South also shows a low proportion, but this may be accounted for by the fact that the majority of rural interviews were included in this region, and it has already been seen that relatively fewer housewives go to the cinema in rural areas.

In the case of all types of films a higher proportion of London housewives than of housewives in any other region gave a positive answer, although the proportion of cinema goers in London is about average.

The difference may be seen more clearly if the results are expressed as percentages of cinema goers only.

The table below shows the proportion of cinema goers in each region who said they had seen the difference sorts of films.

In Scotland and the North of England lower proportions had seen the various sorts of films than in other regions. London shows by far the highest proportions, and the Midlands and the Southern region are about average, films being rather higher in the latter and flashes in the former.

The regional results for cinema slides differ widely from those of the earlier inquiry.

In 1942 cinema slides had been seen by a higher proportion in Scotland than in any other region. In the present inquiry Scotland shows a result below the average.

Percentages at the two periods who said they had seen food slides are as follows:

%(of whole sample) who said they had seen Cinema Slides

The differences may be due to a relatively higher proportion of cinema slides being shown in the South than formerly, and fewer in the North.

It may also be that the change to showing slides only, in small cinemas has affected the relative proportions in different regions.

Or it is possible that housewives' memories are better in some regions than in others. That memory is an important factor is shown by the proportions remembering different films shown below.

Which of those factors is responsible for the differences cannot be decided without detailed information as to the number of slides shown at the two periods in the different regions.

68 69

(v) Demonstrations

Housewives were asked, “have you been to any Wartime Food Demonstration

This question was asked in the Food Problems inquiry made by the Wartime Social Survey in February, 1942. The proportions of women who attend food demonstrations has not changed. It was found in that inquiry that 8.5% had been to demonstrations.

Breakdown by income group shows higher proportion attending demonstration in the upper groups than in the lower.

A similar trend was observed in the results of the earlier inquiry However at this period the differences were not quit so marked.

The Change in results for Class A is barely significant in view of the small samples involved.

Analysis by age groups showed no statistically significant differences either in the present or the earlier inquiry.

Regional breakdowns and breakdowns by urban and rural areas show no statistically significant differences. In the earlier inquiry results were analysed by ten regions, the sample being large (5,752). The size of the present sample is not great enough to allow a ten region breakdown.

Those housewives who had attended food demonstrations were asked where these were held:-

Housewives were asked to describe what the last demonstration they had been to was about. Replies were as follows:-

The percentages given add to more than 100 as some housewives mentioned more than one subject.

The question was followed up with: “Did you find it (the demonstration) useful?”

Two-thirds of the housewives said they had found them so, and 19% about the same proportion as could not remember the subject of the demonstration, had not found them of any use.

To the further question: “Are there any other things you would like shown you in this way?” 65% replied that they could not think of any, and 35% made various suggestions. These were of a miscellaneous nature and included, potato, vegetable and cheese dishes, cakes and buns, “all sorts of baking” and puddings.

(vi) Sample
Total 2,218 Housewives

11.5% of the housewives were doing other full-time jobs, 11.1% other part-time jobs.

70

(vii) THE QUESTIONNAIRE

75 76

FOODS CONSIDERED MOST NECESSARY FOR HEALTH AND STRENGTH

“Which foods are in your opinion most necessary for health and strength?”

Below is given a list of foods, in the order of frequency with which they were mentioned. Results obtained in response to a similar question asked in May, 1942 are compared.

Percentages do not add up to 100 in either case, because informants mentioned more than one food. Percentages are, with a few exceptions, on a higher scale in the present inquiry than in that made last year. In both inquiries, this question was preceded by other questions relating to food, so that attention was probably equally focused on food in both cases. The differences in the number of foods mentioned may be due to the fact that people are more aware of the importance of food values in general than they were in May of last year: or people may have mentioned more foods during the winter months this year than in May of last year: or the increased numbers of foods mentioned this year may reflect a growing awareness of the importance of certain foods which have been affected by ration changes. Meat and bacon are mentioned with the highest frequency in both inquiries; but whereas butter and fats are considered almost as necessary this year, they were mentioned only fourth in order of frequency last year, when vegetables were considered next in importance to meat and bacon. Vegetables take third place this year, and are followed by milk, cream and milk drinks, commodities which were among the four most frequently mentioned last year. This year eggs were mentioned more frequently than bread, whereas last year almost equal proportions mentioned bread and eggs. This may be accounted for by the fact that in May last year eggs were in more plentiful supply, and people tend to become more aware of desirability of certain foods when supplies are reduced.

This year sugar is mentioned more often than cheese – last year this position was reversed and fish was mentioned as often as sugar: cheese and fish are mentioned with equal frequency this year.

Some people who mentioned vegetables as one of the foods most necessary for health and strength referred to particular vegetables. In the present survey 12% specified potatoes and 9% greens. In both inquiries other vegetables such as salads, lettuce and watercress, carrots and tomatoes were mentioned, but not with any great frequency.

Various other kinds of food were mentioned as being important for health and strength, but none were named with a frequency of more than 3%.

Analysis by Sex

Below is given a list of foods which men and women said were necessary for health and strength with significantly different frequency.

Men mention meat and bacon and bread more frequently than women, whereas a higher proportion of women consider butter and fats, milk and milk drinks and fruit and fruit juice necessary for health than men do.

Analysis by age

There are significant differences between frequencies with which people in the three age groups mention three types of food.

It is interesting to notice that a lower proportion of people under 30 years than those in the other two age groups consider meat and bacon to be very necessary for maintaining health and strength: this may be due to the fact that a considerably higher proportion of women than men under 30 were interviewed. People over 45 less frequently consider vegetables and fruit necessary than those in either of the other two age groups: this may be explained by the fact that a larger proportion of men than women over 45 were interviewed.

Analysis by area

People interviewed in Scotland mentioned meat and bacon, milk, cream and milk drinks, eggs, fish and cereals with greater frequency than people in any of the other four areas, figures are also higher than the national figures. In other inquiries made by the Wartime Social Survey people in the Scottish region have been found to consume and be satisfied with less milk than those in other regions. It is interesting to notice that a relatively high proportion of Scottish informants nevertheless consider milk, cream and milk drinks necessary for promoting health and strength.

In Northern England proportions of people mentioning all kinds of food except butter and fats and bread are lower than those in any of the other areas.

Proportions mentioning the various foods in the area covering the Midlands,where the Midland figures are higher than the national ones and are similar to those for South England and East Anglia, in which area most of the proportions are higher than national ones. People in this area mention butter and fats more frequently than those in any other area, which may be due to the relatively high rural population in this area.

In the London area figures approximate to the national proportions, except that butter and fats are mentioned less frequently, the relatively low figures for bread are similar to the Scottish figures, and sugar is mentioned less frequently even than in Northern England.

Analysis by class

Class A and B is Comprised of housewives and retired and unoccupied people of the two upper income groups, as well as professional and managerial groups.

Class C and D is comprised of housewives and retired and unoccupied people of the two lower income groups and all other workers.

There are some differences between frequencies with which people in the two class groups mentioned foods as necessary for health and strength.

It can be seen from this table that the figures for the C and D class are very close to the national figures. The proportions in the A and B class mentioning meat and bacon is lower than the national figure, but proportions mentioning the other five commodities are higher.

Analysis by occupation

There are some interesting differences between the groups. Workers in “other industries” which includes agriculture, mining, building, transport and public utilities mention meat and bacon more often than any other occupational group. It is significant that most workers in these groups are men. These workers mention milk, cream and milk drinks, fruit and fruit juice and fish and cereals less frequently than other groups.

Proportions mentioning cheese in light industry are lower than the national figures.

Workers in heavy industry refer to meat and bacon more often and butter and fats less often than the average. Comparing the figures with those obtained last year they mention vegetables with greater relative frequency.

Figures for clerical and distributive workers approximate to the average. They rank vegetables and butter and fats higher than meat and mention milk, cream and milk drinks with about the same frequency. A very similar result was obtained last year.

Those in the managerial and professional group rate butter and milk higher than meat, as they did last year, and mention milk and fruit more often than any other group.

Figures for the housewife and retired and unoccupied groups follow roughly the same pattern as the total figures, except that the retired and unoccupied group consider vegetables less important. This years results show that housewives lay more emphasis on the importance of butter and fats and meat and bacon than last year.

Proportions mentioning bread are about the same in each group.

Analysis by urban and rural districts

People living in urban and rural districts mention three foods with significantly different frequencies.

As the table shows, proportions mentioning butter and fats, sugar and cheese are higher in rural than in urban districts and also higher than the total frequencies.