WWWINNHNW!NIHIHHIHNINWWW

   

THESIS

 

51 R
(10061 LIBRARY
Michigan State
University

 

 

This is to certify that the
thesis entitled

Father lnvolvements and Children with Chronic Conditions

presented by

Ju-Lien Ko

has been accepted towards fulfillment
of the requirements for the

MA. degree in Department of Family and Child

Ecology

 

 

afloat“; 734%,; w

Major Professor’s Signature/

flax (Mi. £80?

Date

MSU is an Affirmative Action/Equal Opportunity Employer

 

 

 

PLACE IN RETURN BOX to remove this checkout from your record.
TO AVOID FINES return on or before date due.
MAY BE RECALLED with earlier due date if requested.

 

DATEDUE

DAIEDUE

DAIEDUE

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

5/08 K:/Prolecc&Pres/CIRC/DateDue Indd

Father Involvements and Children with Chronic Conditions
By

Ju-Lien K0

A THESIS
Submitted to
Michigan State University
in partial fulfillment of the requirements
MASTER OF ARTS
Family and Child Ecology

2008

ABSTRACT
FATHER INVOLVEMNT AND CHILDREN WITH CHRONIC CONDITIONS
By
Ju-Lien K0
The primary objective of this study was to use the Panel Study of Income
Dynamics-Child Development Supplement 11 (PISD-CDS II) data to investigate .
predictors of greater father involvement based on the Lamb-Fleck model of the
determinants of father involvement. The study identified several factors which contribute
to the predictability of father involvement. The results showed that fathers who have
high motivation. less parenting stress, high self-esteem, and fewer working hours are
more likely to be involved in child care. A second objective was to examine the
influence of childhood chronic conditions on the relationships between individual
predictive factor and different kinds of father involvement activities. Six relationships
were affected by the dichotomous moderator variable, and three relationships were

significant when the moderator variable was classified into four levels of seriousness.

Copyfightby
Ju-Lien K0

2008

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

This current study would not have been possible without the support of many
people. I am extremely grateful to the members of my thesis committee for the guidance.

encouragement. and support. Special thanks to:

Dr. Lillian Phenice
Dr. Thomas Luster

Dr. Robert Griffore

Thanks to my parents and sister who endured this long process with me and

always offer support and love.

Thanks to associate professor at Ohio University, Dr. Margaret Manoogian who
has still offered me encouragement and support after I graduated from Ohio University.
Special thanks to assistant professor at Ohio University, Dr. Greg Kessler who is the first
person in my life to provide me huge encouragement and support and to teach me how to

be a strong person.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

List of Tables ........................................................................................ vi
List of Figures ...................................................................................... vii
Chapter I Introduction ...................................................................... ' .......... 1
Purpose of the Study ...................................................................... 3
Chapter 2 Review of the Literature ................................................................... 4
Definition of Good Fathering ........................................................... 4
Predictors of Father Involvement ....................................................... 5
Fathers of Children with Chronic Illness .............................................. 6
Theoretical Perspective ................................................................. 9
Conclusion .............................................................................. 10
Chapter 3 Methods ................................................................................... 12
Research Questions ...................................................................... 12
Research Hypotheses ................................................................... 12
Conceptual and Operation Definitions ............................................... 15
Sample ................................................................................... I7
Instrumentation ............................................................................ 1 8
Chapter 4 Results ..................................................................................... 23
Descriptive Results .................................................................... 23
Testing onypotheses.........................................................- ........ 31
Chapter 5 F indings, Conclusions. Implications, and Limitations .............................. 5]
Findings ................................................................................... 51
Conclusions ............................................................................. 55
Limitations ................................................................................ 54
Implications .............................................................................. 57
Appendix A ........................................................................................... 60
Appendix B ............................................................................................ 79
Appendix C ......................................................................................... 101

Bibliographyl04

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1. Summary Table of Motivation ........................................................... 24
Table 2. Summary Table of Paternal Parenting Skills and Self-confidence ................. 26
Table 3. Summary Table of Social Support and Stress ......................................... 26
Table 4. Summary Table of Institutional Factors and Demographic Factors ................ 29
Table 5. Summary Table of Father Involvement ................................................ 30
Table 6. Summary Table of Childhood Chronic Conditions ................................... 31
Table 7. The Factors of Father Involvement ..................................................... 33
Table 8. Comparison of Paternal Responsibility ................................................ 37

vi

Figure 1.
Figure 2.
Figure 3.

Figure 4.

Figure 5.

Figure 6.

Figure 7.

Figure 8.

Figure 9.

LIST OF FIGURES

The Lamb-Fleck model of the determinants of father involvement ............... 7
The conceptual model of factors affecting father involvement ................... 13
The model of the influence of childhood chronic conditions ..................... 14

The interaction between parenting socialization and childhood chronic
conditions in paternal warmth and affection ......................................... 40

The interaction between neighborhood involvement and childhood chronic
conditions in paternal warmth and affection ........................................ 41

The interaction between social support and childhood chronic conditions in
father/child household-centered activities ........................................... 42

The interaction between interparental conflict regarding general life goals and
childhood chronic conditions in paternal monitoring ............................... 43

The interaction between fathers monthly working hours and childhood chronic
conditions in paternal monitoring ..................................................... 44

The interaction between father‘s age and childhood chronic conditions in
paternal monitoring ...................................................................... 45

Figure 10. The interaction between father’s education and childhood chronic conditions

in father‘s warmth and affection toward children .................................. 48

Figure 1 1. The interaction between parenting class and childhood chronic conditions in

paternal monitoring .................................................................... 49

Figure 12. The interaction between mother’s attitude about father role and childhood

chronic conditions in paternal monitoring .......................................... 50

vii

CHAPTER ONE
Introduction

In the last three decades. there has been considerable research on positive
outcomes of father involvement for children. The increase in father involvement can
have positive effects on children‘s academic performance, cognitive function, social
behavior. and development (Amato & Rivera, 1999; F Iouri & Buchanan, 2004). Greater
father involvement relates to fathers’ motivation and skills, supports from others, and
institutional factors (Lamb, Pleck, Chamov, & Levine. 1987). Far beyond the traditional
roles as breadwinners. the definition of father involvement today includes nurturing,
caregiving, engaging in leisure and play activities, providing moral guidance, and
discipline for children, and providing emotional and practical support along with the
child’s mother (Cabrera, Tamis-LeMonda, Bradley, Hofferth. S., & Lamb, 2000).

According to the Maternal and Child Health Bureau (US. Department of Health
and Human Services. 2004). as many as 12.8 percent of children “have or are at increased
risk for a chronic physical, developmental, behavioral, or emotional condition and also
require health and related services of a type or amount beyond that required by children
generally.” Approximately 23.2 percent of children‘s conditions usually or always affect
their abilities, and 37.4 percent of children’s abilities are sometimes influenced. In recent
years, some qualitative studies have indicated that chronic illness in a child may emerge
as a catalyst leading to more meaningful father involvement (Dollahite, 2004; McCubbin,
Balling, Possin. F rierdich, & Bryne, 2002; McNeil], 2004). However, findings from

qualitative research cannot be generalizable to the population of fathers of children with

special needs due to qualitative methodology and the unique nature of the sample
(Dollahite, 2004).

Many studies have indicated various impacts of childhood chronic illness or
disability on both children and their parents. Children with chronic illness or disability
are at risk of psychiatric and emotional disorders. abnormal behavioral symptoms, and
school-related adjustment problems (Lavigne & Faier-Routman, 1992; Meijer, Sinnema.
Bijstra. Mellenbergh. & Wolters. 2000; Timko. Stove], Moos, & Miller, 1992). Parents
ofchildren with chronic illness experience greater stress than parents of healthy children
(Baker, McIntyre. Blacher. C mic, Edelbrock & Low, 2003; Dyson. 1997). More
specifically, there are a variety of burdens and obligations that exhaust their energy when
providing daily care to children with chronic health conditions (levers & Drotar. 1996).
Fathers of children with chronic conditions are more likely to experience a significantly
greater number of stressful life event and to report lower self-esteem than fathers of
healthy children (Kats & Krulik, 1999). Although research has investigated the impact of
chronic illness of the child on the parents. literature on father involvements and children
with chronic conditions is limited and needs further investigation.

In order to understand the unique nature of father involvements, the first part of
this study was to identify factors that were associated with greater father involvement
based on the Lamb-Pleck factor model of the determinants of father involvement (Lamb
et al., 1987; McBride. Schoppe, Ho, & Rane, 2004). The second part of this study was to
utilize a moderator model to examine whether childhood chronic conditions affected the
relationships between each factor and different kinds of father involvement activities.

This quantitative study used data from the 2001 Child Development Supplement of the

Panel Study of Income dynamics (PSID-CDS II), a longitudinal study of a representative
sample of US. individuals and the families in which they reside (Mainieri, 2006). The
information gained from the study may aid professionals, policymakers, scholars, and
educators in the field of fathering to have a better understanding of the determinations of
fathers" parenting behaviors and the effects of childhood chronic conditions.
Purpose of the Study

The overall aim of this study is to assess and describe a five-factor model of the
determinants of father involvement, which is based on Lamb, Pleck and colleagues‘
conceptual model (Lamb et al., 1987; McBride et al., 2004). Further. the study attempts
to identify what factors predict father involvement. Specifically, the five-factor includes I
motivation, skills and self-confidence, social supports and stresses, institutional factors,
and demographic factors. Finally, the influence of childhood chronic conditions on the
relationships between each predictive factor and different kinds of father involvement

activities is addressed.

CHAPTER TWO
Review of the literature

Definition of Good Fathering

Researchers have indicated that fathering cannot serve the functions as mothering.
It is a result of the meanings, beliefs, motivations, attitudes, and behaviors of all
stakeholders in the lives ofchildren (Doherty, Kouneski, & Erickson, 1998). According
to Snarey (1993). good fathers mean “generative” fathers: “men who contribute to and
renew the ongoing cycle of the generations through the care they provide as birth fathers
(biological generativity), childrearing fathers (parental generativity), and cultural fathers
(societal generativity)“ (p. 1). Some scholars use the term “responsible fathering,” which
reflects a more explicit value-advocacy approach and suggests an “ought” and a moral
meaning for evaluating fathers’ behavior (Doherty et al., 1998). Levine and Pitt (1995)
defined responsible fathering:

' He waits to make a baby until he is prepared emotionally and financially to

support his child.
' He establishes his legal paternity if and when he does make a baby.
' He actively shares with the child’s mother in the continuing emotional and
physical care of their child, from pregnancy onwards.
I He shares with the child’s mother in the continuing financial support of their
child, from pregnancy onwards. (p. 5)

Other researchers define “good fathering“ as “positive father involvement." Pleck

(1997) stated that “positive father involvement means high engagement, accessibility, and

responsibility with positive engagement behaviors and stylistic characteristics" (p. 102).

Positive paternal involvement can benefit children‘s emotional well-being, social
functioning, and cognitive development (Amato. et al., 1999; Tamis-LeMonda, Shannon.
Cabrera, & Lamb. 2004; Williams & Radin, 1999). In addition, both resident and
nonresident fathers who have active participation in their children’s lives can advantage
their children’s academic achievement and enjoyment of school (Nord, Brimhall. &
West, 1997).

Predictors of Father Involvement

 

Lamb and his colleagues (1985) proposed three dimensions of father involvement
including interaction. availability, and responsibility. Interaction refers to the father’s
direct participation in caretaking and shared activities with his child. Availability refers
to the father’s potential availability for direct interaction with his child. Responsibility
refers to the father's responsibility for ascertaining care with his child and for arranging
available resources for his child. The four factors related to these three components of
father involvement are motivation, skills, social support, and institutional factors (Lamb
et al., 1987). Motivation means that the father is highly motivated for the day-to-day care
of his child. Skills refer to the essential skills for success in and enjoyment of child care.
Social Support is spouse and others’ encouragements to be more involved in child care.
Institutional Factors refer to workplace practices and policies that decrease or increase
father’s involvement. Lamb and his colleagues (1987) suggested that there was more
paternal involvement when the four possible proximate reasons were present.

McBride and his colleagues (McBride et al., 2004) designed a study regarding
multiple determinants of father involvement based on the Lamb-Fleck model by using the

PSID-CDS data set. The five predictors in the study are motivation. skills and self—

confidence, social supports and stress, institutional factors. and demographic factors (see
figure 1). The five composites representing father involvement are responsibility,
paternal warmth and affection. household-centered activities. child-centered activities.
and paternal monitoring. The authors found that the major portion of the Lamb-Pleck
model was supported. The results of the study showed that the institutional factor was
not a significant predictor of the paternal involvement. but the other four predictors were
significantly related to the paternal involvement measures. In addition, paternal
perception of the father role (a motivation variable) was the strongest predictor during
testing of the full model. The variables that were not significantly associated with any of
the measures of father involvement were economic stress. social support, child gender,
father‘s age. mother’s age, father's education, mother‘s education. father’s total
employment. and mother‘s total employment.
Fathers of Children With Chronic Illness

A number of studies have documented how childhood chronic conditions have
impacted mothers. but less research focuses on fathers' experiences (Olson, Dollahite, &
White. 2002). Several studies compare impacts on mothers and fathers and have showed
different results. The majority of studies found evidence of similar patterns of couples‘
response to the challenges of childhood illness or disability (Hoekstra-Weebers, Jaspers.
Kamps, & Klip. 1998: Holmbeck, et al., 1997; Leonard, Kratz, Skay, & Rheinberger,
1997). However. some researchers have suggested that mothers are more likely to
express more intense and prolonged grief than fathers (Bruce, Schutlz, & Smyrnios,
1996; Vance, Bolye. Najman. & Thearle, 1995). Other investigators have indicated that

childhood chronic illnesses may affect fathers deeply. but fathers of children with special

Predictor factors Father Involvement

 

 

 

 

I Motivation I Parental responsibility
I Skills and self-confidence I Parental warmth and
affection toward
I Social support children
F
I Institutional practices I Father/Child house-
centered activities
I Demographic factors
I Father/Child child-

 

 

centered activities

I Paternal monitoring

 

 

 

Figure 1. The Lamb-Fleck model of the detemiinants of father involvement

needs usually do not express their feelings publicly (Davis & May, 1991). They often

felt angry and frustrated because they did not know how and where to get help. Some

fathers would work longer hours in order to deal with their fears of their child’s illness.

Similarly, Clark and Miles (1999) reported that fathers maintained strength and hid their

emotions when coping with their child‘s illness and hospitalization. Their desire to

maintain control in their daily lives often meant continuing to work. According to

Dollahite (2004). a literature review of the research on fathers of children with special-

ncecls provide the following implications:

1.

k)

(2)

Most studies involving special-needs children have focused on mothers and
relatively little research has been conducted with fathers.

Many of the findings in the literature on fathers are suspect because of flawed
methods (i.e., interviewing mothers, relying on clinical impressions, lack of
longitudinal data).

Until recently, fathers were often treated as relatively unimportant to the
development of special-needs children by scholars and practitioners.

We know fairly little about what fathers actually do in their involvement with
their children with disabilities.

There is great diversity of experience because of the variation in disabilities
and fathering styles.

A disproportionate amount of the research has focused only on the negative
aspects of the fathers’ experience and less on personal growth that occurs.
For many fathers, religious meanings and supports are (or become) significant

to how they adapt to this challenge.

8. Fathers often respond creatively and often have a significant impact on their
children with special needs. (p. l 1 1)

Few investigators address potential factors of fathers’ involvement in their child’s
health care. Leonard and her colleagues (1997) found that fathers“ positive perceptions
of self-efficacy were related to their persistence and involvement with the process of
successful health care for their children with Diabetes. Moore and Kotelchuck (2004)
reported that higher levels of education, younger children, and less traditional
childrearing beliefs enhanced fathers’ involvement in their child's health care. In
addition, Dollahite (2004) had in-depth interviews with 35 Latter-day Saint fathers of
children with special needs. Fathers in the study had strong beliefs in their joint and
unique involvement in caring for their children, and they frequently commented on how
they worked hard to meet the needs of their children. Although the findings from the
study might not be generalizable to the population of fathers of children with special
needs. the author mentioned that the research helped illuminate responsible fathering.
Theoretical Perspective

Human ecology is a foundation to comprehend potential cumulative influences on
father involvement. Human ecology theory focuses on human organisms’ interaction with
their natural physical-biological, social-culture, and human-built environments (Bubolz
& Sontag, 1993). According to the theory, natural physical-biological environments
consist ofall living and nonliving things such as plants, animals. rivers, climate, soil and
so on. Social-culture environments refer to the presence of abstract cultural
constructions, and social and economic institutions. Examples of human-built

environments are neighborhood. housing. building size, building accessibility, ambient

temperature and lighting. furnishing. and equipment (Griffore & Phenice, 2001). The
theory helps one recognize the complexity of father involvements. This study
investigated how fathers‘ parenting behaviors were influenced by motivation, skills and
self—confidence, social support, institutional practices, and demographic factors.

Family ecology theory views a family as an interactive system of individuals and has
four fundamental assumptions (Hanson & Lynch, 2003). First, the component parts of
the family system are integrally linked with one another. The second assumption of this
model is “the family as a system only can be understood as a whole rather than in terms
of its individual parts" (p. 42). Third. the family system interacts with its environments.
Finally. the family system is not an actual physical system but a way of knowing the
organization and experiences ofa family. In this system, all family members influence
each other deeply, including feelings. emotions, values, thoughts, and. actions. Even
though the main interest of this study is fathers and fathering, some characteristics of
mothers and children are considered as contributors to father involvement, beside fathers”
own characteristics. Specifically. maternal employment, marital dynamics, child sex. and
child age are considered as potential predisposing factors in this study.

Conclusion

It is clear that interest in fathers as active parents is becoming more prevalent
within research on fathering and fatherhood. Researchers have found that there is a
positive relation between father involvement and children’s emotional well-being. social
functioning. and cognitive development. Recent scholars have identified that “good
fathering is characterized by a high degree of engagement with, accessibility to, and

responsibility for children, each of which reflects fathers” sensitivity, mutual delight,

10

developmentally facilitative practice. and other-centered ethics” (Palkovitz, 2002, p.

135). As theoretical and empirical literature has begun to emphasize the diverse forms of
fatherhood. it becomes evident that the debate about fathers has focused on what fathers
should do inside the family. beyond the traditional breadwinner role. The Lamb-Pleck
model of the determinants of father involvement, one of the most frequently cited and
utilized frameworks. assumes that father involvement consists of interaction, availability,
and responsibility (Lamb et al., 1985; Lamb et al., 1987). The model also assumes that
motivation. skills. social support, and institutional practices are explanations of individual
differences in involvement.

Scholars have found that fathers of children with chronic conditions often hide
their emotions and try to maintain control in their daily lives, in order to cope with their
fears about their children's illnesses. According to existing literature related to fathers“
involvement in child's health care, paternal self-efficacy, father’s education level,
father‘s childrearing beliefs. and children‘s age have been found to influence fathers’
participation in their children's health care. However. very little has been noted in the
literature about the determinants of daily child care among fathers of children with
chronic conditions. This study sought to find the predictors of father involvement based

on the Lamb-Fleck model.

11

CHAPTER THREE

Methods

 

Research flvpotheses

A review of the literature reveals that different forms of father involvement are
influenced by five predisposing factors: Motivation. Skills and Self—Confidence. Social
Support and Stress. Institutional Factors. and Demographic Factors. This research was to
investigate the relationships between individual variables represented in the five factors
and father involvement. The diagram in Figure 2 depicts the conceptual model of the first
hypothesis used in the study. I expect that characteristics in each of the five aspects of
factors are linked to fathers‘ involvement. The first hypothesis is as follows:

H 1. There are significant associations between five particular aspects of factors and

different kinds of father involvement activities (see appendix A for details). I

Further. the study was to identify and assess the effect of childhood chronic
conditions on predictors of father involvement. Childhood chronic health conditions
were treated as moderator variables to examine whether children's health conditions
affected the relationships between each factor and different kinds of father involvement
activities (See Figure 3). I expect to find that children with chronic health conditions to
experience higher or lower father involvement. The second hypothesis is as follows:

H2. Childhood chronic conditions affect the relationships between each factor and

different kinds of father involvement activities. (see appendix B for details).

Predictor variable X

 

I Motivation:

1. Parenting socialization
Better life
Beliefs about father
role
4. Parenting class

D) Ix.)

Dependent/outcome variable Y

 

 

 

 

I Skills and self-confidence:
5. Parenting stress
6. Paternal self-esteem
7. Paternal self-efficacy

 

 

 

I Social support:

8. Economic stress

9. Neighborhood
involvement

10. Social support

11. Mothers’ attitude

I2. I nterparental conflict
(specific)

13. Interparental conflict
(general goals)

 

 

 

I Institutional factors:
14. Father’s monthly
working hours
15. Mother’s monthly
working hours

 

 

 

I Demographic factors:

16. Child sex

17. Child age

18. Number of sibling
living with the child

19. F ather’s age

20. Mother‘s age

21. Father‘s education

22. Mother’s education

 

 

 

Father involvement:

I Parental responsibility

I Parental warmth and
affection toward
children

I Father/Child house-
centered activities

I Father/Child child-
centered activities

I Paternal monitoring

 

 

 

Figure 2. The conceptual model of factors affecting father involvement

 

Moderator/control variable Z

Predictor variable X

 

 

Childhood chronic health
conditions

 

 

I Motivation:
1. Parenting socialization

2. Better life
3. Beliefs about father
role

4. Parenting class

Dependent/outcome variable Y

 

 

 

 

I Skills and self-confidence:
5. Parenting stress
6. Paternal self-esteem
7. Paternal self-efficacy

 

 

 

I Social support:

8. Economic stress

9. Neighborhood
involvement

10. Social support

I 1. Mothers” attitude

12. Interparental conflict
(specific)

13. Interparental conflict
(general goals)

Father iInvolvement:

I Parental responsibility

 

I Parental warmth and

 

 

I Institutional factors:
14. Father‘s monthly
working hours
15. Mother‘s monthly
working hours

affection toward
children

I Father/Child house-
centered activities

 

A I Father/Child child-

 

 

I Demographic factors:

16. Child sex

17. Child age

18. Number of sibling
living with the child

19. Father‘s age

20. Mother’s age

21. Father’s education

22. Mother’s education

 

centered activities

I Paternal monitoring

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Figure 3. The model of the influence of childhood chronic conditions

Conceptual and Operation Definitions

li'tdependent variable

 

Motivation. Fathers are motivated to be more involved in the day-to-day care of
their children (Lamb et al., 1987). The variables include fathers’ reports of parenting
socialization, desire for a better life for their children, and beliefs about the father role in
the family. Father’s participation in parenting classes or parent support groups from
mother’s report is included as well.

Skills and SelfLC’on/‘idence. Skills are defined as the skills necessary for success
in and enjoyment of child care (Lamb et al., 1987). This consists of fathers’ reports of
parenting stress. Self-confidence refers to paternal self-esteem and self-efficacy. Self-
esteem refers to a person’s feeling of self-worth and is measured with the Rosenberg self-
esteem scale (Rosenberg, 1979). Self-efficacy. “ the extent to which people see
themselves as being in control of the forces that importantly affect their lives,” is
measured with Pearlin self-efficacy scale (Pearlin. Lieberman, Menaghan, & Mullan,
1981,p.340)

Social Supports and Stresses. Social supports mean that paternal involvement is
approved by significant others- mothers, relatives, friends, and workmates. The variables
under this concept include self and spouse neighborhood involvement, social support, and
mothers’ attitudes regarding the father role in the family. Social stresses refer to
economic strain and fathers’ perceptions of interparental conflict regarding specific

activities and general life goals.

15

Institutiomtl Factors. Two variables chosen consist of fathers’ and mothers’
monthly hours spent in paid employment. Fathers and mothers reported their total
working hours per month.

Demographic Factors. Demographic variable selected in the study are child sex.
child age, number of sibling living with the child. and father/mother’s age. and
father/mother’s completed education.

Dependent variables

 

Father Involvement. Three components of father involvement are interaction.
availability. and responsibility (Lamb et al., 1987). Interaction refers to father
involvement in caretaking and shared activities directly with the child. Availability is
“the father’s potential availability for interaction, by virtue of being present or accessible
to the child whether or not direct interaction is occurring” (p. 125). Responsibility is that
the father ascertains whether the child is taken care of and arranges resources to be
available for the child. In this study, five variables were used to construct father
involvement (McBride et al., 2004). The five variables are parental responsibility.
warmth and affection toward children, house-centered activities, child-centered activities,
and paternal monitoring.

Moderator variable

(Z‘hildliood Chronic C‘omlitions. A chronic condition refers to a chronic physical,
developmental, behavioral, or emotional condition. The chronic conditions in the study
include asthma. diabetes, ear infections (more than 3 times a year), speech impairment,
serious deafness, serious blindness, mental retardation. serious emotional disturbance.

anemia. lead in the blood. orthopedic impairment, developmental problems, autism,

16

ADHD or ADD, allergies. migraine. heart condition, and hypertension. For the analyses
in this study, the childhood chronic conditions were categorized into three groups: High
level of Serious Health Condition, Medium level of Serious Health Condition, and Low
level of Serious Health Condition. High level of Serious Health Condition includes
diabetes. speech impairment, serious deafness, serious blindness, mental retardation,
serious emotional disturbance, lead in the blood. autism, and heart condition. Medium
level of Serious Health Condition includes asthma, ear infections, orthopedic impairment,
and developmental problems. Low level of Serious Health Condition includes anemia,
ADHD or ADD, allergies. migraine, and hypertension.
Sam le

The analyses for this study are based on previously collected survey data from the
2001 Child Development Supplement of the Panel Study of Income dynamics (PSID-
C DS II), a longitudinal study of a representative sample of US. individuals and the
families in which they reside (Mainieri, 2006). CDS-I was begun in 1997 and
interviewed 2.394 families (88%), providing information on 3,563 children aged 0-12
years. In 2002-2003, C DS recollected data from families in CDS-I and completed
interviews with 2,019 families (91%), providing information on 2.907 children and
adolescents aged 5-18 years. The two major ethnic groups are White non-Hispanic
(46.96%) and Black non-Hispanic (40.83%).

The participants of this study were the primary child caregivers (PCG) who were
biological mothers and the secondary caregivers (OCG) who were biological fathers,

stepfathers. adoptive fathers, or male partners of mothers. In order to be included in the

study, both the primary caregivers and secondary caregivers were living with C DS-II

17

sample children in 2001. The PCG interviews were administered in-person or over the
telephone. The OC G interviews were also administered in-person or over the telephone,
but had the added option of self-administration (Mainieri, 2006). The analysis for this
study was limited to a sample of 1,122 children who lived with their biological mothers
and the secondary caregivers who were biological fathers. stepfathers. adoptive fathers,
or male partners of mother in 2001.

Instrumentation

 

This study utilized and integrated the composite variables under each conceptual
factor, which are formed by McBride and his colleagues (McBride et al., 2004). The
authors selected the best representative items for each factor and checked them. using
confirmatory factor analysis techniques to ensure the unidimensionality of the constructs.
However. C DS-II added or subtracted some items in questionnaires. As a result, the
variables in this study are not exactly the same as the variables of McBride and his
colleagues’ study.

Motivation. Variables under this conceptual factor are (a) Parenting socialization,
(b) Desire for a better life for their children, (c) Beliefs about the father’s role in the
family. and (d) Participation in parenting classes or parent support groups. Parenting
socialization was measured with a single item (e.g.. “How ofien did you actively
participate in this child's after-school activities?”), and fathers’ responses to this question
ranged from I (never) to 7 (usually every day). Higher scores reflected higher levels of
participation in the child’s after-school activities. For the analyses in this study,
individual reporting every day while the program lasted or usually every day were

recoded as six (usually every day). Possible responses ranged from 1 (never) to 6

l8

(usually every day) after recoding this variable. Desire for a better life for their children
was determined by the following question: Have you ever moved to a different
neighborhood because you wanted to make life better for your children. Beliefs about the
father role in the family were assessed with three items: (a) Dads should interact with
children; (b) A father should be as heavily involved in the care of his child as the mother;
and (c) Fathers play a central role in the child’s personality development. Each item was
coded on a 4-point scale (strongly disagree to strongly agree). One variable from
mother’s report was also included in father’s parenting motivation (e.g., “How often

OC G has participated in parenting classes or parent support groups within the past 12
months?”). Possible responses ranged from Never in the past 12 months (1) to Several
times a week (7).

Skills and SelflConfidence. Three variables were used as measures of paternal
parenting skills and self-confidence. The first variable is parenting stress using four
items: (a) Being a parent is harder than I thought it would be; (b) I feel trapped by my
responsibilities as a parent; (c) I find that taking care of the child(ren) is much more work
than pleasure; and (d) I often feel tired, worn out, or exhausted from raising a family
(McBride et al., 2004). Each item was coded on a 5-point scale (not at all true to
completely true). The second variable, paternal self-esteem, was measured with
Rosenberg self-esteem scale, which is a 10-item scale (Rosenberg, 1986). The scale used
response scale of 1-4, where 1 indicates “Strongly Disagree” and 4 indicates “Strongly
Agree". The third variable, self-efficacy, was measured by four items. The original
Pearlin Self-Efficacy scale includes 7 items (Pearlin et al., 1981). CDS-II shortened the

scale version based on factor analysis and reliability assessment (Mainieri, 2006). The

19

four items are: (a) There is really no way I can solve some of the problems I have; (b)
Sometimes I feel that I'm being pushed around in life; (0) I have little control over the
things that happen to me; and (d) I often feel helpless in dealing with the problems in life.
Each item was scored on a 4-point response scale ranged from strongly agree (I) to
strongly disagree (4).

Social Supports and Stresses. There are six variables to assess social supports and
stress (McBride et al., 2004). There were four variables from the mother’s reports. The
first one is economic strain. a fifteen-items measure developed by Conger and Elder
(1994). and the measure is designed to assess whether a family had financial stress and
strain during the past year or not. A sample item is “Have you borrowed money from
friends or relatives in the past 12 months?” The fifteen items are answered with Yes or
No (1 = yes. 0 = no). Self and spouse neighborhood involvement included 18 items (e. g.,
“How often has you/other caregiver participated in a neighborhood meeting?”).

Response choices on a 7-point scale ranged from never in the past 12 months (1) to
several times a week (7). Social support using 4 items is scored on a seven-point response
scale ranged from Completely dissatisfied (1) Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied (4) to
Completely satisfied (7). A sample questions is “How satisfied are you with the amount
of practical help you receive from your friends?” The last variable from mothers is
attitudes regarding the father role in the family consisting of 3 items (e.g., Fathers play a
central role in the child’s personality development”). The questions use a response scale
of 1-4, where 1 indicates “Strongly Disagree” and 4 indicates “Strongly Agree”. The
other two variables are fathers’ perceptions of interparental conflict regarding specific

activities (4 items) and general life goals (3 items). The four items regarding specific

20

activities are: (a) How the children are raised; (b) How you spend money on children; (c)
The amount of time he/she spends with children; and (d) The friends the mother or
primary caregiver spends time with. The questions were answered with a four-point
response scale (’1 = never to 4 = often). Interparental conflict regarding general life goals
was assessed with the following items: (a) Your job or career plans; (b) The child(ren)’s
mother's or primary caregiver's career plans; (c) Spending leisure time. The questions
used a response scale of 1-4. where 1 indicated “Strongly Disagree” and 4 indicated
“Strongly Agree”.

Father Involvement. Five dependent variables are used to construct father
involvement (McBride et al., 2004). The first variables assessed paternal responsibility
(self vs. other vs. shared) for child-related management tasks fathers’ reports. The five
tasks are: (a) Choosing children’s activities; (b) Buying children's clothes; (c) Driving
children to activities; (d) Selecting a pediatrician and making appointments; and (e)
Selecting a child care program. preschool, or school. For the analyses in this study, those
who responded self or shared were recoded as one; those who responded other were
recoded as zero. Fathers’ reports of showing warmth and affection toward their children
are the second variable (six items). A sample item is “how often in the past month have
you talked with this child about things he/she is especially interested in?” The third
variable (seven items) is concerned with house-centered activities (e.g., “In the past
month, how often did you do dishes together?"). The fourth variable (six items) is
concerned with child-centered activities (e. g.. “In the past month, how often did you do
arts and crafts together?”). The questions of the second to fourth variable were answered

with five-point scale (1 = not in the past month to 5 = every day). An overall measure of

21

father involvement for the three variables (2“. 3rd. and 4m) is a sum of the items that are
included in each variable. The last variable (seven items) is paternal monitoring (e.g.,
"Do you have rules for how late this child can stay up at night”). The possible responses
for each question were no (0) and yes (1). The seven items were summed to produce an
overall paternal monitoring score.

Childhood ('hronic Conditions. For the analyses in this study, a pilot study of 21
participants who are convenience samples helped to categorize all childhood chronic
conditions that were mentioned in this study into three groups: (a) High level of Serious
Health Condition. (b) Medium level of Serious Health Condition, and (c) Low level of
Serious Health Condition. Participants in the pilot study were 7 males aged 19-65 years
and 14 females aged 22-63 years. The range of participants’ completed education level
was from high school to doctoral degree. One female participant has a nursing
background and three participants have experiences to take care or work with children
with chronic conditions. Others have heard about childhood illnesses or learned about
childhood illnesses from experiences of people whom they know. In the survey,
participants were asked to categorize all childhood chronic conditions based on their own
perception of the seriousness of illness. The surveys were administered in-person, via e-

mail. or over the telephone.

[Q
[Q

CHAPTER FOUR
Results
The results are presented in two parts. The first part of this chapter is to present

descriptive analysis results. For each variable, the descriptive analysis includes
frequency. mean, median. standard deviation, and mode. The second part is to present the
results of the Lamb-Fleck model of father involvement and the effect of childhood
chronic health condition on the relationship between the independent variables (factors)
and the dependent variable (father involvement).

Descriptive Results

 

illotivation. This conceptual factor includes parenting socialization, desire for a
better life for their children, beliefs about the father role in the family, and participation
in parenting classes or parent support groups. The results of the frequency analysis for
the three variables are presented in Table 1. Six hundred and twelve participants (54.5%)
reported “never” participated in their child’s after-school activities during the last 12
months, 14% answered “less than once a month,” 8.5% said “at least once a month,”
8.3% said “ once a week, 7.6% reported ” more than once a week,” and 7.1%
participated daily. The mean was 2.22, the median was I, and the mode was 1 (SD =
1.66). Forty-eight percent of the fathers in this study had not moved to a different
neighborhood and 52% had moved to a different neighborhood. The mean score of
desire for a better life was .52, the median was 1 (yes). and the mode was 1 (SD = .50).
An overall belief about father role score was the sum of the three items (alpha= .79), and
the mean score for this scale was 10.23 (E = 1.48). The mode of father role score was

9. The range of scores for the sample in this study was from 3 to 12. The mean score

Ix.)
b)

Table 1 Summary Table of Motivation

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Frequency Percentage Mean Median Mode SD
(N = 1122) (100.0)
Parenting socialization 2.22 1 1 1.66
1 Never 612 54.5
2 Less than once a month 157 14.0
3 At least once a month 95 8.5
4 Once a week 93 8.3
5 More than once a week 85 7.6
6 Everyday 80 7.1
Desire for a better life for .52 1 l .50
their children
0 No. had not moved to a
different neighborhood 538 48.0
1 Yes. had moved a
different neighborhood 584 52.0
Beliefs about the father 10 23 10 9 1.48
rpl_e (alpha= .79)
3 ~ 8 74 6.6
9 396 35.3
10 153 13.6
1 1 157 14.0
12 342 30.5
Parenting classes 1.15 1 1 .68
rlnlglnetvf'lesr 1n the past 12 1046 93.2
221 1:; 11:11:68 in the past 36 3.2
i; 1:23;]:168 in the past 13 1.2
4 Once a month 12 1.1
5 A few times a month 7 .6
6 Once a week
7 Several times a week 3

 

24

of participation in parenting classes for the sample was 1.15, the median was 1 (SD =
.68), and the mode was 1(Never in the past 12 months ). One thousand and forty-six
mothers (93.2 %) in this study indicated that fathers had never participated in parenting
classes or parent support groups within the past 12 months.

Skills and Self-Confidence. Three variables under this factor are parenting stress.
paternal self-esteem, and paternal self-efficacy. The results of Frequency analysis are
presented in Table 2. An overall parenting stress scale was the sum of the four items
(alpha = .71). The range of scores for the sample in this study was from 4 to 20. The
mean score for this scale was 8.51 (S_D = 3.34), the median was 8, and the mode was 4.
An overall self-esteem scale was the sum of the ten items. Higher scores indicated higher
self-esteem, and the range of scores was from 15 to 40. Cronbach’s alpha for this scale
was .85, the mean score was 34.70 (SD = 4.48), and the mode was 40. An overall self-
efficacy scale was the sum of the four items. High scores designated higher self-efficacy
(alpha = .83), and the range of scores was from 5 to 16. The mean score for this scale
was 13.05 (SD = 2.42), the median was 13, and the mode was 16.

Social Supports and Stresses. There are six variables to assess social supports and
stress. The results are presented in Table 3. The first variable is economic strain, a
fifteen-items measure (alpha = .69). The mean score for the economic strain scale was
1.35 (SD = 1.74). The median score was 1, and the mode was 0. The range of scores
was from O to 10. Four hundred and ninety-three participants (43.9%) in the study did not
experience financial stress and strain during the past year, 22.0% had one economic
problem, 14.3 % had two, and 19.8% had three or more than three. The mean score of

self and spouse neighborhood involvement measure was 39.08. The median score was

25

Table 2 Summary Table of Paternal Parenting Skills and Self-confidence

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Mean Median Mode SD
Parenting Stress 8.51 8 4 3.34
(Alpha = .71)
Paternal Self-esteem 34,70 35 40 4.48
(Alpha = .85)
Paternal Self-efficacy 13.05 13 16 2.42
(Alpha = .83)
Table 3 Summary Table of Social Supports and Stresses

Mean Median Mode “SD
Economic Strain 1.35 1 0 1.74
(Alpha = .69)
Neighborhood Involvement 39.08 38 26 12.36
(Alpha = .73)
Social Support 20.89 21 20 4.53
(Alpha = .79)
Father Role in the Family 10.53 10 9 1.41
(Alpha = .76)
Interparental Conflict 7.98 8 8 2.54
(specific activities)
(Alpha = .74)
Interparental Conflict 9.19 9 9 1.82

(general goal)
(Alpha = .84)

 

38. and the mode was 26. C ronbach’s alpha ofthe overall neighborhood involvement
measure was .73. The range of scores was from 18 to 87 (S_D = 12.36). Higher scores
indicate higher level of neighborhood involvement. The mean score for the social
support scale was 20.89 (S_D = 4.53). The median score was 21, and the mode was 20.
The range of scores was from 4 to 30. Higher scores reflect higher level of satisfaction
with social support. Cronbach’s alpha of the father role in the family measure was .76.
and the mean score was 10.53 (S_D = 1.41). The median score was 10, and the mode was
9. The range of scores was from 3 to 12. Higher scores indicate higher level of father’s
agreement with being involved in child care. Cronbach’s alpha of the overall
interparental conflict regarding specific activities measure was .74, and the mean score
for this scale was 7.98 (S_D = 2.54). The range of scores was from 4 to 16. The median
score was 8, and the mode was 8 ( 19.3%). Cronbach’s alpha of the overall interparental
conflict regarding general life goals measure was .84, and the mean score for this scale
was 9.19 (SD = 1.82). The range of scores was from 3 to 12. The median score was 9,
and the mode was 9 (48.4% of all participants).

Institutional Factors. The mean monthly hours in paid jobs for fathers were
226.03 (_S_D = 1 10.77). the median was 225, and the mode was 200 (22.1%). The mean
monthly hours in paid jobs for mothers were 128.15 (SD = 113.82), the median was 150,
and the mode was 0 (31.5%). The results are presented in Table 4.

Demographic Factors. Demographic variable selected in the study are child sex,
child age, number of sibling living with the child, and father/mother’s age, and education
(see Table 4). In this study, 49.3% of all children were boys, and 50.7% were girls. The

mean age of children was 10.90 years old (S_D = 3.80), the median was 11 years old, and

27

the mode was age 9 (9.4%). The range of child age was from 4 to 18 years old. The
mean number of sibling living with child in 2001 was 1.32 (S_D = .96), the median
number was 1, and the mode was 1 (49.3%). The mean age of fathers was 41.92 years
old (S_D = 7.03). the median was 42 years old, and the mode was age 42 (I 1.4%). The
range of fathers’ age was from 24 to 77 years old. The mean age of mothers was 39.43
years old (S_D = 6.58). the median was 40 years old, and the mode was age 39 (8.0%).
The range of mothers’ age was from 22 to 58 years old. The mean of fathers’ completed
education level in 2001 was 13.09 (S_D = 2.68), the median was 13, and the mode was 12
(31.8%). The mean of mothers’ completed education level in 2001 was 12.74 (SD =
3.49), the median was 13, and the mode was 12 (26.6%).

Father Involvement. The five items were summed to produce an overall measure
of paternal responsibility (alpha = .64). The mean paternal responsibility score for the
sample was 3.04 (S_D = 1.38), the median was 1, and the mode was 3 (26.4%). The range
of paternal responsibility was from O to 5. Cronbach’s alpha for warmth and affection
was .87, and the mean score for warmth and affection was 20.57 (E = 5.46). The range
of warmth and affection was from 6 to 30. The median score for warmth and affection
was 21.00, and the mode was 24 (8.2%). Cronbach’s alpha for house-centered activities
was .72. and the mean score was 15.09 (E = 4.25). The range of house-centered
activities score was from 7 to 29. The median score was 15, and the mode was 15
(9.8%). Cronbach’s alpha for child-centered activities was .80, and the mean score was
12.75 (SD = 4.79). The range of child-centered activities score was from 6 to 28. The

median score was 12. and the mode score was 10 (8.0%). Cronbach’s alpha for paternal

28

Table 4 Summary Table oflnstitutional Factors and Demographic Factors

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Frequency Percentage Mean Median Mode SD
(N = 1122) (100.0)
Father’s Monthly 226.03 225 220 110.77
Hours in Paid Jobs
Mother’s Monthly 128.15 150 0 113.82
Hours in Paid Jobs
Child Sex
Boys 553 49.3
Girls 569 50.7
Child Age 10.90 11 9 3.80
Father’s Age 41.92 42 42 7.03
Mother’s Age 39.43 40 39 6.58
Fathers’ 13.09 13 12 2.68
Completed
Education
Mother’s 12.74 13 12 3.49
Completed
Education

 

monitoring was .84. The mean of paternal monitoring score for the sample was 4.89 (SD
= 2.24). The range of paternal monitoring score was from 0 to 7. The median score was
6.00. and the mode score was 7 (36.5%). Higher scores on each scale reflect higher level

of father involvement (see table 5).

Table 5 Summary Table of Father Involvement

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Mean Median Mode SD
Paternal Responsibility 3.04 1 3 1.38
(Alpha = .64)
Warmth and Affection 20.57 21 24 5.46
(Alpha = .87)
Father/Child House-centered 15.09 15 15 4.25
Activities
(Alpha = .72)
Father/Child Child-centered 12.75 12 10 4.79
Activities
(Alpha = .80)
Paternal Monitoring 4.89 6 7 2.24
(Alpha = .84)

 

Childhood Chronic Conditions. Frequency analysis showed that 45.5% of all
children had no chronic health conditions (n= 509). Of the remaining 54.6%, 14.5% had
low level of serious health conditions (n= 163), 24.9% had medium level of serious
health conditions (n= 279), and 15.2% had high level of serious health condition-(n=

171). The results are presented in Table 6.

30

Table 6 Summary Table ofChildhood Chronic Conditions

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Frequency Percentage
(N = 1122) (100.0)
No Chronic Health Conditions
509 45.4
Children with Low Level ofSerious
Health Conditions
163 14.5
Children with Medium Level of
Serious Health Conditions
279 24.9
Children with High Level of Serious
Health Conditions
171 15.2

 

Testing of Hypotheses

 

The first null hypothesis to be tested in this study is that there is no association
between five particular aspects of factors and five kinds of father involvement activities,
Paternal Responsibility, Paternal Warmth and Affection, F ather/Child Household-
centered Activities, F ather/C 'hild Child-centered A ctivities, and Paternal tl'Ionitoring.
Multiple regression analysis was conducted to determine the predictive power of the
independent variables: Motivation Factors (F our variables), Skills and Self-confidence
Factors (Three variables), Social Support and Stresses Factors (Six variables),
Institutional Factors (Two variables). and Demographic Factors (Ten variables). For
each set of analyses. all predictive variables were entered simultaneously through means
of forced entry with no stepwise, forward or backward procedures, and one father
involvement activity was included as the dependent variable. A .05 Alpha level was
established for the evaluation. and the probability value. p. represents the significance of

the independent variables to predict the variation in the dependent variable. The

31

statistical software used in the analysis was SPSS version 14.0 for Macintosh by SPSS
Inc. The results of these analyses are reported in Table 7.

In order to obtain the ideal of a high R value in multiple regression it is important
that the independent variables be highly correlated with the dependent variable while
having a low correlation among themselves (Bowerman & O’Connell, 1990).
Consequently. it is necessary to examine the potential effects of multicollinearity by
confirming the variation inflation factor (VIF) statistics in the regression. According to
Bowerman and O’Connell (1990), any VIF score above 10 and the average VIF greater
than I may suggest there is a problem with multicollinearity. As the average VIF score
in this output was near 1 and all VIF values were below 10, the current set of data did not
appear to have a problem with multicollinerarity.

The first set of multiple regressions was to determine significant predictors of the
dependent variable, Paternal Responsibility. As noted in Table 7, Parenting Socialization
([3 = .14, p < .001) and Beliefs about father role (18 = .15, p < .001), two variables in the
Motivation factors, were found to have positive correlation with Paternal Responsibility.
The Skills and Self-confidence factors were not related to the dependent variable. For the
Social Support and Stresses factors, Mothers’ attitude was positively associated with
Paternal Responsibility (6 = .10, p < .01). For the Institutional Factors, Paternal
Responsibility had a negative association with Father’s monthly working hours (,8 = -.07,
p < .05), but was positively related with Mother’s monthly working hours (,B = .08, p <
.01). For the Demographic Factors, Mother’s age ([3 = -.11, p < .05) and Father’s
education (16 = -.07. p < .05) were negatively related to Paternal Responsibility. The R-

square value of this analysis was .326, and this reveals that 32.6 % of the variance of

Table 7 The Factors of Father Involvement

 

Paternal
Responsibility

Paternal
Warmth &
Affection

Household-
Centered
Activities

Child-
Centered
Activities

Paternal
Monitoring

 

Arlotivation:
Parenting
socialization
Better life
Beliefs about
father role
Parentingglass

.14***(13)

.15***(.18)

.23*** (.31)

.l9*** (.30)

.23***(25)

.07**(Jl)
.l4***(24)

.28***(34)

.07** (.09)
.Io***(22)

.15***(18)

.12***(.l6)

 

Skills & Self-

C on/idence:
Parenting stress
Paternal
self-esteem
Paternal
self-efficacy

208**(a16)

.06* (.13)

.08* (.04)

 

Social supports

& stress:
Economic
stress
Neighborhood
involvement
Social Support
Mothers’
attitude
Interparental
conflict
(specific)
Interparental
conflict
(general goals)

.10**(J2)

.06*(a04)

.07*(10)

.l6***(14)

 

Institutional

Factors:
Father’s
working hours
Mother’s
working hours

407*(210)

.08**(07)

208**(a08)

-.09** (-.l3)

406**(208)

 

Demographic

F actors:
Child sex
Child age

Number of
sibling living
with the child
Father’s age
Mother's age
Father’s
education
Mother’s
education
R square

411*(a12)
207*(210)

.326

a33***(240)

.ll**(a18)
211* (222)

.322

-.l4***(-.22)

.O6* (.07)

«11*(ni9)
208*(206)

.177

n48***
(‘55)

.437

-.33***(-.38)

.18***(a18)
a21***(429)

.248

 

* p < .05; ** p < .01; *** p < .001 : The numbers in parentheses indicate zero-order correlations.

Paternal Responsibility is explained by the combination of the independent variables.

When determining significant predictors of the dependent variable, Paternal
Warmth and Affection. two factors of Motivation, Parenting Socialization ([3 = .23, p <
.001) and Beliefs about father role ([3 = .19, p < .001), were found to have positive
relation with Paternal Warmth and Affection. For the Skills and Self—confidence factors,
Parenting Stress was negatively related to Paternal Warmth and Affection (fl = -.08, p <
.01). The Social Support and Stresses factors were not significant predictors of Paternal
Warmth and Affection. Father’s monthly working hours (,8 = -.08, p < .01), one of the
Institutional Factors. was negatively related to paternal warmth and affection. For the
Demographic Factors. child age ([3 = -.33, p < .001) and Mother’s age (6 = -.l I,p < .05)
had negative associations with the dependent variable. Father’s age was positively
associated with Paternal Warmth and Affection ([3 = .1 1, p < .05). When controlling for
the effects of other predictors, Father’s age had a negative correlation with the outcome (r
= -.18). Approximately 32.2% of the variance in Paternal Warmth and Affection is
accounted for by the independent variables.

For the third set of multiple regressions, Father/Child Household-centered
activities was entered as a dependent variable. For the Motivation factors, Parenting
Socialization ([3 = .23. p < .001), Better Life ([3 = .07, p < .05), and Beliefs about Father
role ( [3 = .14. p < .001) had positive associations with F ather/Child Household-centered
activities. The Skills and Self-confidence factors and the Social Support and Stresses
Factors were not significant predictors. For the Institutional Factors, Fathers’ monthly
working hours had a negative association with Father/Child Household-centered

activities ( [3 = -.09. p < .001). For the Demographic Factors. Child Age (,6 = -.14, p <

34

.001), Mother’s age ([3 = -.11, p < .05), and Father’s education ([3 = -.08,p < .05) had
negative associations with Father/Child Household-centered activities. Number of
sibling living with the child (,8 = .06. p < .05) was significantly associated with
Father/Child Household-centered activities. The R-square value of this analysis was .18.

The next set of the analyses was to discover significant predictors of Father/Child
C hild-centered activities. For the Motivation factors. Parenting Socialization (B = .27, p
< .001), Better Life (6 = .07, p < .01), and Beliefs about Father role (,8 = .10,p < .001)
had positive associations with Father/Child Child-centered activities. Paternal Self-
efficacy under The Skills and Self-confidence factors was significantly associated with
Father/Child Child-centered activities ([3 = .06, p < .05). For the Social Support and
Stresses Factors. Interparental Conflict regarding specific activities ([3 = .06. p < .05) was
positively associated with Father/Child Child-centered activities. As noted in Table 7.
the zero-order correlation between Interparental Conflict regarding specific activities and
the outcome variable was -.04. For the Institutional Factors, Fathers’ monthly working
hours had a negative association with Father/Child Child-centered activities (,8 = -.06, p <
.01). For the Demographic Factors, Child age ([3 = -.48. p < .001) was negatively related
to F ather/Child Child-centered activities. Approximately 43.7 % of the variance of
Father/Child Child-centered activities is explained by the combination of the independent
variables.

Paternal Monitoring was entered as a dependent variable when conducting the
final set of the analyses. For the Motivation factors, Parenting Socialization ([3 = .15. p <
.001) and Beliefs about Father role (,8 = .12. p < .001) were positively related to Paternal

Monitoring. Paternal Self-efficacy, one of the Skills and Self-confidence factors, had a

35

positive association with Paternal Monitoring (,8 = .08. p < .05). For the Social Support
and Stresses Factors, Neighborhood Involvement ([3 = .07, p < .05) and Interparental
Conflict regarding specific activities ([3 = .16, p < .001) were significant predictors of
Paternal Monitoring. None of the Institutional Factors was associated with Paternal
Monitoring. For the Demographic Factors, child age (6 = -.33. p < .001) and Mother’s
age ([3 = -.21, p < .001) had negative associations with Paternal Monitoring. Father’s
Age (6 = .21. p < .001) was positively associated with Paternal Monitoring. However, it
had a negative correlation with the outcome (r = -.18) when testing zero-order
correlation. Approximately 24.8% of the variance in Paternal Monitoring is accounted
for by the independent variables.

In the previous analysis of paternal responsibility, fathers reported that they often
did child-related management tasks or shared the tasks with other household members.
In the next step, fathers who responded self were recoded as one; those who responded
other or shared were recoded as zero. As shown in Table 8, Paternal Self-efficacy was
positively associated with Paternal Responsibility ([3 = .16, p < .001). For the Social
Support and Stresses factors, Neighborhood involvement (6 = -.11, p < .001) and Social
Support (6 = -.07, p < .05) had negative associations with Paternal Responsibility.
Interparental conflict was positively related to the dependent variable ([3 = .13, p < .001).
For the Demographic Factors, Father’s education (6 = -.09, p < .05) was negatively

related to Paternal Responsibility.

36

Table 8 Comparison of Paternal Responsibility

 

Paternal Responsibility (self)

Paternal Responsibility
(self and shared)

 

Motivation:
Parenting
socialization
Better Life
Beliefs about Father
role
Parenting class

.l4*** (.13)

.15*** (.18)

 

Skills & Self-Confidence:
Parenting stress
Paternal
self-esteem
Paternal
self-efficacy

.16 *** (.07)

 

Social supports of stress:
Economic stress
Neighborhood
involvement
Social Support
Mothers’ attitude
Interparental conflict
(specific)

Interparental conflict
(general goals)

-Jl***(al4)
no7*(207)

.l3***(Jl)

.10” (.12)

 

Institutional Factors:
Father’s working
hours
Mother’s working
hours

207*(410)

.08" (.07)

 

Demographic Factors:
Child Sex
Child age
Number of sibling
living with the child
Father’s age
Mother’s age
Father’s education
Mother’s
educafion
R square

-.09 * (-.16)

.074

all*(a12)
n07*(210)

.326

* p < .05; ** p < .01; *** p < .001: The numbers in parentheses indicate zero-order correlations.

37

The Effect of Childhood Chronic Conditions

The next analysis in this study was to examine the possible moderation of
Childhood Chronic Conditions on the associations between predictors and father
involvement activities. A series of 2 X 2 ANOVAs were conducted to address this
question, and childhood chronic condition was conceptualized as a moderator variable
(Baron & Kenny, 1986). The p-value for the interaction term (predictor variable X the
moderator variable) was examined to determine if childhood chronic conditions (the
moderator variable) might moderate the associations, and a .05 Alpha level was
established for the evaluation. To test this possibility, all predictor variables and the
moderating variable were treated as dichotomous variable. When used as dichotomous
variables, fathers and mothers who had completed or did not complete the twelfth grade
were put in the low education group; all others with some college education were in the
education group. Fathers who had children without any childhood chronic conditions
were coded as zero (n=509); those who had children with childhood chronic conditions
were coded as one (n=613). Finally, all other predictor variables representing low and
high levels groups were created through median splits. For each set of analyses, the
moderating variable and one predictor variable were entered as factors, and one father
involvement activity was the dependent variable.

These analyses indicated that there were significant effects of Childhood Chronic

conditions on father’s Parenting Socialization (F [1,1118]= 4.84, p< .05) and

Neighborhood Involvement (F [1,1118]= 5.67, p< .05) in Paternal Warmth and Affection.

Fathers of children with chronic conditions showed less affection toward their children

than fathers of children without chronic conditions when they tended to participate in the

38

fi

ELLA!

child’s after-school activities and neighborhood meetings (see Figure 4 and 5). However,
those fathers appeared more affection toward their children than fathers of children
without chronic conditions if they were less likely to attend at their children’s after-
school activities and neighborhood meetings. Overall, children with and without chronic
conditions experienced more paternal affection when fathers were more likely to
participate in the child’s after-school activities and neighborhood meetings. In predicting
Father/Child Household-centered activities, there was a significant effect of Childhood
Chronic conditions on Social Support (F [1,11 18]= 5.19, p< .05). Fathers of children
with chronic conditions tended to report spending more time in household tasks with their
children when mothers reported lower level of satisfactions with social support from
families and friends (see Figure 6). In contrast, fathers of children without chronic
conditions participated more with their children in household tasks if mothers reported
higher levels of satisfactions. Finally, Interparental conflict regarding general life goals
(F [1,1118]: 4.10. p< .05), Father’s monthly working hours (F [1,1118]= 5.13,p< .05)
and Father’s age (F [1,1 1 18]= 4.98, p< .05) interacted significantly with Childhood
Chronic conditions in Paternal Monitoring. Fathers’ reports of interparental conflicts
regarding general life goals were negatively related to paternal monitoring among fathers
of children with chronic conditions (see Figure 7). On the other hand, interparental
conflicts regarding general life goals were positively associated with paternal monitoring
among fathers of children without chronic conditions. Childhood chronic conditions had
a significant interaction with fathers’ monthly working hours and age on paternal
monitoring (see Figure 8 and 9). Fathers who spent more time on paid work reported

lower level of monitoring. especially for fathers of children with chronic conditions.

39

IQ
19

Father’s warmth and affection toward their children

18

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Parenting socialization

Childhood chronic
conditions

0 no chronic
condition

Cl chronic
condition

Markers/Lines
show Mean

Figure 4. The interaction between Parenting Socialization and Childhood Chronic

Conditions in Paternal Warmth and Affection

40

 

 

 

 

 

22 ..
c:-
<1)
i...
32
E
0 Childhood chronic
.3: conditions
<1)
.5: .
H Ono chronic
a condition
3 Dchronic

21 " . .
8 condition
Cl
2 I Markers/Lines
:3 show Mean
8.:
(6
"C3 .
a :t’
.t:
E
‘55 20 ‘
3
m
":—
0.)
:5
CG
LLI

v”
'9 I l
I 2

Neighborhood involvement

Figure 5. The interaction between Neighborhood involvement and Childhood

Chronic Conditions in Paternal Warmth and Affection

41

 

—~——-——.—-—;— 4

Childhood chronic
conditions

Ono chronic
condition

3 Dchronic

condition

Markers/Lines
il show Mean

Father/Child household-centered activities

 

 

 

 

Social support

Figure 6. The interaction between Social Support and Childhood Chronic Conditions in

Father/Child Household-centered activities

42

 

 

 

 

 

 

5 .
5 .. Childhood chronic
conditions
00
E 0 no chronic
:— . .
8 cond1t1on
a [:1 chronic
3 condition
—4 5 .1 -
Cd Markers/Lmes
E show Mean
.93.
to
0..
5 -l
5 1 T

1 2
Interparental conflict (general goals)

Figure 7. The interaction between Interparental conflict regarding general life

goals and Childhood Chronic Conditions in Paternal Monitoring

43

 

 

 

 

 

":1,
It.
5 'l \
. Childhood chronic
DD ’3‘. conditions
.5
S ‘\ 0 no chronic
3:3 5 "‘ ’. 1 condition
g . Cl chronic
8 condition
“7::
E Markers/Lines
8 show Mean
c6 5 ‘
D...
\
5 a \
4 l 1
l 2

Father’s monthly working hours

Figure 8. The interaction between Father’s monthly working hours and

Childhood Chronic Conditions in Paternal Monitoring

44

‘1..."—

 

Paternal monitoring

 

 

 

 

 

5 d
Childhood chronic
5 .. conditions
Ono chronic
condition
I Clchronic
5 q cond1t1on
Markers/Lines
show Mean
4 -
4 -1
4 1 1

Father’s age

Figure 9. The interaction between Father’s age and Childhood Chronic Conditions

in Paternal Monitoring

45

Children without chronic conditions received lower lever of paternal monitoring than
children with chronic conditions when fathers were older.

In the previous analyses, the childhood chronic condition (the moderator
variable) was treated as a dichotomous variable (have chronic condition and have no
chronic condition). In the next step, the childhood chronic conditions were categorized
into 4 levels of seriousness. high level of seriousness (3), medium level of seriousness
(2), low level of seriousness (1), and no chronic health conditions (0), in order to further
examined the interactions between different level of seriousness of childhood chronic
conditions and predictive factors. A series of 4 X 2 ANOVAs were conducted to
determine the effect of childhood chronic condition on the association between predictive
factors and father involvement activities. Each of ANOVA analyses included the
moderator and one predictive factor as factors, and one father involvement activity was
the dependent variable.

The results of these analyses showed that Father’s Education had a significant
interaction with Childhood Chronic Conditions in predicting Paternal Warmth and
Affection. (F [2, 609]= 6.44, p< .01). Greater paternal warmth and affection was related
to lower level of education among fathers of children with medium level of seriousness,
but related to higher level of education among others (see Figure 10). The effect of
Childhood Chronic Conditions on fathers’ participation in Parenting Classes or Parent
Support Groups (F [2, 609]= 4.48, p< .05) and Mother’s attitude about father role (F [2,
609]= 3.70, p< .05) was significant when predicting Paternal Monitoring. Fathers of
children with high level of seriousness reported lower level of paternal monitoring

behaviors if they participated in parenting classes or parent support groups (see figure

46

1 1). Others reported higher level of paternal monitoring when they participated in
parenting classes or parent support groups. When mothers reported less traditional
perceptions of fatherhood, fathers of children with high level of seriousness reported
lower level of paternal monitoring; but the reverse was true among fathers of children
with low level of seriousness (see figure 12). Fathers of healthy children and children

with medium level of seriousness were less affected by mothers’ perceptions of

fatherhood.

47

[\J
[\J

21

20

Father’s warmth and affection toward their children

18

 

 

 

p—r—wa .-. —~.~——.—~.- 4

 

NI—i

Father’s education

Childhood chronic
conditions

0 no chronic
condition

D low level of
seriousness

X medium level
of seriousness

A high level of
seriousness

Markers/Lines
show Mean

Figure 10. The interaction between Father’s education and Childhood Chronic

48

Conditions in Father’s warmth and affection toward children

 

Paternal monitoring

 

 

 

 

Parenting class

Childhood chronic
conditions

0 no chronic
condition

1:] low level of
seriousness

X medium level of
seriousness

A high level of
seriousness

Markers/Lines show
Mean

Figure 1 1. The interaction between Parenting class and Childhood Chronic

Conditions in Paternal monitoring

49

 

 

 

 

6 .1
r;
x" t
, ' ,. Childhood chronic
/ ' conditions
6 . ° '
y" 0 no chronic
' condition
01) / [:1 low level of
.S ' ser1ousness
:— 5 . .. .
O / ' X medium
d: t
5:: 1 level of
g f I seriousness
To 5 A\ /,. I A high level of
E I ‘3. 1‘ seriousness
a) ' \ —vI -" r,
H \ a, -'
a“: 1:: - ‘3‘.’ ~. Markers/Lines
M Show Mean
\.
5 _, \
.\
\-
\fi
\
4 . n,‘
I t
l 2

Mother’s attitude about father role

Figure 12. The interaction between Mother’s attitude about father role and

Childhood Chronic Conditions in Paternal monitoring

50

CHAPTER FIVE
F indings, Conclusions, Limitations. and Implications
Findings
Building on the Lamb-Fleck model of the determinants of father involvement
(Lamb et al., 1987; McBride et al., 2004), the results from this study confirmed partial
findings of previous studies when testing simultaneously all direct paths of the predictive
variables. The results showed that when fathers increased participation in their children’s
after-school activities. their children experienced higher level of all forms of father
involvements. Fathers who had ever moved to a different neighborhood to make a better
life for their children tended to participate in both household-centered and child-centered
activities with their children. Furthermore, fathers’ beliefs about the father’s role in the
family were associated with five forms of father involvements. As parents, fathers who
felt trapped by their responsibilities, exhausted from raising a family, experienced more
work than pleasure, and thought taking care of children was much more work than
pleasure showed less warmth and affection toward their children. Fathers were more
likely to show higher levels of paternal responsibility and paternal monitoring if they had
higher level of self-efficacy. Mothers’ report of self and spouse neighborhood
involvement was associated positively with paternal monitoring. Mother’s attitudes
regarding the father role influence higher levels of paternal responsibility. If fathers
experienced more interparental conflict regarding specific activities such as raising
children and spending time with friends, they reported greater father/child child-centered
activities and paternal monitoring. Fathers who spent more time on monthly paid work

were less likely to show paternal responsibility, paternal warmth and affection toward

51

their children, father/child household-centered activities, and child-centered activities
with their children. When mothers spend more time in paid employment, fathers reported
higher levels of paternal responsibility. Older children experienced less paternal warmth
and affection, father/child household-centered activities, father/child child-centered
activities, and paternal monitoring. Fathers who had more children living together were
more likely to spend more time doing household-centered activities with children. Older
fathers showed higher level of paternal monitoring. Fathers who had younger spouses
reported higher levels of paternal responsibility, paternal warmth and affection,
father/child household-centered activities, and paternal monitoring. Finally, fathers with
higher education reported lower levels of paternal responsibility and spend less time in
household tasks with their children.

This study found that fathers’ motivation was the most important key of high
father involvement. More specifically, the frequency of fathers’ participation in
children’s after-school activities was the strongest predictor, and fathers’ perception of
father’s role was the second strongest predictor. In McBride and his colleagues’ study
(2004), fathers’ perception of father’s role was the most consistent and strongest
individual determinant of father involvement. In addition, both the current study and the
previous study found that fathers who experienced more interparental conflict regarding
child raising issue showed more father involvement. The possible reason may be that a
father who is more involved in child care has greater opportunities for him to compare his
parenting with mother's. This may cause more disagreements about child raising issues
with the mother. In contrast to previous study, the results of this current study showed

that father’s monthly working hours, father’s age, mother’s age, and father’s education

52

were significant factors of father involvement. These findings are consistent with a past
study of factors associated with fathers' caregiving activities and sensitivity with young
children which found that fathers who were older had more sensitivity during play
interactions, and younger mothers were associated with greater paternal caregiving
activities (NICHD Early Child Care Research Network, 2000). The variable of
Interparental disagreements about general life goals was not significantly related to any
form of father involvement, whereas it was associated with father/child household-
centered activities, father/child child-centered activities, and paternal monitoring in
McBride and his colleagues’ study (2004). The variable of father’s beliefs about father
role was positively related to father’s warmth and affection in this current study.
Conversely, the previous study indicated that father’s perception of father role was
negatively associated with father’s warmth and affection. Even though higher level of
father and mother’s neighborhood involvement related to higher level of paternal
monitoring in this study. the reverse was true in the previous study. Several results
differed from McBride and his colleagues’ study (2004) possibly due to no control of
ethnic groups in this current study and children’s age. Additionally, few questions being
used in this study are different from the previous study.

In addition, this study compared two different kinds of coding from paternal
responsibility (see p.37). Fathers who had more self-efficacy, less neighborhood
involvement. less social support, more interparental conflict, and lower education level
tended to involved in child-related management tasks without sharing with other
household members. The results from focusing on fathers’ involvement only can reflect

what is the real strongest factor that increases more father involvement. When including

53

sharing part as father involvement, it is not clear to show whether fathers often
participated in those activities. Fathers might occasionally or rarely do those tasks which
were often done by other household members.

The second subject of the current study was to explore the possible moderation of
childhood chronic conditions on association between five aspects of factors and five
kinds of father involvement activities. When childhood chronic conditions were treated
as a dichotomous variable (children with chronic conditions and children without chronic
conditions), five relationships between predictors and father involvement activities were
affected by childhood chronic conditions. Children without chronic condition
experienced more warmth and affection from fathers than children with chronic condition
as their fathers increased participation in their children’s after-school activities and
neighborhood involvement. When fathers of children without chronic condition received
more support from others, they were more likely to participate in household-centered
activities with their children. Children with chronic condition received lower level of
paternal monitoring when their fathers reported higher level of interparental conflict
about general goals and worked longer hours in paid employment. Older fathers of
children with chronic conditions were likely to show lower level of monitoring than older
fathers of children without chronic conditions. Overall, children without chronic
conditions experienced more father involvement than children with chronic conditions.

In testing interactions between different level of seriousness of childhood chronic
conditions and predictive factors, three predictive factors were found to interact with the
moderator variable. The patterns of these results are complex, and further research is

needed to explain these findings.

54

Conclusions

As Lamb and his colleagues (1987) suggested, multiple factors contributed to
father involvement. This study indicated that fathers’ motivation is the most consistent
variable, but motivation for involvements is not the only determination, and individual
involvement varies depending on social circumstances and resources. Fathers who have
high motivation, less parenting stress, high self-esteem, and fewer working hours are
more likely to be involved in child care. Even though some variables are not significant
predisposing characteristics in this study, those characteristics still have possible
influences on father involvement. For instance, one study reported that fathers spent
more times in play and companionship activities with their older sons (Yeung, Sandberg,
Davis-Kean, & Hofferth, 2001). According to Pleck (1997), “the specific factors that act
cumulatively or interactively to influence paternal involvement probably vary, perhaps
substantially, in different ecological contexts” (p.102).

The second question in this study was to examine the possible interaction between
childhood chronic conditions (the moderator variable) and individual factors in different
forms of father involvement activities. When comparing children without chronic
conditions and with chronic conditions, four of six significant interactions showed that
children without chronic conditions often received higher father involvement than
children with chronic conditions. The study also intended to explore the possible
influence of four levels of seriousness and found only three interactions were significant.
Unfortunately, these three interactions did not provide enough information to understand

the influence of four levels of seriousness on father involvement activities.

55

Limitations

There are some limitations in the current study. First, this study only focuses on
resident biological fathers. stepfathers or other father figures, exclusive of nonresident
biological fathers. The response rate for nonresident biological fathers is low, and
several variables in questionnaires for nonresident biological fathers are different from
variables for resident biological fathers, stepfathers or other father figures. Second, this
study does not reflect how chronic heath conditions affect the children and the fathers’
life experiences. Some children with chronic heath conditions may have more serious
disabilities than others. For example, some children have multiple disabilities. Studies
showed that parents of children with cancer reported higher levels of posttraumatic stress
symptoms and general distress compared with parents of children with diabetes mellitus
(Hung, Wu, & Yeh, 2004; Fuemmeler, Mullins, Pelt, Carpentier, & Parkhurst, 2005).
Life threatening chronic illnesses may have more significant effect on father involvement
activities than non-life threatening chronic illnesses. A third limitation to this study is
that some information about fathers’ activities with children is drawn from mothers’
reports. As a result, there may be some questions regarding the reliability and validity of
the data for assessing important dimensions of father involvement (McBride et al., 2004).
This study does not include children’s reports regarding relationships with fathers
because children interviews are only for children age 12 years and older. The child’s
reports about father involvement will provide valuable information and reduce potential
bias in parental reports. Finally, since this study is a quantitative research, the results

from the study may not be able to provide in-depth knowledge of father involvement.

56

Implications

This study delineates that there is no single cause that determines father’s
parenting behaviors. Each factor brings people closer to understanding father’s parenting
behaviors. These unique features have implications for research, programs supporting
fathers and their children. The current study of the determinants of father involvement
suggests several areas for further research: the benefits of positive paternal parenting to
fathers’ own developments and relationships with their children and spouses; father
involvement with adult children; and father involvement among gay fathers, single
fathers. and non-resident fathers. Not only does father involvement call for unique
research questions, it also calls for research regarding fathers of children with special
needs. Since many factors affect experiences of fathers whose children have special
needs. it is difficult to generalize their involvement in the care of children with
disabilities (Lamb & Billings, 1997). The current study is a quantitative research, so it
cannot reflect how the health characteristics of the children affect the families and
fathers’ life. A small sample size study with a single type of disabilities may provide a
clear picture of the detemtinants of father involvement among fathers of children with
special needs.

Programs and supports for fathers and their children must reflect the unique needs
of fathers. As examples, programs would do well to: 1) provide information reflective of
father’s interests when framing and marketing programs; 2) encourage the positive
relationships between father and child; 3) provide knowledge to the father regarding how
his involvement will benefit the child’s development and help him or her to succeed; 4)

include mother as well as father, focusing on aspects of their relationship, such as

57

communication and conflict resolution, that are relevant to the shared care of the child; 5)
provide opportunities for the father to discuss his concerns and interests; 6) connect the
father to other community resources and peer groups; and 7) suggest activities that will

support and enhance children’s development and the personal needs of the father.

58

APPENDICES

59

APPENDIX A

Research Hypotheses I

60

APPENDIX A

Research Hypotheses I

The research hypotheses for question 1 include:

H01: There is no association between parenting socialization and paternal responsibility.

Hal: There is an association between parenting socialization and paternal responsibility.

H02: There is no association between parenting socialization and paternal warmth and
affection toward children.

Ha2: There is an association between parenting socialization and paternal warmth and
affection toward children.

H03: There is no association between parenting socialization and father/child house-
centered activities.

Ha3: There is an association between parenting socialization and father/child house-
centered activities.

1104: There is no association between parenting socialization and father/child child-
centered activities.

Ha4: There is an association between parenting socialization and father/child child-
centered activities.

H05: There is no association between parenting socialization and paternal monitoring.

Ha5: There is an association between parenting socialization and paternal monitoring.

H06: There is no association between desire for a better life for children and paternal
responsibility.

Ha6: There is an association between desire for a better life for children and paternal

responsibility.

61

H07: There is no association between desire for a better life for children and. paternal
warmth and affection toward children.

Ha7: There is an association between desire for a better life for children and paternal
warmth and affection toward children.

H08: There is no association between desire for a better life for children and father/child
house-centered activities.

Ha8: There is an association between desire for a better life for children and father/child
house-centered activities.

H09: There is no association between desire for a better life for children and father/child
child-centered activities.

Ha9: There is an association between desire for a better life for children and father/child
child-centered activities.

H010: There is no association between desire for a better life for children and paternal
monitoring.

Hal 0: There is an association between desire for a better life for children and paternal
monitoring.

H011: There is no association between beliefs about the father role and paternal
responsibility.

Hall: There is an association between beliefs about the father role and paternal
responsibility.

H012: There is no association between beliefs about the father role and paternal warmth

and affection toward children.

62

Hal2:

H013:

Hal3:

H014:

Ha14:

H015:

Ha15:

H016:

Ha16:

H017:

Ha17:

H018:

There is an association between beliefs about the father role and paternal warmth
and affection toward children.

There is no association between beliefs about the father role and father/child
house-centered activities.

There is an association between beliefs about the father role and father/child
house-centered activities.

There is no association between beliefs about the father role and father/child child-
centered activities.

There is an association between beliefs about the father role and father/child child-
centered activities.

There is no association between beliefs about the father role and paternal
monitoring.

There is an association between beliefs about the father role and paternal
monitoring.

There is no association between parenting class and paternal responsibility.

There is an association between parenting class and paternal responsibility.

There is no association between parenting class and paternal warmth and affection
toward children.

There is an association between parenting class and paternal warmth and affection
toward children.

There is no association between parenting class and father/child house-centered

activities.

63

Hal8:

H019:

Hal9:

H020:

Ha20:

H021:

Ha21:

H022:

H023:

H024:

Ha24:

H025:

There is an association between parenting class and father/child house-centered
activities.

There is no association between parenting class and father/child child-centered
activities.

There is an association between parenting class and father/child child-centered
activities.

There is no association between parenting class and paternal monitoring.

There is an association between parenting class and paternal monitoring.

There is no association between parenting stress and paternal responsibility.
There is an association between parenting stress and paternal responsibility.
There is no association between parenting stress and paternal warmth and affection

toward children.

: There is an association between parenting stress and paternal warmth and affection

toward children.
There is no association between parenting stress and father/child house-centered

activities.

- : There is an association between parenting stress and father/child house-centered

activities.
There is no association between parenting stress and father/child child-centered
activities.
There is an association between parenting stress and father/child child-centered
activities.

There is no association between parenting stress and paternal monitoring.

64

Ha25:

H026:

Ha26:

H027:

Ha27:

H028:

Ha28:

H029:

Ha29:

H030:

Ha30:

H031:

Ha31:

H032:

Ha32:

There is an association between parenting stress and paternal monitoring.

There is no association between paternal self-esteem and paternal responsibility.
There is an association between paternal self-esteem and paternal responsibility.
There is no association between paternal self-esteem and paternal warmth and
affection toward children.

There is an association between paternal self-esteem and paternal warmth and
affection toward children.

There is no association between paternal self-esteem and father/child house-
centered activities.

There is an association between paternal self-esteem and father/child house-
centered activities.

There is no association between paternal self-esteem and father/child child-
centered activities.

There is an association between paternal self-esteem and father/child child-
centered activities.

There is no association between paternal self-esteem and paternal monitoring.
There is an association between paternal self-esteem and paternal monitoring.
There is no association between paternal self-efficacy and paternal responsibility.
There is an association between paternal self-efficacy and paternal responsibility.
There is no association between paternal self-efficacy and paternal warmth and
affection toward children.

There is an association between paternal self-efficacy and paternal warmth and

affection toward children.

65

H033: There is no association between paternal self-efficacy and father/child house-
centered activities.

Ha33: There is an association between paternal self-efficacy and father/child house-
centered activities.

H034: There is no association between paternal self-efficacy and father/child child-
centered activities.

Ha34: There is an association between paternal. self-efficacy and father/child child-
centered activities.

H035: There is no association between paternal self-efficacy and paternal monitoring.

Ha35: There is an association between paternal self-efficacy and paternal monitoring.

H036: There is no association between economic strain and paternal responsibility.

Ha36: There is an association between economic strain and paternal responsibility.

H037: There is no association between economic strain and paternal warmth and
affection toward children.

Ha37: There is an association between economic strain and paternal warmth and affection
toward children.

H038: There is no association between economic strain and father/child house-centered
activities.

Ha38: There is an association between economic strain and father/child house-centered
activities.

H039: There is no association between economic strain and father/child child-centered

activities.

66

Ha39:

H040:

Ha40:

H041:

Ha4l:

H042:

Ha42:

H043:

Ha43:

H044:

Ha44:

H045:

There is an association between economic strain and father/child child-centered
activities.

There is no association between economic strain and paternal monitoring.

There is an association between economic strain and paternal monitoring.

There is no association between neighborhood involvement and paternal
responsibility.

There is an association between neighborhood involvement and paternal
responsibility.

There is no association between neighborhood involvement and paternal warmth
and affection toward children.

There is an association between neighborhood involvement and paternal warmth
and affection toward children.

There is no association between neighborhood involvement and father/child
house-centered activities.

There is an association between neighborhood involvement and father/child house-
centered activities.

There is no association between neighborhood involvement and father/child child-
centered activities.

There is an association between neighborhood involvement and father/child child-
centered activities.

There is no association between neighborhood involvement and paternal

monitoring.

67

Ha45:

H046:

Ha46:

H047:

Ha47:

H048:

Ha48:

H049:

Ha49

H050:

H350:

H051:

H351:

There is an association between neighborhood involvement and paternal
monitoring.

There is no association between social support and paternal responsibility.

There is an association between social support and paternal responsibility.

There is no association between social support and paternal warmth and affection
toward children.

There is an association between social support and paternal warmth and affection
toward children.

There is no association between social support and father/child house-centered
activities.

There is an association between social support and father/child house-centered
activities.

There is no association between social support and father/child child-centered

activities.

: There is an association between social support and father/child child-centered

activities.
There is no association between social support and paternal monitoring.
There is an association between social support and paternal monitoring.
There is no association between mothers’ attitude about father role and paternal
responsibility.
There is an association between mothers’ attitude about father role and paternal

responsibility.

68

H052:

Ha52:

H053:

Ha53:

H054:

Ha54:

H055:

Ha55:

H056:

Ha56:

H057:

There is no association between mothers’ attitude about father role and warmth
and affection toward children.

There is an association between mothers’ attitude about father role and warmth
and affection toward children.

There is no association between mothers’ attitude about father role and father/child
house-centered activities.

There is an association between mothers’ attitude about father role and father/child
house-centered activities.

There is no association between mothers’ attitude about father role and father/child
child-centered activities.

There is an association between mothers’ attitude about father role and father/child
child-centered activities.

There is no association between mothers’ attitude about father role and paternal
monitoring.

There is an association between mothers’ attitude about father role and paternal
monitoring.

There is no association between interparental conflict regarding specific activities
and paternal responsibility.

There is an association between interparental conflict regarding specific activities
and paternal responsibility.

There is no association between interparental conflict regarding specific activities

and paternal warmth and affecti0n toward children.

69

Ha57:

H058:

Ha58:

H059:

Ha59:

H060:

Ha60:

H061:

Ha61:

H062:

Ha62:

There is an association between interparental conflict regarding specific activities
and paternal warmth and affection toward children.

There is no association between interparental conflict regarding specific activities
and father/child house-centered activities.

There is an association between interparental conflict regarding specific activities
and father/child house-centered activities.

There is no association between interparental conflict regarding specific activities
and father/child child-centered activities.

There is an association between interparental conflict regarding specific activities
and father/child child-centered activities.

There is no association between interparental conflict regarding specific activities
and paternal monitoring.

There is an association between interparental conflict regarding specific activities
and paternal monitoring.

There is no association between interparental conflict regarding general life goals
and paternal responsibility.

There is an association between interparental conflict regarding general life goals
and paternal responsibility.

There is no association between interparental conflict regarding general life goals
and paternal warmth and affection toward children.

There is an association between interparental conflict regarding general life goals

and paternal warmth and affection toward children.

70

H063: There is no association between interparental conflict regarding general life goals
and father/child house-centered activities.

Ha63: There is an association between interparental conflict regarding general life goals
and father/child house-centered activities.

H064: There is no association between interparental conflict regarding general life goals
and father/child child-centered activities.

l-la64: There is an association between interparental conflict regarding general life goals
and father/child child-centered activities.

H065: There is no association between interparental conflict regarding general life goals
and paternal monitoring.

Ha65: There is an association between interparental conflict regarding general life goals
and paternal monitoring.

H066: There is no association between fathers’ monthly working hours and paternal
responsibility.

Ha66: There is an association between fathers’ monthly working hours and paternal
responsibility.

H067: There is no association between fathers’ monthly working hours and paternal
warmth and affection toward children.

Ha67: There is an association between fathers’ monthly working hours and paternal
warmth and affection toward children.

H068: There is no association between fathers’ monthly working hours and father/child

house-centered activities.

71

Ha68:

H069:

Ha69:

H070:

Ha70:

H071:

Ha71:

H072:

Ha72:

H073:

Ha73:

There is an association between fathers’ monthly working hours and father/child
house-centered activities.

There is no association between fathers’ monthly working hours and father/child
child-centered activities.

There is an association between fathers’ monthly working hours and father/child
child-centered activities.

There is no association between fathers’ monthly working hours and paternal
monitoring.

There is an association between fathers’ monthly working hours and paternal
monitoring.

There is no association between mothers’ monthly working hours and paternal
responsibility.

There is an association between mothers’ monthly working hours and paternal
responsibility.

There is no association between mothers’ monthly working hours and paternal
warmth and affection toward children.

There is an association between mothers’ monthly working hours and paternal
warmth and affection toward children.

There is no association between mothers’ monthly working hours and father/child
house-centered activities.

There is an association between mothers’ monthly working hours and father/child

house-centered activities.

H074:

Ha74:

H075:

Ha75:

H076:

Ha76:

H077:

Ha77:

H078:

Ha78:

H079:

Ha79:

H080:

Ha80:

H081:

There is no association between mothers’ monthly working hours and father/child
child-centered activities.

There is an association between mothers’ monthly working hours and father/child
child-centered activities.

There is no association between mothers’ monthly working hours and paternal
monitoring.

There is an association between mothers’ monthly working hours and paternal
monitoring.

There is no association between child sex and paternal responsibility.

There is an association between child sex and paternal responsibility.

There is no association between child sex and paternal warmth and affection
toward children.

There is an association between child sex and paternal warmth and affection
toward children.

There is no association between child sex and father/child house-centered
activities.

There is an association between child sex and father/child house-centered
activities.

There is no association between child sex and father/child child-centered activities.
There is an association between child sex and father/child child-centered activities.
There is no association between child sex and paternal monitoring.

There is an association between child sex and paternal monitoring.

There is no association between child age and paternal responsibility.

73

Ha81 :

Ho82:

Ha82:

H083:

Ha83:

H084:

Ha84:

H085:

Ha85:

H086:

Ha86:

H087:

Ha87:

There is an association between child age and paternal responsibility.

There is no association between child age and paternal warmth and affection
toward children.

There is an association between child age and paternal warmth and affection
toward children.

There is no association between child age and father/child house-centered
activities.

There is an association between child age and father/child house-centered
activities.

There is no association between child age and father/child child-centered
activities.

There is an association between child age and father/child child-centered activities.
There is no association between child age and paternal monitoring.

There is an association between child age and paternal monitoring.

There is no association between number of sibling living with the child and
paternal responsibility.

There is an association between number of sibling living with the child and
paternal responsibility.

There is no association between number of sibling living with the child and
paternal warmth and affection toward children.

There is an association between number of sibling living with the child and

paternal warmth and affection toward children.

74

H088:

Ha88:

H089:

Ha89:

H090:

Ha90:

H091:

Ha9l:

H092:

Ha92:

H093:

Ha93:

There is no association between number of sibling living with the child and
father/child house-centered activities.

There is an association between number of sibling living with the child and
father/child house-centered activities.

There is no association between number of sibling living with the child and
father/child child-centered activities.

There is an association between number of sibling living with the child and
father/child child-centered activities.

There is no association between number of sibling living with the child and
paternal monitoring.

There is an association between number of sibling living with the child and
paternal monitoring.

There is no association between father’s age and paternal responsibility.

There is an association between father’s age and paternal responsibility.

There is no association between father’s age and paternal warmth and affection

toward children.

There is an association between father’s age and paternal warmth and affection

toward children.
There is no association between father’s age and father/child house-centered
activities.
There is an association between father’s age and father/child house-centered

activities.

75

H094:

Ha94:

H095:

Ha95:

11096:

Ha96:

H097:

Ha97:

H098:

Ha98:

H099:

Ha99:

There is no association between father’s age and father/child child-centered
activities.

There is an association between father’s age and father/child child-centered
activities.

There is no association between father’s age and paternal monitoring.

There is an association between father’s age and paternal monitoring.

There is no association between mother’s age and paternal responsibility. _

There is an association between mother’s age and paternal responsibility.

There is no association between mother’s age and paternal warmth and affection
toward children.

There is an association between mother’s age and paternal warmth and affection
toward children.

There is no association between mother’s age and father/child house-centered
activities.

There is an association between mother’s age and father/child house-centered
activities.

There is no association between mother’s age and father/child child-centered
activities.

There is an association between mother’s age and father/child child-centered

activities.

H0100: There is no association between mother’s age and paternal monitoring.

Ha100: There is an association between mother’s age and paternal monitoring.

H0101: There is no association between father’s education and paternal responsibility.

76

Hal 01: There is an association between father’s education and. paternal responsibility.

H0102: There is no association between father’s education and paternal warmth and
affection toward children.

Hal 02: There is an association between father’s education and paternal warmth and
affection toward children.

H0103: There is no association between father’s education and father/child house-
centered activities.

Hal 03: There is an association between father’s education and father/child house-
centered activities.

H0104: There is no association between father’s education and father/child child-centered
activities.

Hal 04: There is an association between father’s education and father/child child-centered
activities.

H0105: There is no association between father’s education and paternal monitoring.

Hal 05: There is an association between father’s education and paternal monitoring.

H0106: There is no association between mother’s education and paternal responsibility.

Hal 06: There is an association between mother’s education and paternal responsibility.

H0107: There is no association between mother’s education and paternal warmth and
affection toward children.

Hal 07: There is an association between mother’s education and paternal warmth and
affection toward children.

H0108: There is no association between mother’s education and father/child house-

centered activities.

77

Hal 08: There is an association between mother’s education and father/child house-
centered activities.

H0109: There is no association between mother’s education and father/child child-
centercd activities.

Hal 09: There is an association between mother’s education and father/child child-
centered activities.

1101 10: There is no association between mother’s education and paternal monitoring.

Hal 10: There is an association between mother’s education and paternal monitoring.

78

APPENDIX B

Research Hypotheses II

79

APPENDIX B

Research Hypotheses II

The research hypotheses for question 2 include:

H01 1 1: Childhood chronic conditions have no effect on the relationship between
parenting socialization and paternal responsibility.

Hal 1 1: Childhood chronic conditions have effects on the relationship between parenting
socialization and paternal responsibility.

H01 12: Childhood chronic conditions have no effect on the relationship between
parenting socialization and paternal wannth and affection toward children.

Hal 12: Childhood chronic conditions have effects on the relationship between parenting
socialization and paternal warmth and affection toward children.

H01 13: Childhood chronic conditions have no effect on the relationship between
parenting socialization and father/child house-centered activities.

Hal 13: Childhood chronic conditions have effects on the relationship between parenting
socialization and father/child house-centered activities.

H01 14: Childhood chronic conditions have no effect on the relationship between
parenting socialization and father/child child-centered activities.

Hal 14: Childhood chronic conditions have effects on the relationship between parenting
socialization and father/child child-centered activities.

H01 15: Childhood chronic conditions have no effect on the relationship between
parenting socialization and paternal monitoring.

Hal 15: Childhood chronic conditions have effects on the relationship between parenting

socialization and paternal monitoring.

80

H0116: Childhood chronic conditions have no effect on the relationship between desire
for a better life for children and paternal responsibility.

Hal l6: Childhood chronic conditions have effects on the relationship between desire for
a better life for children and paternal responsibility.

H01 17: Childhood chronic conditions have no effect on the relationship between desire
for a better life for children and paternal warmth and affection toward children.

Hal 17: Childhood chronic conditions have effects on the relationship between desire for
a better life for children and paternal warmth and affection toward children.

H01 18: Childhood chronic conditions have no effect on the relationship between desire
for a better life for children and father/child house-centered activities.

Hal 18: Childhood chronic conditions have effects on the relationship between desire for
a better life for children and father/child house-centered activities.

H0119: Childhood chronic conditions have no effect on the relationship between desire
for a better life for children and father/child child-centered activities.

Hal l9: Childhood chronic conditions have effects on the relationship between desire for
a better life for children and father/child child-centered activities.

H0120: Childhood chronic conditions have no effect on the relationship between desire
for a better life for children and paternal monitoring.

Hal 20: Childhood chronic conditions have effects on the relationship between desire for
a better life for children and paternal monitoring.

H0121: Childhood chronic conditions have no effect on the relationship between beliefs

about the father role and paternal responsibility.

81

Hal 21: Childhood chronic conditions have effects on the relationship between beliefs
about the father role and paternal responsibility.

H0122: Childhood chronic conditions have no effect on the relationship between beliefs
about the father role and paternal warmth and affection toward children. .

Hal 22: Childhood chronic conditions have effects on the relationship between beliefs
about the father role and paternal warmth and affection toward children.

H0123: Childhood chronic conditions have no effect on the relationship between beliefs
about the father role and father/child house-centered activities.

Hal 23: Childhood chronic conditions have effects on the relationship between beliefs
about the father role and father/child house-centered activities.

H0124: Childhood chronic conditions have no effect on the relationship between beliefs
about the father role and father/child child-centered activities.

Hal 24: Childhood chronic conditions have effects on the relationship between beliefs
about the father role and father/child child-centered activities.

H0125: Childhood chronic conditions have no effect on the relationship between beliefs
about the father role and paternal monitoring.

Hal 25: Childhood chronic conditions have effects on the relationship between beliefs
about the father role and paternal monitoring.

H0126: Childhood chronic conditions have no effect on the relationship between
parenting class and paternal responsibility.

Hal 26: Childhood chronic conditions have effects on the relationship between parenting

class and paternal responsibility.

H0127: Childhood chronic conditions have no effect on the relationship between
parenting class and paternal warmth and affection toward children.

Ha127: Childhood chronic conditions have effects on the relationship between parenting
class and paternal warmth and affection toward children.

H0128: Childhood chronic conditions have no effect on the relationship between
parenting class and father/child house-centered activities.

IIal 28: Childhood chronic conditions have effects on the relationship between parenting
class and father/child house-centered activities.

H0129: Childhood chronic conditions have no effect on the relationship between
parenting class and father/child child—centered activities.

Hal 29: Childhood chronic conditions have effects on the relationship between parenting
class and father/child child-centered activities.

H0130: Childhood chronic conditions have no effect on the relationship between
parenting class and paternal monitoring.

Hal 30: Childhood chronic conditions have effects on the relationship between parenting
class and paternal monitoring.

H0131: Childhood chronic conditions have no effect on the relationship between
parenting stress and paternal responsibility.

Hal 3 1: Childhood chronic conditions have effects on the relationship between parenting
stress and paternal responsibility.

H0132: Childhood chronic conditions have no effect on the relationship between

parenting stress and paternal warmth and affection toward children.

83

Hal 32: Childhood chronic conditions have effects on the relationship between parenting
stress and paternal warmth and affection toward children.

H0133: Childhood chronic conditions have no effect on the relationship between
parenting stress and father/child house-centered activities.

Hal 33: Childhood chronic conditions have effects on the relationship between parenting
stress and father/child house-centered activities.

H0134: Childhood chronic conditions have no effect on the relationship between
parenting stress and father/child child-centered activities.

Hal 34: Childhood chronic conditions have effects on the relationship between parenting
stress and father/child child-centered activities.

H0135: Childhood chronic conditions have no effect on the relationship between
parenting stress and paternal monitoring.

Hal 35: Childhood chronic conditions have effects on the relationship between parenting
stress and paternal monitoring.

H0136: Childhood chronic conditions have no effect on the relationship between paternal
self-esteem and paternal responsibility.

Ha136: Childhood chronic conditions have effects on the relationship between paternal
self-esteem and paternal responsibility.

H0137: Childhood chronic conditions have no effect on the relationship between paternal
self-esteem and paternal warmth and affection toward children.

Hal 37: Childhood chronic conditions have effects on the relationship between paternal

self-esteem and paternal warmth and affection toward children.

84

H0138: Childhood chronic conditions have no effect on the relationship between paternal
self-esteem and father/child house-centered activities.

Ha138: Childhood chronic conditions have effects on the relationship between paternal
self-esteem and father/child house-centered activities.

H0139: Childhood chronic conditions have no effect on the relationship between paternal
self-esteem and father/child child-centered activities.

Hal 39: Childhood chronic conditions have effects on the relationship between paternal
self-esteem and father/child child-centered activities. I

H0140: Childhood chronic conditions have no effect on the relationship between paternal
self-esteem and paternal monitoring.

Hal40: Childhood chronic conditions have effects on the relationship between paternal
self-esteem and paternal monitoring.

H0141: Childhood chronic conditions have no effect on the relationship between paternal
self-efficacy and paternal responsibility.

Hal4l: Childhood chronic conditions have effects on the relationship between paternal
self-efficacy and paternal responsibility.

H0142: Childhood chronic conditions have no effect on the relationship between paternal
self-efficacy and paternal warmth and affection toward children.

Hal42: Childhood chronic conditions have effects on the relationship between paternal
self-efficacy and paternal warmth and affection toward children.

H0143: Childhood chronic conditions have no effect on the relationship between paternal

self-efficacy and father/child house-centered activities.

85

Ha143: Childhood chronic conditions have effects on the relationship between paternal
self-efficacy and father/child house-centered activities.

Hol44: Childhood chronic conditions have no effect on the relationship between paternal
self-efficacy and father/child child-centered activities.

Hal 44: Childhood chronic conditions have effects on the relationship between paternal
self-efficacy and father/child child-centered activities.

110145: Childhood chronic conditions have no effect on the relationship between paternal
self-efficacy and paternal monitoring.

Hal45: Childhood chronic conditions have effects on the relationship between paternal
self-efficacy and paternal monitoring.

H0146: Childhood chronic conditions have no effect on the relationship between
economic strain and paternal responsibility.

Hal46: Childhood chronic conditions have effects on the relationship between economic
strain and paternal responsibility.

H0147: Childhood chronic conditions have no effect on the relationship between
economic strain and paternal warmth and affection toward children.

Ha147: Childhood chronic conditions have effects on the relationship between economic
strain and paternal warmth and affection toward children.

H0148: Childhood chronic conditions have no effect on the relationship between
economic strain and father/child house-centered activities.

Hal48: Childhood chronic conditions have effects on the relationship between economic

strain and father/child house-centered activities.

86

H0149: Childhood chronic conditions have no effect on the relationship between
economic strain and father/child child-centered activities.

Ha149: Childhood chronic conditions have effects on the relationship between economic
strain and father/child child-centered activities.

H0150: Childhood chronic conditions have no effect on the relationship between
economic strain and paternal monitoring.

Hal 50: Childhood chronic conditions have effects on the relationship between e00nomic
strain and paternal monitoring.

H0151: Childhood chronic conditions have no effect on the relationship between
neighborhood involvement and paternal responsibility.

Hal 51: Childhood chronic conditions have effects on the relationship between
neighborhood involvement and paternal responsibility.

H0152: Childhood chronic conditions have no effect on the relationship between
neighborhood involvement and paternal warmth and affection toward children.

Hal 52: Childhood chronic conditions have effects on the relationship between
neighborhood involvement and paternal warmth and affection toward children.

H0153: Childhood chronic conditions have no effect on the relationship between
neighborhood involvement and father/child house-centered activities.

Hal 53: Childhood chronic conditions have effects on the relationship between ’
neighborhood involvement and father/child house-centered activities.

H0154: Childhood chronic conditions have no effect on the relationship between

neighborhood involvement and father/child child-centered activities.

87

Hal 54: Childhood chronic conditions have effects on the relationship between
neighborhood involvement and father/child child-centered activities.

H0155: Childhood chronic conditions have no effect on the relationship between
neighborhood involvement and paternal monitoring.

Hal 55: Childhood chronic conditions have effects on the relationship between
neighborhood involvement and paternal monitoring.

110156: Childhood chronic conditions have no effect on the relationship between social
support and paternal responsibility.

Hal 56: Childhood chronic conditions have effects on the relationship between social
support and paternal responsibility.

H0157: Childhood chronic conditions have no effect on the relationship between social
support and paternal warmth and affection toward children.

Hal 57: Childhood chronic conditions have effects on the relationship between social
support and paternal warmth and affection toward children.

H0158: Childhood chronic conditions have no effect on the relationship between social
support and father/child house-centered activities.

Ha158: Childhood chronic conditions have effects on the relationship between social
support and father/child house-centered activities.

H0159: Childhood chronic conditions have no effect on the relationship between social
support and father/child child-centered activities.

Hal 59: Childhood chronic conditions have effects on the relationship between social

support and father/child child-centered activities.

88

H0160: Childhood chronic conditions have no effect on the relationship between social
support and paternal monitoring.

Hal 60: Childhood chronic conditions have effects on the relationship between social
support and paternal monitoring.

H0161: Childhood chronic conditions have no effect on the relationship between
mothers’ attitude about father role and paternal responsibility.

Hal 61: Childhood chronic conditions have effects on the relationship between mothers’
attitude about father role and paternal responsibility.

H0162: Childhood chronic conditions have no effect on the relationship between
mothers’ attitude about father role and warmth and affection toward children.

Hal 62: Childhood chronic conditions have effects on the relationship between mothers’
attitude about father role and warmth and affection toward children.

H0163: Childhood chronic conditions have no effect on the relationship between
mothers’ attitude about father role and father/child house-centered activities.

Hal 63: Childhood chronic conditions have effects on the relationship between mothers’
attitude about father role and father/child house-centered activities.

H0164: Childhood chronic conditions have no effect on the relationship between
mothers’ attitude about father role and father/child child-centered activities.

Hal 64: Childhood chronic conditions have effects on the relationship between mothers’
attitude about father role and father/child child-centered activities.

H0165: Childhood chronic conditions have no effect on the relationship between

mothers’ attitude about father role and paternal monitoring.

89

Hal65: Childhood chronic conditions have effects on the relationship between mothers’
attitude about father role and paternal monitoring.

H0166: Childhood chronic conditions have no effect on the relationship between
interparental conflict regarding specific activities and paternal responsibility.

Hal 66: Childhood chronic conditions have effects on the relationship between
interparental conflict regarding specific activities and paternal responsibility.

H0167: Childhood chronic conditions have no effect on the relationship between
interparental conflict regarding specific activities and paternal warmth and
affection toward children.

Hal 67: Childhood chronic conditions have effects on the relationship between
interparental conflict regarding specific activities and paternal warmth and
affection toward children.

Ho] 68: Childhood chronic conditions have no effect on the relationship between
interparental conflict regarding specific activities and father/child house-centered
activities.

Hal 68: Childhood chronic conditions have effects on the relationship between
interparental conflict regarding specific activities and father/child house-centered
activities.

H0169: Childhood chronic conditions have no effect on the relationship between
interparental conflict regarding specific activities and father/child child-centered

activities.

90

Hal 69: Childhood chronic conditions have effects on the relationship between
interparental conflict regarding specific activities and father/child child-centered
activities.

H0170: Childhood chronic conditions have no effect on the relationship between
interparental conflict regarding specific activities and paternal monitoring.

Hal 70: Childhood chronic conditions have effects on the relationship between
interparental conflict regarding specific activities and paternal monitoring.

H0171: Childhood chronic conditions have no effect on the relationship between
interparental conflict regarding general life goals and paternal responsibility.

Hal 71 : Childhood chronic conditions have effects on the relationship between
interparental conflict regarding general life goals and paternal responsibility.

H0172: Childhood chronic conditions have no effect on the relationship between
interparental conflict regarding general life goals and paternal warmth and
affection toward children.

Hal 72: Childhood chronic conditions have effects on the relationship between
interparental conflict regarding general life goals and paternal warmth and
affection toward children.

H0173: Childhood chronic conditions have no effect on the relationship between
interparental conflict regarding general life goals and father/child house-centered
activities.

Hal 73: Childhood chronic conditions have effects on the relationship between
interparental conflict regarding general life goals and father/child house-centered

activities.

91

H0174: Childhood chronic conditions have no effect on the relationship between
interparental conflict regarding general life goals and father/child child-centered
activities.

Hal 74: Childhood chronic conditions have effects on the relationship between
interparental conflict regarding general life goals and father/child child-centered
activities.

H0175: Childhood chronic conditions have no effect on the relationship between
interparental conflict regarding general life goals and paternal monitoring.

Hal 75: Childhood chronic conditions have effects on the relationship between
interparental conflict regarding general life goals and paternal monitoring.
H0176: Childhood chronic conditions have no effect on the relationship between fathers’

monthly working hours and paternal responsibility.

Hal 76: Childhood chronic conditions have effects on the relationship between fathers’
monthly working hours and paternal responsibility.

H0177: Childhood chronic conditions have no effect on the relationship between fathers’
monthly working hours and paternal warmth and affection toward children.

Hal 77: Childhood chronic conditions have effects on the relationship between fathers’
monthly working hours and paternal warmth and affection toward children.

H0178: Childhood chronic conditions have no effect on the relationship between fathers’
monthly working hours and father/child house-centered activities.

Hal 78: Childhood chronic conditions have effects on the relationship between fathers’

monthly working hours and father/child house-centered activities.

92

H0179: Childhood chronic conditions have no effect on the relationship between fathers’
monthly working hours and father/child child-centered activities.

Hal 79: Childhood chronic conditions have effects on the relationship between fathers’
monthly working hours and father/child child-centered activities.

H0180: Childhood chronic conditions have no effect on the relationship between fathers’
monthly working hours and paternal monitoring.

Hal 80: Childhood chronic conditions have effects on the relationship between fathers’
monthly working hours and paternal monitoring.

H0181: Childhood chronic conditions have no effect on the relationship between
mothers’ monthly working hours and paternal responsibility.

Hal 81 : Childhood chronic conditions have effects on the relationship between mothers’
monthly working hours and paternal responsibility.

Hol 82: Childhood chronic conditions have no effect on the relationship between
mothers’ monthly working hours and paternal warmth and affection toward
children.

Hal 82: Childhood chronic conditions have effects on the relationship between mothers’
monthly working hours and paternal warmth and affection toward children.

H0183: Childhood chronic conditions have no effect on the relationship between
mothers’ monthly working hours and father/child house-centered activities.

Hal 83: Childhood chronic conditions have effects on the relationship between mothers’
monthly working hours and father/child house-centered activities.

H0184: Childhood chronic conditions have no effect on the relationship between

mothers’ monthly working hours and father/child child-centered activities.

93

Hal 84: Childhood chronic conditions have effects on the relationship between mothers’
monthly working hours and father/child child-centered activities.

110185: Childhood chronic conditions have no effect on the relationship between
mothers’ monthly working hours and paternal monitoring.

Hal 85: Childhood chronic conditions have effects on the relationship between mothers’
monthly working hours and paternal monitoring.

H0186: Childhood chronic conditions have no effect on the relationship between child
sex and paternal responsibility.

Hal 86: Childhood chronic conditions have effects on the relationship between child sex
and paternal responsibility.

H0187: Childhood chronic conditions have no effect on the relationship between child
sex and paternal warmth and affection toward children.

Hal 87: Childhood chronic conditions have effects on the relationship between child sex
and paternal warmth and affection toward children.

H0188: Childhood chronic conditions have no effect on the relationship between child
sex and father/child house-centered activities.

Hal 88: Childhood chronic conditions have effects on the relationship between child sex
and father/child house-centered activities.

H0189: Childhood chronic conditions have no effect on the relationship between child
sex and father/child child-centered activities.

Hal 89: Childhood chronic conditions have effects on the relationship between child sex

and father/child child-centered activities.

94

H0190: Childhood chronic conditions have no effect on the relationship between child
sex and paternal monitoring.

Ha190: Childhood chronic conditions have effects on the relationship between child sex
and paternal monitoring.

H0191: Childhood chronic conditions have no effect on the relationship between child
age and paternal responsibility.

Hal 91: Childhood chronic conditions have effects on the relationship between child age
and paternal responsibility.

H0192: Childhood chronic conditions have no effect on the relationship between child
age and paternal warmth and affection toward children.

Hal 92: Childhood chronic conditions have effects on the relationship between child age
and paternal warmth and affection toward children.

H0193: Childhood chronic conditions have no effect on the relationship between child
age and father/child house-centered activities.

Hal 93: Childhood chronic conditions have effects on the relationship between child age
and father/child house-centered activities.

H0194: Childhood chronic conditions have no effect on the relationship between child
age and father/child child-centered activities.

Ha194: Childhood chronic conditions have effects on the relationship between child age
and father/child child-centered activities.

H0195: Childhood chronic conditions have no effect on the relationship between child

age and paternal monitoring.

95

Hal95: Childhood chronic conditions have effects on the relationship between child age
and paternal monitoring.

H0196: Childhood chronic conditions have no effect on the relationship between number
of sibling living with the child and paternal responsibility.

Hal 96: Childhood chronic conditions have effects on the relationship between number of
sibling living with the child and paternal responsibility.

H0197: Childhood chronic conditions have no effect on the relationship between number
of sibling living with the child and paternal warmth and affection toward children.

Hal 97: Childhood chronic conditions have effects on the relationship between number of
sibling living with the child and paternal warmth and affection toward children.

H0198: Childhood chronic conditions have no effect on the relationship between number
of sibling living with the child and father/child house-centered activities.

Hal 98: Childhood chronic conditions have effects on the relationship between number of
sibling living with the child and father/child house-centered activities.

H0199: Childhood chronic conditions have no effect on the relationship between number
of sibling living with the child and father/child child-centered activities.

Hal 99: Childhood chronic conditions have effects on the relationship between number of
sibling living with the child and father/child child-centered activities.

H0200: Childhood chronic conditions have no effect on the relationship between. number
of sibling living with the child and paternal monitoring.

Ha200: Childhood chronic conditions have effects on the relationship between number of

sibling living with the child and paternal monitoring.

96

H0201: Childhood chronic conditions have no effect on the relationship between father’s
age and paternal responsibility.

Ha201: Childhood chronic conditions have effects on the relationship between father’s
age and paternal responsibility.

H0202: Childhood chronic conditions have no effect on the relationship between father’s
age and paternal warmth and affection toward children.

Ha202: Childhood chronic conditions have effects on the relationship between father’s
age and paternal warmth and affection toward children.

H0203: Childhood chronic conditions have no effect on the relationship between father’s
age and father/child house-centered activities.

Ha203: Childhood chronic conditions have effects on the relationship between father’s
age and father/child house-centered activities.

H0204: Childhood chronic conditions have no effect on the relationship between father’s
age and father/child child-centered activities. ’

Ha204: Childhood chronic conditions have effects on the relationship between father’s
age and father/child child-centered activities.

H0205: Childhood chronic conditions have no effect on the relationship between father’s
age and paternal monitoring.

Ha205: Childhood chronic conditions have effects on the relationship between father’s
age and paternal monitoring.

H0206: Childhood chronic conditions have no effect on the relationship between

mother’s age and paternal responsibility.

97

Ha206: Childhood chronic conditions have effects on the relationship between mother’s
age and paternal responsibility.

110207: Childhood chronic conditions have no effect on the relationship between
mother’s age and paternal warmth and affection toward children.

Ha207: Childhood chronic conditions have effects on the relationship between mother’s
age and paternal warmth and affection toward children.

110208: Childhood chronic conditions have no effect on the relationship between
mother’s age and father/child house-centered activities.

Ha208: Childhood chronic conditions have effects on the relationship between mother’s
age and father/child house-centered activities.

H0209: Childhood chronic conditions have no effect on the relationship between
mother’s age and father/child child-centered activities.

Ha209: Childhood chronic conditions have effects on the relationship between mother’s
age and father/child child-centered activities.

H0210: Childhood chronic conditions have no effect on the relationship between
mother’s age and paternal monitoring.

Ha210: Childhood chronic conditions have effects on the relationship between mother’s
age and paternal monitoring.

H0211: Childhood chronic conditions have no effect on the relationship between father’s
education and paternal responsibility.

Ha211: Childhood chronic conditions have effects on the relationship between father’s

education and paternal responsibility.

98

H0212: Childhood chronic conditions have no effect on the relationship between father’s
education and paternal warmth and affection toward children.

11a212: Childhood chronic conditions have effects on the relationship between father’s
education and paternal warmth and affection toward children.

110213: Childhood chronic conditions have no effect on the relationship between father’s
education and father/child house-centered activities.

Ha213: Childhood chronic conditions have effects on the relationship between father’s
education and father/child house-centered activities.

H0214: Childhood chronic conditions have no effect on the relationship between father’s
education and father/child child-centered activities.

Ha214: Childhood chronic conditions have effects on the relationship between father’s
education and father/child. child-centered activities.

H0215: Childhood chronic conditions have no effect on the relationship between father’s
education and paternal monitoring.

Ha215: Childhood chronic conditions have effects on the relationship between father’s
education and paternal monitoring.

110216: Childhood chronic conditions have no effect on the relationship between
mother’s education and paternal responsibility.

Ha2 l 6: Childhood chronic conditions have effects on the relationship between mother’s
education and paternal responsibility.

H0217: Childhood chronic conditions have no effect on the relationship between

mother’s education and paternal warmth and affection toward children.

99

Ha217: Childhood chronic conditions have effects on the relationship between mother’s
education and paternal warmth and affection toward children.

110218: Childhood chronic conditions have no effect on the relationship between
mother’s education and father/child house-centered activities.

Ha218: Childhood chronic conditions have effects on the relationship between mother’s
education and father/child house-centered activities.

110219: Childhood chronic conditions have no effect on the relationship between
mother’s education and father/child child-centered activities.

Ha219: Childhood chronic conditions have effects on the relationship between mother’s
education and father/child child-centered activities.

H0220: Childhood chronic conditions have no effect on the relationship between
mother’s education and paternal monitoring.

Ha220: Childhood chronic conditions have effects on the relationship between mother’s

education and paternal monitoring.

100

APPENDIX C

SIRB Letter

101

 

 

 

 

OFFICE OF
REGULATORY
AFFAIRS

Human Research

ProtscflonProgrm

BIOMEDICAL 5 HEALTH
INSTITUTIONAL REVIEW
BOARD (BRO)

COIMUNITY RESEARCH
INSTITUTIONAL REVIEW
BOARD (OMB)

SOCIAL SCENCB
BEHAWRN. I EDUCATOR
INSTITUTDML REVIEW
BOARD (SIRE)

202 Old: Hal
48824—1046
517-355-2180
Fax 5174324503

mhunanresearo‘v mucdu
5le I. BIRB: lRBQrisuedu

 

MSU I: on WE'OCUOI
equal-omnwo Institution.

STATE or» reach for

S'TY useotian

approved public
data fie

 

MICHIGAN
u N 1 v E R

February 19. 2008

To: Lillian Phonics
Family and Child Ecology
13 E. Human Ecology Bldg.

Re: Certification # PDOMOZ

Title: Fathers involvement. Children with chronic health conditions

Thank you for submitting your certification for the use of an approved public data file.
The Social Science / Behavioral 1 Education Institutional Review Board (SIRB) has
received and accepted your oortiflcodon.

You may conduct this research project using the approved data file until its completion
without any further review from the SIRB. If your project expands to include human
subjects or Identifiable data from human subjects you will have to submit a complete
application to SIRB.

In the future, if you wish to conduct another project. not directly related to this project. or
use another approved data file not listed on this certification, please submit another
certification form. This will allow you to continue your work without IRB review. In
addition, the certification allows us to keep a total of all human research being performed
and gives credit to you and your department in any reports or statistics.

Please use the certification number listed above on any forms submitted which relate to
this project. or on any correspondence with SIRB.

Thank you for your cooperation and good luck with your research. If we can be of further
assistance. please contact us at 517-355-2180 or via email at lRB@prg.msu.edu.

Sincerely. /

W

Peter Vasilenko
Director, Human Research Protection Program

cc: Ju.Lien K0
1800 Haslett Rd Apt Apt8
East Lansing MI 48823

102

BIBLIOGRAPHY

103

Bibliography

Amato, P. R., & Rivera, F. (1999). Paternal involvement and children’s behavior
problems. Journal of Marriage and Family, 61, 375-384.

Baker, B. L., McIntyre, L. L., Blacher, J., Cmic, K., Edelbrock, C., & Low, C. (2003).
Pre-school children with and without developmental delay: Behaviour problems

and parenting stress over time. Journal of Intellectual Disability Research, 4 7,
217-230.

Baron, R., & Kenny, D. (1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social
psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 1 173-] 182

Bowerman, B.L. & O’Connell, R. T. (1990). Linear statistical model: An applied
approach (2"d edition). Belmont, CA: Duxbury.

Bruce, E. J., Schultz, C. L., & Smyrnios, K. X. (1996). A longitudinal study of the grief
of mothers and fathers of children with intellectual disability. British Journal of
Medical Psychology, 69, 35-45.

Bubloz, M., & Sontag, S. (1993). Human ecology theory. In P.G. Boss, W. J. Doherty, R.
LaRossa, W. R. Schumm, & S. K. Steinmentz (Eds.), Sourcebook of family
theories and methods: A contextual approach (pp.419-450). New York: Plenum
Press.

Cabrera, N. J., Tamis-LeMonda, C. 8., Bradley, R. H., Hofferth, S.,& Lamb, M.E.
(2000). Fatherhood in the twenty-first century. Child Development, 71, 127-136.

Clark, S. M., & Miles, M. A. (1999). Conflicting responses: The experiences of fathers of
infants diagnosed with severe congenital heart disease. Journal for Specialists in
Pediatric Nursing, 4, 7-14.

Conger, R., & Elder, G. H., Jr. (1994). Families in troubled times: Adapting to change in
rural America. New York: Aldine de Gruyter.

Davis, P. B., & May, J. E. (1991). Involving fathers in early intervention and family
support programs: issues and strategies. Children’s Health Care, 20, 87-92.

Dyson, L. (1997). Fathers and mothers of school-age children with developmental
disabilities: Parental stress, family functioning and social support. American
Journal on Mental Retardation, 102, 267-279.

Doherty, W. J., Kouneski, E. F., & Erickson, M. F. (1998). Responsible fathering: An

overview and conceptual framework. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 60,
277-292.

104

 

Dollahite, D. C. (2004) A narrative approach to exploring responsible involvement of
fathers with their special-needs children. In R. Day & M. Lamb (Eds.),
C onceptualizing and measuringfather involvement (pp. 109-127). Mahwah, NJ:
Erlbaum.

Flouri, E., & Buchanan, A. (2004). Early father‘s and mother’s involvement and child’s
later educational outcomes. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 74, 141—
153.

Fuemmeler, B., Mullins, L. L., Pelt, J. V., Carpentier, M. Y., & Parkhurst, J. (2005).
Posttraumatic stress symptoms and distress among parents of children with
cancer. Children’s Health Care, 34, 289-303.

Griffore, R., & Phenice, L. (2001). The language of human ecology: A general systems
perspective. Dubuque, IA: Kendall/Hunt Publishing Co.

Hanson, M. J., & Lynch, E. W. (2003). Understanding families: Approaches to diversity,
disability, and risk. Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes Publishing Co.

Hoekstra-Weebers, J ., Jaspers, J ., Kamps, W., & Klip, E. (1998). Gender differences in
psychological adaptation and coping in parents of pediatric cancer patients.
Psycho-Oncology, 7, 26-36.

Holmbeck, G., Gorey-Ferguson, L., Hudson, T., Seefeldt, T., Shapera, W., Turner, T., et
a1. (1997). Maternal, paternal, and marital functioning in families of
preadolescents with spina bifida. Journal of Pediatric Psychology, 22, 167-181.

Hung. J. W., Wu, Y., & Yeh, C. (2004). Comparing stress levels of parents of children
with cancer and parents of children with physical disabilities. Psycho-Oncology,
13, 889-903.

levers, C. E., & Drotar. D. (1996). Family and parental functioning in cystic fibrosis.
Journal of Developmental and Behavioral Pediatrics, 1 7, 48-55.

Katz, S., & Krulik, T. (1999). Fathers of children with chronic illness: Do they differ
from fathers of healthy children. Journal of Family Nursing, 5, 292-315.

Lamb, M. E., & Billings, L. A. (1997). Fathers of children with special needs. In M. E.
Lamb (Ed), The role of the father in child development (3rd ed., pp. 179-190).
New York: Wiley.

Lamb, M.E., Pleck, J. H., Chamov, E. L., & Levine, J. A. (1985). Paternal behavior in
humans. American Zoologist, 25, 883-894.

105

Lamb, M.E., Pleck, J. H., Charnov, E. L., & Levine, J. A. (1987). A biosocial perspective
on paternal behavior and involvement. In J. Lancaster, J. Altmann, A. Rossi, & L.

Sherrod (Eds.). Parenting across the lifespan: Biosocial dimensions (pp.111-142).
New York: Aldine de Gruyter.

Lavigne, J. V., & Faier-Routman, J. (1992). Psychological adjustment to pediatric
physical disorders: A meta-analytic review. Journal of Pediatric psychology, 1 7,
133-157.

Leonard, B. J., Kratz, B. J., Skay, C. L., & Rheinberger, M. M. (1997). Comparison of
mother-father perceptions of their child’s self-management of diabetes. Issues in
Comprehensive Pediatric Nursing, 20, 69-87.

Levine, J. A., & Pitt, E. W. (1995). New expectations: Community strategiesfor
responsiblefatherhood. New York: Families and Work Institute.

Mainieri, T. (2006). The panel study of income dynamic child development supplement:
user guide for CDSII. Retrieved September 9, 2008 from
http://psidonline.isr.umich.edu/CDS/cdsii__useer.pdf

McBride, B. A., Schoppe, S. J., Ho, M., & Rane, T. R. (2004) Multiple determinants of
father involvement: An exploratoty analysis using the PSID-CDS data set. In R.

Day & M. Lamb (Eds.), Conceptualizing and measuringfather involvement (pp.
321-340). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

McCubbin, M., Balling, K., Possin, P., Frierdich, S., & Bryne, B. (2002). Family
resiliency in childhood cancer. Family Relations, 51, 103-1 11.

McNeill, T. (2004). Fathers’ experience of parenting a child with juvenile rheumatoid
arthritis. Qualitative Health Research, 14, 526-545.

Meijer, S. A., Sinnema, G., Bijstra, J. 0., Mellenbergh, G. J., & Wolters, W. H. (2000).
Socinal functioning in children with a chronic illness. Journal of Child
Psychology and Psychiatry and Allied Disciplines, 41, 309-317.

Moore, T., & Kotelchuck, M. (2004). Predictors of urban fathers’ involvement in their
child’s health care. Pediatrics, 113, 574-580.

NICHD Early Child Care Research Network (2000). Factors associated with fathers’
caregiving activities and sensitivity with young children. Journal of Family
Psychology, 14(2). 200—219.

Nord, C., Brimhall, D. A., & West, J. (1997). Fathers’ involvement in their children’s

schools. Washington, DC: Office of Educational Research and Improvement, US.
Department of Education.

106

Olson, M. M., Dollahite, D. C., & White, M. B. (2002). Involved fathering of children
with special needs: Relationships and religions as resources. Journal of Religion,
Disbility, & Health, 6, 47-73.

Palkovitz, R. (2002). Involved fathering and child development: Advancing our
understanding of food fathering. In C. S. Tamis-LeMonda & N. Cabrera (Ed.),
Handbook of father involvement: Multidisciplinary perspectives (pp. 119-140).
Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Pearlin, L., Lieberman, M., Menaghan, E., & Mullan, .l. (1981). The stress process.
Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 22, 337-356.

Pleck, J. H. (1997). Paternal involvement: Levels, sources, and consequences. In M. E.
Lamb (Ed), The role of the father in child development (3rd ed., pp. 66-103). New
York: Wiley.

Rosenberg, M. (1979). Conceiving the self New York: Basic Books.

Snarey, J. (1993). How fathers care for the next generation: A four-decade study.
Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press.

Tamis-LeMonda, C. 8., Shannon, J. D., Cabrera, N. J., & Lamb, M. E. (2004). Fathers
and mothers at play with their 2- and 3-year-olds: Contributions to language and
cognitive development. Child Development, 75, 1806-1820.

Timko, C ., Stovel, K.W., Moos, R.H., & Miller III, J]. (1992). Adaptation to juvenile
rheumatic disease: A controlled evaluation of functional disability with one-year
follow-up. Health Psychology, 1 I, 67-76.

US. Department of Health and Human Services. (2004). Children with special health
care needs. Child Health USA 2004. Retrieved October 30, 2008 from
http://mchb.hrsa.gov/mchirc/chusa_04/pages/0305cshn.htm

Vance, J. C., Boyle, F. M., Majman, J. M., & Thearle, M. J. (1995). Gender difference in
parental psychological distress following perinatal death or sudden infant death
syndrome. British Journal of Psychiatry, 1 6 7, 806-81 1.

Williams, E., & Radin, N. (1999), Effects of father participation in child rearing: Twenty-
year follow-up. American Orthopsychiatric Association, 69, 328-336.

Yeung, W. J., Sandberg, J. F., David-Kean, P. E., & Hofferth, S. L. (2001). Children’s Time
with Fathers in Intact Families. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 63, 136-54.

107

   

M'llllllllljllllllllljilllllllll“