ABSTRACT
When the research of Yankee City began, the director wrote a description of what he believed was fundamental in our social system, in order that the assumptions he held be explicitly stated and not become unconscious biases which would distort the field work, later analysis, and ultimate conclusions. If these assumptions could be stated as hypotheses they were then subject to criticism by the collection of data which would prove, modify, or disprove them. Most of the several hypotheses so stated were subsumed under a general economic interpretation of human behaviour in our society. It was believed that the fundamental structure of our society, that which ultimately controls and dominates the thinking and actions of our people, is economic, and that the most vital and far-reaching value systems which motivate Americans are to be ultimately traced to an economic order. Our first interviews tended to sustain this hypothesis. They were filled with references to 'the big people with money' and to 'the little people who are poor'. They assigned people high status by referring to them as bankers, large property owners, people of high salary, and professional men, or they placed people in a low status by calling them labourers, ditchdiggers and low-wage earners. Other similar economic terms were used, all designating superior and inferior positions.
