The social implications of the changes in agricultural structures in rural America (i.e., the family farm structure in which labor, capital, and management are provided by the family; the corporate-integratee structure in which the capital is obtained through a formal contract with an agribusiness organization and the integratee furnishes the land, labor, and facilities; and the corporate-farmhand structure in which big corporations own the land and hire the labor) are examined. The community involvement of workers in the family farm structure is compared to that of workers in the corporate-integratee and the corporate-farmhand structures. In a county with a large number of contract poultry producers and only one major town, a random sample of 24 family farm units, consisting of 48 workers, and 28 owner-managers and 85 workers, which comprised the sample for the corporate-integratee and the corporate farmhand workers was used to measure dimensions of alienation and community involvement. Findings indicated that (1) the corporate farmhand workers were less involved in community activities than the corporate-integratee or the family farm workers; (2) the world perceptions held by the corporate-farmhand workers were more similar to those held by alienated persons; and (3) little difference existed between corporate-integratee and family farm workers with regard to community involvement. (NQ)