A recent paper by Yilmaz, Boone, and Andersen (2004) is criticized on four grounds. First, the paper does not have adequate definitions of "urban" and "sub"urban". Second, the interpretation of these terms for Ankara does not reveal the particular socio-economic circumstances existing there. Third, no clear grounds are established for the ascription of group attitudes. Four, the language of some of the questions will have been unfamiliar to respondents. Other recent studies are subjected to similar criticisms.