Attributions of poverty among social work and non-social work students in Croatia.

AIM To investigate how students in Croatia perceive causes of poverty and to examine the differences in attributions of poverty between students of social work, economics, and agriculture. METHODS The study included 365 participants, students of social work (n=143), economics (n=137), and agriculture (n=82). We used the newly developed Attribution of Poverty Scale, consisting of 4 factors, as follows: individual causes of poverty (eg, lack of skills and capabilities, lack of effort, poor money management, alcohol abuse); micro-environmental causes (eg, poor family, region, single parenthood); structural/societal causes (eg, poor economy, consequences of political transition, war); and fatalistic causes (eg, bad luck, fate, God's will). We also used a questionnaire that measured 5 dimensions of students' personal values: humanistic values, family values, striving for self-actualization, traditional values, and hedonistic values. In both questionnaires, items were rated on a 5-point Likert-type scale. RESULTS Students of all three faculties put most emphasis on structural causes of poverty (mean+/-standard deviation=3.54+/-0.76 on a 1-5 scale), followed by environmental (3.18+/-0.60), individual (2.95+/-0.68), and fatalistic causes (1.81+/-0.74). Social work students perceived individual factors as significantly less important causes of poverty (ANOVA, F-value=12.55, P<0.001) than students of economics and agriculture. We found a correlation between humanistic values and perceived structural (r=0.267, P<0.001) and micro-environmental causes of poverty (r=0.185, P<0.001), and also between traditional values and structural (r=0.168, P<0.001), micro-environmental (r=0.170, P<0.001), and fatalistic causes of poverty (r=0.149, P<0.001). CONCLUSION Students see structural/societal factors, such as poor economy and political transition as main causes of poverty in Croatia. Individual factors connected with individual's personal characteristics were considered less important, while luck and fate were considered as least important. Students of social work perceived individual causes to be less important than students of agriculture and economics. Students with strong humanistic and traditional values put more emphasis on external sources of poverty.