.. 3:93;: i. :._ ¢ 2 >171: . y . . :3 .54.? mmfibfib . .2...) .1]. fits... . 6 2.4. :JJ: 5.. e J... . ,. 2 II. pfl'r'llQ . I IHESlS nuanmifis \llllll‘llll Mil Ml This is to certify that the thesis entitled RESEARCH ARTICLES IN THE JOURNAL OF MARRIAGE AND THE FAMILY IN THE EIGHTIES: A CONTENT ANALYSIS presented by ‘°'~;..—-—- Evelyn Suleeman has been accepted towards fulfillment of the requirements for Master of Arts degreein Family Studies Wax Major professor Date @fi/ 30,; /€92~ 0-7539 MS U is an Affirmative Action/Equal Opportunity Institution LIERARY Mlchlgan State University L PLACE IN RETURN BOX to remove this checkout from your record. TO AVOID FINES return on or bdoro date duo. MSU Is An Affirmative Action/Equal Opportunity Institution - email”! RESEARCH ARTICLES IN THE JOURNAL OF MARRIAGE AND THE FAMILY IN THE EIGHTIES: A CONTENT ANALYSIS STUDY BY Evelyn Suleeman A THESIS Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF ARTS Department of Family and Child Ecology 1992 ABSTRACT RESEARCH ARTICLES IN THE JOURNAL OF MARRIAGE AND THE FAMILY IN THE EIGHTIES: A CONTENT ANALYSIS BY Evelyn Suleeman This study was a content analysis review of articles found in the 19803 decade of the Journal of Marriage and the Family. During the 805 social changes provided the stimuli for study of emerging phenomena in family studies. Most of these research were descriptive in nature using cross sectional designs. Sample size tended to be large, however, many were nonrandom samples. The most popular technique for gathering data were the use of questionnaires and interview schedules. Statistical techniques became more Sophisticated and varied compared with earlier periods. An increase in teams of authorship were found as well as male and females within co-authorship. Most research subject included middle class, individuals, mostly located in urban areas, with mix ethnic backgrounds. Three conceptual frameworks found most often were structural functional, symbolic interactional, and social exchange still the most conceptual frameworks used. Most of the research were conducted in micro-systems level. .- IR 1 a I a“ B O soVa..~v c ~“‘HV! :-..J’ v ”A'VAct.‘ ”b..bfi- 3‘ 'I‘~A “' uv. : v o W t, 2' “.1 y... 9 ‘ V " v U‘ “e . ‘ “‘0. Vi. SCI‘. A. n. A 03"»:3: ' I “A by “a”... I t" ~ AA“! I; V Vu‘ n 't t N“ "‘ \ A ‘V - " QU~°o \ A P... g \‘w “”2!“ “t.. v v~I ‘u°Q~: ' A I ~"V‘ O ‘Rc F“. fly“ 5~ ‘ ‘ ACKNOWLEDGMENTS This study could be done because many people assisted in completing my thesis. Many thanks to Dr. Lillian Phenice, my academic advisor who first introduced me to this study, helped, and encouraged me to finish it. And also for borrowing some of her 803 QME collection so that I could work at home. I appreciate the efforts of Dr. Lawrence Schiamberg and Dr. Mary Andrews, who served on my thesis committee. I also want to thank Dr. Barbara Ames for borrowing some of her 805 Egg collection. I appreciate Louis Sternberg, my host family, who filled out some answers during my field work in some summer mornings. Deborah Davis, who did the reliability test for this study. Julie Pelletier and Stacey Bieler supported and gave critical cements that really challenged me. Without their help I could not imagine to finish this study. I also want to thank my sponsor MUCIA who gave the scholarship. And last but not least, many thanks toimy husband, Trisno Sutanto, who accompanied me, helped in answering some questions and with the computer work, and supported me during the critical events; my son, Gabriel Ekaputra who was born iii ‘ I ”My. pg 0‘0-..“ d 9-! an 3 .O.‘.. u during my study and gave joy in my life, and taught me more than anyone else about the "family"-- the laboratory of my field. Let me dedicate this study to them who enrich my life. iv v..- -.~ ‘ A. A. N“ I--. ‘s Q‘. “ \‘4. my h-‘. 0-- TABLE OF CONTENTS Page LIST OF TABLES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . viii LIST OF APPENDICES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . x CHAPTER I. INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . l The Background of the Study . . . . . . 2 Review of Family Research . . . . . . . 3 Theory Building Period . 5 Data Collection and Data Collection Techniques . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 Time Dimension . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 Sample Size . . . . . . . . . . 8 Statistical Techniques . . . . . . . . 9 .Rationale for the Study . . . . . . . . 9 Assumptions . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 Research Questions . . . . . . . . . . 10 Limitations of the Study . . . . . . . . 12 II. METHODOLOGY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 Content Analysis as a Research Technique. . . . . . . 13 Operational Definitions of Variables . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 Sample . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 Data Collection . . . . . . . . . . 30 Reliability and Validity . . . . . . . . 35 III. RESULTS: THEMES IN THE EIGHTIES . . . . . 37 Themes During the Eighties . . . . . . . 39 Gender Roles . . . . . . 40 Premarital Sexual Relationship . . . . 43 Mate Selection . . . . . . . . 44 Adolescent Sexual Behavior . . . . . . 45 Parent— child Relationship . . . . . . 46 V Chapter IV. VI. Remarriage and Stepfamily Family in Later Life . Family and Religion . Family and the Economy . Marital Quality . . . . . . . . . . Family Power . . . . . . . . Family Stress and Coping . . Family Violence . . . . Nontraditional Family Forms . Kinship . . . . Divorce . O O O 0 O O O O 0 Family Communication . . . . . . . . Family Policy . . . . . . . . . . . Summary on Themes . . . . . . . . . RESULTS: THE CHARACTERISTICS OF RESEARCH IN THE EIGHTIES . . . . . . . . . . . . Purpose of the Study . . . . Use of Hypotheses in Research . . . Level of Data Analysis . . . . . . Time Dimension . . . . . . . . : Statistical Techniques . . . . . . . Summary . . . . . . . . . . . RESULTS: AUTHORS AND RESEARCH SUBJECTS IN THE EIGHTIES . . . . . . . . . . . Authors in the Eighties . . Research Subject in the Eighties . Gender of the Research Subject . Type of Research Subject . Ethnicity of the Research Subject . . . Social Class of the Research Subject . . . Indicator of Social Class of the Research Subject . . . Location of the Research Subject Summary . RESULTS: TECHNIQUES OF GATHERING DATA AND SAMPLE ISSUES DURING THE EIGHTIES Techniques of Gathering Data Gender of the Interviewer vi Page 47 48 50 51 53 55 56 58 59 60 62 63 64 65 67 67 70 73 75 81 85 88 88 92 92 97 99 104 110 114 116 120 120 126 Chapter Sampling Issues . . . . . The Type of Sample . . . Sample Size . . . . . . Summary . . . . . . . . . VII. RESULTS: CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORKS IN EIGHTIES O O O O O O O O O O O O Symbolic Interaction Framework . Structural Functional Framework Institutional Framework . . . . Situational Framework . . . . Conflict Framework . . . . . . Social Exchange Framework . . Developmental Framework . . . . Social Psychology Framework . . Psychoanalytic Framework . . . . Systems Framework . . . . . . . Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . VIII. RESULTS: THE ENVIRONMENTAL SYSTEMS THE EIGHTIES . . . . . . . . . . . Micro—systems . Meso-system Exo-system . Macro-system Summary . . IX. CONCLUSIONS . . . . . . . . . . . APPENDICES . . . . . . . . . . LIST OF REFERENCES 0 o o o o o o o o o o 0 vii Page 128 128 134 139 141 142 146 148 149 151 151 153 154 154 154 155 157 157 161 164 167 170 171 178 204 LIST OF TABLES Table Page 1. Themes by Five Year Periods, 1980-1989 0 o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o 41 2. Purpose of the Study by Five Year Periods, 1980-1989 . . . . . . . . . . 68 3. Use of Hypotheses by Five Year Periods, 1980-1989 . . . . . . . . . . 71 4. Themes by Use of Hypotheses . . . . . . . . 72 5. Level of data Analysis by Five Year Periods, 1980-1989 . . . . . . . 74 6. Time Dimension by Five Year Periods, 1980-1989 . . . . . . . . . 76 7. Themes by Time Dimension . . . . . . . . . 78 8. Statistical Techniques by Five Year Periods, 1980-1989 . . . . . . . 82 9. Themes by Gender of Authors . . . . . . . . 90 10. Gender of the Research Subject by Gender of the Author . . . . . . . . . . 91 11. Themes by Gender of the Research Subject . 93 12. Ethnicity of the Research Subject by Five Year Periods, 1980-1989 . . . . . . 101 13. Social Class of the Research Subject by Five Year Periods, 1980-1989 . . . . . . 107 14. Themes by the Social Class of the Research Subject . . . . . . . . . . . . . 108 15. Indicator of the Research Subject's SOC1al Class 0 o o o o o o o o o o o o o 111 viii Table 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. A1. B1. C1. D1. E1. F1. G1. H1. Page Themes by Social Class Indicator . . . . . 112 Themes by Location of the Research Subject . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 115 Techniques of Gathering Data by Five Year Periods, 1980- 1989 . . . . . . . . . . 121 Gender of the Interviewer and Gender of the Research Subject . . . . . . . . . . . 128 Themes by the Sampling Techniques . . . . 130 Sample Size by Five Year Periods, 1980-1989 0 o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o 134 Sample Size by Level of Data Analysis . . 135 Themes by Sample Size . . . . . . . . . . 137 Techniques of Gathering Data by Sample Size . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 138 Number of Articles using the Conceptual Frameworks by Five Year Periods, 1980-1989 0 o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o 143 Environmental Systems by Five Year Periods, 1980-1989 . . . . . . . . . . . . 158 Themes by Purpose of the Study . . . . . . 180 Themes by Level of Data Analysis . . . . . 182 Themes by Statistical Technique . . . . . 184 Themes by Type of the Research Subject . . 187 Themes by Ethnicity of the Research Subject . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 189 Themes by Techniques of Gathering Data . . 191 Themes by Conceptual Framework . . . . . . 193 Themes and the Environmental System . . . 196 ix Appendix A. B. C. D. Themes by Themes by Themes by Themes by Subject Themes by Subject Themes by Data . Themes by Themes by LIST OF APPENDICES Purpose of the Study Level of Data Analysis Statistical Techniques . . . . Type of the Research Ethnicity of the Research Techniques of Gathering Conceptual Framework . the Environmental System Questionnaires . . . . . . . . . . . . Page 179 181 174 186 188 190 192 195 197 CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION Comprehensive reviews of research or theoretical literature in family science are scarce. It is often left to the scholar to gather various information related to studies in specific areas. Since critical analyses of findings over time are difficult to locate, it will be difficult to assess the importance of the findings. However, a comprehensive look at journal articles can help family scholars find congruencies to better understand ways in which family research occurs and progresses over time. This type of study would also provide information to researchers by identifying problems which systematically can occur in the publication of articles in journals. Given these problems, the primary focus of this study was to review the literature in The Journal of Marriage and m. The Journal of Marriage and Family_(JMF) is one of the mOSt Popular professional journals used by scholars when Publishing research studies on families. First published in 1939. it emphasizes articles related to marriage and family a r .44 " “I 2 issues. Published quarterly, it consists of approximately 20 research articles in each issue. Since 1960 it has been a tradition of the JMF to publish decade reviews dealing with certain themes. The reviews are in the November issues of the first year of the new decade, such as the 1960, 1970, 1980, and 1990 issues. There are limited studies dealing with what the Journal has published over time. A comprehensive study of the articles published in the JMF from 1980-1989, such as this study, will meet that need. The Background of the Study A systematic study of the family began during the late 18005. Komarovsky and Waller (1945) studied the progress in family studies in the first 50 years by looking at three different periods. In the first period, 1895-1914, moral evaluations were used rather than modern value-free evaluation (p. 443). The second period, 1915-1926, was characterized by the separation of science and morality. In this period, empirical research was done and official statistics were used for the first time (p. 445). The use of official statistics, such as the governmental surveys, was increased in the last period, 1927-1944 (P- 445)- In a review of the family research in four principal s°°1°1°91cal journals, American Sociological Review, American Journal of Sociology, Social Forces, and Sociology 22§_Social Researgg, Nye (1988) reported that in 1937 there m. 4.. 3 were seven articles based primarily on research. In a 1948 review of periodicals using the International Index to Periodicals, Nimkoff (1948) reported an increase in the number of research articles from 14% in 1920-1923 to 48% in 1943-1946. This dramatic increase in research on the family radically changed the "image" of family studies. In his comprehensive study of 50 years of family research, Nye (1988) pointed out, "A new era of scientific research in family behavior was beginning, and an exciting new perspective was opening for scholars and students of the family [i.e., since 1937]" (p. 305). Many family experts recognize the need for reviewing and summarizing the research studies conducted in their field. A review of the literature is a valuable and comprehensive measure of the scientific endeavor of family scholars to understand the family phenomenon. It also improves research quality as well as contributes to the process of theory-building. Review of Family Research Several review studies have been conducted on family research and literature. These studies often reported the theoretical approaches and methodological approaches used in family research. Most of the studies included journal articles as their primary source for analyzing the literature (Hodgson & Lewis, 1979; Lavee, 1986; Nimkoff, I \ . 4 1948; Nye, 1988; Nye & Bayer, 1963; Ruano, Bruce, & McDermott, 1969). Most family research studies are reported in journals, and therefore, these journals are the primary medium for publication of the researches (Ehrmann, 1955; La Rossa 8 Wolf, 1985). Summaries of comprehensive reviews can also be found in books, dissertations, or other published reports (Ehrmann, 1955; Hill, 1958; Mogey, 1969). The themes of the studies have varied throughout different decades. The themes of marital satisfaction and conflict have been dominant in family research ever since they first emerged in the 19405 (Nimkoff, 1948; Nye, 1988; Nye & Bayer, 1963). During 1947-1961, dating, courtship, and mate selection were the predominant themes in research articles in The American Sociological Review, The American Journal of Sociology. Social Forces, and Marriage and Family Liying (Nye 8 Bayer, 1963). In the decade of the 19605, teenage parenthood, sex roles, family stress and coping, and family violence either were not included or were given little attention (Berardo, 1980). Violence, drug abuse, alcoholism, or other child Problems did not become prevalent in the literature until the mid-19805 (Gelles, 1980; Nye, 1988). Nye reported that "almost all of the social work articles listed on topics of the fannily in the Social Science Index in 1986 dealt with some aspects of family violence . . ." (Nye, 1988, p. 309). Although personality emerged as a phenomena in the 19205 5 (Nimkoff, 1948), it was still a minor topic in the JMF until 1987 (Nye, 1988). Overall, Streib and Beck (1980) argued that the major focus of research in the 605 and 705 was on internal‘ relationships between family members or on the micro-systems level, to use Bronfenbrenner's term for the level of ecological environment (1979). Because the welfare system in the United States has become so extensive in influencing many people, Streib and Beck (1980) suggested that researchers in the 19805 examine the impact of macro-environmental influences, such as the welfare program, on the family or on the meso-system level, to again utilize Bronfenbrenner's (1979) terminology. Theory Building Period Family studies entered a period of systematic theory building in 1950 (Christensen, 1964; Thomas 8 Wilcox, 1987). More family scholars have taken an interest in theory building since that time. In the first Workshop on Marriage End Family Research in 1951, there was an attempt to identify the major theoretical approaches used in the study Of the family as the (1) institutional, (2) structural fUmstional, (3) situational, (4) interactional, (5) family dEVGILIpment, (6) learning theory-maturational, and (7) h°usehold economics-home management (Hill, 1951). IIri the 19605, there were attempts to summarize and in"legrate the five dominant theoretical approaches utilized 6 in family study as the (1) institutional, (2) structural- functional, (3) interactional, (4) situational, and (5) developmental (Christensen, 1964; Hill & Hansen 1960). The household economics-home management approach was no longer included in the theoretical approach "because of its failure to generate a full-fledged conceptual framework ." (Hill & Hansen, 1960, p. 299). The learning theory-maturational approach was also excluded because it only dealt with the individual and not the family as a whole (Hill & Hansen, 1964). In 1966, Nye and Berardo published a book containing a large number of essays on theoretical approaches which had been used in family study. During the 19605, general systems theory, balance theory, game theory, and exchange theory were also introduced into family studies (Broderick, 1971). The rapid development of family theory, however, was .not followed by its utilization in family research. Klein, (Slavert, Garland, and Poloma (1969) reported in their survey <3f journal articles dealing with marriage and the family <1uring 1962-1968 that there was a general lack of 11tilization.of'theory to guide empirical research. They found only 96 out of 600 articles, from 12 social science journals.'using a certain theoretical approach. Nye (1988) reported that "the more impressive statistic is the overWhelming proportion of projects that employ no type of 7 theory-about 80% for the entire time period, and over 75% in 1987" (p. 311). After it was first formalized in 1951, the developmental approach dominated the family field in 19505 and 19605 (Broderick, 1988). In addition to the developmental approach, the structural-functional and interactional approaches were the most popular among researchers throughout the 19605 (Klein, Clavert, Garland, & Poloma, 1969; Nye & Berardo, 1981). During the years 1969-1976, the interactional theory was the most popular, followed by the structural-functional, the developmental and the institutional theory (Hodgson & Lewis, 1979). During the 19705, interactional theory was the dominant theoretical approach among the family scholars. Following interactional theory, exchange theory and systems theory replaced structural-functional theory and developmental theory as the major schools of thought in that decade (Holman & Burr, 1980). Data Collection and Data 99, ection Tec iques Data collection and data collection techniques are part of the methodology which was discussed in the previous reviews of family research. Secondary data, such as the Census, vital statistics records, and historical documents were a major source from 1937 to 1987 (Nye, 1988)‘ Questionnaires and interviews were the most popular 8 techniques for gathering data since the 19405 (Hill, 1958; Hodgson 8 Lewis, 1979; Nye, 1988; Nye 8 Bayer, 1963; Mogey, 1969; Ruano, Bruce, 8 McDermott, 1969). Time Dimension The time dimension in family studies varies according to the purpose of the research. There are behavior patterns best understood by means of cross sectional studies (Walters 8 Walters, 1980). There are themes better understood by taking a longitudinal dimension, such as divorce and remarriage, as processes and impacts on behavior of the early parent-child relationship and the later parent-child relationship (Price-Bonham 8 Balswick, 1980; Walters 8 Walters, 1980). Longitudinal studies based on repeated observations "are essential to understanding the processes of change" (Davies, 1987, p. 1). However, these longitudinal studies on divorce and remarriage are difficult to conduct because remarried couples and stepfamilies are very mobile (Coleman 8 Ganong. 1990). §§mple Size During the 1947-1961 period, there was a tendency to use small sample sizes (less than 100) (Nye 8 Bayer. 1953)- After 1967 large sample sizes (more than 1,000) were popular (Nye, 1988). According to Nye and Bayer (1963), the sample size was related to using census data. The tendency to use a small sample was followed by a decline in using census 9 data. Sample size also depended on the themes being studied. For example, a large sample was difficult to obtain for adolescent childbearing because the researchers had to obtain parental permission to interview an adolescent (Walters 8 Walters, 1980). A majority of the researchers used small samples to study remarried families and stepfamilies; their mobility made a random sample difficult to obtain (Coleman 8 Ganong, 1990). Statistical Techniques Statistical techniques have become more popular in family research. More empirical research used one or more statistical analyses. During 1947-1951, only 29.6% of all empirical research projects used any statistical technique (Nye 8 Bayer, 1963). In 1987, 80% of all empirical research projects used statistical analysis (Nye, 1988). Chi-square was the statistical test most often used by researchers (Nye 8 Bayer 1963; Ruano, Bruce, 8 McDermott, 1969). Not only did more studies use statistical analyses, the family researchers also attempted explanatory studies in addition to descriptive studies (Nye, 1988)- Rationale for the Study Although the importance of review in family research is generally known, there is no study that covers a whole decade using one specific journal. This study contributed to the literature of review of family research. 10 This study was concerned with several issues which have been studied before, such as themes, theoretical approaches, statistical techniques, and data collection, as well as several issues which have been little studied before, such as the social class of the respondents. This study also included the level of ecological environment being researched. Assumptions Assumption 1: Research articles in the JMF reflect a goodsample of what family researchers are doing in present time. Assumption 2: Research articles in the JMF dealt with varied themes. Assumption 3: Research articles in the JMF were framed by various theoretical approaches. Assumption 4: Research articles in the JMF dealt with varied techniques for gathering data. Assumption 5: Research articles in the JMF dealt with varied samples. Assumption 6: Research articles in the JMF had a different designs of research. Assumption 7: Research articles in the JMF used different statistical techniques. Assumption 8: Content analysis is an effective method for gathering data in this study. Research Questions All the research articles in JMF in 1980-1989 were used in this study. The following research questions were used in this study: 11 Question 1: How many articles between 1980 through 1989 dealt with the themes which were used in the 19805 review? Question 2: How many articles between 1980 through 1989 dealt with exploratory studies, how many with descriptive studies, how many with explanatory studies, and how many with meta-analysis studies? Question 3: What kind of theoretical framework was used most during the 19805? estion 4: How many studies dealt with cross-sectional studies and how many with longitudinal studies during the 19805? Question 5: What was the dominant technique used for gathering data in the research articles between 1980 and 1989? Question 6: How many studies used random samples and how many non random samples during the 19805? Question 7: How many studies involved females, males, or both in their samples during the 19805? Question 8: How many studies were conducted in the urban area and rural area during the 19805? Question 9: Were certain ethnic groups used as samples in the studies during the 19805? Question 10: How many studies used lower-, middle-, or upper class as their samples during the 19805? Question 11: How many studies dealt with micro- systems, meso-system, exo-system, and macro-system levels during the 19805? Question 12: How many studies dealt with primary, secondary, and meta-analysis during the 19805? Question 13: Was there a preferred statistical technique used during the 19805? Question 14: Were there more advanced statistical techniques than simple ones used during the 19805? 12 Limitations of the Study As with any other research, this study had some limitations: First, themes for this study were derived from the titles of the article. Therefore some themes that emerged in the content of the research were not included in this study. Second, past studies about the review of family research used more than one reader to evaluate an article and compare their evaluations (Klein, Clavert, Garland, 8 Poloma, 1969; Nye 8 Bayer, 1963; Ruano, Bruce, 8 McDermott, 1969). However, since this review and coding of the literature was done by the author alone, there may be subjective judgments and/or errors in coding. CHAPTER II METHODOLOGY Content Analysis as a Research Technique This study dealt with articles in the Journal of Marriage and the Family and used content analysis as a tool to gather data. Content analysis is primarily used as a research technique in the field of communication where it is used for analyzing the content in a text. According to Budd, Thr0p, 8 Donohew (1967) content analysis is "a systematic technique for analyzing message content and message handling. . ." (p. 2). It can be applied to any form of communication, oral or written, such as books, journals, magazines, poems, speeches, motion pictures, broadcasts, photographs, or songs. W of content analyeis is to "take a verbal,_ non-quantitative document and transform it inteuquantitatW (Bailey, w 1978, p. 276) . Carrying out a content analysis is basically the same as doing a structured observation, except that the former is applied to documents rather than to observation of nonverbal behavior (Bailey, 1978). As in any other research method, variables in content analysis should have categories which 13 14 are exhaustive. Every unit of analysis should have a category that is mutuallyuexclusive with only one correct category for one unit analysis. Each category must be independent which means that the value of one category does not determine the value of another category (Holsti, 1969). According to Holsti (1969), the unit of analysis in content analysis can be: (1)_eu§iugle_uegduormsymbelL (2) a chemewwhich.refers to the purpose of a documentLpL3)ta whfl‘mv ___ m 11 n -. -- -- characterwgfisuchues... a characteriin a.-novel~or radio-“play, (4) -_._.q.——w---"" .~-- ._...._._——---' a sentence or 935393381 or (5) an item which refers to the ._.—..—--—-M. o-_~.... H... entire dosumen}. ”Also mentioned was the notion that several poo-h..— m LHlitS of analysis can be used simultaneously in doing a content analysis. Sometimes the unit of analysis cannot be put into a given category without "considering the context in which it is found" (Bailey, 1978, p. 282). If that happens, the researcher should choose subjectively a context unit, which is a larger unit that includes the unit of analysis. For example, if the sentence is the unit of analysis, the context unit can be a paragraph, chapter, or an entire document. Quantifying the data may be as simple as counting the rnnhber of a given word in a paragraph or counting the number cxf photographs appearing in a book. According to Holsti (1959), this is quantitative research for it offers a precise. Objective. and reliable observation about the 15 frequency of a particular content variable. Babbie (1989) called it a manifest content because it is visible. On the other hand, in qualitative research inferences are made on the basis of the underlying meaning (Holsti, 1969). Therefore, qualitative research may be more sophisticated because it needs the researcher's knowledge to assess the latent content, to use Babbie's (1989) term. Holsti (1969) gave four ways to quantify data in content analysis: 1. Appearance: the researcher finds whether the data are appearing or not in an article or broadcast program. 2. Frequency: the researcher counts the number of times the data appear. 3. NUmber of space: the researcher measures the size of an article or the amount of time in a broadcast program. Holsti (1969) mentioned that this measure is crude for analyzing the intensity of attitudes or values because it does not measure the content of the data itself. 4. Strength or intensity of the statement: the researcher measures the strength of a statement by comparing it with other relevant statements. The stronger statements will have greater value than the rest; in other words, they will more likely represent the attitudes. For example, one of two articles could be concluded to have more positive attitudes expressed toward AIDS by comparing their statements. 16 The survey data of a content analysis as can be presented in tables containing frequencies and percentages. Operational Definitions of Variables Variables in this study were operationalized as below: Year of the Issues is the year the journal was published. This study includes all issues in the Journal of Marriage and the Family from the years 1980 to 1989. Number of Authors is the actual number of authors of ‘the article such as one, two, and three or more. Gender of Authors is the description of the gender of the authors, such as male, female, male and female, and not known. Thine is the emerging issue in research that distinguishes one research from another. Categories for themes in this study are: Gender Roles. Concepts included are gender stratification, gender differentiation, division of labor by gender, gender norms, gender-role attitudes, and«gender-role ideologies. Premarital and Sexual Relationship. Concepts included are sexual interaction with persons other than one's spouse or with an individual outside the marriage, such as necking, kissing, breast fondling, or intercourse; as well as attitudes toward premarital and extra-marital relationship. 17 Mate Selection. Concepts included are physical attractiveness, personality factors, birth order factor, arranged marriage, and demographic factors such as age, education, religion, race, ethnicity, and socioeconomic status, as well as attitudes toward mate selection. Adolescent Sexual Behavior. Concepts included are sexual intercourse, contraception, marriage, adoption, and childrearing among teens; and attitudes toward adolescent sexual behavior. Parent-child Relationship. Concepts included are child abuse, parent abuse, value of children, parental influences on infant and adolescent behavior, parent-child communication, child care, interaction between noncustodial parent and child, socialization, adaption, as well as attitudes toward parent-child relationship. Family'Power. Concepts included are acts related to decision making, and perceptions of power in the family. Family Stress and Coping. Concepts included are events and related hardships that lead to crisis such as physical and mental well-being of the members of the family, prolonged war-induced separation, imprisonment, interpersonal conflict, suicide, financial hardships, transition to parenthood, child launching, empty nest, 18 retirement, widowhood, family adjustment to these crisis, as well as attitudes toward family stress and. coping. Family Violence. Concepts included are physical assault such as throwing an object; pushing, grabbing, or shoving; slapping or spanking; kicking, biting, or hitting with a fist or with an object; beating up; threatening with a knife or gun; and sexually abusing a spouse, children, or parents; as well as attitudes toward spouse, child, or parental abuse. Nontraditional Family Forms. Concepts included are different family lifestyles, such as nonmarital cohabitation, voluntary childlessne55, single-parent, divorce and remarriage, dual earner marriage, commuter marriage, same-sex intimate relationships, communal _ living, affiliated families and expanded families, and multilateral marriage; as well as attitudes toward nontraditional family forms. Kinship. Concepts included are family relationships, such as interactions, being a caregiver, sharing a household, and mutual aid among siblings, aid from elderly parent to adult children, aid from adult children to elderly parent, as well as attitudes toward kinship. ' Divorce. Concepts included are demographic factors and interpersonal relationships related to divorce or l9 desertion, divorce or desertion adjustment, as well as attitudes toward divorce or desertion. Remarriage and Stepfamilies. Concepts included are probability of remarriage, the dynamics of remarriage, relationship between stepparent and stepchildren, as well as attitudes toward remarriage and stepfamilies. Marital Quality. Concepts included are marital happiness, marital success, marital satisfaction, and marital stability, as well as attitudes toward marital quality. Family in Later Life. Concepts included are family stages such as the empty nest, the middle years, and the aging years. Family and Religion. Concepts included are religious beliefs, practices, and commitment; new religious movements; intergenerational religious values; religious homogamy; missionaries and clergy; religious factors on marital stability and quality; religious factors and family experiences; as well as religious factors and family customs and traditions. Family and.Economy. Concepts included are parents' employmentg childrenls employment, occupational patterns. occupational changes, economic changes, dual earner couples, work socialization, work stress, women's employment, work - family conflict, as well as attitudes toward family and economy. I” "‘ 20 Family Policy. Concepts included are governmental goals and activities directed toward the well-being of families, such as AFDC, Medicaid, Medicare, and Food Stamps. A Hypothesis is a testable statement consisting of two or more variables which are related. Categories used for it are any hypothesis and no hypothesis. Purpose of Research. The purpose taken by the researcher to formulate a specific research question. Categories used for purpose of research are: Exploration. An exploratory study is when a subject is relatively new or unstudied to find out what the important variables and issues are. Description. A descriptive study is when it is necessary to describe situations, behavior, and events. Explanation. An explanatory study is when it is necessary to provide reasons why a certain situation happens by identifying antecedents and consequences of the situations, behavior or events. aneptual Framework. A group of concepts integrating into a meaningful configuration by their basic assumptions. In.this study categories of conceptual frameworks used were: The Institutional Framework: A framework which deals with: 21 1. The family institution and its changes over periods of time. For example, the roles of husband and wife at the present time are more equal than in the past. 2. The family institution at a given point in time for different cultures. For example, a comparison of the patterns of mate selection in the United States and in Japan. The Structural Functional Framework: A framework which focuses on the analysis of: 1. The structure of the nuclear family and its relation to other social systems such as economy, politics, community, and value system. For example, the relationship between industrialization-urbanization and the family structure (McIntyre, 1981). 2. The internal family activities such as task performance, family leadership, integration and solidarity, and pattern maintenance. For example, the division of labor between the sexes and the functions of this division of labor for the maintenance of the family. 3. The relationships between the family and the personality of'the individual member. For example, the relationship between the maternal child-training practices and children's behavior (Minturn and Lambert, 1968). The Symbolic Interaction , Framework: A framework which focuses on the interpersonal interaction among the family members based on their interpretation of 22 symbols in terms of definitions of the situation. For example, the extent to which a husband and wife are able to recognize their roles in a family decision-making session (Kenkle 8 Hoffman, 1956). The Situational Framework: A framework which focuses on the behavior of the family members in a certain situation. For example, the coping patterns of prisoners' wives when their husbands are imprisoned. The Developmental Framework: A framework which deals with the changing role patterns in the family over its life cycle. Family life cycle and developmental task are the basic concepts for this framework. For example, the husband-wife interaction in the new parenthood stage, the launching stage and the retirement stage. The Conflict Framework: A framework which views the role of the family member in promoting family instability through the use of competition, conflict, consensus, negotiation and bargaining, power and influence, and aggression. For example, the problems created by the birth Of the first child in the relationship between the husband and the wife. The Social Exchange Framework: A framework which assumes that people avoid costly behavior and seek to maximize rewards in their, relationships, interactions, and feeling states. For example, the younger child, the less likely that the mother will be employed 23 because the cost of good care for younger children is greater than the benefit from work (Nye, 1979). The Social Psychological Framework: A framework which focuses on the self-concept and its relationship to the family. Self-concepts are developed by the individual through interaction with others. At least a minimum of needs must be fulfilled directly or indirectly in order for an individual to be able to cope with others. For example, the influence of birth order on the A personality of an individual (Brown, 1981). The Psychoanalytic Framework: A framework which focuses on the influence of early familial experience on the individual. For example, "the quality of the husband-wife relationship may be viewed as a function of the love or hate originally held for a parent transferred to the spouse, as the spouse is unconsciously identified with the parent of the opposite sex" (Bayer, 1981, p. 164). The Systems Framework: A framework which focuses on the processes that occur, and the interrelationships betweenievent, people, or other elements of the system. It assumes an interdependence of all systems components, which means that a change in one subsystem is generally followed by a change in another subsystem in that system. The key concepts for this framework are system, subsystem, boundaries, input, output, 24 positive and negative feedback, strata hierarchies, and rules of transformation (Broderick 8 Smith, 1979; Giles-Sims, 1983). The Environmental System. The setting which is used to relate to the research purposes. Categories included: Micro-systems refers to "a pattern of activities, roles, and interpersonal relations experienced by a developing person in a given face-to-face setting with particular physical and material features, and containing other persons with distinctive characteristics of temperament, personality, and systems of belief" (Bronfenbrenner, 1989, p. 227). For example, the effect of the husband-wife relationship on the parent-child relationship (Bronfenbrenner, 1989). Meso-system refers to a pattern of activities, roles and interpersonal relations experienced directly by family members in two or more settings. For example, children will be more independent and will have greater initiative if, in their homes or classroom, they have greater opportunities to communicate or make a decision (Bronfenbrenner, 1986). Exo-system refers to one or more settings where family members indirectly affect or are affected by what happens in that setting without entering the setting. For example, there are more neglected 25 children among the families with weak kinship networks and irregular church attendance (Bronfenbrenner, 1986). Macro-system refers to overarching pattern of micro-, meso-, and exosystems characteristic of a given culture, subculture, or other broader social context, with particular reference to the developmentally-instigative belief systems, resources, hazards, life styles, opportunity structures, life course options, and patterns of social interchange that are embedded in each of these systems (1989, p. 228). For example, patterns of socialization in the lower, middle and upper classes. Time Dimension. Time used for collecting the data. Categories included are: Cross Sectional a study which is based on observations made at one time. Longitudinal a study which is based on observations made at many times. There are three types of longitudinal studies: 1. Trend study which deals with some general population over time. For example, polls during the beginning and the end of Gulf War. 2. Cohort study which deals with more specific subpopulations (cohorts) as they change over time. For example, a sample of persons 20-29 years of age might be surveyed in 1970, another sample of persons 30-39 of age in 1930. and another sample of those 40-49 years of age in 1990. and used to study attitudes toward abortion. 26 3. Panel study which is a combination of trend and «cohort studies. It examines the same set of people over time. Type of Samples. Types of samples which distinguish 'the selecting observations. Categories included are: Probability Sample. The sample that all members of the population have an equal chance of being selected in the sample. Simple random, systematic, and stratified sampling are types of probability samples. Nonprobability Sample. The sample that not all members cxf the population have an equal chance of being selected in the sample. Purposive and quota samples are types of nonprobability samples. It is called_a purposive sampling if? the researcher uses her own judgement in the selection of the sample members. In a quota sample, the sample members are selected in such a fashion as to include different composite profiles that exist in the population (quota matrix). Level (of Data Analysis. The level of analysis based uP011 tile sources of data. Categories included are: Primar3;.Analysis is an analysis of original data in a research. Secondary Analysis is a re-analysis of old data or analYSis of the existing data. Mite-analysis is an analysis of results from individual studies for the purpose of integrating the findings. 27 Sample Size. The size of a sample used in the research. Categories included are less than 100, 100 - 250, 251 - 500, 501 - 1000, and more than 1000. Location of the Study. The location where the research is conducted. Categories for location of the study are tarban, rural, urban and rural, and not mentioned. Type of Research Subject. The type of the respondent .in.a research. Categories included are individual, a couple, child-parent, child-grandparent, siblings, and others. Gender of the Research Subject. The description of the gender of the subject such as male, female, and male and female. Social Class of the Research Subject. The social position in the society which distinguishes one person from another person. Categories included are lower; middle; upper; lower and middle; upper and middle; upper and lower; lower, middle, and upper; and not mentioned. The Irudicator of Social Class of the Research Subject. The sources used in defining the social class of the research subject. Categories included are family income; educational level; occupational level; family income and educational level; family income and occupational level; educational level and occupational level; family income, educational level, and occupational level; and not ment ioned . 28 Ethnicity of the Research Subject. The description of the ethnic groups included in a research. Categories included are Black, Hispanics, White, Mixed, others, and not mentioned. Gender of the Interviewer. The description of the gender of the interviewer in a research such as male, female, male and female, and not mentioned. Techniques of Data Collection. The techniques used for data collection in a research. Categories included are experiments, self-administered questionnaires, interviews, observation, secondary data, and content analysis. Statistical Techniques. The statistical techniques used in a research for analyzing the data. Categories included are univariate analysis, correlation,test hypothesis, regression, path analysis, ANOVA, factor analysis, log-linear/logit model/probit model, test of hypotheses, multiple classification analysis, and discriminant analysis, ANCOVA, LISREL, life table method/proportional hazards model. Sample Since the 19505, the Journal of Marriage and the Family ilflfil has been the principal interdisciplinary journal about marriage and the family (Ehrmann, 1955; La Rossa 8 Wolf, 1985; Nye, 1987). It has a long history and although it was first published in 1939 under the title Living, the journal's name was changed in 1941 to Marriage and Family 29 Living. In 1964 it was changed again to Journal of Marriage and the Family. It publishes important research findings related to marriage and the family, but it has had a tradition of publishing a decade review of research on the various themes found in marriage and family. Several themes have been reviewed in the November issues of the 19605, 19705, 19805, and 19905. However, these are only reviews of one issue. There has not been a comprehensive review on the research articles in the gug, itself, especially a review of all of issues for one decade. Therefore, this study will review all articles that were published in one decade. The 1980 decade was chosen for this study because this decade published the most recent articles in the area of marriage and family. All of the articles in the issues of QM: from 1980 to 1989 were used in this study. Most of the journals were found in the Main Library at Michigan State University. Because the 1980 and 1981 issues were the only ones that could be borrowed from the Library, the researcher borrowed some of the issues from Dr. Barbara Ames and Dr. Lillian Phenice. The EMF publishes four issues each year: February, May, August, and November. Each issue consists of approximately 20 research and nonresearch articles. The total number of the articles included in this study was 867. 30 Data Collection In order to do this study using the technique of content analysis, each article published in the QMF was read. Assistants Louise Sternberg, a member of the researcher's host family, and Trisno Sutanto, the researcher's husband, aided in data collection by identifying the title, volume, month of issue, year of issue, number of author(s), and gender of author(s). Articles with explicitly stated words or phrases identifying certain variables, such as the conceptual framework, presented little, if any, problems. There were considerable problems, however, when the researcher had to determine subjectively the correct category for a word or phrase when the author had not adequately stated these variables clearly. Each article was analyzed to identify the themes, conceptual framework, purpose of the study, time dimension, technique for gathering data, the respondent, sample size, level of analysis, statistical technique, and level of the environment. A category for including a variable included only a single word such as volume, month, year, and themes. A category might be a sentence or a paragreph for other variables. Sometimes the researcher considered the context when putting the variable in a given category. SUCh as in deciding what themes or conceptual framework were used. O . -\~ ~ ass .~.\ Ts \ 3.l\ 31 In some cases, due to the different cultural backgrounds of the researcher and use of initials by the author(s), it was nearly impossible for the researcher to decipher the gender of the author(s), hence they were listed under not mentioned. For example, an Indonesian named "Ira" is usually for a female, but in the United States, this name is usually for a male. Further, a person named Lynn can be either a male or a female in the United States. The themes in a research article were identified by key words in the title. Then the researcher selected key words in the title and omitted prepositions and conjunctions. For example, an article entitled "Changes in Chinese Urban Family Structure" was listed under the key words of family §§ructure and Chinese. These key words then were put into the categories of others and cross cultural family Perspective. Sometimes the researcher made inferences in order to put the key words into the category. For example, an article entitled "The Determinants of Depression in Two-Income Marriages" was listed under the key words Qgpressign and two income marriages; and put into family EEIGSS and coping, nontraditional familyuforms, and family 999 the economic categories. When an author explicitly had stated the conceptual framework which was employed in the research, the researcher listed it under a particular categorY- For example, an article stating "Based on the exchange perspective..." :':I Quit. 9.3.9 boov MU. 5.0V t ”I've, “' in ‘o “A. ‘.v‘ 5“. ' we. ‘- su~ 32 (Stoller, 1985, p. 336), was placed in the exchange framework. However, when the authors did not indicate the framework explicitly, the researcher made an inference from the latent statement of the assumptions of a given framework. On the other hand, when an author did not state a particular framework in the study and the researcher could not clearly infer that a certain framework had been used, the article was placed in the not using theoretical framework category. The category for coding of the hypotheses was more difficult. In many cases authors did not explicitly mention jhypotheses in their studies. The researcher made inferences :from the statement concerning the authors' expectations in ‘their findings. Expectations were usually found either in 'the beginning or the latter part of an article. For example, if an article stated a relationship in the beginning such as, "We anticipate that the higher the income level of a state, the less the gap between material means and ends and the lower the rate of suicide" (Stack, 1980, E’- 86). the researcher assumed that sentence was the author's hypothesis. If there were no research questions Inor expectations, the article was placed in the category of no hYPotheses. If the purpose of the study was not stated explicitly ‘bY the authors, the researcher made inferences from the statement of the problem or the questions asked. The 33 article was placed in a descriptive category when the authors wanted only to describe the situations and events. For example from this kind of statement, The purpose of the present discussion is to provide recent estimates on the extent of married and unmarried cohabitation, to highlight change during the 1975-1980 period, to provide an updated profile of social and economic characteristics of unmarried couples, and to compare and contrast couples who live together without being married to each other with those who are married to each other (Spanier, 1983, p. 277), the researcher could infer that the author's intention was a descriptive study. Usually the authors mentioned the time dimension of their research. For example, "the data used in this study were taken from the Panel Study of Income Dynamics . . ." (McLanahan, 1983, p. 349) . When the time dimension was not stated, it was inferred from the data whether based on observations made at one time or at many times. Nonprobability sampling method was usually mentioned clearly in the article, that is, through newspaper advertisements, friends of other respondents, members of a certain support group, clinical sample, and so forth. However, when the authors did not mention how they had obtained their samples, the researcher put them in the category not mentioned. Because the authors clearly mentioned the technique of data collection used in their research, there was little difficulty in categorizing it. 34 In some instances the authors did not mention whether the sample was from urban or rural locations. In these cases the researcher put the article under the not mentioned category. There was little difficulty in determining gender and types of subjects in this study because these characteristics were mentioned by the authors. Many of the authors did not explicitly mention the social classes of their subjects. Inferences were made by the researcher by looking at the categories used in measuring the respondent's social class. For example, an article that stated the respondent's occupational status score ranging from 1 to 7 [that is, 1 - unskilled employees, 7 - higher executives] (Schoenbach, 1985, p. 598), is listed under the category of lower, middle, and upper class because the author measured all of the social class categories of the respondents. When the author did not indicate the respondent's social class, it was coded put into _n_o_t_ mentioned category. The researcher identified the ethnicity of the sample when it were mentioned. Australians, Canadians, and European are categorized under 3132 people. There were no authors in this study who identified their level of environment. Inferences were made from the focus of their research. For example, research about the relationship between adolescents and drugs (Hundleby 8 35 Mercer, 1987) was listed under the meso-system category because it referred to activities experienced directly by the adolescents in two settings, that is at home with their families and outside home with their friends. The means of determining the level of data analysis used in the article was by determining at how the authors gathered their data. If they collected their own data, the article was classified as primary analysis. But if they analyzed the data from other sources, it was classified as secondary analysis. The researcher read every article to see whether these or not categories appeared in the article. The data were then counted and put into a frequency table. Reliability and Validity As in other measurements, content analysis has problems of reliability and validity. Reliability means that the same results will be found when anyone uses the same techniques on the same material. There is no great problem in the matter of reliability in a manifest content because it is stated explicitly. Reliability is more difficult when the researcher must make a subjective analysis. Certain techniques have been developed for dealing with the problem of reliability, that is, instrument reliability: comparing similar documents at two or more points in time; and analyst Leliability: comparing the results of two or more coders at the same point in time (Bailey, 1978). 36 A valid measure is one that taps the construct the researcher intends to tap (Budd 8 Throp, 1967). According to Holsti (1969), there are four kinds of validity: (a) content or face validity, whether the instrument measures what it is supposed to measure; (b) predictive validity, whether the instrument is valid for predicting a particular phenomenon in the future; (c) concurrent validity, whether the instrument "is able to distinguish sources with known differences" (p. 144); and (d) construct validity, whether the instrument is concerned with the theory underlying the measure. The "hypotheses derived from the theory should yield similar results in different settings" (p. 148). Because this study was a descriptive study, content validity is sufficient (Holsti, 1969). The researcher measured this by doing a pretest for the instrument used in this study with professors who specialized in family studies. For reliability testing, one professor, one graduate student in Family and Child Ecology, and the researcher piloted the instrument. The same article was read and coded: the average agreement was 90%. Results will be discussed in the following chapters. CHAPTER III THEMES IN THE EIGHTIES The Journal of Marriage and the Family (JMF), especially in the 805, discussed a wide range of issues which can be divided into research articles and non research articles. The non research articles discussed reviews of such topics as theories in family fields and methodological issues. Some were international or comparative articles while others focused on certain ethnic problems. In the 11g during the 805, 15.5% of the articles featured were non research articles. Compared to Nimkoff's study (1948), research articles increased from 48% in 1943-1946 to 84.5% in the 805. Among the research articles, six percent discussed family theory and research methods. Some articles discussed a certain scale's application used in measuring family problems; some assessed techniques for gathering data, such as family observations; some discussed a certain type of subject, such as a couple or an individual, as a methodological tool; while others discussed the application of a theory. 37 38 In the present study 16.2% of the research was done in a country other than the U.S. or was a comparison study with country other than the U.S. These studies, were categorized as cross-societal researches. Osmond (1980) argued that the advent of the Journal of Comparative Family Studies in 1970 and the International Journal of Sociology of the Family in 1971 stimulated a greater interest in doing cross-societal family research in the decade of the 19705. In 1967 the J_M§ was beginning to publish cross-cultural perspective articles under the International section. Blacks were the only minority reviewed in the gig of the 605. Historically, the 605 are known as the most productive era of research on the Black family (Staples, 1971) . The assumption that Black families are an important subculture of American society inspired % to devote its entire November 1978 issue to Black families (Peters, 1978). Research on the Black family has been used to shape public policy in an effort to diminish the causes of poverty among them (Staples, 1971). In a decade review of minority families in the 19705. 31415: included Asian Americans, Hispanics, and Native Americans, as well as Black families. In this decade, a new ethnic identification emerged with a huge number of immigrants from Asia and Latin America (Staples 8 Mirande, 1980) - 39 In the present study 3.7% of the research articles were of the race-cultural variation using minority groups as research subjects. Unlike the decade review of the 705, there were only Black and Hispanic families as research subjects in the 91F: during the 805. The growing Hispanic population during the 19805 caused them to be the second largest minority population in the United States (Wilkinson, 1987), stimulating researchers to study this ethnic group. Staples and Mirande (1980) argued that Asian American families were largely neglected in the family literature. They cited, as main reasons for this, the small numbers of Asian Americans which represent less than 10% of all minority groups, and their lifestyles, which are viewed as not being very different from the majority. Themes during the Eighties The categories for themes in this study follow the categories used in the EH2 decade reviews. In observing the last three decades it is seen that new themes have appeared while others have disappeared in the titles of the gig decade reviews. Table 1 compares the number of research articles during two periods: 1980-1984 and 1985-1989. It also consists of the total number of each research articles during the 805 . 40 Gender Roles Until the 605 little research was done on gender roles, gender roles were seen as a minor area in family study. This may be the reason for the lack in the gig decade review on gender roles for the 605 (Scanzoni 8 Fox, 1980). During the 19705, gender became an important social issue after "the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that gender discrimination violated the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendement" in 1971 (Caycedo, Wang, 8 Bahr, 1991, p. 450). The importance of this issue can be seen in the increase of research on gender roles in the family in the 705. The decade of the 19705 was characterized as the decade which gave attention to the division of labor by gender (Osmond, 1980). Before the 805, the term "sex role" was used instead of "gender role" (Scanzoni 8 Fox, 1980). In the 705 the term "sex role" was criticized for its deficiency and, ambiguity of the term, the confusion and overlap with genuine sexual issues, and the failure to identify the gender status differences (Scanzoni, 1980). The term "gender," now preferred, refers to "socially constructed behavior and usually insist it be distinguished from biological features" (could, 1980, p. 462). Thompson and Walker (1989) did a review on gender in three domains of family life-marriage, work, and parenthood. In the JMF decade review of the 805, gender role is 41 Table 1 Themes by Five Year Periods, 1980-1989 Themes 1980-1984 1985-1989 Total (*l (*l (*l Gender Roles 23 4.8 23 3.9 46 4.3 Premarital Sexual IRelationship 6 1.3 15 2.6 21 2.0 iMate Selection 13 2.7 16 2.7 29 2.7 .Adolescent Sexual Behavior 7 1 .5 14 2.4 21 2.0 Parent-Child Relationship 76 16.0 114 19.6 190 17.9 Marital Quality 51 10.7 45 7.7 96 9.1 Family Power 16 3.4 8 1.4 24 2.3 Family Stress 55 11.6 80 13.7 135 12.7 Family Violence 17 3 . 6 19 3 . 3 36 3 . 4 Nontraditional Family Forms 18 3.8 25 4.3 43 4.1 Kinship 25 5.3 23 3.9 48 4.5 Divorce 29 6.1 51 8.7 80 7.6 Remarriage and Stepfamily 3 0.6 21 3.6 24 2.3 Family in Later Life 23 4.8 21 3.6 44 4.2 Family and Religion 17 3 .6 23 3.9 40 3.8 42 "Table 1 (Continued) 'Themes 1980-1984 1985-1989 Total (%) (*) (%) Family and Economy 58 12.2 50 8.6 108 10.2 Family Communication 8 1.7 5 0.9 13 1.2 Family Policy 3 0.8 3 0.5 6 o . 6 Others 28 5.9 24 4.1 52 4.9 Total 476 100 583 100 1059 100 Note: The "others" category covers a diversified group, including quality of life, family and politics, life course, family structure, family formations, life cycle, leisure activity, birth order, and structure and size of households. 43 discussed in the article on feminism and family research (Ferree, 1990). In the present study, the percentage of research articles on gender roles decreased from 4.8% to 3.9% in the second five year period. Premarital Sexual Relationship Many studies showed that attitudes and behavior in relation to premarital sexual relationship changed among young adults during the 605 (Bell & Chaskes, 1970; Bell & Coughey, 1980; Cannon & Long, 1971; Chilman, 1980a, 1980b; Reiss, 1966; Robinson & Jedlicka, 1985). Social changes, such as the accessability of birth control pills and student militancy in the mid-19605, were the most frequently cited factors for explaining this phenomenon. In both ggg decade reviews of the 603 and 703, factors correlated to sexual behavior and impact of premarital sexual attitudes and behavior were discussed (Cannon & Long, 1971; Scanzoni & Fox 1980). Because many former studies were conducted to describe the variety of premarital sexual relationships, it would have been redundant to do the same thing in the decade review of the 805 (Surra, 1990). By disccussing the effects of the premarital sexual relationship on mate selection in her decade review, Surra showed the importance of premarital sexual relationship in relation to other populations, such as divorced or older people. 44 In this study the percentage of research articles on jpremarital sexual relationships doubled, increasing from 1.3% in the first period to 2.6% in the second period. Mate Selection In a book about courtship, engagement, and marriage, Burgess, Wallin, and Schultz (1954) pointed out that more research on love and marriage was conducted after World War I. Before that time, discussion about sexual relations in marriage was taboo. For an example, in the mid-205, two professors at a state university lost their positions after approving an empirical study on attitudes toward sex (Burgess, Wallin, and Schultz, 1954). In a review of dating, courtship, and mate selection at the beginning of the 605, Burchinal (1964) pointed out that dating is known as an American innovation that began in the 19205. More studies about dating were conducted after Lowrie published an article about dating as a neglected area in Marriage and Family Living (now ggg) in 1948 (Burchinal, 1964). In a decade review of mate selection of the 705, Murstein (1980) said that the 705 was characterized by a decline in dating among the college students. A decline in dating on campus life led to a decline in research on dating since the research subjects were usually college students. In the Egg decade review of the 705, mate selection is broadly formulated by including premarital relationships 45 generally, not just those that result in marriage (Surra, 1990). Research on mate selection in this study was steady in two periods, i.e., 2.7% and 2.7%, consecutively in the first and second periods. Adolescent Sexual Behavior Since the mid-19603 and continuing through at least 1976, teenage sexual behavior experienced a dramatic increase. This phenomenon, on the one hand, can be explained by a lack of social or psychological studies of the consequences of adolescent sexuality before the 19705 (Chilman, 1980a). On the other hand, it can also be an impetus for an increase of research in this area during the 1970s (Chilman, 1980a). Researchers are interested in studying adolescent sexual behavior because it is seen as a critical process of family formation (Miller & Moore, 1990). The dramatic increase in adolescent sexuality during the 705 predictably made it "an area of major investigation in the eighties" (Berardo, 1981, p. 251). In a review of adolescent sexuality, Dyk, Christopherson, and Miller (1991) found an enormous increase in research in this area in the 805. Funding from the Adolescent Family Life Act of 1981 encouraged research on adolescent sexuality. The percentage of articles of this theme in the present study increased even though the number was still low, from 1.5% in the first five year period to 46 2.4% in the second five year period. The small amount of research in adolescent sexual behavior in the QMF might be explained by the appearance of articles dealing with this ‘theme in other adolescence journals such as Adolescence, Youth and Society, and Journal of Youth and Adolescence. However, this is a speculation by the author as she has no empirical data to support this conclusion. Parent-child Relationship The QME decade review of the 605 included the broad issues concerning parent-child relationships, such as gender role identification, intergenerational relationships between parents and adult children (family in later life), effects of divorce and stepparents (divorce and remarriage), and occupational choice and mobility aspiration (family and economy). In later QME decade reviews, these subthemes were reviewed separately. Although the decade review of the 805 did not mention a single article dealing with the "parent-child relationship," this does not indicate that there was no review of this theme. The theme of the parent-child relationships in the 805 decade review was divided into family and adolescence (See Gecas & Seff, 1990), and parental-nonparental child care and children's socioemotional development (see Belsky, 1990). The QMF November 1989 issue had two reviews of Parent-child relationship, i.e., between aging parents and adult children (see Mancini & Blieszner, 1989) and between 47 Inothers and daughters (Boyd, 1989). These several reviews of subthemes of the parent-child relationship indicated many studies had been done in these areas. In the present study the parent—child relationship was the most popular theme. The percentage of articles of this theme increased from 16.0% in the first period to 19.6% in the second period. These findings were not surprising since all themes can be studied, directly or indirectly, in terms of the parent-child relationship. Many issues can be viewed from the perspective of relationships between parent and children, including the relationship between children and the custodial parent, the impact of parental divorce on courtship, child abuse, premarital sexual behavior among adolescents as a function of their mothers' marital status, the relationship between the presence of adult children and the stress for elderly couples, and the impact of children on marital quality. Marital_guality Marital quality has been the dominant topic since it emerged in the 19405 (Nimkoff, 1948; Nye, 1988; Nye & Bayer, 1963). The 1970 decade review featured articles on marital happiness and marital stability (Hicks & Platt, 1970). Their review focused on divorce as an indicator of marital instability and "the subjective feeling about the state of marriage" (p. 59), which can be labeled as haPPiness, satisfaction, success, or adjustment. Though «Ila. ‘\V v u \\N 48 these concepts are difficult to define and often used interchangeably, they are most frequently used to describe the subjective state of the marital relationship or the quality of marriage (Burr, 1973; Hicks & Platt, 1970; Lewis & Spanier, 1979). During the 19703, marital quality continued to be one of the most widely studied in the family field, although ‘there was still little agreement on the definition and the 'use of the terms marital quality, satisfaction, adjustment, and happiness (Spanier & Lewis, 1980). During this decade Inarital quality was recognized as encompassing luultidimensional phenomena (Spanier & Lewis, 1980). After two decades, marital quality was still being studied. Unlike Hicks and Platt's (1970) review which Inentioned the relationship between communication and marital liappiness, the review in the 80s about marital quality is ciivided into marital quality (Glenn 1990). and marital communication (Noller & Fitzpatrick 1990). As Spanier and Lewis (1980) predicted, research on rnarital quality was still dominant during the 80s, though the research articles on this theme decreased from 10.7% in the first period to 7.7% in the second period. Family Power In an article about family power in 1963, Heer (1963) said that family power has been a neglected area in family stflldY’for a long time. Several studies of family power was 49 conducted in the late 1950s. The increase of employed married women was the factor most often mentioned as the impetus for studying family power. It was assumed that the "husband-dominated family becomes more equalitarian as a result of the wife's employment outside the home" (Blood & 'Hamblin, 1958, p. 347). The year 1950 was the first time in .American history that married women were the majority of all ‘working women (Blood & Wolfe, 1960). An abundance of research on family power was conducted in the 608 (Safilios-Rothschild, 1971). One of the problems in studies of family power during this time was the lack of 1,000 100 31.1 124 34.1 Total 322 100 364 100 135 These findings support Nye's (1988) study which found a trend for using samples of more than 1,000 after 1967. The sample size may relate to the level of data analysis. Nye (1988) found an increase of secondary analysis during 1977 to 1987. In this study the bigger sample sizes were mostly from the use of secondary data as seen in Table 22. If the researchers took their own data for their studies, the sample size tends to be smaller, i.e., less than 1,000 or even less than 100. Although the size of the sample was frequently mentioned in reviews, they did not mentioned Table 22 (Sample Size bprevel of Data Analysis Sample Size Primary Secondary Meta- Primary and Analysis Analysis Analysis Secondary Analysis (%) (%) (%) (%) (100 121 23.3 3 1.9 2 50 2 100 100—<1,000 298 57.4 36 22.5 1 25.0 - >1,000 100 19.3 121 75.6 1 25.0 — Total 519 100 160 100 4 100 2 100 the actual number of the sample. In the 703, much of the research on marital quality used small samples (Glenn & Weaver, 1978) although it was generally larger than samples :UIthe 60s (Spanier and Lewis, 1980). During the 803, there was e mari‘ quari base: the E roles (25.0 136 was an increase in the use of large samples in research on marital quality (Glenn, 1990). In this study, almost three quarters (71.0%) of the research on marital quality was based on more than 100 respondents. This study supports Caycedo, Wang, & Bahr's (1991) findings that there was a tendency to use larger samples in the 803. More than half (63.0%) of the research on gender roles was based on loo-1,000 respondents, and a quarter (25.0%) was based on more than 1,000 respondents. Most research on nontraditional family forms used small samples (Macklin, 1987). For example, a third of the studies on voluntary childlessness that have been reviewed were based on fewer than 30 respondents (Houseknecht, 1987). About one fifth (21.1%) of the research on the nontraditional family forms in this study had fewer than 100 respondents. During the decade of the 803 sample size in research on divorce increased. Most research on divorce that published in major journals during the 803 was based on large national data sets (White, 1990). In this study, more than half (50.7%) of the research on divorce used more than 1,000 respondents. Sample size on the topic of remarriage in the 803 varied from 25 to 209 (Coleman & Ganong, 1990). The reasons for using small samples were the mobility of the population and the stigma of negative stereotypes (see Type of Sample Table 23 Themes by Sample Size 137 Themes <100 100-<1,000 >1,000 (t) (%) (*) Gender Roles 5 11.4 28 63.6 11 25.0 Premarital Sexual Relationship 3 15.8 8 42.1 8 42.1 Mate Selection 4 17.4 6 26.0 13 56.5 Adolescent Sexual Behavior 1 5.0 11 55.0 8 40.0 Parent-child Relationship 32 17.1 99 52.9 56 29.9 Marital Quality 27 29.0 45 48.4 21 22.6 Family Power 5 20.8 17 70.8 2 8.3 Family Stress and Coping 33 25.2 63 48.1 35 26.7 Family Violence 3 8.3 18 50.0 15 41.7 Nontraditional Family Forms 8 21.1 20 52.6 10 26.3 Kinship 8 16.3 29 59.3 12 24.5 Divorce 10 14.9 23 34.3 34 50.7 Remarriage 3 13.6 15 68.2 4 18.2 Family in Later Life 2 4.7 29 67.4 12 27.9 Family and Religion 4 10.8 18 48.6 6 40.5 Family and Economy 9 9.0 62 62.0 28 28.0 Family Communication 7 53.8 6 46.2 - Family Policy 1 20.0 1 20.0 3 60.0 Others 9 20.0 9 20.0 27 60.0 56 1C 138 section). Most (68.2%) research on this study was based on loo-1,000 respondents in the samples. The size of the sample may be related to the techniques of gathering data used as is seen in Table 24. Table 24 Techniques of Gathering data by Sample Size Techniques < 100 100-1,000 >1,000 Total of Gathering Data (*) (%) (t) (*) Questionnaire and standardized tests 72 24.7 183 62.9 36 12.4 291 100 Interview 56 21.8 135 52.5 66 25.7 257 100 Secondary sources 5 3.0 35 21.3 125 75.8 165 100 Observation 27 77.1 6 17.2 2 5.7 35 100 Content analysis 8 34.8 8 30.4 7 30.4 23 100 IExperiments 11 64.7 6 35.3 - 17 100 Simulation - 1 100 - 1 100 «Questionnaires and interviews as survey research techniques (are good "in collecting original data for describing a jpopulation too large to observe directly" (Babbie, 1989, p. 237). This advantage was seen in this study. About 'three-quarters (75.3% and 78.2%, respectively) of research “that used questionnaires and interviews were based on more than 100 respondents. 81' re we 139 Secondary sources were usually garnered from national surveys; therefore, it enabled the researcher to get larger samples. In this study, most studies (75.8%) that used secondary sources were based on more than 1,000 respondents. On the other hand, observation and experiments are usually used for small samples. Most (77.1% and 64.7%, respectively) studies that used observation and experiments were based on less than 100 respondents. In a review of research on family violence, Steinmetz (1987) found that one-fourth of the studies had 20 respondents or fewer, and one-half had 60 respondents or fewer. Research on family violence published in the QM: during the 803 had.larger samples than Steinmetz' study. 'Fhe research in this study, 50% had 100-<1,000 respondents, while 41.7% had more than 1,000 respondents. Less than 10% (8.3%) of the research had less than 100 respondents. Summary Questionnaires and interviews are popular in family research. Some techniques, such as content analysis, focus «group, and simulation was not mentioned as a technique in 'the previous reviews. For some themes, techniques for «gathering data in the 803 were found to be similar to the jprevious reviews. For the themes gender roles, family ‘violence, remarriage, and family and religion, the «questionnaire was still a popular method in the 803. For research on adolescent sexual behavior and marital quality .w; as I10 00 as V1 192 MM 140 the interview and questionnaire was more preferred methods. Divorce research usually relied on secondary data. For other themes, interview and questionnaire were interchangeably used as the preferred method. For example, interview method was popular in research on family stress and coping in the 703, while in the 803, the questionnaire was more popular than interview technique. Little was reported on the interviewer's gender. Only 7.6% of the research using interview mentioned the gender of the interviewer. Among all of the research reported mentioned the way the sample was gathered. Until the 803, some themes, such as premarital sexual relationship, remarriage, .nontraditional family forms, and family communication used .nonrandom samples. In the JMF during the 803 themes, such as adolescent sexual behavior, marital quality, family ‘violence, and divorce, used more random samples than the previous decade. Sample sizes were larger during the period of 1985 1989. The larger samples tended to come from data sets tising secondary analysis. CHAPTER VII CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORKS IN THE EIGHTIES One of the objectives in assessing the trends of family theory and methodology was the identification of the most used conceptual frameworks in the field of family studies. Larzelere and Klein (1987) mentioned three functions of the conceptual framework for research: (a) summarizing the research findings; (b) clarifying the important concepts which are defined in terms of one another; and (c) generating new research directions. Klein, Clavert, Garland, and Poloma (1969) found that the symbolic interactional (27.3%), the structural functional (24.5%), and the developmental (14.6%) conceptual frameworks were the most used in the journal articles from 1962 through 1968. In another study of journal articles, Hodgson and Lewis (1979) found the same pattern, i.e., the symbolic interactional (24%), the structural functional (22%), and the developmental (19%) conceptual frameworks continued to dominate the family study during 1969 to 1976. Hodgson and Lewis (1979) found that the institutional (16%) framework also became popular during those time. 141 m r97 y 142 In this study, 54.7% of empirical research did not use a conceptual framework. Symbolic interaction and the structural functional conceptual frameworks still dominated the family study during the 803. In this study most of ' the researchers used the structural functional framework (30.2%), followed by the symbolic interactional framework (22.5%). Social exchange framework was least used in Hodgson and Lewis study's (1979), replaced the developmental as the third dominant.conceptual framework in this study followed by the developmental approach during the 803. Using a certain conceptual approach depends upon a theme being studied (Appendix G). For example, until the -803, a conceptual approach was relatively unused in research concerning divorce issues. Many researcher relied on the common sense notion rather than on conceptual approaches (White, 1990). When a conceptual approach was used, it was usually social exchange framework (Raschke, 1987; White. 1990). Symbolic Interaction Framework The symbolic interaction conceptual framework argued that individuals were influenced directly by the meaning they gave to the response of others. In this study research on parent-child (34.8%), nontraditional families (36.4%). family stress and coping (31.5%), kinship (37.1%). family in later life (45.2%), and family communication (50%) had symbolic interaction as the themes' conceptual framework. 143 Table 25 Number of Articles using the Conceptual Frameworks by Five Year Periods, 1980-1989 Conceptual Framework 1980-1984 1985-1989 Total (*) (%) (%) Structural Functional 49 29.2 52 31.3 101 30.2 Symbolic Interactional 37 22.0 38 22.9 75 22.5 Social Exchange 27 16.1 28 16.9 55 16.5 Developmental 25 14.9 16 9.6 41 12.3 Social Psychology 10 6.0 12 7.2 22 6.6 Institutional 6 3.6 11 6.6 17 5.1 Situational 9 5.4 4 2.4 13 3.9 Conflict 3 1.8 4 2.4 7 2.1 Psychoanalytic 1 0.6 1 0.6 2 0.6 Systems 1 0.6 - 1 0.3 Total 168 100 166 100 334 100 ’11 144 For example the use of the symbolic interaction framework on research on nontraditional families look at how role strains in dual-earner family relate to husband's and wife's perceptions of the degree of marital interaction (Galambos & Silbereisen, 1989). Research on parent-child relations included the children's perception of their parents' values and the children's definitions of situations as important factors in building their self-concept (Clark, Werthington, & Danser, 1988; Cooper, Holman" & Braithwaite, 1983; Demo, Small, & Savin-Williams, 1987; Gecas & Schwalbe, 1986; Hoelter & Harper, 1987; McDonald, 1980); children's behavior, (Barness, Farrell, & Cairns, 1986; Coombs & Landsverk, 1988; Wright & Piper, 1986); as well as in the formation of attitudes (Acock & Bengston, 1980; Trimberger & MacLean, 1982); aspirations (Corder & Stephan, 1984); values (Whitbeck & Gecas, 1988); how parents' attitude affect their perceptions of their children's behavior ( Demo, Small. & Savin-Williams, 1987; Houser & Berkmar, 1984); and how children's and parent's perceptions influenced each other (Felson & Zielinski, 1989; Walker & Thompson, 1989). Research on kinship using symbolic interaction looked at how individuals define situations for role taking. For example, evidence show that older women who based a large part of their lives and definitions of self on a marital relationship felt more lonely after the relationship was disrupted through death or divorce (Essex & Nam. 1987)- In HH 145 other studies, it was found that family members of Alzheimer's patient derive meanings of kinship and caregiving from interacting with support groups (Gubrium, 1988). There is also evidence that mother's satisfaction with their relationships with their children related to their perceived quality of contact with children (Houser, & Berkman, 1984). Research on family in later life using symbolic interaction focused on relationships between adult children and their elderly parents. Helping elderly parents was more evident when the adult children felt a greater sense of filial responsibilities and perceived that their elderly parents were more dependent (Cicirelli, 1983). The mothers' and adult daughters' perceptions of intimacy related to the exchange of aid (Walker & Thompson, 1983). The loss of a spouse may motivate a person to use other members of the family to overcome his/her own bereavement (Morgan, 1984). Research on family stress and coping focused on how members of a family faced and overcame the hardships that lead to crisis. Some examples are stress, depression, and loneliness among family members were discussed as the result of multiple roles required of certain individuals (Berkowitz & Perkins, 1984; Bolger, DeLonigs, Kessler, & Wethington, 1989; Jones & Butller, 1980); loss of the established sources of definition of self and reality through the Spouse's death or divorce (Essex & Nam, 1987); definition of the situation as in the case of incest victims (Morrow & 146 Sorell, 1989); perceptions of parental rejection (Robertson & Simons, 1989); and the presence of adult children at home (Suitor & Pillemer, 1987). How individual cope with these hardships were also studied. For example Ward (1981) found that patients in alcohol treatments who experience satisfaction and meaning from their family relationships will more readily improve than those without such experience. Another example is that the older widows frequently got help from their unmarried sisters when they felt "blue" because the sisters had similar past experience and situations (O'Bryant, 1988). Research on family communication focused on the ;perceptions of being understood by the other spouse in ‘verbal and nonverbal communication (Allen & Thompson, 1984; Gottman & Porterfield, 1981). Structural Functional Framework Research on gender roles (42.3%), remarriage (58.3%), family and religion (53.3%), and family policy (100%) are tflne themes that used the structural functional conceptual framework. Examples of research on gender roles included the relationships between social class and gender roles, dinvision of household labor (Seccombe, 1986), sex-role digfferentiation and family social economic status among the adolescent (McCandless, Lueptow, 8. McClendon, 1989). Research on remarriage discussed the structure of rennarried families and the relationships between remarried 147 families and the societal norms. Cherlin and McCarthy (1985) explored the structure of remarried families after divorce. They found fewer remarried families with stepmothers than with stepfathers. Generally mothers had the children when they remarried. Different family structures may cause different problems (Amato, 1987; Lambert, 1986; Weingarten, 1985). For example, remarried persons may have problems with former spouses, with stepchildren, with absentee children, and with spouse's former spouse(s). The single woman with dependent children may join welfare as a result of financial needs instigated by divorce and remain there because of limited employment and child care options for her as a single parent (Weingarten, 1985). The lack of clear norms guiding family relationships for remarried families makes remarriage problematic .including poor integration within the community (Ihinger-Tallman & Pasley, 1986), patterns of functioning in families (Peck, Bell, Waldren, & Sorell, 1988), and continuity of abusive behaviors in remarriage (Kalmus & Seltzer, 1986). Research on religion that included a structural functional conceptual framework looked at religious values :33 they specify standards within families and which are accepted by the members of the family. The Catholic church, :for instances, teaches that the primary purposes of marriage aare the procreation and education of children and that other aaims must be regarded as secondary (Whelpton, Campbell. & 'U 148 Patterson, 1966). Therefore, Catholic women are expected to have children to fulfill their duty as Catholics. Thorton and Camburn (1989) studied Roman Catholic values as related to sexual attitudes and behavior. Heckert and Teachman (1985) investigated the time between births for Catholics and for non—Catholics. The norms of moral necessity to allow for the birth of all spirits accounted for a higher birth rate among Mormons (Toney, Golesorkhi, & Stinner, 1985) . Religious values were also studied in relation to family affection (Wilkinson & Tanner III, 1980); in resolving conflict between Quaker husband and wife (Brutz & .Allen, 1986); gender attitudes (Brinkerhoff & Mackie, 1985), and as a predictor for marital adjustment (Filsinger & ‘Wilson, 1984). There was only one study on family policy used any conceptual framework, i.e., the structural functional. Rank (1986) studied the relationships between family structure and welfare utilization. He found that single heads of households experienced limitations in labor-market participation; hence they were more likely to need public assistance over longer periods of time than married couples. Institutional Framework Studies on mate selection (33.3%) and premarital :relationships (33.3%) were themes that more frequently used 'the institutional conceptual framework. Research on mate :selection found changes in the process of mate selection 149 during certain periods. For example, a change in mate selection occurred from pre-1912 to 1962 in India. From the analysis of Gujarati fiction during the three periods, Kathri.(1980) found that in pre-1912, the two genders were rust allowed to interact. During the 1931-1937 period, :uiteractions between the genders were freer. During the 1956-1962 period, people were allowed to select their own mate. 1Meanwhile in the United States intermarriage has become rmore popular. Glenn (1982) showed the rapid increase of the .interreligious marriages in the United States from 1957 to 1978. With those facts, he argued that the institution of marriage has become a secular institution. Labov and Jacobs (1986) found an increased interethnic marriage from 1950 to 1983 in Hawaii. They explained that the Hawaiian society is becoming a melting pot. A society which increases the cultural acceptance of intermarriages. Lee and Stone (1980) studied mate selection systems in relation to family structure and they found that an autonomous mate selection based on romantic attraction is more likely to happen in societies with nuclear family systems than in those with extended family. Situational Framework Research on family stress, coping, and divorce were the ‘themes more frequently found using the situational :framework. The focus was on helping or coping patterns m. 9.. 150 among family members in certain situations, such as old age, ill, or imprisonment. Barbarin, Hugher, & Chesler (1985) and McCubbin, McCubbin, Patterson, Cauble, Wilson, and Warwick (1983) studied parental coping patterns in the care of an ill child; while Lowenstein (1984) studied the coping patterns of prisoners' wives. In another study Bankoff (1983) focused on situational factors could influence the psychological well-being of widows. She found that whether a support was helpful or harmful to the widow's well-being was depended upon the type of support given, as well as its source and where the widow was in the adjustment process. For example, parental support was important for the widow's well being in the crisis loss phase, while ties with peers was important in introducing new networks. Cousins and Vincent (1983) found that better adjusted couples expressed Inore emotion, more support, and less aversive behavior than poorly adjusted couples in dealing with negative affect expressed by their partners. Katz and Pesach (1985) studied the patterns of distress and adjustment for divorced men and women in Israel. 1Parenthood was the most stressful area for divorced men, «while the reestablishment of social and intimate relationships was difficult for divorced women. Their «explanations were based on gender role differentiation. In :Israel a divorced mother was expected to devote most of her ‘time, energY. and other resources to her children, while a (divorced father was encouraged to pursue new intimate 151 relationships. Differences in the adjustment process among men and women were also found in Bloom and Caldwell's (1981) study. Without explaining why, they found that women made less adjustment during the pre-separation period, while men made less adjustment during the early postseparation period. Conflict Framework Research on family communication was the theme most studied using the conflict framework. For example, Jones and Gallois (1989) studied how public and private conflict between husband and wife were managed. Public settings were described as situations where the individuals were with friends, acquaintances, or strangers. They found five rules which involved both verbal and nonverbal behavior that facilitated communication, i.e., consideration, rationality, specific self-expression, conflict resolution, and positivity. Social Exchange Framework The social exchange conceptual framework assumes that individuals will try to maximize rewards and minimize costs in their relationships. Research on family power (61.5%) and family violence (50.0%) were the themes that more .frequently used the social exchange framework or variants «of it as the conceptual framework. Research.on family power -that used social exchange framework discussed the power that a: family member has related to decision making. The greater 152 power the wives have, such as employment status, income, occupational prestige, education, and low level of parity; the greater the influence they have over the decision making process (Rank, 1982; Shukla, 1987) because these powers refer to social competence in the family (McDonald, 1980). The individual's perceptions were as significant in determining marital power as were actual resources exchanged (Sexton & Perlman, 1989). A spouse who perceived resource exchanges with the other spouse as more equitable would more equitable decision. Adolescent power was also studied (Giles-Sinis & Crosbie-Burnett, 1989). For example, whether adolescents had alternatives related to accepting a stepparent's role as an authority figure in the stepparent family, or whether financial support from or the adolescent's contact with the outside parent may become resources for the adolescent to make their own decision in the stepfamilies were studied. There is evidence to support the notion that having power in marital relationships is also related to making a decision to remain or leave an abusive relationship. For example, the more dependent the wife on her husband in the marriage. such as economic dependency, love, or the- perceptions about whether she or her husband would be hurt more if their marriage were to break up; the more likely she was to remain with her abusive husband (Kalmus & Straus. 1982; Strube & Barbour, 1983; Strube & Barbour, 1984)- Findings of more studies in family violence which used the 153 social exchange framework were different from The systems framework was the conceptual framework most frequently used in research on family violence. Developmental Framework Research on marital quality (29.4%) and kinship (17.1%) most frequently used the developmental framework. The studies often discussed different stages in family life related to marital quality. For example themes of marital adjustment or satisfaction during pregnancy, after the first child born, or during the middle stage were studied (Belsky, Spanier, & Rovine, 1983; Lee, 1988; Snowden, Schott, Awalt, & Gillies-Knox, 1988; Steinberg & Silverberg, 1987; Waldron & Routh, 1981). Benin and Nienstedt (1985) found that life cycle stages have important effects for the husbands' Inarital happiness but not for the wives' marital happiness. Kinship interactions were studied in different stages of the life cycle (Belsky & Rovine, 1984; Ishi-Kuntz & Seccombe, 1989; Kennedy & Stokes, 1982; Leigh, 1982). Kennedy and Stokes (1982) found that people in the early stages of their life cycle were more likely to receive help for purchasing their own home than in other groups. Interactions with kin were also related to the dimension of closeness between parents and children (Ishi-Kuntz & Seccombe, 1989) . Closeness seem to vary depending on the :stage in the family life cycle. For example, the mutual ciependence between parent-preschool children was hi93h 154 because of the physical and other needs of children. This kept parents from extensive interaction with their kin families of origin. Social Psychology Framework This framework was found in 36.4% of the research on the adolescent sexual behavior. Here are a few examples. Jorgensen and Sonstegard (1984) predicted the pregnancy risk-taking behavior of adolescent females. Marsiglio (1988) studied the adolescent males' intentions to live with their child and partner. Brazzell and Acock (1988) studied the adolescent females' intentions to deal with an unwanted pregnancy. Psychoanalytic Framework The psychoanalytic framework was used in research. on the themes of mate selection and parent-child. Examples of this approach being used is the topic of mate selection ‘which argues that a man is likely to marry someone resembling his mother and that a woman would marry someone resembling her father. Jedlicka's study (1984) supported 'that argument by finding that sons were more influenced by Inothers in mate choice and daughters were more influenced by fathers. Systems Framework Only research on parent-child (1.0%) relationships used 'the systems conceptual framework. Larson (1983) studied the 155 adolescent's relationship with family and friends. He used the concepts of feedback to compare these relationships. Interactions with friends were described as more open and free, while interactions with family were described as more rigid. Summary The structural functional, the symbolic interaction, and the social exchange were the most used in the Egg in the 803. Symbolic interaction . framework was used more in some themes, such as parent-child relationship, family stress and coping, nontraditional family forms, kinship, and family in later life. Structural functional framework was used more in themes, such as gender roles, remarriage, family and religion, and family policy. They discussed the relationships between social class and gender roles, structure of remarried fanulies, function of religion for family member's behavior, and relation between family structure and welfare utilization. The institutional framework was used in research on mate :selection and premarital relationship. They discussed the «:hanges in the mate selection process during certain periods, and the changing values of intermarriage. Situational framework was used in research on family sstress, coping, and divorce. For example, focus on coping puatterns among family members in a variety situation. 156 Conflict framework was used most in family communication research in the 9M3 in the 803. It discussed how husband and wife managed conflicts in different situations. Social exchange framework was used more in family power and family violence. The research focused on the power of family member pertaining to the decision making process. Developmental framework was used in marital quality and kinship research studies. Discussed were different stages in family life and relations with marital adjustment, and interaction with kin members. Social psychology framework was used in research on the topic of adolescent sexual behavior. Focused was on the relationships between knowledge of sexual behaviors, intention of sexual behaviors, beliefs of significant others and what they think the significant other should do, as well as the motivation to comply with these beliefs. Psychoanalytic framework was discussed in mate selection and parent-child relationship research. Focus was on.how a spouse resembles the mother's or the father's :spouse. and offspring loneliness related to the lack of jparental involvement in the early years. Systems framework was discussed in the parent-child :relationships, such as comparing adolescent's relationship cvith family and friends. CHAPTER VIII THE ENVIRONMENTAL SYSTEM IN THE EIGHTIES At the end of 19703 Bronfenbrenner introduced an ecological model for research in human development. This model enabled researchers to understand "the processes and outcomes of human development as a joint function of the person and the environment" (Bronfenbrenner, p. 188, 1989). This study found that most of the research in the 803 was conducted on the micro level, although the percentage decreased from 72.2% to 66.4% in the second period (Table 26) . The decrease in research on the micro level in the second period was followed by an increase in the percentage of research in other levels in the second period. The increase of research on the meso level was found in family research during 1945—1979 (Hill, 1981). The level of the environmental system may depend on the theme that was studied as seen in Appendix H. Micro—Systems Research on family and communication (92.3%). family violence (86.5%), and marital quality (83.2%) were the 157 158 Table 26 Environmental Systems by Five Year Periods, 1980-1989 Environmental system 1980-1984 1985-1989 (%) (%) Micro—systems 242 72.2 254 64.0 Meso-system 32 9.6 61 15.4 Exo-system 21 6.3 34 8.6 Macro-system 40 11.9 48 12.1 Total 335 100 397' 100 themes that focused most on the micro level. Research on family communication focused on communication between husband and wife. In contrast to earlier research cited by .Allen and Thompson (1984), it was found that understanding a spouse's perceptions was related to marital satisfaction. .Allen and Thompson (1984) found that understanding cannot ;predict communicative satisfaction in marital dyad. Only «agreeing and feeling understood were found to be the predictors of communicative satisfaction in marital dyad. liarital satisfaction was also related to the husband's ability to understand his wife's nonverbal messages. The Innsbands of satisfied wives were more able to read their cvive's nonverbal language and vice versa (Gottman & Porterfield , 1981) . 159 various situations were studied on different dimensions of marital quality at the micro level, such as in premarital cohabitation (De Maris & Leslie, 1984), pregnancy (Snowden, Schott, Awalt, & Gillis-Knox, 1988), children (Callan, 1981; Glenn.& McLanahan, 1982; Waldron & Routh, 1981), in leisure activity (Holman & Jacquart, 1988), and health (Simmons & Ball, 1984). For example evidence indicated that compared with noncohabitators, husband and wife cohabitators perceived lower quality of marital communication and marital satisfaction (De Maris & Leslie, 1984). It was argued that it is the characteristics of the people who do and do not choose to cohabit before marriage, rather than the experience of cohabitation itself, which that accounts for the difference. The cohabitators tended to expect more in Inarriage from the beginning and adapt less readily to the role expectations of conventional marriage than do the noncohabitators. Although the direction of the relationship was not known, Snowden, Schott, Awalt, and Gillis-Knox (1988) found a relationship between uncertainty and conflict in becoming pregnant and low marital satisfaction at the beginning of pregnancy. Couples who had trouble in adjusting to the birth of their child tended to have trouble throughout pregnancy. Pregnant women who had more self-confidence tended to feel more satisfied in marital relationship. The presence of a child was found to decrease the Inothers' marital adjustment (Callan, 1981; Waldron & Routh, 160 1981,) and parents' marital happiness (Glenn & McLanahan, 1982). Infertile women reported that they feli: more pleased with their husband with fewer quarrels, less regret about marriage, and greater happiness in the marital relationship than other women (Callan, 1981). This findings can be explained by the characteristics of the sample izhat had been drawn. The infertile women were on an in vitro fertilization program in attempting to have their own child, and they still had not given up in being mothers. The higher marital adjustment may possibly reflect their present status. The lower marital adjustment among new mothers may be due to postpartum depression, a shift of mood due to feeling "tied" to the house, and fewer social interactions than before the birth of their child (Waldron & Routh, 1981). The health of a spouse can influence a couple's marital adjustment. Simmons and Ball (1984) found that the wife who rnarried after the husband's injury had better marital adjustment than the wife who married before an injury. lflives who married after an injury had better marital «adjustment if they were more present centered, had a high «:apacity for developing intimacy and closeness with others, were interpersonally sensitive and reported good contact with other people. The level of spousal communication may also influence rnarital satisfaction. Holman and Jacquart (1988) argued that joint spousal leisure activity is positively related to 161 xnarital satisfaction if the communication is high and the reverse if the communication is low. Research on family violence on the micro level focuses on violence among family members. It was found that violent behaviors and attitudes may be acquired through direct experiences in the family, such as observed siblings aggression, parent aggression, or having experienced a childhood of family aggression (Forsstrom-Cohen & Rosenbaum, 1985; Gully, Dengerink, Pepping, and Bengstrom, 1981; Ulbrich & Huber, 1981). Marital violence tended to be more frequent in remarriage if both spouses were previously involved in violent marriages (Kalmuss & Seltzer, 1986). Other research on family violence focused on family factors related to it. Some wives cannot work outside the .household due to traditional husbands who will not permit 'their wives to work if they have young children. Therefore, ‘they are economically dependent cn their husbands and tend 'to experience more physical abuse from their husbands than *working wives (Kalmuss & Strauss, 1982). Meso-System At the meso level, research studies on adolescent sexual behavior (26.1%), kinship (34.0%), and family and «economy (21.1.2%), were more common. Some studies about adolescent sexual behavior focused on parental and peer influences. Shah and Zelnik (1981) found that during the transition from early to late adolescence, peers became a 162 more important reference group than parents. Therefore, higher levels of premarital pregnancy were found among girls who were more influenced by friends than by parents. Girls who involved parents in obtaining a method of contraception tend not to involve girl peers, and vice versa (Nathanson & Becker, 1986). Among those who mentioned both girlfriends and boyfriends as their advisors, they more frequently chose girlfriends to accompany them to the health clinic. Robbins, Kaplan, and Martin (1985) found that school stress can be a strong predictor of premarital pregnancy in adolescence. They explained that "marginal students became pregnant because parenthood seems a viable alternative to continued self-devaluing experiences in the educational system" (p. 580). Some research on kinship focused on the different relationships of various kin. The relationship between mothers and daughters become more positive with decreasing relational strain, increasing visiting or telephone contact, and when the daughter asks for advice in child rearing. In contrast to the relationship between mothers and daughters, the relationship between mothers-in-law and daughters—in-law becomes more negative with increasing relational strain, and daughters-in-law have ambivalent or negative feelings about receiving help from mothers-in—law (Fischer, 1983). Social support from parents, in-laws, children, other close relatives, and friends may have different influences on widows in the long-term process of adjusting to the loss 163 of their husbands (Bankoff, 1983). Children appear to have no positive effect on the well—being of widows in the phase of crisis loss because they also are grieving and need support. Parental support, especially from widowed mothers, appeared to be very important for the well-being of the new widows during the period of intense grief soon after the death of a spouse. They are better able to understand their widowed daughter because they had gone through the same experience. A network of close relatives tended to restrict access to new information and social contacts for widows who began to reorganize herself around her new status. Friends introduced the widow to members of new networks who were more supportive to her newly acquired needs as a single person. Some research on family and economy on the meso level focused on the relationships between parents' employment and child care. The presence of young children influenced the employment expectations of married mothers. Although these women experienced ambivalence toward employment during their infants' first year, most of them planned to return to work before their infant's first birthdays. The reasons for it were either economic or to protect themselves from «discontinuous employment patterns (Hock, Gnezda, & McBride. .1984). Some mothers who wanted to combine work and nurtherhood chose a part-time job (Pistrang, 1984; Thomson, 1980) . Women who had husbands with high income felt freer to re hire their role did I avaii Works take was i for ‘ chiL Ofte; (27.. 164 to return to work after they had babies because they could hire someone to do child care (Gordon & Kammeyer, 1980). Some employed couples reduced their working'hours when their children were young to minimize the time conflicts and role strain (Moen & Dempster-McClain, 1987). Or, if they did not arrange for either the husband or the wife to be available for child care during the day, they may have worked shifts that permitted either of them to pick up or take the child to the child care provider while the other was at work (Nock & Kingston, 1984). Working mothers who chose the self-care arrangements for their children when they went to work used it when their children were older (Rodman & Pratto, 1987). Exo-System Research conducted on the exo-system level was more often focused on family policy (55.6%) and mate selection (27.6%). Research on family policy looked at the impact of social programs and policies on families. Spakes (1982) found that the AFDC mandatory work registration policy could have positive and negative impacts to their clients and their families. Positive impacts included the improvement of skills, self-concept, and extra money which may result in decreased family tension. On the other hand, negative impacts included lower self-concept as the result of failure txo get a better job, more training, and family tension such 165 as inadequate child care because the mother nuJSt now accept a low-paying job. Darity and Myers (1984) studied the effect of welfare dependency on the "Black female headship." It was argued that "Black female headship" were "the most overly represented group of individuals who are long term dependents on welfare . . ." (p. 767). But Darity and Myers (1984) found no influence of welfare dependency to "Black female headship." Much of the research on mate selection discussed intermarriages. It focused on the factors that influenced the choice of a marriage partner. Education was one of the many factors that influenced intermarriage in two ways (Lee, 1988). First, the longer people remained in the formal education system, the longer they may share similar values and attitudes. Second, the use of English as the medium of instruction in the school can bypass the differences in cultural background, such as race or ethnic membership (Lee, 1988) and language (Stevens & Schoen, 1988). Segregation was also found related to marital choice :since "a person is likely to choose a spouse with similar slalues, that the residential environment may have helped to shape" (Morgan, 1981, p. 916). An individual's choice of nuarriage partner is constrained by whom he meets. Therefore, the larger the social networks, the greater the Opportunity for the individual to choose a potential partner with Whom she/he is likely to come into contact. 166 Davis-Brown, Salamon, and Surra (1987) found that the different religious groups in an agricultural community had more opportunities to interact with each other after school consolidation and integration. Marriage was.more frequent among people from similar, rather than different, . ecological areas (Morgan, 1981). The size of the group is another factor related to marital choice. Labov and Jacobs (1986) found that intermarriage in Hawaii was influenced by the size of the groups whether they are age cohorts, ethnic groups, residential communities, or occupational groups. The larger the group, the lower the rate of intermarriages. For example, in Hawaii, Koreans were more likely to marry. outside the group than other ethnic groups because the Korean population there was much smaller than that of other ethnic groups. The high rates of interracial marriage in 'the United States were aided partly by the lack of formal ‘barriers such as the abolishment of the prohibition of .interracial marriages with whites in 1967 (Kitano, Yeung, Chai, & Hatanaka, 1984). Glenn (1982) found that the religious institution has a cveak influence on marital choice because there were many itherreligious marriages where persons married persons with a different religion and consequently changed their own religion. t?) ’44. '1 167 Macro-System Research on the macro-system level was more likely to focus on factors related to divorce (23.3%), religion (35.9%), and family power (23.3%). Much research on divorce on the macro level discussed the antecedent factor or the impact of divorce. Social integration was found to be related to divorce, with integration increasing the likelihood that people will follow social norms in choosing an appropriate spouse and fulfilling their marital roles. On the other hand, the absence of integration or normlessness increases the likelihood that people will divorce (Glenn & Shelton, 1986). Migration was used as a factor to indicate level of social integration- It was assumed that migration affects the degree of social integration by causing instability in any social relationships among people (Glenn & Shelton, 1985). 'Therefore, except for Wilkinson, Reynolds, Thompson Jr., and (Dstresh (1983) who found that migration had little .influences on changes in divorce rates, others found that the more rapid the rate of social change as measured by rnigration. the higher the divorce rate (Breault & Kposowa, 11987; Glenn & Shelton, 1985; Makabe, 1980; Trovato, 1986a). Divorce was seen as a factor associated with suicide. Divorced persons were assumed to experience significant losses the integration to the family institution by losing their Spouse and/or children (Stack, 1980). Many divorced persons felt that divorce was a way to solve the problems 168 they experienced during their previous marriages. Often, they still experienced unhappiness, social isolation, hurt, guilt, depression, and perceived that suicide was the only alternative to end their depression. Findings indicated that divorce was significantly related to suicide (Stack, 1980; Trovato, 1986b). Much of the research on religion at the macro level looked at the impact of the several religious affiliations on activities in marriage and family life, such as fertility expectations among Catholics and Mormons (see the Structural Functional Framework section), gender roles among the women who return to orthodox Judaism (Kaufman, 1985), and marital violence in Quaker families (Brutz & Allen, 1986). In research about the effect of orthodox Judaism values on attitudes, practices, and beliefs in gender roles and familial lifestyles among women who returned to orthodox Judaism, it was found that the women found their identity as women after their return. Whereas before, they felt that their lives had been spiritually empty and without meaning, as expressed by one woman, " a new dignity, a dignity they felt most contemporary feminists disregarded and devalued" (Kaufman, 1985, p. 547). Quakers emphasize peaceful means to resolve conflict, regardless of personal sacrifice or adversity of conditions. With their commitment to Quaker beliefs, husbands and wives were less violent and use less abusive methods to resolve their marital conflicts (Brutz & Allen, 1986). "1 '1 ‘I In r!- 'H rt- 169 Research on family power on the macro system level focused on the influence of cultural norms of power in the family. Warner, Lee, and Lee (1986) did research in 186 societies in a cross-cultural sample to begin to understand the conditions under which wives may have more power in decision making in marriage. It was found that wives have more power in marriage in societies with nuclear rather than extended family structures, and in societies with matrilateral, rather than patrilateral, customs of residence and descent. Cooney, Rogler, Hurell, and Ortiz (1982) studied the decision-making patterns within two generations of Puerto Rican families in the United States related to cultural norms. In patriarchal societies, norms were strong and shared by all classes of society. In egalitarian societies, individual's worth was based on socioeconomic achievements which act as a resource. Thus, in the parent generation, the husband with higher socioeconomic achievements had less power in decision making; while in the child's generation, the husband with higher socioeconomic achievements had more power in decision making. These differences reflected the cultural norms of the parent generation born and raised in Puerto Rico, which is a modified patriarchal society, and the cultural norms of the child's generation born and raised in the United States, a transitional egalitarian society. 170 Summary Most of research in the JME in the 803 were conducted at the micro-systems level. Micro system level of analysis was used more on research on marital quality, family violence, and family communication. They focused on marital quality in different situations, communication between husband and wife, and violence among family members. Meso-system level of analysis was found more on research of adolescent sexual behavior, kinship, and family economies. Researchers focused on parental and peer influences on adolescent behavior; different relation with parents, in-laws, children, and friends; and the relationship between parents' employment and child care. Research on family policy and mate selection were conducted at the exo-system level of analysis. They focused on the impact of social programs and policies on families and factors related to mate selection. Research on macro-system level of analysis were more found in family power, divorce, and family and religion. They discussed the influence of the cultural norms on power in family members, relation between social integration and divorce, impact of religious values and family member's behavior CHAPTER IX CONCLUSION A lack of comprehensive review of research studies or theoretical literature in family science pulled the researcher's interest to do a content analysis of the Journal of Marriage and the Family (JMEL. It is one of the most popular professional journals used by scholars to publish research studies on families. It was first published in 1939, with an emphasis on publishing articles related to marriage and family issues. It has been a tradition for the_gM§ to publish decade reviews dealing with certain themes since 19603. Yet there is a lack of studies that deal with what the JME has published over time, with the subsequent problems noted above. Social changes in the 603 and the 703 were cited as a stimulus for some emerging phenomena such as gender roles, adolescent sexual behavior, nontraditional family forms, and family policy which became new areas of interest in family studies. This supports Hess' view that "what is studied in any society at a given historical moment is determined by 171 172 . the cultural context and historical moment" (Hess, & Markson, 1980, p. 5). For example, family policy and gender roles were recognized as the important topics among social scientists after they became the political agenda. The. enormous research on adolescent sexual behavior was conducted because of support from federal funding agencies. The increase in divorce rate during the mid-603 and 703 pulled the researchers to examine this phenomena. Interest of the new areas can be seen in some themes, such as divorce, remarriage, family and economy, and family communication which were only subthemes in the former reviews, could be reviewed individually as a single theme in the 803. The enormous research of some themes enables them to be reviewed in two different articles, such as determinants and consequences of divorce; family and health, and economic distress; and parental employment and economic distress. The small percentage on some themes, such as adolescent sexual behavior, nontraditional family forms, remarriage, family in later life, family communication, and family policy, in the 803 does not mean that they were not popular. The author argued that many of them were published in other journals beside JMF. In general, compared to the findings of previous reviews, research in the QME during the 803 were still mainly descriptive in nature and without the use of hypotheses. Different from the previous reviews which did 173 not mention about meta-analysis, in this study a small amount of research in the 803 can be categorized as a meta— analysis study. The fact that meta-analysis was first mentioned in 1976 by Glass may explain a lack of this study in the previous decades. Although most of the research were still conducted in cross sectional rather than longitudinal designs, there was an increase of longitudinal designs in the second five year period during the 803. It may relate to the needs of knowing the process of a phenomenon which was the limitation of a cross sectional design. Most of the researchers used primary data in the 803. Reason for not using the secondary data may relates to the limitation of questions which cannot be manipulated in relation to the research issue. . Many samples of family research in the 803 were still nonrandom. Some themes such as premarital sexual relationship, remarriage, nontraditional family forms, and family communications used more nonrandom samples. The difficulty to get the research subject can be account for this. For example, remarried people were recognized as a mobile population. The stepfamily was usually associated to negative stereotype, such as the neglected and abused stepchild, or the wicked stepmother. In the 803 there was an improvement in sample size which tended to be larger than earlier times. There was also an increase in the complexity of the statistical 174 techniques for analysis. Compared to the previous reviews, in the 803 there were more variety of statistical techniques, such as LISREL, log-linear, or proportional hazards model. Research subject tended to be individuals, female and male, located in urban areas, "mixed" ethnicity, and middle class using education as the social class indicator. The dominant value in American society lies in the urban, Protestant, and middle class society (Spiegel, 1954) was cited as the reason why family research were more conducted among them. In the 803 sibling was still a neglected research subject in family research. The parent-child's ‘bond is assumed to be more important than the sibling's bond can account for this. Compared to other themes, adolescent sexual behavior used more female subjects. Reasons can be given for this: (a) the rate increase of premarital sexual behavior was greater among the college females than college males; and (b) the assumption of females as the primary responsible persons for their consequences sexual behavior. Compared to other studies, in this study research smibject were more from "mixed" ethnicity. It may be explained due to the different definitions of "mixed". Blacks and Hispanics were the only minority which were studied individually. There was no study deal with the Native American. 175 Family policy research was the only theme that used more research subject from the lower class and income as the only indicator for social class. It was due to the use of welfare data. Family communication was the only theme that use more middle or upper class research subject. Since 1957 the percentage of the articles written by one author has decrease. A network or team of authors replaced single author in writing a research article. Though it was not examined in this study, hopefully a team of authors can be associated with higher quality of the article (Bayer, 1982). More female and male together as authors in the 803 may reduce gender bias in research. While there was an increase in two gender authors research articles, female researchers often chose certain research themes, such as gender roles. parent-child relationship, kinship, remarriage, family in later life, and family and economy. They may find different perspective over problems from the male authors. Questionnaires and interviews were the more popular 'techniques for gathering data in family research. It was «due to the private nature of family. Simulation and focus «group as the techniques for gathering data appeared in the 803 that were not mentioned in the previous decade. The structural functional, the symbolic interaction,’ arnd the social exchange were the most often used conceptual frameworks in the JME in the 803. Most research in the 1M3 111 the 803 were conducted in micro-systems level, to use 176 Bronfenbrenner's category. It means that there was a lack of research that examine two or more settings. As a conclusion it can be said that family research has improved in larger sample size, research subject not limited to females, increase in multivariate statistical techniques, new techniques for gathering data, and teams of multi gender authors. This study has some limitations. First, themes for this study were derived from the titles of the article. Different results will be found if themes are derived from the content of the research. Second, this study was conducted by one author. Two or more authors will enhance the results since one author may have subjective judgement. Third, since content analysis technique enables the materials to be recode, it will also influence the results. Recommendations are given from this study: 1. The importance of explicitly stating underlying conceptual frameworks in research reports. Lavee (1986) xnentioned the advantages of its relation to theory building process, interpretation of results, and research process. ESimilar to Lavee's experience, the author had a longer time «or "frustrating" times, to use Lavee's (1986) word, to do tflne conceptual framework part compared to other parts, since rnany'of the researcher did not explicitly mention any of the cxonceptual frameworks in their studies. 177 2. The importance of mentioning ethnicity, social class, and area of locations of the study in a research report since they influence the results. 3. The importance of including more Native American and Asian American studies in the future. There was no such single study in the QME during 803. 4. The importance of publishing studies using meta- analysis study. There is an advantage of using this methodology in future studies by pooling relevant data concerning a particular topic for a better understanding of the problem. 5. More longitudinal studies in the future should be carried out. There was a lack of this type of study in the JMF during the 803. APPENDICES 178 APPENDIX A THEMES BY PURPOSE OF THE STUDY 179 Tabl e A1 Themes by Purpose of the Study Exploratory Descriptive Explanatory Meta- Themes analysis (t) (%) (*) (*) 1. 5 10.9 23 50.0 17 37.0 1 2.2 2. 2 9.5 18 85.7 1 4.8 - 3. 2 6.9 21 72.4 6 20.7 — 4. 2 9.5 14 66.7 5 23.8 - 5. 20 10.5 118 62.1 52 27.4 - 6. 11 11.5 60 62.5 24 25.0 1 1.0 7. 5 20.8 13 54.2 6 25.0 — 8. 20 14.8 83 61.5 30 22.2 2 1.5 9. 6 16.7 27 75.0 3 8.3 — 10. 9 20.9 25 58.1 9 20.9 - 11. 9 18.8 28 58.3 11 22.9 — 12. 17 21.3 40 50.0 23 28.8 - 13. 6 25.0 16 66.7 1 4.2 1 4.2 14. 5 11.4 27 61.4 12 27.3 - 15. 4 10.0 27 67.5 9 22.5 - 16. 16 14.8 58 53.7 32 29.6 2 1.9 17. l 7.7 8 61.5 4 30.8 - 18. - 3 50.0 3 50.0 - l9. 8 15.4 39 75.0 5 9.6 - Note 1. Gender Roles 11. Kinship 2. Premarital Sexual Relationship 12. Divorce 3. Mate Selection 13. Remarriage 4. Adolescent Sexual Behavior 14. Family in Later Life 5. Parent-child Relationship 15. Family and Religion 6. Marital Quality 16. Family and Economy 7. Family Power 17. Family Communication 8. Family Stress and Coping 18. Family Policy 9. Family Violence 19. Others :10. Nontraditional Family Forms 180 APPENDIX B THEMES BY LEVEL OF DATA ANALYSIS 181 Table B1 Themes by Level of Data Analysis Primary Secondary Meta-analysis Primary and Analysis Analysis Secondary Analysis (95) (9s) (96) (96) 1.; 37 80.4 8 17.4 1 2.2 — 2.; 13 61.9 8 38.1 - — 3.- 15 51.7 12 41.4 - 2 6.9 4. 15 71.4 6 28.6 - — 5, 152 80.0 38 20.0 - - 5, 79 82.3 16 16.7 1 1.0 - 7, 21 87.5 3 12.5 - - 8. 108 80.0 25 18.5 2 1.5 - 9. 29 80.6 7 19.4 - - 10. 28 65.1 14 32.6 - l 2.3 11. 49 80.3 12 19.7 - - 12. 41 51.3 39 48.8 - - 13. 16 66.7 7 29.2 1 4.2 - 14. 32 72.7 12 27.3 - - 15. 26 65.0 13 32.5 - 1 2.5 16. 73 67.6 33 30.6 2 1.9% - 17. 12 92.3 1 7.7 - - 18. 2 33.3 4 66.7 - - 19. 30 57.7 22 42.3 - - Note: 1. Gender Roles 11. Kinship 2. Premarital Sexual Relationship 12. Divorce 3. Mate Selection 13. Remarriage 4. Adolescent Sexual Behavior 14. Family in Later Life 5. Parent—child Relationship 15. Family and Religion 6. Marital Quality 16. Family and Economy 7. Family power 17. Family Communication 8. Family Stress and Coping 18. Family Policy 50 Family Violence 19. Others Nontraditional Family Form 182 APPENDIX C THEMES BY STATISTICAL TECHNIQUE 183 Table C1 Themes by Statistical Techniques 1 5 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 1 - 8. 28.3 30. 3.3 8.3 11.7 5. 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7 - 2 6.9 10. 31.0 20. - 3.4 10.3 3 3.4 3.4 - 3.4 3.4 3 5.7 20. 14.3 17. 5.7 8.6 11.4 2 11.4 - 2.9 - - 4 — 6. 17.2 34. 6.9 3.4 10.3 13 - - 3.4 - 3.4 5 2.8 5. 26.3 29. 4.8 4.8 14.3 2 2.4 0.8 5.2 0.8 0.4 6 - 4. 29.4 29. 5.9 5.9 16.9 5 0.7 - 0.7 - 0.7 7 - 6. 30.3 24. - 12.1 15.2 3 - - 3.0 6.1 - 8 0.5 4 25.4 32. 4.3 6.5 13.5 4. 1.6 1.1 1.6 1.6 2.2 9 2.1 19. 29.8 12. - 2.1 17.0 10. 4.3 e - - 2.1 10 5.7 9. 22.6 30. 5.7 1.9 13.2 5 - 1.9 3.8 - - 11 5.1 5. 22.0 42. 3.4 1.7 13.6 1 1.7 - 3.4 - - 12 0.4 9. 27.7 26. 2.7 5.4 10.7 4. 0.9 0.9 5.4 - 2.2 13 - 19. 39.0 10. - 3.2 22.6 6 - 3.2 3.2 — 3.2 14 1.9 7. 13.2 41. 3.8 3.8 13.2 5 5.7 - 3.8 - - 15 1.8 12. 26.8 26. 5.4 5.4 5.4 5 1.8 1.8 3.6 - 3.6 16 1.4 4 21.4 30. 7.6 4.8 11.7 6. 4.2 1.4 4.8 0.7 - 17 - 4. 34.8 26. - 4.3 21.7 - 8.7 - - - 184 185 Table C1 (Continued) 10 11 12 13 18 - 25.0 12.5 25.0 — — - — 12.5 - — 12.5 12.5 19 5.6 11.3 20.8 35.8 1.9 1.9 13.2 3.8 1.9 3.8 - - - Note: Row legends: Column legends: Gender Roles . Univariate Premarital Sexual Relationship Correlation Mate Selection Test Hypotheses Adolescent Sexual Behavior Regression Marital Quality Family Power Family Stress and Coping Family Violence Nontraditional Family Forms Kinship Divorce Remarriage and Stepfamily Family in Later Life Family and Religion Family and Economy Family Communication Family Policy Others 1 2 3 4 5 Parent-child Relationship 6 7 8 9 F‘H PlowoaaqcnUIecoaaw 12 13 Path Analysis Factor Analysis Analysis of Variance Log-linear Discriminant Analysis Analysis of Covariance Multiple Classifi- cation Analysis LISREL Hazards Model APPENDIX D THEMES BY TYPE OF THE RESEARCH SUBJECT 186 Table D1 Themes by Type of the Research Subject Individual Couple Siblings Parent- Others Themes Child (%) (%) (*l (%) (%) l. 23 51.1 20 44.4 - 2 4.4 - 2. 18 90.0 1 5.0 - 1 5.0 - 3. 18 72.0 7 28.0 - - - 4. 18 85.7 - - 3 14.3 - 5. 118 63.4 11 5.9 3 1.6 50 26.9 4 2.2 6. 50 51.5 43 44.3 - 4 4.1 - 7. 8 38.1 10 47.6 - 3 14.3 - 8. 81 62.8 35 27.1 1 0.8 10 7.8 2 1.6 9. 24 66.7 7 19.4‘ - 2 5.6 3 8.3 10. 28 71.8 9 23.1 - 2 5.1 - 11. 33 70.2 1 2.1 1 2.1 10 21.3 2 4.3 12. 48 78.7 8 13.1 - 4 6.6 1 1.6 13. 12 57.1 6 28.6 - 3 14.3 - 14. 31 75.6 2 4.9 1 2.4 7 17.1 - 15. 27 71.1 8 21.1 - 3 7.9 - 16 75 76.5 17 17.3 - 4 4.1 2 2 O 17. 3 23.1 10 76.9 - - - 18. 4 100 — - - 19. 40 88.9 3 6.7 1 2.2 - 1 2.2 Note: 1. Gender Roles 11. Kinship 2. Premarital Sexual Relationship 12. Divorce 3. Mate Selection 13. Remarriage 4. Adolescent Sexual Behavior 14. Family in Later Life 5. Parent-child Relationship 15. Family and Religion 6. Marital Quality 16. Family and Economy 7. Family Power 17. Family Communication 8. Family Stress and Coping 18. Family Policy 9. Family Violence 19. Others 10. Nontraditional Family Forms 187 APPENDIX E THEMES BY ETHNICITY OF THE RESEARCH SUBJECT 188 Table E1 Themes by Ethnicity of the Research Subject Themes White Black Hispanic Mixed Others (%) (%) (t) (%) (%) 1. 7 43.8 - - 8 50.0 1 6.3 2. 5 41.7 - - 7 58.3 - 3. 7 33.3 - - 13 61.9 1 4.8 4. 6 35.3 1 5.9 - 10 58.8 - 5. 46 39.3 - 3 2.6 64 54.7 4 3.5 6. 15 31.3 3 6.3 3 6.3 26 54.2 1 2.1 7. 5 62.5 - 1 12.5 1 12.5 1 12.5 8. 23 29.9 1 1.3 5 6.5 42 54.5 6 7.8 9. 5 35.7 - - 2 14.3 7 50.0 10. 4 20.0 1 5.0 1 5.0 13 65.0 1 5.0 11. 9 37.5 - 2 8.3 12 50.0 1 4.2 12. 14 35.0 - - 23 57.5 3 7.5 13. 7 50.0 - — 7 50.0 - 14. 10 38.5 1 3.8 1 3.8 14 53.8 - 15. 12 48.0 - - 12 48.0 1 4.0 16. 21 35.6 - 3 5.1 31 52.5 4 6.8 17. 1 50.0 - - 1 50.0 - l8. 1 20.0 - 1 20.0 *3 60.0 - l9. 6 17.1 3 8.6 - 21 60.0 5 14.3 Note: 1. Gender Roles 11. Kinship 2. Premarital Sexual Relationship 12. Divorce 3. Mate Selection 13. Remarriage 4. Adolescent Sexual Behavior 14. Family in Later Life 5. Parent-child Relationship 15. Family and Religion 6. Marital Quality 16. Family and Economy 7. Family Power 17. Family Communication 8. Family Stress and Coping 18. Family Policy 9. Family Violence 19. Others 10. Nontraditional Family Forms 189 APPENDIX F THEMES BY TECHNIQUES OF GATHERING DATA 190 Table F1 Themes by Techniques of Gathering Data 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1. 23.9% 54.3% 17.4% 3.2: 2.2% - - . .7% 41.4% 34.5% . - - - 3. 28.6% 14.7% 38.2% 8.8% 2.9% 11.8% 2.9% 4. 42.3% 34.6% 23.1% - - - - 5. 35.6% 40.3% 18.5% - 0.5% 5.1% - 6. 27.3% 48.8% 12.4% 0.8% 4.1% 6.6% - 2% 7. 33.3% 37.5% 12.5% 4.2% 4.2% 4.2% - 8. 35.6% 43.7% 13.8% 2-4% 1.1% 5.7% - 9. 41.5% 39.0% 17.1% . - - - 10. 39.0% 22.0% 31.7% 2.4% 2.4% 2.4% - 11. 48.2% 19.6% 23.2% 1.8% 1.8% 5.4% - 12. 31.4% 17.4% 45.3% 3.5% - 2.3% - _ 13. 25.9% 40.7% 25.9% 7.4% - - - _ 14. 49.0% 19.6% 25.5% 3.9% - 2.0% - 15. 26.5% 40.8% 28.6% - 2.0% 2.0% — -9% 16. 30.4% 33.0% 30.4% 3.5% 0.9% 0.9% - 17. 9.1% 45.5% 9.1% — 27.3% 9.1% - : 18. 28.6% 28.6% 42.9% — - - - 19. 30.9% 20.0% 36.4% 3.6% 1.8% 7.3% - - Notes: ‘ Row legends: Column legends: 1. Gender Roles 1. Interview 2. Premarital Relationship 2. Questionnaire 3. Mate Selection 3. Secondary Sources 4. Adolescent Sexual Behavior 4. Content Analysis 5. Parent—child Relationship 5. Experiment 6. Marital Quality 6. Observation 7 Family Power 7. Focus Group 2 Family Stress and Coping 8. Simulation Family Violence 10. Nontraditional Family Forms 11. Kinship 12. Divorce 13. Remarriage and stepfamilies 14. Family in Later Life 15. Family and Religion 16. Family and Economy 1; gamiiy Communication . am Po ' 19. other: llcy 191 APPENDIX G THEMES BY CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK 192 Table G1 Themes by Conceptual Framework Conceptual Framework Themes 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 10 1 15.4 42.3 - 11.5 26.9 - - - 2 — 33.3 33.3 - 16.6 - - 16.6 - 3 16.3 16.7 33.3 - 16.7 8.3 - 8.3 - 4 18.2 18.2 - - 27.3 - - 36.4 - 5 34.8 28.1 2.1 6.3 17.7 2.1 1.0 5.2 3.1 6 29.4 11.7 2.9 29.4 17.6 - - 5.9 2.9 7 15.4 23.1 - - 61.5 - - - - 8 31.5 17.8 - 11.0 6.8 - - 16.4 13.7 9 16.7 33.3 - - 50.0 - - - - 10 30.0 30.0 - 10.0 20.0 — - 10. - 11 37.1 22.9 — 17.1 17.1 - - — 5.7 12 25.0 25.0 6.3 25.0 - - - — 12.5 13 9.1 63.6 9.1 - 18.2 - — _ - 14 45.2 16.1 - 12.9 19.4 — - - 6.5 15 — 53.3 26.7 - 13.3 - — 6. — 15 18.5 31.5 - 14.8 29.6 - - 3. - 193 194 Table G1 (Continued) Conceptual Framework Themes 1 2 3 4 6 7 8 9 10 17 50.0 - - - 25.0 - - - 25 0 - 18 — 100.0 - — - - - - 7 Notes: Row Legends: Gender Roles Premarital Sexual Relationship 3 Mate Selection 4 Adolescent Sexual Behavior 5. Parent-child Relationship 6. Marital Quality 7. 8 9 NH Family Power Family Stress and Coping . Family Violence 10. Nontraditional Family Forms 11. Kinship 12. Divorce 13. Remarriage and Stepfamilies 14. Family in Later Life 15. Family and Religion 16. Family and Economy 17. Family Communication 18. Family Policy Column legends: Symbolic Interactional Structural Functional Institutional Developmental Social Exchange Psychoanalytic Systems Social Psychology Conflict .Situational HmmqmmewNI—o o. APPENDIX H THEMES AND THE ENVIRONMENTAL SYSTEM 195 Table H1 Themes and the Environmental System Themes Micro— Meso- Exo- Macro- systems system system system (%) (%) (%) (%) 1. 31 68.9 6 13.3 4 8.9 4 8.9 2. 18 78.3 2 8.7 — 3 13.0 3. 17 58.6 — 8 27.6 4 13.8 4. 15 65.2 6 26.1 - 2 8.7 5 138 71.1 31 17.8 10 5.7 15 7.7 6. 79 83.2 8 8.4 4 4.2 4 4.2 7. 14 77.8 - - 4 22.2 8. 94 68.6 32 23.4 8 5.8 3 2.2 9. 32 86.5 1 2.7 2 5.4 2 5.4 10. 32 71.1 7 15.6 2 4.4 4 8.9 11. 27 57.4 16 34.0 4 8.5 - 12. 37 48.1 11 14.3 11 14.3 18 23.4 13. 16 69.6 3 13.0 - 4 17.4 14. 31 64.6 9 18.8 1 2.1 7 14.6 15. 17 43.6 2 5.1 6 15.4 14 35.9 16. 65 59.6 23 21.1 13 11.9 8 7.3 17. 12 92.3 1 7.7 - - 18. 2 22.2 2 22.2 5 55.6 - 19. 32 61.5 5 9.6 3 5.8 12 23.1 Note 1. Gender Roles 11. Kinship 2. Premarital Sexual Relationship 12. Divorce 3. Mate Selection 13. Remarriage 4..Adolescent Sexual Behavior 14. Family in Later Life 5. Parent-child Relationship 15. Family and Religion 6. Marital Quality 16. Family and Economy 7. Family Power 17. Family Communication 8. Family Stress and Coping 18. Family Policy :0 Family Violence 19. Others Nontraditional Family Forms 196 APPENDIX I QUESTIONNAIRE 197 . Number of article - _ _ 1 2 3 Title -------------------------------------------------- . Volume - - 4 5 . Month of issue: February (1) August (3) ' May (2) November (4) 6 . Year of issue: 1980 (0) (1985) (5) - 1981 (1) (1986) (6) 7 1982 (2) (1987) (7) 1983 (3) (1988) (8) 1984 (4) (1989) (9) o AUthO r ------------------------------------------------- One (1) - Two ( 2) 8 Three or more (3) . Gender of author(s) Male (1) - Female (2) 9 Male and female (3) Can't tell (4) THEMES Sex roles, family and society (01) Premarital relationship (02) - - - - Mate selection (03) 10 11 18 19 Adolescent sexual behavior: (04) pregnancy and parenting - - - - Parent-Child relationship (05) 12 13 20 21 Marital quality (06) Family power (07) - - - - Family Stress and Coping (08) 14 15 22 23 Wife abuse (09) 198 199 Child abuse (10) - - - - Elderly abuse (11) 216 17 24 25 Racial and Cultural variations among American families (12) Nontraditional family forms (13) Kinship (14) Divorce (15) Remarriage and Stepfamily (16) Marital and family therapy (17) Cross-societal family research(18) Families in later life (19) Religion and family (20) Family and health (21) Parental employment (22) Marital communication (23) Family policy (24) Others (specify) ............. ------------------------------ (26) Not a research article (00) 9. Focus of the study ------------------------------------ 10 Empirical study (1) _ Not an empirical study (2) 25 11 Hypotheses Any hypotheses (1) No hypotheses . (2) _ Not a research article (0) 27 12 purpose of research Ex loratorY (l) _ Degcriptive (2) 28 Explanatory (3) 13 14 15 200 Meta-analysis (4) Not a research article (0) Theoretical framework used Interactionist ( Institutional ( Structural functional ( Situational (4 Developmental ( Social exchange ( Others (specify) ............ Not a research article (0) Time dimension Cross sectional studies ( Longitudinal studies ( Meta-analysis ( Not a research article ( Sample ---------------------------------------------- Sampling technique Random (1) Non random (2) Not mention (9) Not a research article (0) Number of samples (specify) -------- not mention (9999) not a research article (0000) Location of the subjects: Urban (1) Rural (2) Urban and Rural (3) Subject is not a person(8) Not mention (9) Not a research article (0) Type of subject: Individual A Couple Child—parent Child—Grandparent Siblings thers """""""" ‘ got a research article/subject is not a person 31 29 30 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 (1) — (2) 39 (3) <4) (5) <6) <0) 201 e. Gender of the subjects Male Female Male and female Not mention (1) (2) (3) (9) Not a research article/subject is not a person (0) f. Social class of the subjects: Lower (1) Middle (2) Upper (3) Lower and middle class (4) Upper and middle class (5) Upper and lower calss (6) Lower middle and upper (7) Subject is not a person(8) Not mention (9) Not a research article (0) g. Type of definition of social class: Family income Education level “A NH VV Occupational level Family income and educational level Family income and occupational level Educational and occupational level All of them Subject is not a person Not mention Not a research article AAAAA" O «reasons-u VAVVVVVV A h. Ethnicity of the subjects: Asian Black Hispanic White Others (specify) .............. Mixed Subject is not a person Not mention Not a research article (0) (9) 202 i. If an interview technique is used, the gender of the 16 17 18 interviewer: Male (1) Female (2) Male and female (3) Not mention (9) Not a research article/did not use interview (0) Levels of organization of the studies: Microsystem (1) Mesosystem (2) - - (3) Exosystem Macrosystem Not a research article (0) Technique for gathering data: Experiments Self administered questionnaire Interview Observation Secondary analysis Content Analysis Historical/comparative analysis Life histories Others ----------------------- Not a research article AAAAAAAAAA \l ox 01 oh vvvvvvvvvv 0‘06) Statistical Techniques Univariate analysis (distributions, central tendency, dispersion) (1) Cross table (2) Measures of associations: nominal, ordinal, interval or ratio (3) Linear regression or multiple regression (4) Path analysis (5) Time series analysis (5) Factor analysis (7) Tests of statistical significance (8) others (specify) ----------------------- (9) Not a research article (0) 49 50 44 19 Level of data analysis Primary analysis Secondary analysis Meta-analysis Not research 203 AAAA ob LON H vvvv LIST OF REFERENCES 204 LIST OF REFERENCES Acock, A. C., & Bengston, V. L. (1980, August). Socialization and attribution processes. Actual versus perceived «similarity among parents and youth. Journal of Marriage and the Family, £9, 501-515. Adams, B. N. (1971). Isolation, function, and beyond: American kinship in the 1960's. In C. B. A. Broderick (Ed.), Decade of family research and action 1960-1969 (pp. 163-185). Minnesota: National Council on Family Relations. Adams, B. N. (1979). Mate selection in the United States: A theoretical summarization. In W. R. Burr, R. Hill, F. I. Nye, & I. L. Reiss (Eds.), gontemporary theorigs abppt the family: Vol. I. (pp. 259-267). New York: The Free Press. Albrecht, S., Bahr, H, & Goodman, K. (1983). Divorce and remarriage: Problems, adaptations, and adjustments. Westport: CT Greenwood Press. Aldous, J. & Dumon, W. (1990, November). Family policy in the 19803: Controversy and consensus. .Journal of Marriage and the Family, §3, 1136-1151. Allen, A., & Thompson, T. (1984, November). Agreement, understanding, realization, and feeling understood as predictors of communicative satisfaction in marital dyads. Journal of Marriagp and the Family, 45. 915-921. Amato, P. R. (1987. May). Family processes in one-parent, stepparent, and intact families: The child's point of view. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 42, 327-338. Babbie, E- (1939)- The practice of social research (5th ed.). California: Wadsworth. Bahr, S. J. (1974). Effects on power and division of labor in the family. In L. W; Hoffman, & F. I. Nye (Eds.), Working mothers (pp. 167-185). San Fransisco: Jossey-Bass, Inc. 205 206 Bahr, S. (1976). The kinship roleIn F. I. Nye (Ed.), Role §tructure and role analysis of the family (pp. 61-79), Beverly Hills, California: Sage Publication. Bahr, S. J., Chappell, C. B., & Leigh, G. K. (1983, November). Age at marriage, role enactment, role consensus, and marital satisfaction. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 45, 795-803. Bailey, K. D. (1978). Methods of social research. New York: The Free Press. Bankoff, E. A. (1983, November). Social support and adaptation to widowhood. Journal of Marriage and the Family, fig, Barbarin, O. A., Hugher, D. & Chesler, M. A. (1985, May). Stress, coping, and marital functioning among parents of children with cancer. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 51, 473-480. Barness, G. M., Farrell, M. P. & Cairns, A. (1986, February). Socialization factors and adolescent drinking behaviors. Journal of Marriage and the Family, fig, 27-36. Bauman, K. E. (1973, February). Volunteer bias in a study of sexual knowledge, attitudes, and behavior. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 3;, 7-31. Bayer, A. E. (1981). The psychoanalytic frame of reference in family study. In F. I. Nye & F. M. Berardo (Eds.), Emerging conceptual frameworks in family analysis (pp. 152-175). New York: Praege. Bayer, A. E. (1982, August). A bibliometric analysis of marriage and family literature. Journal of Marriage and the Bean, F. D., Clark, M. P.. Swicegood, G. & Williams, D. (1983, May). Husband-wife communication, wife's employment, and the decision for male or female sterilization. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 2;, 395-403. Bell, R. R., & ChaSkeS. J. B. (1970, February). Premarital sexual experience among coeds, 1958 and 1968. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 23, 31-34, Bell, R. R.. & Coughey. K- (1980). Premarital sexual experience among college females. 1958, 1968, and 1978. Family Relatiops. 32. 353-357. 207 Belsky, J. (1990, November). Parental and nonparental child care and children's socioemotional development: A decade in review. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 2, 885-903. Belsky, J., & Rovine, M. (1984, May). Social-network contact, family support, and the transition to parenthood. Journal of Marriage and the Familgg, 19, 455-462. Belsky, J, Spanier, G. B., & Rovine, M. (1983, August). Stability and change in marriage across the transition to parenthood. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 3;, 567-577. Benin, M. H., & Agostinelli, J. (1988, May). Husbands' and wives'satisfaction with the division of labor. Journal of Marriage and the Family, §Q, 349-361. Benin, M. H., & Nienstedt, B. C. (1985, November). Happiness in single- and dual-earner families. The effects of marital happiness, job satisfaction, and life cycly. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 21, 975-984. Benney, M., Riesman, D., & Star, S. A. (1956). Age and sex in the interview. American Journal of Sociology, g3, 143-152. Berardo, F. M. (1980, November). Decade preview: Some trends and directions for family research and theory in the 19805. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 3g, 723-728. Berardo, F. M. (1981, May). Family research and theory: Emergent topics in the 19705 and the prospects for the 19805. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 2;, 251-254. Berkowitz, A., & Perkins, H. W. (1984, February). Stress among farm Women: Work and family as interacting systems. Journal of Marriage and the Family, fig, 161-166. Blood, R. 0. Jr., & Hamblin, R. L. (1958. May). The effects of the wife's employment on the family power structure. Social Force, gg, 347-352. Blood, R. 0. Jr., & Wolfe, D. M. (1960). Husbands and wives: The dynamics of married living. Illinois: The Free Press of Glencoe. Bloom, B. L-. & Caldwell, R- A- (1981. August). Sex differences in adjustment during the process of marital separation. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 43, 693-701. 208 Bolger, N., DeLongis, A., Kessler, R. C., & Wethington, E. (1989, February). The contagion of stress across multiple roles. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 5;, 175-183. Booth, A. 1972. Sex and social participation. American Sociological Review, 31, 3, 183-195. Booth, A., & Edwards, J. N. (1985, February). Age at marriage and marital instability. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 31, 67—75. Boyd, C. J. (1989, May). Mothers and daughters: A Discussion of theory and research. Journal of Marriage and the Family, §l 291-301. Brazzell, J. F. & Acock, A. C. (1988, May). Influence of attitudes, significant others, and aspirations on how adolescents intend to resolve a premarital pregnancy. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 59, 413-425. Breault, K.D. & Kposowa, A. J. (1987, August). Explaining divorce in the United States: A study of 3,111 counties, 1980. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 42, 549-558. Brinkerhoff, M. B., & Mackie, M. (1985, May). Religion and gender: A comparison of Canadian and American student attitudes. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 41, 415-29. Brodbar-Nemzer, J. Y. (1986, May). Divorce and group commitment: The case of the Jews. Journal of Marriage and the Family, Igg, 329-340. Broderick, C. B. (1971). Beyond the five conceptual frameworks: A decade of development in family theory. In C. B. Broderick (Ed.), A decade of Family research and action, 1960-1969 (pp. 3—23). Minnesota: National Council on Family Relations. Broderick, C., & Smith, J. (1979). The general systems approach to the family. In W. R. Burr, R. Hill, F. I. Nye, I. L. Reiss (Eds.), Contemporary theoris about the family: Vol. II; (pp. 112-129). New York: The Free Press. Bronfenbrenner, U. (1977, July). Toward an experimental ecology of human development. American Psychologist, 32, 513-531. Bronfenbrenner, U. (1979). The ecology of human development. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. Bronfenbrenner, U. (1986). Ecology of the family as a context for human development. Developmental Psychology, gg, 723-742. 209 Bronfenbrenner, U. (1989). Ecological systems theory. Annals of child development, g, 187-249. Brown, W. D. (1981). A social-psychological conceptual framework of the family. In F.I. Nye & F. M. Berardo (Eds.), Emerging conceptual frameworks in family analysis (pp. 176-197). New York: Praeger. Brubaker, T. H. (1990, November). Families in later life: A burgeoning research area. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 52, 959-981. Brutz, J. L., & Allen, C. M. (1986, August). Religious commitment, peace activism, and marital violence in Quaker families. Journal of Marriage and the Family, fig, 491—502. Budd, R. W., Throp, R.K., & Donohew, L. (1976). Content analysis of communication. New York: Macmillan. Burchinal, L. G. (1964). The premarital dyad and love involvement. In H. T. Christensen (Ed.), Handbook of marriage and the family (pp. 623-674). Chicago: Rand McNally. Burgess, E. W., Wallin P., & Schultz G. D. (1954). Courtship, engagement and marriage. Philadelphia: JB Lipplncott Company. Burr, R. (1973). Theory construction and the sociology of the family. New Yofk: Wiley. Burr, R. W., Hill, R., Nye, F. I., & Reiss, I. L. (1979). Metatheory and diagramming conventions. In W. R. Burr, R. Hill, F. I. Nye, & I. L. Reiss (Eds.), Contemporary theories about the family: Vol. I. (pp. 17-24). New York: The FreePress. Busby, D. M. (1991). Violence in the family. In S. J. Bahr (Ed.), Family research: A sixty-year reyiew 1930-1990: Vol. I. (pp. 335-385). New York: Lexington Books. Butler, E. W. (1979). Traditional marriage and emerging alternatives. New York: Harper and Row. Callan, V. J. (1981, November). The personal and marital adjusment of mothers of voluntarily and involuntarily childless wives. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 43, 847-856. 210 Cannon, K. L., & Long, R. (1971). Premarital sexual behavior in the sixties. In C. B. Broderick (Ed.), A decade of family research and action 1960-1969 (pp. 25-38). Minnesota: National Council on Family Relations. Caycedo, J. C., Wang, G., & Bahr, S. J. (1991). Gender roles in the family. In S. J. Bahr (Ed.), Family research: A sixty-year review 1930-1990: Vol. I (pp. 335-491). New York: Lexington Books. Cherlin, A. (1978, November). Remarriage as an incomplete institution. American Journal of Sociology, 95, 634-650. Cherlin, A. & McCarthy, J. (1985, February). Remarried couple households: Data from the June 1980 current population survey. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 41, 23-30. Chilman, C. S. (1980a). Adolescent sexuality in a changing American society: Social and psychological perspectives. NIH Publication No. 80-1426, Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office. Chilman, C. S. (1980b, November). Social and psychological research concerning adolescent childbearing: 1970-1980. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 42, 793-805. Christensen, H. T. (1964). Development of the family field of study. In H. T. Christensen (Ed.), Handbook of marriage and the family (pp. 3-32). Chicago: Rand McNally Company. Cicirelli, V. C. (1983, November). Adult childrenfs attatchment and helping behavior to elderly parents: A path model. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 45, 815-25. Clark, C. A”, Werthington, E. L. Jr., & Danser, D. B. (1988, May). The transmission of religious beliefs and practices from parents to first born early adolescent. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 59, 463—472. Clayton, R” R5 & Bokemeier, J. L. (1980, November). Premarital sex in the seventies. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 5g, 759-936. (3. L., Cole, A. L., & Dean, D.G. (1980, August). Emotional maturity and marital adjustment: A decade replication. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 3%, 533-539. Cole, 211 Coleman, L. M., Antonucci, T. C., Adelmann, P. K., & Crohan, S. E. (1987, November). Social roles in the lives of middle-aged and older Black women. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 44, 761-771. Coleman, M., & Ganong, L. H. (1984, July). The effects of remarriage on children: A review of the empirical literature. Family Relations, 44, 389-406. Coleman, M., & Ganong, L. H. (1987). The cultural stereotyping of stepfamilies. In K. Pasley (Ed.), Remarriage and stepparenting: Current research and theory (pp. 19-41). New York: Guilford Press. Coleman, M., & Ganong, L.H. (1990, November). Remarriage and stepfamily research in the 19805: Increased interest in an old family form. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 52, 925-940. Coombs, R. H., & Landsverk, J. (1988, May). Parenting styles and substance use during childhood and adolescence. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 59, 473-482. Cooney, R., Rogler, L. H., Hurrell, R. M., & Ortiz V. (1982, August). Decision making in intergenerational Puerto Rican families. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 44, 621-631. Cooper, J. E., Holman, J. & Braithwaite, V. A. (1983, February). Self—esteem and family cohesion: The child's perspective and adjustment. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 45, 153-159. Corder, J. & Stephan, C. W. (1984, May). Female's combination of work and family roles: Adolescents' aspirations. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 44, 391—402. Cottrell, Ln S. (1948, April). The present status and future orientation of research on the family. American Sociological Review, 44, 123-136. Cousins, P. CL, & Vincent, J. P. (1983, August). Supportive and aversive behavior following spousal compliants. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 4§, 679-682. Cox, IL (1972). Regression models and life tables with cdiscussion. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series_§, 34, 187-220. Darity, W; A” Jr., & Myers, S. L. Jr. (1984, November). Does ‘welfare dependency cause female headship?. The case of the Black family. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 4_6_, 765-779. 212 Davies, R. B. (1987). The limitations of cross sectional analysis. In R. Crouchley (Ed.), Longitudinal data analysis (pp. 1-15). England: Avebury. Davis-Brown, K., Salamon, S., & Surra, C. A. (1987, February). Economic and social factors in mate selection: An ethnographic analysis of an agricultural community. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 42, 41-55. DeLamater, J. (1974, August). Methodological issues in the study of premarital sexuality. Sociological Methods and Research, 1, 30-61. De Maris, A., & Leslie, G. R. (1984, February). Cohabitation with the future spouse: its Influence upon marital satisfaction and communication. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 44, 77-84. Demo, D. H., & Acock, A. C. (1988, August). The impact of divorce on children. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 5_0_, 619—6480 Demo, D. H., Small, S. A., & Savin-Williams, R. C. (1987, November). Family relations and the self-esteem of adolescents and their parents. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 41, 705-716. Di Leonardo, M. (1987). The female world of cards and holidays: Women, families and the work of kinship. Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society, 11, 440-453. Dixon, R. B., & Weitzman, L. J. (1982, February). When husbands file for divorce. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 44, 103-115. Drabek, T. E., Key, W. H., Erickson, P. E., & Crowe, J. L. (1975, May). The impact of disaster on kin relationships. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 41, 481-494. Dyk, P. H., Christopherson, C. R., & Miller, B. C. (1991) Adolescent sexuality. In S. J. Bahr (Ed.), Family _ggsearch: A sixty-year review, 1930-1990: Vol. I. (pp. 25-63). New York: Lexington Books. Drabek, T. E., Key, w. H, Erickson, P. E., s. Crowe, J. L. (1975, Angust). The impact of disaster on kin relationships. figurnal of Marriage and the Family, 11, 481-494. Eale. A. H., Carli, L. L. (1981). Sex of researchers and sex-typed communications as determinants of sex differences in influencibility: A meta-analysis of social influence studies. Psychological Bulletin, 24(1), 1-20. 213 Ehrmann, W. (1955, May). A review of ramily research in 1954. Marriage and Family Living, 11, 169-176. Essex, M., & Nam, S. (1987, February). Marital status and loneliness among older women: The differential importance of close family and friends. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 41, 93-106. Farrell, J., & Markides, K. S. (1985, Novembr). Marriage and health: A three-generation study of Mexican Americans. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 41, 1029-35. Felson, R. B., & Zielinski, M. A. (1989, August). Children's self esteem and parental support. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 11, 727—35. Ferree, M. M. (1990, November). Beyond separate spheres: Feminism and family research. Journal of Marriage and the Family, s_2_, 866-884. Filsinger, E. E., & Wilson, M. R. (1984, November). Religiosity, socioeconomic rewards, and family development: Predictors of marital adjustment. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 41, 663-670. Fischer, L. R. (1983, February). Mothers and mothers-in—law. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 41, 187-192. Forrstrom-Cohen, B., & Rosenbaum, A. (1985, November). The effects of parental marital violence on young adults: An exploratoty investigation. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 41, 467-472. Furstenberg, F. F. (1990). Divorce and the American family. Annual Review of Sociology, 11, 379-403. Galambos, N. L., & Silbereisen, R. K. (1989, May). Role strain in West German duar-earner households. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 11, 385-389. Ganong, L. H., & Coleman, M. (1984, July). The effects of remarriage on children: A review of the empirical literature. Family Relations, 11, 389-406. Gecas, V., & Nye, F. I. (1974, November). Sex and class differences in parent-child interaction: A test of Kohn's hypothesis. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 11, Gecas, V., & Seff, M. A. (1990, November). Families and adolescents. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 11, 214 Gelles, R. J. (1978, July). Methods for studying sensitive family topics. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 41, 408-424. Gelles, R. J. (1980, November). Violence in the family: A review of research in the seventies. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 41, 873-885. Gelles, R. J. (1985). Family violence. Annual Review of Sociology, 11, 347-367. Gelles, R. J. (1990). Methodological issues in the study of family violence. In M. A. Straus, & R. J. Gelles (Eds.), Physical violence in American families: Risk factors and adaptations to violence in 8,145 families (pp. 17- -28). New Brunswick: Transaction Publishers. Gelles, R. J., & Conte, J. R. (1990, November). Domestic violence and sexual abuse of children: A review of research in the eighties. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 11, 1045-1058. Gelles, R. J., & Straus, M. A. (1979). Determinants of violence in the family: Toward a theoretical integration. In W. R. Burr, R. Hill, F. I. Nye, & I. L. Reiss (Eds.), Contemporary theories about the family Vol. I. (pp. 549-581). New York: The Free Press. Gerstel, N. (1988, February). Divorce and kin ties: The importance of gender. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 50. 209-219. Giles-Sims, J. (1983). Wife battering; A systems theory approach. New York: The Guilford Press. Giles-Sims, J., & Crosbie-Burnett, M. (1989, November). Adolescent power in stepfather families. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 11, 1065-1078. Glass, G. V. (1976). Primary, secondary and meta-analysis of research. Educational Researcher, 1(10), 3-8. Glass, G. V. & Mc-Gaw B., & Smith, M. L. (1981). Meta-analysis in social research. London: Sage Publications. (Slenn, N. D. (1982, August). Interreligious marriage in the United States: Patterns and recent trends. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 44, 555-566. (Slenn, N. D. (1990, November). Quantitative research on marital quality in the 19805: A critical review. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 11, 818-831. 215 Glenn, N. D., & McLanahan, S. (1982, February). Children and marital happiness: A further specification of the relationship. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 41, 63-72. Glenn, N. D., & Shelton, B. A. (1985, August). Regional differences in divorce in the United States. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 41, 641-652. Glenn, N. D., & Weaver, C. N. (1978, May). A multivariate, multisurvey study of marital happiness. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 41, 269-282. Goetting, A. (1986, November). The developmental tasks of siblingship over the life cycle. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 41, 703-714. Gold, D. T. (1989). Sibling relationships in old age: A typology. International Journal of Aging and Human Development, 11(1), 37—51. Gordon, H. A., & Kammeyer, K. C. W. (1980, May). The gainful employment of women with small children. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 41, 327-336. Gottman, J. M., & Porterfield, A. L. (1981, November). Communicative competence in the nonverbal behavior of married couples. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 41, 817-824. Gould, M. (1980). The new sociology. 11gns: Journal of Women in Culture and Sociegy, 1(3), 459-467. Greeley, A. M. (1971). Why can't they be like us?: America's White ethnic groups. New York: E.P. Dutton & Co., Inc. Gubrium, J. F. (1988, February). Family responsibility and caregiving in the qualitative analysis of the azheimer's disease experience. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 11, 197-207. Gully, K. J., Dengerink, H. A., Pepping, M., & Begstrom, D. (1981, May). Reseach note: Sibling contribution to violent behavior. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 41, 333-337. Haas, L. (1981, November). Domestic role sharing in Sweden. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 41, 957-967. .Harbin, H. T., & Madden, D. J. (1979). Battered parents: A new syndrome. American Journal Psychiatry, 136(10), 1288-1291. 216 Hartup, W. W. (1978). Perspectives on child and family interaction: Past, present and future. In R. M. Lerner, & G. B. Spanier (Eds.), Child influences on marital and family interaction: A life-span perspective (pp. 23-46). New York: Academic Press. Heckert, A., & Teachman, J. D. (1985, May). Religious factors in the timing of second births. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 41, 361-368. Heer, D. M. (1963, May). The measurement and bases of family power. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 11, 133-139. Heiskanen, v. S. (1971, February). The myth of the middle-class family in American family sociology. The American Sociologist, 1, 14-18. Hess, B. B., & Markson, E. W. (1980). Aging and old age. An 1ntroduction to social gerontology. New York: Macmillan Publishing Co., Inc. Hicks, M., & Platt, M. (1970, August). Marital happiness and stability: A review of the research in the sixties. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 11, 553-574. Hill, R. (1951). Interdisciplinary workshop on marriage and family research. Marriage and Family Living, 11, 13-28. Hill, R. (1964). Methodological issues in family development research. Family process, 1, 186-205 Hill, R., Foote, N., Mangus, A. R., Polak, 0., & Leslie, G. (1957, February). Appraising progress in research. Marriage and Family Living, 11, 89-108. Hill, R., & Hansen, D. A. (1960, November). The identification of conceptual frameworks utilized in family study. Marriage and Family Living, 11, 299-311. Hill, R. (1981, May). Whither family research in the 19805: Continuities, emergents, constraints, and new horizons. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 41, 255-257. Hock, E., Gnezda, M. T., & McBride, S. L. (1984, May). Mothers of infants: Attitudes toward employment and motherhood following birth of the first child. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 41, 425-432. Hodgson, J. W., a Lewis, R. A. (1979, June). Pilgrim's progress III: A trend analysis of family theory and methodology. Family Process, 11, 163-173. (D Hoelt m ’u‘. '4 Hoffna I Holfo: i Holma: I S HolmaJ i Holst House HOUSE 30118! HUan Ihi: 217 Hoelter, J., & Harper, L. (1987, February). Structural and interpersonal family influences on adolescent self-conception. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 41, 129-139. Hoffman, L. W., & Nye, F. I. (1974). Working Mothers. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers. Holford, T. R. (1976, September). Life table with concomitant information. Biometrics, 11, 587-597. Holman, T. B., & Burr, W. R. (1980, November). Beyond the beyond: The growth of family theory in the 1970s. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 41, 729-741. Holman, T. B., & Jacquart, M. (1988, February). Leisure-activity patterns and marital satisfaction: A further test. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 11, 69-77. Holsti, O. R. (1969). Content analysis for the sgcial sciences and humanities. Philippines: Addison-Wesley Publishing Company. Houseknecht, S. K. (1987). Voluntarily childlessness. In M. B. Sussman, & S. K. Steinmetz, (Eds.), Handbook of Marriage and the Family (pp. 369-395). New York: Plenum Press. Houseknecht, S. K., & Macke, A. S. (1981, August). Combining marriage and career: The marital adjustment of professional women. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 41, 651-661. Houser, B. B., & Berkman, S. L. (1984, May). Aging parent/mature child relationships. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 41, 295-299. Huang, I. C. (1991). Family stress and coping. In S. J. Bahr (Ed.), Family research: A sixty-year review 1930-1990: Vol. 11 (pp. 289-334). New York: Lexington Books. .Hudson, W. W., & Mcintosh, S. R. (1981, November). The assessment of spouse abuse: Two quantifiable dimensions. »Journal of Marriage and the Family, 41, 873-885. Hundleby, J. D., & Mercer, G. w. (1987, February). Family and friends as social environments and their relationship to adolescents' use of alcohol, tobacco and marijuana. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 41, 151-164. Ihinger-Tallman, M. (1988). Research on stepfamilies. Annual Review Sociology, 14, 25-48. 218 Ihinger-Tallman, M., & Pasley, K. (1986, May). Remarriage and integration within the community. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 41, 395-405. Irish, D. P. (1964). Sibling interaction: A neglected aspect in family life research. Social Forces, 41(3), 279-288. Ishi-Kuntz, M., & Seccombe, K. (1989, August). The impact of children upon social support networks throughout the life course. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 11, 777-790. Jacob, T. (1975). Family interaction in disturbed and normal families: A methodological and substantive review. Psychological Bulletin, 11(1), 33-65. Jedlicka, D. (1984, February). Indirect parental influence on ' mate choice: A test of the psychoanalytic theory. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 41, 65-70. Jenkins, K. W. (1991). Religion and families. In S. J. Bahr (Ed.), Fam1ly research: A sixty-year reylew, 1930-1990: Vol. 1. (pp. 235-288). New York: Lexington Books. Jogev, S., & Brett, J. (1985, November). Perceptions of the division of housework and child care and marital satisfaction. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 41, 609-618. Johnson, C. L. (1988, February). Postdivorce reorganization of relationships between divorcing children and their parents. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 19, 221-231. Johnson, D. R. (1988, November). Panel analysis in family studies. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 19, 949-955. .Jones, A. P., & Butller, M. C. (1980, May). A role transition approach to the stresses of organizationaaly induced family role disruption. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 41, 367-376. .Jones, E., & Gallois, C. (1989, November). Spouse' impressions of rules for communication in public and private marital conflicts. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 11, 957-967. :norgensen, S. R., & Johnson, A. C. (1980, August). Correlates of divorce liberality. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 42, 617-626. ;norgensen, S. R., & Sonstegard, J. S. (1984, February). Predicting adolescent sexual and contraceptive behavior: An application and test of the Fishbein model. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 41, 43-55. 219 Kaats G. R., & Davis, K. E. (1971, February). Effects of volunteer biases in studies of sexual behavior and attitudes. The Journal of Sex Research, 1, 26-34. Kalmuss, D. S., & Straus, M. A. (1982, May). Wife's marital dependency and wife abuse. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 41, 277-286. Kalmuss, D., & Seltzer, J. A. (1986, February). Continuity of marital behavior in remarriage: The case of spouse abuse. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 41, 113-120. Kathri, A. A. (1980, February). Analysis of fiction - A method for intracultural and crosscultural study of family systems. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 41, 197-203. Katz, R., & Pesach, N. (1985, August). Adjustment to divorce in Israel: A comparison between divorced men and women. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 41, 765-771. IKaufman, D. R. (1985, August). Women who return to Orthodox Judaism: A feminist analysis. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 7, 543-552. :Kellam, S. G., Adams, R. F., Brown, C. H, & Ensminger, M. E. (1982, August). The long-term evolution of the family structure of teenage and older mothers. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 44, 539—554. :Kenkel, W. F. (1961, February). Sex of observer and spousal roles in decision making. Marriage and Family Living, 23, 185-186. lKenkel, W. F., & Hoffman, D. K. (1956, November). Real and conceived roles in family decision making. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 11, 311-316. lKennedy, L. W., & Stokes, D. W. (1982, May). Extended family support and the high cost of housing. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 41, 311-318. Ititano, H. H. L., Yeung, W. T., Chai, L., & Hatanaka, H. (1984, ‘ February). Asian-American interracial marriage. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 41, 179-190. Icitson, G. C., & Morgan, L. A. (1990, November). The multiple consequences of divorce: A decade review. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 11, 913-924. 220 Kitson, G. C., Sussman, M. B., Williams, G. K., Zeehandelaar, R. B., Schikmanter, B. K., & Steinberger, J. L. (1982, November). Sampling issues in family research. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 44, 965-981. Klein, J. F., Clavert, G. P., Garland, T. N., & Poloma, M. M. (1969, November). Pilgrim's progress I: Recent developments in family theory. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 11, 677-687. Knoke, D., & Burke, P. (1980). LogeLinear Models. Beverly Hill, CA: Sage. Kohn, M. L. (1959, January). Social class and parental values. American Journal of Sociology, LXIV, 337-352. Kohn, M. L. (1963). Social class and parent child relationship: An interpretation. American Journal of Sociology, LXVIII(JanuarY). 471-480. Komarovsky, M., & Waller W. (1945, July). Studies of the family. The American Journal of Sociology, 11, 443-451. Labov, T., & Jacobs, J. A. (1986, February). Intermarriage in Hawaii, 1950-1983. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 41, ‘79-'88 o Lambert, A. M. (1986, November). Being a stepparent: Live-in and visiting stepchildren. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 41, 795-804. Larson, R. W. (1983, November). Adolescents daily experience with family and friends: Contrasting opportunity systems. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 41, 739-750. LaRossa, R., & Wolf, J. H. (1985, August). On qualitative family research. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 47, 531-541. Larzelere, R. E., & Klein, D. M. (1987). Methodology. In M. B. Sussman and S. K. Steinmetz (Eds.), Handbook of Marriage and the Family (pp. 125-155). New York: Plenum Press. Lavee, Y. (1986, November 3). The use, non-use and misuse 9f contemporary family theories in empirical research. Paper presented at Theory Construction and Research Methodology Workshop. NCFR Annual Conference, Dearborn, MI. jLavee, Y. (1988, November). Linear structural relationships (LISREL) in family research. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 19, 937-948. t4 L“! 221 Lee, G. R. (1980, November). Kinship in the seventies: A decade review of research and theory. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 41, 923-934. Lee, G. R. (1988, November). Marital satisfaction in later life. The effects of nonmarital roles. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 11, 775-783. Lee, G. R., & Stone, L. H. (1980, May). Mate selection systems and criteria: Variation according to family structure. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 41, 319-326. Lee, S. M. (1988, February). Intermarriage and ethnic relations in Singapore. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 11, 255-266. Leigh, G. (1982, February). Kinship interaction over the family life span. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 41, 197-208. Lewis, R. A., Spanier, G. B. (1979). Theorizing about the quality and stability of marriage. In W. R. Burr, R. Hill, F. I. Nye, & I. L. Reiss (Eds.), Contemporarythepgies about Ehe family: Vol. I. (pp. 268-294). New York: The Free Press. Lobdell, J., Perlman, D. (1986, August). The intergenerational transmission of loneliness: A study of college females and their parents. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 41, 589-595. Lopata, H. z. (1978, May). Contributions of extended families to the support systems of Metropolitan area widows: Limitations of the modified kin network. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 49, 355-364. Lowenstein, A. (1984, August). Coping with stress: The case of prisoners' wives. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 41, 699-708. Macklin, E. D. (1978). Cohabitation: Review of research on nonmarital cohabitation in the United States. In B. I. Murstein (Ed.), Exploging Intimate Life Styles (pp. 196-243). New York: Springer Publishing Company. Macklin, E. D. (1980, November). Nontradiitonal family forms: A decade of research. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 41, 905-922. Macklin, E. D. (1987). Nontraditional family forms. In M. B. Sussman & S. K. Steinmetz (Eds.), Handbook of Marriage and the Family (pp. 317-353). New York: Plenum Press. 222 Mancini, J. A., & Blieszner, R. (1989, May). Aging parents and adult children: Research themes in intergenerational Relationships. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 11, 275-290. Mahoney, E.R. (1978, January). Gender and social class difference in changes in attitudes toward premarital coitus. Sociology and Social Research, 11, 279-286. Makabe, T. (1980, February). Provincial variations in divorce rates: A Canadian case. Journal of Marriage and the Family, _4_2, 171-176. Maret, E., & Finlay, B. (1984, May). The distribution of household labor among women in dual-earner families. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 41, 357-364. Marsiglio, W. (1988, May). Commitment to social fatherhood. Predicting adolescent males' intentions to live with their child and partner. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 11, 427-441. Maslow, A.H., & Sakoda, J.M. (1952). Volunteer error in the Kinsey study. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 41(2), 259-267. Matthews, 3. H., & Rosner, T. T. (1988, February). Shared filial responsibility: The family as the primary caregiver. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 19, 185-195. McCandless, N. J., Lueptow, L. B., & McClendon, M. K. (1989, August). Family socioeconomic status and adolescent sex—typing. Journal of Marriage and the Family 11, 627-635. McCubbin, H. I., Cauble, A. E., & Patterson, J. M. (1982). Family stress, coping, and social support. Illinois: Charles Thomas. McCubbin, H. I., McCubbin, M. A., Patterson, J. M., Cauble, A. E., Wilson, L. R., Warwick, W. (1983, May). CHIP - COping health inventory for parents: An assessment of parental coping patterns in the care of the chronically ill child. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 41, 359-370. McCready, w. C. (1974). The persistence of ethnic variation in American families. In A. M. Greely (Ed.), Ethnicity in the United States: A preliminary reconnaissance. New York: John Wiley and Sons. MCC MC MC Me M11 MOQ 223 McCubbin, H. I., Joy, C. B., Cauble A. E., Comeau, J. K., Patterson, J. M., & Needle, R. H. (1980, Novembner). Family stress and coping: A decade Review. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 41, 855-871. McDonald, G. W. (1980a, November). Family power: The assessment of a decade of theory and research, 1970-1979. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 41, 841-854. McDonald, G. W. (1980b, May). Parental power and adolescents' parental identification: A reexamination. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 41, 289-296. McIntyre, J. (1981). The structure-functional approach to family study. In F. I. Nye & F. M. Berardo (Eds.), Emerging conceptual frameworks in family analysis (pp. 52-77). New York: Praeger Publishers. McLanahan, S. S. (1983, May). Family structure and stress: A longitudinal comparison of two-parent and female-headed families. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 41, 347-357. McLanahan, S. S., & Booth, K. (1989, August). Mother-only families: Problems, prospects, and politics. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 11, 557-580. Menaghan, E. G., & Lieberman, M. A. (1986, May). Changes in depression following divorce: A panel study. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 41, 319-328. Menaghan, E. G., & Parcel, T. L. (1990, November). Parental employment and family life: Research in the 19803. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 11, 1079-1098. Miller, B. C., & Moore, K. A. (1990, November). Adolescent sexual behavior, pregnancy, and parenting: Research through the 19805. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 11, 1025-1044. Miller, B. C., Rollins, B. C., & Thomas, D. L. (1982, November). On methods of studying marriages and families. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 44, 851-873. Minturn, L., & Lambert, W. (1968). Motherhood and child rearing. In N. W. Bell & E. F. Vogel (Eds.) A modern introduction to the family (pp. 551-557). New York: The Free Press. Moen, P., & Dempster-McClain, D. I. (1987, August). Employed parents: Role strain, work time, and preferences for workingless. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 41, 579-590. 224 Mogey, J. (1969). Sociology of marriage and family behavior 1957-1968. Current Sociology, 11, 5-51. Mogey, J. M. (1969, May). Research on the family: The search for world trends. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 31, 225-232. Morgan, B. S. (1981, November). A contribution to the debate on homogamy, propinquity, and segregation. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 41, 909-921. Morgan, L. A. (1984, May). Changes in family interaction following widowhood. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 46, 323-331. Morgan, S. P., & Teachman, J. D. (1988, Novembner). Logistic regression: Description, examples, and comparisons. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 11, 929-936. Morrow, K. B., & Sorell, G. T. (1989, August). Factors affecting self-esteem, depression, and negative behaviors in sexualy abused female adolescents. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 11, 677-686. Moss, J. J., Apolonio, F., & Jensen, M. (1971). The premarital dyad during the sixties. In C. B. Broderick (Ed.), A decade of family research andjaction 1969-1969 (pp. 39-58). Minneapolis: National Council of Family Relations. Murstein, B. I. (1980, November). Mate selection in the 19705. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 41, 777—792. Nathanson, C. A., & Becker, M. H. (1986, August). Family and peer influence on obtaning a method of contraception. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 41, 513-526. Nichols-Casebolt, A. (1986, November). The economic impact of child support reform on the poverty status of custodial families. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 41, 875-880. Nimkoff, M. F. (1948, May). Trends in family research. The American Journal of Sociology, 53, 477-482. Nock, S. L., & Kingston, P. W. (1984, May). The family work day. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 41, 333-343. Noller, P., & Fitzpatrick, M. A. (1990, November). Marital communication in the eighties. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 11, 832-843. 225 Nye, F. I. (1979). Choice, exchange, and the family. In w. R. Burr, R. Hill, F. I. Nye, & I. L. Reiss (Eds.), Contemporary Eheories about the family. Vol. II. (pp. 1-41). New York: The Free Press. Nye, F. I. (1988, May). Fifty years of family research, 1937-1987. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 14, 305-316. Nye, F. I., & Bayer, A. E. (1963). Some recent trends in family research. Social Forces, 4, 290-301. Nye, F. I., & Berardo, F. M. (1981). Emerging_conceptual frameworks in family analysis. New York: Praeger. O'Bryant, S. L. (1988, February). Sibling support and older widow's well-being. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 11, 173-183. Osmond, M. W. (1980, November). Cross-societal family research: A macrosociological overview of the seventies. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 41, 995-1016. Otto, L. B. (1975, May). Class and status in family research. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 11, 315-332. Pasley, K., & Ihinger-Tallman, M. (1987). Remarriage and stepparenting: Current research and theory. New York: Guilford Press. Peck, C. E., Bell, N. J., Waldren, T., & Sorell, G. T. (1988, November). Patterns of functioning in families of remarried and first-married couples. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 11, 699—708. Pedhazur, E. J. (1982). Multiple regression in behavioral research, explanation and prediction (2nd. ed.). New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston. Peek, C. W., & Fischer, J. L. (1985, November). Teenage violence toward parents: A neglected dimension of family violence. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 41, 1051-1058. Peters, M. F. (1978, November). Notes from the guest editor. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 41, 655-658. Petersen, L, R., Lee, G. R., & Ellis, G. J. (1982, February). Social structure, socialization values, and disciplinary techniques: A cross-cultural analysis. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 44, 131-142. 226 Piotrkowski, C. S., Rapoport, R. N., & Rapoport, R. (1987). Families and work. In M. B. Sussman and S. K. Steinmetz (Eds.), Handbook of marriage and the family (pp. 251-283). New York: Plenum Press. Pistrang, N. (1984, May). Women's work involvement and experience of new motherhood following birth of the first child. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 41, 433-347. Pittman, J. F., & Orthner, D. K. (1988, May). Predictors of spousal support for the work commitments of husbands. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 19, 335—348. Price-Bonham, S., & Balswick, J. O. (1980, November). The noninstitutions: Divorce, desertion, and remarriage. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 41, 959-972. Rank, M. R. (1982, August). Determinants of conjugal influence in wive's employment decision making. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 44, 591-604. Rank, M. R. (1986, August). Family structure and the process of exiting from welfare. Journal of Marriage and the Family, Raschke, H. J. (1987). Divorce. In M. B. Sussman 8 s. K. Steinmetz (Eds.), Handbook 9f Marriage and the Family (pp. 597-624). New York: Plenum Press. Reiss, I. L. (1966, April). The sexual renaissance: A summary and analysis. Journal of Social issues, 11, 123-137. Rettig, K., Bubolz, M. M. (1983, May). Interpersonal resource exchanges as indicators of quality of marriage. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 41, 497-509. Rexroat, C., & Shehan, C. (1987, November). The family lice-cycle and spouses' time in housework. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 41, 737-750. Robertson, J. F., & Simons, R. L. (1989, February). Family factors, self-esteem, and adolescent depression. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 11, 125-138. Robbins, C., Kaplan, H. B., & Martin, S. S. (1985, August). Antecedents of pregnancy among unmarried adolescents. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 41, 567-583. Robinson, I. E., King, K., Balswick, J. O. (1972, April). The premarital sexual revolution among college females. Family Coordinator, 11, 189-194. ’x) (f) (0 227 Rodman, H., & Pratto, D. J. (1987, August). Child's age and mother's employment in relation to greater use of self-care arrangements for children. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 41, 573-578. Rosenthal, C. (1985, November). Kinkeeping in the familial division of labor. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 41, 965-974. Ross, C. E., Mirowsky, J., & Goldsteen, K. (1990, November). The impact of the family on health: The decade in review. Journal of Marriege and the Family, 11, 1059-1078. Ruano, B. J., Bruce, J. D., & McDermott, M. M. (1969, November). Pilgrim's progress II: Recent trends and prospects in family research. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 11, 688-698. Saenz, R., Goudy, W. J., & Lorenz, F. O. (1989, February). The effects of employment and marital relations on depression among Mexican-American women. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 11, 239-251. Sander, W. (1985, May). The economic aspects of single parenthood in Chicago. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 47, 497-502. Safilios-Rothschild, C. (1969, May). Family sociology of wives' family sociology? A cross-cultural examination of decision making. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 11, 290-301. Safilios-Rothschild, C. (1971). The study of family power structure: A review 1960-1969. In C. B. Broderick (Ed.), A decade of family research and action 1960-1969 (pp. _ 187-214). Minneapolis: National Council of Family Relations. Scanzoni, J. (1965). A note on the sufficiency of wife responses in family research. Pacific Sociological Review, 1, (Fall), 109-115. Scanzoni, J., & Fox, G. L. (1980, November). Sex'roles, family and society: The seventies and beyond. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 41, 743-756. Schaninger, C. M., & Buss, w. C. (1986, February). A longitudinal comparison of consumption and finance handling between happily married and divorced couples. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 41, 129-136. Scheirer, M. A. (1983, November). Household structure among welfare families: Correlates and consequences. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 41, 761-771. 228 Schneider, D. M., & Smith, R. T. (1973). Class differences and sex roles in American kinship and family structure. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall Inc. Schoen, R., & Wooldredge, J. (1989, May). Marriage choices in North Carolina and Virginia, 1969-71 and 1979-81. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 11, 465—481. Schoenbach, C. (1985, August). Effects of husband's and wife's social status on psychological functioning. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 41: 597-607. Scott, J. P. (1990). Sibling interaction in later life. In T. H. Brubaker (Ed.), Family relationships in later life (2nd ed.) (pp. 86-99). California: Sage Publications. Seccombe, K. (1986, November). The effects of occupational conditions upon the division of houshold labor: An application of Kohn's theory. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 41, 839-848. Sewell, W. H., & Hauser, R. M. (1972). Causes and consequences of higher education: Models of the status attainment process. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 14(5), 851-861. Sexton, C. S., & Perlman, D. S. (1989, November). Couple's career orientation, gender role orientation, and perceived equity as determinants of marital power. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 11, 933-941. Shamir, B. (1986, February). Unemployment and household division of labor. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 41, 195-206. Shah, F., & Zelnik, M. (1981, May). Parent and peer influence on sexual behavior, contraceptive use, and pregnancy experience of young women. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 41, 339-348. Shanas, E. (1973, August). Family-kin-networks and aging in cross-cultural perspective. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 11, 505-511. Shukla, A. (1987, August). Decision making in single-and dual-career families in India. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 41, 621-629. Siegler, R. T. (1989). Domestic violence in context: An assessment of community attitudes. Massachusetts: Lexington Books. S] S] 229 Simmons, S., & Ball, S. E. (1984, November). Marital adjustment and self-actualization in couples married before and after spinal cord injury. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 41, 943-45. Smith, T. E. (1982, August). The case for parental transmission of educational goals: The importance of accurate offspring perceptions. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 44, 661—674. Snowden, L. R., Schott, T. L., Awalt, S. J., & Gillis-Knox, J. (1988, May). Marital satisfaction in pregnancy: Stability and change. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 50, 325-333. Spakes, P. (1982, August). Mandatory work registration for welfare parents: A family impact analysis. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 44, 685-699. Spanier, G. B. (1983, May). Married and unmarried cohabitation in the United States 1980. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 41: 277-288. Spanier, G. B., & Furstenberg F. F. Jr. (1987). Remarriage and reconsitute families. In M. B. Sussman & S. K. Steinmetz (Eds.), Handbook of Marriage and the Family (pp. 419-434). New York: Plenum Press. Spanier, G. B., & Lewis, R. A. (1980, November). Marital quality: A review of the seventies. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 41, 825-839. Spiegel, J. P. (1954, February). New perspectives in the study of the family. Marriage and Family Living, 11, 4-12. Spitze, G. (1988, November). Women's employment and family relations: A review. Journal of Marriage and the Family, §Q. 595-618. ' Stack, S. (1980, February). The effects of marital dissoluton on suicide. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 41, 83-92. Staples, R. (1971). Towards a sociology of the Black family: A theoretical and methodological assessment. In C. B. Broderick (Ed.), A decade of family research and action 1960-1969 (pp. 141-160). Minneapolis: National Council on Family Relations. Staples, R., & Mirande A. (1980, Novembner). Racial and cultural variations among American families: A decennial review of the literature on minority families. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 41, 887-903. 230 Steggell, G. L., & Harper, J. M. (1991). Family interaction patterns and communication processes. In S. J. Bahr (Ed.), Family research: A sixty-year review, 1930-1990: Vol. I. (pp. 97-170). New York: Lexington Books. Steinberg, L., & Silverberg, S. B. (1987, Novembner). Influences on marital satisfaction during the middle stages of the family life-cycle. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 41, 751-760. Steinmetz, S. K. (1978, July-August). Battered parents. Steinmetz, S. K. (1987). Family violence: Past, present and future. In M. B. Sussman & S. K. Steinmetz (Eds.), Handbook 9f Marriage and the Family (pp. 725-765). New York: Plenum Press. Stephan, C. W., & Corder, J. (1985, November). The effects of dual-career families on adolescent's sex-role attitude, work, and family plans, and choices of important others. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 11, 921-929. Stevens, 6., & Schoen, R. (1988, February). Linguistic intermarriage in the United States. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 11, 267-285. Stoller, E. P. (1985, May). Exchange patterns in the informal support networks of the elderly: The impact of reciprocity on morale. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 41, 335-342. Straus, M. A., & Gelles, R. J. (1986, May). Societal change and change in family violence from 1975-1985 as revealed by two National survyes. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 41, 465-479. Straus, M. A. & Gelles. R. J. (1990). Physical violence in American family:ijisk factors and adaptations to violence in 8,145 Families. New Brunswick: Transaction Publishers. Straus, M. A., Gelles, R. J., & Steinmetz, S. K. (1980). Behind closed doors: Violence in the American family. New Yor : Anchor Press. Streib, G. F., & Beck, R. W. (1980, November). Older families: A decade review. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 41, 937-955. 231 Strube, M. J., & Barbour, L. S. (1983, November). The decision to leave an abusive relationship: Economic dependency and psychological commitment. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 41, 785-793. Strube, M. J., & Barbour, L. S. (1984, November). Factors related to the decision to leave an abusive relationship. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 41, 837-844. Stryker, S. (1964). The interactional and situational approaches. In H. T. Christensen (Ed.), Handbook_of Marriage and the Family (pp. 125-170). Chicago: Rand McNally Company. Suitor, J. J., & Pillemer, K. (1987, November). The presence of adult children: A source of stress for elderly couples' marriages?. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 49, 717-725. Surra, C. A. (1990, November). Research and theory on mate selection and premarital relationships in the 19805. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 11, 844-865. Szinovacz, M. E. (1987). Family power. In M. B. Sussman & S. K. Steinmetz (Eds.), Handbook of Marriage and the Family (pp. 651-693). New York: Plenum Press. Tanfer, K. (1987, May). Patterns of premarital cohabitation among never—married women in the United States. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 41, 483-97. Taylor, R. J., Chatters, L. M., Tucker, M. B., & Lewis, B. (1990, November). Developments in research on Black families: A decade review. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 2, 993-1014. Thomas, D. L., & Cornwall, M. (1990, November). Religion and family in the 19805: Discovery and development. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 11, 983-992. Thomas, D. L., & Wilcox, J. E. (1987). The rise of family theory. A historical and critical analysis. In M. B. Sussman & S. K. Steinmetz (Eds.), 11ndbookygf Marriage and the Family (pp. 81-102), New York: Plenum Press. Thomas, K., & Wister, A. (1984, May). Living arrangements of older women: The ethnic dimension. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 41, 301-311. Thompson, L., & Walker, A. J. (1989, November). Women and men in marriage, work, and parenthood. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 11, 845-871. 232 Thomson, E. (1980, February). The value of employment to mothers of young children. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 41, 551-566. Thornton, A., & Camburn, D. (1989, November). Religious participation and adolescent sexual behavior and attitudes. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 11, 641-653. Toney, M. B., Golesorkhi, B., & Stinner, W. F. (1985, May). Residence exposure and fertility expectations of young Mormon and non-Mormon women in Utah. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 41, 459-465 Trimberger, R., & MacLean, M. J. (1982, May). Maternal emplyoment: The child's perspective. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 44, 469-475. Troll, L. E. (1971). The family of later life: A decade review. In C. B. Broderick (Ed.), A decade of family research and action1960-1111 (pp. 187-214). Minnesota: National Council on Family Relations. Trovato, F. (1986a, February). The relationship between marital dissolution and suicide: The Canadian case. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 41, 341-348. Trovato, F. (1986b, February). The relationship between migration and the provincial divorce rate in Canada, 1971 and 1978: A reassessment. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 41, 207-216. Ulbrich, P., & Huber, J. ( 1981, August). Observing parental violence: Distribution and effects. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 41, 623-631. U.S. Bureau of the Census, Statistical Abstract of the United States, 111 th ed. U.S. Department of Commerce Economics and Statistics Administration Bureau of the Census, 1991 U.S. Bureau of the Census, Historical Statistics of the gnited States, Colonial Time to 1970, Bicentennial Edition. Part I, Washington, D.C., 1975 Vega, W. A. (1990, November). Hispanic families in the 19805: A decade of research. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 11, 1015-1024. Velsor, E. V., & O'rand, A. M. (1984, May). Family life-cycle, work career patterns, and women's wages at midlife. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 41, 365-373. 233 Vemer, E., Coleman, M., Ganong, L. H., & Cooper, H. (1989, August). Marital satisfaction in remarriage: A meta-analysis. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 11, 713-725. Verbrugge, L. M. (1985). Women and men: Mortality and health of older people. In B. B. Hess & E. W. Markson (Eds.), Growing Old 1n Amerige. New Perspectives on 91d Age (3rd ed.) (pp. 181-205). New Brunswick: Transaction Books. Voydanoff, P. (1990, November). Economic distress and family relations: A review of the eighties. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 11, 1099-1115. Vuchinich, S., & Teachman, J. (1991, November). Families and hazards rates that change over time: Some methodological issues in analyzing transitions. Journal of Marriage and the Family. £3, 898-912. Waldron, H., & Routh, D. K. (1981, November). The effects of the first child on the marital relationship. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 41, 785-788. Walker, A. J. & Thompson, L. (1983, November). Intimacy and intergenerational aid and contact among mothers and daughters. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 41, 841-849. Walters, J., & Walters, L. H. (1980, November). Parent-child relationships: A review, 1970-1979. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 41, 807-822. Ward, D. A. (1981, November). The influence of family relationships on social and pyschological functioning: A follow up study. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 41, 807—815. Warner, R. L., Lee, G. R., & Lee, J. (1986, February). Social organization, spousal resources, and marital power: A cross-cultural study. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 48, 121-128. Weingarten, H. R. (1985, August). Marital status and well-being: A National study comparing first-married, currently divorced, and remarried Adults. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 41, 653-662. Weller, L., & Rofe, J. (1988, May). Marital happiness among mixed and homogeneous marriages in Israel. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 11, 245-54. 234 Whelpton, P. S., Campbell, A. A., Patterson, E. (1966). gertility and family planninglin the United States. New Jersey: Princeton Unlversity Press. White, J. M. (1987, August). Premarital cohabitation and marital stability in Canada. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 41, 641-647. White, L. K. (1990, November). Determinants of divorce: A review of research in the eighties. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 11, 904-912 Whitbeck, L. B., & Gecas, V. (1988, August). Value attributions and value transmission between parents and children. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 11, 829-940. Wilkinson, D. (1987). Ethnicity. In M. B. Sussman & S. K. Steinmetz (Eds.), Handbook of Marriage and the Family (pp. 183-210). New York: Plenum Press. Wilkinson, K. P., Reynolds, R. R. Jr., Thompson, J. G., Ostresh, L. M. (1983, May). Divorce and recent net migration into the old west. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 4_5_, 437-446. Wilkinson, M. L., & Tanner, W. C. III. (1980, May). The influence of family size, interaction, and religiosity on family affection in a Mormon sample. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 41, 297-304. Woehrer, C. E. (1978, October). Cultural pluralism in American families: The influence of ethnicity on social aspects of aging. Family Coordinator, 11, 329-339. Wood, W. (1987). Meta-analysis review of sex differences in group performance. Psychological Bulletin, 102(1), 53-71. Wright, D. W. & Price, S. J. (1986, November). Court-ordered child support payment: The effect of the former-spouse relationships on compliance. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 41, 869-874. Wright, S. A., & Piper, E. S. (1986, February). Families and cults: Familial factors related to youth leaving and remaining in deviant religious groups. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 41, 15-25. Zelnik, M., & Kantner, J. (1977, March/April). Sexual and contraceptive experience of young unmarried women in the United States, 1966-1971. Family Planning Perspectives, 9, 55-73. STRTE UNIV. LIBRR MICHIGAN IIIIIWIIWII NW 312 ll! nu1|qu11301“ 930089 86 5