. . n.
£1»

kt
. 3!. 9-...“ .

(5301.19.21. ... 3. .
II {4.1.1. u".

.1 ... . . ‘00“? L
lmwhHfiamusWW

I I. > o ’02;
iguarebs... in.

 

 

. . {3.1.15th

6%.“qu “Hm...” tutti:
P ...... . \

go?- ICJI'IIi'éd

Jig-5:!!! .
4}.) ‘-
r111: w. : 1 Al... 2
. .29.!» 3......

' 11.4 It: .

03...! .

. o} .454}! SC
glvgfiuflli
! cl Ileo 1....vliit d
3‘13-‘63;
:01!

... 1 [All I
...
, . ;§bfim
. ...2..... in
. . . . . ......uxumua.
. ......2.z. .
3 'III‘ Iv .

1
. v. . (1-.....I'r- .1116 all. Q!
. i: . til 1

..‘r....n7

$43103:

 

. , .. v . _ .. . . I I . .bdl.‘.|k 3099190 2 .. cu.

. . ... . .. .Ihr . .. .1: .. . .t. .. I “Jaw I {‘13: . . : .Of.v. SLAP-{5.2.2.5 ...... .1). .. .-.o . f .
. I 3).Iao‘.l..n.u . \ in ...... :..2. Hi) .I . ‘ . . . p. . 1 . .. . . 1 4 .
«Hfl.wJullvulv§.l.olV 1.... . .. , .. a. y . .

 

   
   

III: III. | l ' ‘llll:
Illll‘ ‘. I.|\ ll

ID" . ”-

HIGAN TATE NNER lTY LIBRA l

illllillllllllllll lull film I lulu ”

3 1293 00910 1795

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

This is to certify that the

dissertation entitled

RELATIONSHIP OF GENDER TO FAMILY AND
PARENT CARE CONCERNS IN RETIREMENT
PLANNING BY SINGLE MEN AND WOMEN

presented by ' 54-. I ..
Phyllis Ellen Greenberg Gendler “"'

has been accepted towards fulfillment
of the requirements for

Doctor of Philosophy degreein Family Ecology

Professor Lawrence B. Schiambergi
Major professor

 

 

 

 

MSU is an Affirmatiwp Action/Equal Opportunity Institution 0-12771

 

 

LIBRARY
Michigan State
Unlverslty

 

U
l
1—

PLACE IN RETURN BOX to remove this checkout from your record.
TO AVOID FINES return on or before date due.

DATE DUE DATE DUE DATE DUE

fl. r————j
__lL __J
——I

MSU Is An Affirmative Actlon/Equel Opportunity Institution
cMMprna-pA

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

RELATIONSHIP OF GENDER TO FAMILY AND PARENT CARE CONCERNS
IN RETIREMENT PLANNING BY SINGLE MEN AND WOMEN

BY

Phyllis Ellen Greenberg Gendler

A DISSERTATION

Submitted to
Michigan State University
In partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree of

DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY

Department of Family and Child Ecology

1993

ABSTRACT

RELATIONSHIP OF GENDER TO FAMILY AND PARENT CARE CONCERNS IN
RETIREMENT PLANNING BY SINGLE MEN AND WOMEN

BY

Phyllis Ellen Greenberg Gendler

The purpose of this research was to examine differences
between single men and women regarding their concerns for
family and parent care in retirement planning. While the
unmarried will be a larger part of the aged population, they
have been studied minimally in relationship to both
retirement issues and parent care. Women are more often the
care-givers in the family for not only the children but also
aging parents. We need to better understand the special
needs and processes for women during the retirement phase of
life particularly related to family and parent care
issues.

The sample were single subjects and came from the
Research Project (W-176) titled, "Housing and Locational
Retirement Decisions: A Study of Preretirees in Four States"
There were 70 men and 112 women. Selected portions of the

mailed questionnaire were analyzed. The major dependent

variables were retirement concerns about family and parent
care. Also included were concerns about physical and
sociocultural environment.

Data analysis demonstrated significant differences
between men and women on the family concerns scores using
Mann Whitney U. There were no significant differences using
Mann Whitney U and ANOVA techniques with the parent care
measures. Correlation coefficients between the proposed
intervening variables and the dependent variables suggested
that analyses using multiple regression and/or ANCOVA would
provide little further understanding. Unexpected findings
occurred with the environmental dependent variables. While
there were no significant differences between men and women
on the physical environment variable, there were differences
on the sociocultural variables.

This study demonstrated areas where there are
differences between single men and women as they consider
retirement. Therefore, we need to rethink our previous
understanding of retirement as a genderless issue. We need
to consider family concerns and some sociocultural concerns
for women. Women also need to be more cognizant of parent
care responsibilities in retirement planning. 'This research
adds to the understanding of women's development expanding
theories of moral development. Women, in their later years,
value family relationships highly and this affects decision

making in retirement planning.

Copyright by
PHYLLIS ELLEN GENDLER
1993

I dedicate this dissertation to my
husband, Harvey, my best friend for 34 years.
He has always encouraged me and made me

feel that I could do anything.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

I would like to acknowledge and thank my committee
members for their help in my completing this dissertation
and Ph.D. My experiences with Dr. Margaret Bubolz convinced
me of the value of this doctoral program. As chair of my
program committee and teacher, she stimulated my thinking
and facilitated my progression within the program. Dr.
Sharon King cheerfully joined my committee and brought a
much appreciated nursing perspective as well as her
expertise in gerontology. Dr. Joyce Ladenson helped me
design the women's studies minor and expanded my interest
and understanding of feminist thought. Dr. Linda Nelson
fostered my interest in qualitative methods and furthered my
understanding of theory development. Dr. Lawrence
Schiamberg generously shared his research on retirement,
from which I developed this dissertation, and patiently
directed and encouraged me along the way as I wrote.

I am also indebted to Verna Lee and John R. Hildebrand
for the Dissertation Fellowship awarded to me to assist with

expenses. Not only did the money help with the myriad of

vi

expenses associated with the research, but it was also an
honor to have my dissertation recognized as an important
affirmative action topic by not only the Family and Child
Ecology Department but also Women's Studies.

I also want to thank my family from which I gained
insights about this dissertation topic and the role of

family in a woman's life.

vii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

LIST OF TABLESOOOOOOOOOOOOO.........OOOOOOOO......OOOOOOix
LIST OF FIGURESOOOO.....OOOOOOOOOOOOOOO0.0.0.0....OOOOOOXi

CHAPTER ONE -- INTRODUCTION..............................1
Statement of the Problem............................1
Purpose of Research.................................2
-Research Objectives.................................6

CHAPTER TWO -- REVIEW OF LITERATURE......................8
Retirement Process..................................8
Family Relationships in Later Life.................18
Parent Care Concerns...............................23
Gender.............................................33
Summary of Retirement Research.....................37
An Emerging Theoretical Framework..................37
Research Questions.................................40

CHAPTER THREE -- METHODOLOGY AND PROCEDURE..............42
Sampling Procedures................................43
Demographic Characteristics of Sample..............45
Research Design....................................52
Operational Definitions of the Research Variables..53

Independent Variables.........................53
Dependent Variables...........................56
Research Assumptions...............................60
Research Hypotheses................................60
Instrumentation....................................62
Statistical Hethods................................66

CHAPTER FOUR -- RESULTS.................................69
Organization of Data Analysis......................69
Descriptive Analysis...............................70
Summary of Preliminary Analysis....................80
Test of Hypotheses.................................81

Hypothesis 1.................................81
Hypothesis 2.................................83
Hypothesis 3............... .......... ........84
Hypothesis 4.................................86
Hypothesis 5.................................87
Hypothesis 6.................................89
Hypothesis 7.................................91
Hypothesis 8.................................93
Hypothesis 9.................................95
Hypothesis 10.................................96

viii

CHAPTER FIVE -- DISCUSSION, IMPLICATIONS, AND

CONCLUSIONS.............................98

Brief Description of the Study.....................98
Demographic Findings..............................100
marital statuSOOOOOOOOO0.0.0.00.0000000000000100
AgeOOOOOOOOIOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO0.0I...0.0.0.000100
Subjects' Health.............................101
IncomeOOOO......OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO00.0.0000000101
Parents' Dependency..........................101
Current Assistance to Parents................102
Educational Level............................103
Discussion of Hypotheses..........................103
HYPOthe818 IOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO00.00.00.0000103
HYPOtheSis ZOOOOIOOOOOOOOOOO0.0.0.0.00000000104
Hypothesis 3................................105
HYPOtheSj-s 4....0.000.000.00000.0.00.0000000108
HYPOtheSis 5..........O0.0.00000000000000000109
Hypothesis 6................................111
HYPOtheSis 7.0.0.0000000000000000......0.00.112
HYPOtheSis aOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO0.0.0.000000000113
Hypothesis 9................................114
HYpOtheSis 10....O......0.0.00.00000000000000115
Summary of Discussion.............................116
LimitatiODSOOOO0.0.0.0.000...0.00.00.00.0000000000116
Implications for Future Research..................117
Policy Implications...............................119
Implications for Theory Development...............120
COhCluSions.0.0.00.......OOOOOOOOOOOOOOO...0.0.0.0122

LI ST OF REFMCES O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 12 3
GENERAL REFERENCES O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 127
APPENDICES.0.0......00............OOOOOOOOOOOOOO0.0.00.129

Appendix A - Copy of Questionnaire................129
Appendix B - UCRIHS Approval Letter...............141

ix

Table
Table
Table
Table
Table
Table
Table
Table
Table
Table

Table
Table
Table
Table
Table
Table
Table

Table
Table
Table
Table
Table
Table
Table
Table

Table
Table

Table
Table

Table
Table

Table
Table

ommflmthNH
co to ea 00 co co on on no on

27:
29:
30:
31:

33:

LIST OF TABLES

Extent Thinking About Retirement Q-l. ...... .....46
Marital Status Q-33.............................46
Age Q-380000000ooeeeeooooeeooeoooeooeoooo000000048
Summary of ANOVA for Age........................48
Employment Status Q-39..........................49
Occupation Q-40.................................SO
Highest Level of Education Q-41.................51
Income Q-4ZOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO......OOOOOOOOOOOOSZ
Variables.......................................54
Alpha Reliabilities for Parent Care Influence,
Economics and Safety, Convenience, and Personal
Enrichment......................................66
Subject's Health................................70
Mann-Whitney U for Subject's Health and Gender..71
Parents' Dependency....... ..... ....... ...... ....72
Summary of ANOVA for Parents' Dependency........72
Mann-Whitne U for Income and Gender............73
Current Assistance to Parents...................74
Mann-Whitney U for Current Assistance to Parents
and Gender......................................75
Mann-Whitney U for Educational Level and Gender.76
Zero-order Correlations of Variables............78
Family Proximity................................82
Mann-Whitney U for Family Proximity and Gender..82
Family Influence on Retirement Dec sions........83
Mann-Whitney U for Family Influence and Gender..84
Parent Care Influence on Retirement Decisions...85
Mann-Whitney U for Parent Care Influence and
GenderOOOOOOO00.00.0000...0.00.00.00.00000000000BS
Move Parent to Care Facility....... ...... .......86
Mann-Whitney U for Move Parent to Care Facility
and Gender......................................87
Move Parent to My Home..........................87
Summary of ANOVA for Move Parent to My Home and
Gender..........................................88
Anticipated Assistance to Parents...............90
Mann-Whitney U for Anticipated Assistance and
Gender................................. ...... ...90
Physical Environment............................92
Summary of ANOVA for Physical Environment and
Gender..........................................92

Table
Table

Table
Table
Table
Table

34:
35:

36:
37:
38:
39:

Economics and Safety............................94
Mann-Whitney U for Economics and Safety and

Gender..................... ......... . ........... 94
Convenience... ............... ... ....... .... ..... 95
Summary of ANOVA for Convenience and Gender.....96
Personal Enrichment.. ....................... ...97

Mann-Whitney U for Personal Enrichment and
Gender.OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO0.0...00.00.000097

xi

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1: Pro osed model of interrationships of
var ableBOOOO.......OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO....O....0039

xii

CHAPTER ONE -- INTRODUCTION

Statement_9f_the_2rgblem

The American population is aging and therefore our
society is dealing with new concerns related to these
changing demographics. Planning for retirement is one major
issue in relation to our aging population. Social
scientists and theorists recognize the importance of
maintaining a view of the future as a resource in order to
manage difficult life events (Rakowski & Clark, 1985).
Antonovsky and Sagy (1990) proposed that the more one is
active and successful with the developmental tasks
associated with retirement, the more likely the retirement
transition will result in reintegratign. The best time to
plan for retirement may be the middle years (40-50);
however, this is the ”sandwich" generation when many other
responsibilities are primary, particularly for women who are
”in the middle” (Brody, 1990). People in their 50s do begin
to think about their retirement. Karp (1989) argued that
since retirement researchers view retirement as a process,
more detail is needed in research about the elements of the
process. Because of death of spouses, the unmarried will be
a large part of the aged population. They have been studied
minimally in relationship to both retirement issues and

parent care (Brody, 1990; Keith, 1985).

Women face unique challenges in the later years. Women
generally outlive men and they tend to have more acute and
chronic diseases (Verbrugge, 1984). Additionally, women
make less money than men throughout their working careers
(American Association of Retired Persons, 1989). Those
retiring in the near future will likely have at least one
parent still living, since increasing numbers of people are
living into their 803 and 908. Women are more often the
care-givers in the family for not only the children but also
aging parents (Abel, 1986; Brody, 1990; Brody & Schoonover,
1986; Finley, 1989; Horowitz, 1985). Brody (1990) so
eloquently stated how it is for women:

The first, most powerful, and over-arching theme, one

that appears and reappears for virtually all daughters

and daughter-in-law, is their fundamental acceptance
that parent care is a woman's role. Related to this
acceptance is their feeling that they are responsible
for more than performing the instrumental,
personal-care, and nursing tasks that are needed. The
, women also feel responsible for the emotional
well-being of the older people. Indeed, they often
feel responsible for the happiness of everyone in their

families (p. 79).

EBIRQ§§_QI_BEEQAIQD

This research addressed the special needs and processes
for women during the retirement phase of life, particularly
related to family and parent care issues. Moreover,

unmarried women will be a large part of the elderly

population. Therefore, the central purpose of this
investigation was to examine differences between single men
and women regarding their concerns for family and parent
care during retirement planning. Planning for retirement
can be understood within the context of lifespan human
development. Retirement creates changed circumstances for
individuals in relationship to their social, emotional,
psychological, intellectual, and biological wholeness
(Antonovsky & Sagy 1990). At this time in their lives,
values influence behavior as individuals make decisions
about their physical and sociocultural environment (Bubolz &
Sontag, 1993).

According to Gilligan (1982), women are very much
influenced by how their decisions will affect other people.
This ”caring" value is hypothesized to be a result of
cultural influences during their early development. Since
women, men, boys, and girls do not experience their family
in the same way, there is a gender basis to social and
cultural life (Thorne, 1982). Although women are concerned
about the human-constructed, natural, and sociocultural
environments, they are particularly concerned about other
people as they make retirement decisions. Women are
currently in the work-force in much larger numbers than in
the past and tend to live longer than men, frequently with
responsibilities for care of aging parents. Nonetheless,
there is relatively little in the research literature about
women and retirement. Notably absent from this research are

retirement issues related to family and household

responsibilities. Most retirement studies report findings
on men alone, particularly married men, or do not
differentiate findings by gender.

Gender is a very complex concept and, as Palmore,
Burchett, Fillenbaum, George, and Wallman (1985) suggested,
reflects a number of underlying biological and psychosocial
processes. Even though some differences associated with
gender may be explained by research methods that control for
social and economic influences, remaining differences in men
and women in the work force need to be identified and
understood.

Thompson (1987) recommended that feminists view women
as active agents in their lives. Two basic assumptions of
feminist theory are that women are oppressed, and society is
organized around gender. Women's personal experiences are
influenced by social, political, and economic systems of
society (Thompson). While feminists have been debating the
meaning of nurturance in women's lives, parent care has been
ignored (Abel, 1986). However, government policies that
provide support to caregivers of the elderly will affect
women adversely as they will encourage women to leave the
work force and reinforce their subordinate position in the
labor force (Abel).

Gender is used as a variable in this study to determine
if there are unique perceptions and needs which women tend
to exhibit as they think about retirement. It is not
possible to determine the stability of gender differences
over time because the data for the study are

cross-sectional. However, even cross-sectional data provide

a valuable opportunity to investigate retirement in relation
to women's issues. The assumption that we can understand
women and retirement based on studies on men needs to be
explored. In order to assist women with retirement
decisions and provide appropriate support for them, it is
necessary to understand the needs and concerns of women at
both the pre- and post-retirement phases of life.

The family ecological framework (Bubolz & Sontag, 1993)
integrated with Bronfenbrenner's (1979) human development
model provides a means for an understanding of these
issues. Bronfenbrenner conceptualized the systems
interacting with the developing individual as the
microsystem, mesosystem, exosystem and macrosystem (1979).
More recently he introduced the chronosystem as a concept
(1986). Bronfenbrenner originally focused on the young and
was concerned with the early development of the individual
which occurs primarily in the context of the family, a
microsystem. The mesosystem is the interacting of
microsystems that affect the developing individual. One can
envision concentric circles around the individual with the
outer layers having less direct interactions with the
individual yet still having an effect on the individual.
The next level is the exosystem which contains the more
formal structures in society like the legal system. The
most distant circle is the macrosystem in which the
ideologies or "blue-print" of the society interact with the
individual.

Both the family ecological framework (Bubolz & Sontag,
1993) and Bronfenbrenner's model view the individual
interacting with the environment. An assumption of the
family ecological framework is that the individual/family,
acting as a system, has goals and rules for interacting with
human made, natural and sociocultural environments. These
goals and rules reflect exosystem and macrosystem
influences. Decisions are made about how to use material
and psychic energy to meet individual/family goals.
Therefore, individuals/families have some control over their
destinies as they make decisions for their future (Bubolz &
Sontag).

For the individual planning retirement, the family
microsystem will influence decision making. There are also
laws (exosystem) that affect the timing of retirement and
financial resources available, such as social security
benefits and when annuities can be accessed. The individual
has been influenced his/her whole life by the ideologies in
our society (macrosystem) which have resulted in gender
differences. There have been different expectations and

experiences for women and men as has been explained.

W
Retirement is a normal developmental, ecological
transition (chronosystem) occurring in the later years of an
individual's life in an environment that has become
increasingly more complex. In order to understand the
independent effect of gender on retirement planning, it is

important to study women as unique individuals rather than

as part of a married couple (microsystem) planning for
retirement. The family (microsystem) does interact with the
individual at this time. Therefore, the main objective for
this study was to analyze differences between single men and
women regarding their concerns for family and parent care
during retirement planning. Since there is little in the
retirement literature about retirement of single men and
women, additional objectives of this study included:

1. Describing family and parent care retirement
concerns of single men and women.

2. Comparing single male and female respondents, mid-
and later-life, on family and parent care retirement
concerns to determine if concerns increase as one approaches
retirement.

3. Determining differences between single men and women
related to concerns about selected characteristics of the
physical and sociocultural environment during retirement
planning.

4. Analyzing the effect of health, income, educational
level and employment status on the retirement concerns

selected for this study.

CHAPTER TWO -- REVIEW OF LITERATURE

A discussion of the literature and research relevant to
an understanding of retirement planning is included in this
chapter. Retirement is conceptualized as a phase or
transition in life which includes a planning part of the
process. Some of the concerns that people consider during
planning for retirement include adequate retirement income
and when and if they should retire. Other issues include
health, happiness, activities during retirement, and death.
Although there are many losses with retirement, such as
income, structure of daily routine, social status, and
support, there are as likely to be positive outcomes as well
as these negative ones (Palmore et al., 1985).

Aspects of research on both family and parent care are
reviewed in this chapter, since this researcher hypothesizes
that these influence retirement planning differently for men
and women. Gender is also discussed as it relates to
retirement planning and its importance as a variable for

study.

W
Antonovsky and Sagy (1990) developed a framework for
explaining the retirement process and the relevant aspects.
They adapted Erikson's work expanding the ideas of
generativity and integrity to clarify the significant

developmental transitions during these 40 years of the life

cycle. Their framework included the context for
development, which is discussed here as "on-time" retirement
in the late 19805 in Israel.

Although the authors recognized the limited research on
the social and psychological consequences of retirement,
they identified the most important developmental tasks for
those going through the retirement transition to be: active
involvement, reevaluation of life satisfaction, reevaluation
of a world view, and a sense of health maintenance. The
personality dimension of this conflict results in
W-
”Reintegration-disintegration refers to the putting together
again, or the falling apart of, in adaptation to a set of
considerably changed circumstances, the social, the
emotional, the psychological, the intellectual, and the
biological wholeness of the person" (Antonovsky & Sagy,
1990, p. 366).

Of the four developmental tasks, a sense of health
maintenance is not considered specific for the retirement
transition but related to the age of retirement for subjects
if they retire at the usual time. Actiye_1nyglyemgnt has to
do with confronting the idea of what is to done with one's
time now that many hours have been freed. Begyglgatign_gf
(lifie_§§;1§fagtign means taking stock with what one has
achieved or what one has done with one's life. It also
includes dreams for the future. Beeygluatign gfi_g_ggzlg
gntlggk deals with the linkages between the person and
his/her world: the time structure, persons, tasks and the

social definition of one's role which have all changed. The

10

WW forces one to examine the
morbidity and mortality levels that begin to rise sharply

among peers and their personal relevance. Their theory
proposes that the more one is active and successful with
these four developmental tasks, the more likely the
retirement transition will result in reintegratign_ye:§u§
Wen.

Karp (1989) studied the early phase of the retirement
process through professionals' interpretations of their
current work situations and how these influenced their views
and anticipation of retirement. He believed it is important
to understand people's attitudes prior to retirement in
order to explain adaptation to retirement. Qualitative data
were collected through interviews which began by asking the
individual to trace his or her occupational route. Karp
considered the 72 subjects, 50 to 60 years old, to be
between the remote phase and the near phase of retirement.
Differences were found between the men and women relative to
feelings about retirement. The women in the study were less
likely to think about retiring because they had barely begun
their professional careers. Women had spent theirearlier
years oriented around relationships and now in their fifties
experienced their work lives differently than men. Men were
feeling bored with their work and were interested in
becoming less intensely involved in their work, whereas
women experienced a sense of growth in their work lives. Of
all subjects, 27 viewed retirement as negative, 14 were
ambivalent, and 22 saw retirement in positive terms. These

responses were not reported by gender. Karp (1989)

11

concluded, that in their fifties, people begin to think
about what will happen in their future. The research
indicated there is no uniformity in the way fifty year olds
think about retirement. Respondents tended to imply that
they would stay at their jobs if they perceived unfinished
career work, were concerned with financial security, and
were in good health.

Palmore et a1. (1985) used multi-variate statistical
techniques on seven data sets in order to study both the
predictors and the consequences of retirement. These data
sets included the Retirement History Study (RHS) conducted
by the Social Security Administration during 1969 to 1979,
the National Longitudinal Surveys (NLS) conducted for the
Department of Labor during 1966 to 1976, the Panel Study of
Income Dynamics (PSID) conducted by the Institute for Social
Research of the University of Michigan from 1968 to 1977,
the Duke Work and Retirement Study (DWRS) and the Duke
Second Longitudinal Study (DSLS) conducted by the Center for
the Study of Aging and Human Development at Duke University
during 1961 to 1966 and 1969 to 1976 respectively, the Ohio
Longitudinal Study (OLS) conducted by the Scripps Foundation
during 1975 to 1981, and the Michigan Study of Auto Workers
(MSAW) conducted by the Institute of Social Research of the
University of Michigan from 1966 to 1969.

The subjects selected for inclusion were present in all
waves of the research projects, at least 50 years old, not
retired, and working a minimum of sixteen hours a week
initially. As a result most of the subjects were between 50

and 69 years of age. In most of the data sets, males

12

represented 70% or more of the subjects. Males made up 100%
of three of the data sets and only the OLS had a slight
majority of females.

Because of previous research, Palmore et al. (1985)
predicted that demographic characteristics, socioeconomic
status, health, job characteristics, and attitudes toward
work and retirement would affect retirement. Results
differed depending on whether retirement was defined
dichotomously or as a continuous variable. Demographic and
SES variables were more important predictors of the
dichotomous measure and job characteristics more predictive
of the continuous measure of retirement. Health variables
and attitudes were not important predictors for retirement
at normal ages. The authors explained these findings as
occurring because workers are being pressured to retire due
to mandatory policies at work; whereas early retirement is
more influenced by subjective factors such as health
status. Those who were self-employed were more likely to
work after retirement. Other factors that distinguished
retired working men from the non-working retired included
less education, lower occupational status, less income, and
lower socioeconomic status. For women, less income and
lower socioeconomic status were the only findings that
supported working after retirement. Further analysis on
these issues was not done for women because of small
numbers.

The reason for retirement for women was an aspect of
the retirement process studied by Szinovacz (1986-87). She

interviewed 115 recent retirees who had worked in lower and

13

middle level occupations. Most of these women were in their
603 and had worked a mean of 19 years in the last job. The
majority gave two reasons for retirement. The most frequent
responses included tired of working, health, family needs,
age, work conditions, leisure interests, and financial
reasons. The dependent variables were preferred timing of
retirement and retirement satisfaction. Women who retired
for family needs or health reasons preferred a later
retirement; however that was not related to retirement
satisfaction. Szinovacz (1986-7) concluded that women may
become more oriented to work and instrumental life goals as
they age and complete parenting responsibilities. Thus,
women retiring for family needs feel a disruption in their
goals. However, it is only when they are unable to pursue
leisure interests that there are negative effects on
retirement satisfaction. The author identified the need to
investigate differences between men and women regarding
retirement motives and retirement satisfaction.

Palmore et al. (1985) inferred from previous research
that men and women prepared in different ways for
retirement: women less so than men. Therefore, gender
differences were studied with the data from RHS and DSLS by
Palmore et a1. There were significant differences by gender
in predictors of retirement. For men in the RHS, older age,
lower education and occupational status, greater health
limitations, being enrolled in a pension program, greater
tenure in longest job, and fewer years worked since age 21
significantly increased the odds of retiring. Higher

income, increased interaction with friends, reporting that

14

one would not work unless necessary, and perceptions of
poorer health were the factors in the DSLS that increased
the likelihood of retirement. For women the only predictor
for retirement was age. The authors concluded that the
predictors for retirement differ considerably by gender.
Further analysis of these two data sets revealed that
retirement resulted in increased health limitations,
decreased income and income adequacy, decreased
participation in formal organizations, increased time spent
in extra-work interests, and decreased life satisfaction for
married men in the RHS. For unmarried men and women,
decreased income and income adequacy were the effects of
retirement with extra-work interests also a factor for
unmarried women. Therefore, retirement had considerably
more outcomes for married men than for the remaining men and
women. Similar results were demonstrated in the DSLS. Men
had increased psychosomatic symptoms; decreased perceptions
of health; decreased income; increased time spent in
hobbies, self-care, household tasks, and with friends;
increased frequency of church attendance; increased
perceptions of social worth; and increased perceptions of
uselessness. For women, retirement was not associated with
all of these outcomes. Similarities included increased
psychosomatic symptoms, increased time spent in hobbies and
household tasks, increased time spent with friends and
increased perceptions of social worth. Additionally, women

had increased perceptions of internal control.

15

For both men and women, there was no relationship
between retirement and participation in formal
organizations, interaction with family, time spent in
sedentary activities, age identification, anomie, life
satisfaction and the three affect measures. A major
limitation of these analyses was the inability to
differentiate some of the findings that might have been
influenced by marital status due to the small numbers of
married women in the RHS data and the preponderance of
married subjects in the DSLS. The authors made a strong
argument for the importance of studies on women and
retirement.

Additional research on retirement preparation has
demonstrated that a person's stated reason for retirement
did not adequately explain the process leading to retirement
(Henretta, Chan, & O'Rand, 1992). Although the sample
included both retirees and older continuing workers, aged
62-72, women were not included in this study because of the
differences between the work careers of men and women. The
most frequent reasons given for leaving the last job
included wanting to retire, health, lost job, and compulsory
retirement. Further analyses used individual variables
grouped into three categories: family, job characteristics,
and health. The only reason for retirement affected by
family variables was wanting to retire. Pensions and wages
also influenced individual control of retirement. For

health, there was a blurring of reasons for retirement

16

because health limits affect other types of exit from work.
Henretta et al. 1992 concluded that retirement reason was
only an approximate indicator of the process of retirement.

There have been relatively few studies on the
differential retirement experiences of men and women.
Martin Matthews and Brown (1987) chose that focus for their
research. The 300 subjects in their sample included retired
persons, 60 to 72, 124 of whom were women. Men were more
likely to have retired for reasons of company policy or
being tired of work. There was no difference by gender for
health as a reason to retire. However, women were more
likely to retire for reasons of health of spouse or other
family members (7.2% for women versus 1.1% for men). Men
were more likely to have positive feelings about retirement
when they retired. However, both men and women were most
likely to be satisfied with retirement.

Further analysis using an adaptation of the Holmes and
Rahe Social Readjustment Rating Scale demonstrated that
retirement had slightly more effect on men than women. This
effect was not necessarily negative. Another finding was
that women were more likely to report an increase in their
social activities during retirement. However, both men and
women saw friends about the same amount of time and most
respondents perceived their health as very good to good.
Pre-retirement attitude and health were strong predictors of
retirement attitude for both men and women. Martin

Matthews and Brown (1987) concluded that the social

17

involvement of women in retirement needs further study.
They also recognized much individual variation in the
experience of retirement.

In order to further understand gender and retirement,
Keith (1985) considered unmarried persons' evaluations of
work, retirement, and happiness in relationship to gender.
Data came from two waves of the Longitudinal Retirement
History Survey conducted by the U.S. Bureau of the Census
for the Social Security Administration for a subsample of
1398 unmarried men and women. There were 1072 women and 326
men in the study, initially ranging in age from 58 to 63.
The background variables of age, education, occupation,
health, income, and employment status were incorporated into
the study because previous research documented the relevance
of these variables. All the subjects were employed at the
initiation of the research, and employment status was a
dichotomous variable.

Although men evaluated work more positively than women,
there were no differences in attitudes toward retirement.
Initially, attitudes did not differ by marital status,
although there was a tendency for the widowed to stress the
importance of work less than the never married at time 2.
Marital status seemed to have more effect on attitudes
toward work, retirement, and happiness for women than for
men. Never married men and women had similar attitudes
toward work. However, formerly married women found work
less important than men. Never married women looked forward

to retirement more than previously married women. The

18

background variables were not explanatory of the results
(Keith, 1985). This research points out the importance of
differentiating findings by gender and marital status.

In summary, the research on the retirement process
demonstrates a planning phase which initiates the transition
into retirement. Women give less thought to retirement than
men (Karp, 1989). If people believe they have unfinished
career work, need financial security and are in good health,
they are less likely to want to retire (Harp; Palmore et
al., 1985). For men, being tired of work or company policy,
being enrolled in a pension plan, older age, poorer health,
less education, both lower and higher income, and lower
occupational level and SES are associated with retirement.
Poorer health of self or family member, family needs, age,
being tired of work, work conditions, leisure interests, and
less income and SES are associated with retirement for women
(Martin Matthews 8 Brown, 1987; Palmore et al.; Szinovacz,
1986-7). However, many studies do not include adequate

numbers of female subjects (Palmore et al.).

3W

An understanding of family relationships in later life
provides insights into retirement planning issues. Brubaker
(1990) acknowledged the diversity in later life family
relationships. Although family relationships of older
people are important, the dynamics of later life
relationships are not fully understood. Generally later
life families are contracting, as children are launched.

Even childless families experience similar family issues as

19

people retire and the family networks contract, parents need
care, and the family members experience health

difficulties. Many later life families are
multigenerational and reciprocity is often a characteristic
(Allen, 1989). The relationship patterns that have been
established in earlier years continue into the later years
as the family experiences commonly occurring events such as
launching of children, becoming a grandparent, retiring, the
aging process, and coping with widowhood.

Barresi and Hunt (1990) divided the elderly into three
age groups for discussion. The yggng;91g are the
preretirement group, aged 55 to 64, and are active and
healthy. Often, they are not only primary caregivers for
their elderly parents, but are also helping adult children.
The nigglgzglg, aged 65 to 74, are retired, the majority of
whom are married and active. The 91g;91g, aged 75 or older,
are likely to be experiencing the difficulties of old age.
The unmarried elderly over 55 make up 37% of the total group
with 25% widowed, 1.5% separated, 5.1% divorced, and 5.7%
never married. Women are a higher percent in all categories
except the separated. There have been relatively few
studies of the unmarried elderly, which include not only the
never married but also the divorced, separated, and
widowed. Although spouse and children may be lacking in
unmarried elderly, over the years they have developed other
reciprocal relationships. Siblings are important as well as
friends, nieces, nephews, and cousins (Allen, 1989). Some

gender differences among the unmarried include females'

20

greater dependence on help with instrumental tasks than
males, and males' tendency to have smaller networks than
females (Barresi & Hunt 1990).

Troll (1986) summarized other research findings about
aging families. Most adult children are in contact with
parents and visit frequently if they live close to them.
Long visits and phone calls often occur for those that live
far away. There is continuity in the patterns of contacts
that have been established in earlier years. Older people
who live with a child are more likely to live in their own
home with a daughter rather than a son, and it is more
likely to be an unmarried daughter than a married one. Help
is usually a mutual process with the direction dependent on
the stage of the various families involved. Families are
often held together by the mother-daughter bond.

Keith and Wacker (1990) discussed our understanding of
sex roles in the older family. One aspect of study, derived
from psychology, includes self-assessment of sex-role
characteristics related to perception of one's own
masculinity or femininity attributes. Masculine
characteristics include such things as being assertive,
independent, and forceful, whereas feminine characteristics
include being affectionate, compassionate, and sensitive to
needs of other. Studies in family and family sociology have
investigated marital roles in the household relative to
expressive and/or instrumental behavior (Parsons & Bales,
1955). Keith and Wacker suggested that the research has
provided conflicting information: role reversal, a move

towards androgyny, both androgyny and masculinity associated

21

with better mental health, and femininity associated with
distress. Many of the studies have been on young people as
has the work on the division of household tasks.

To examine the idea that there would be an anticipated
substitution of family roles for work roles as one
approached retirement, Anson, Antonovsky, and Sagy (1989)
studied the association between gender, familial states, and
attitudes toward retirement. The relationships between
marital status and proximity to children, of men and women
on the verge of retirement, and attitudes toward retirement
were the focus of the research. The researchers believed
that gender differences might occur because of the gender
differences in work and work-related experiences. Health
status and education were controlled for in the research.
Various occupations were appropriately represented.

Attitudes towards retirement were conceptualized into
three dimensions: losses in retirement, gains in retirement,
and gains in leaving work. Gender differences in the
results of this study showed that women held significantly
more positive attitudes toward gains in entering retirement
and gains in leaving work. Marital status was not a
relevant factor in these findings.

Proximity of children was related to gains in entering
retirement, however not linearly, and there was partial
support for it being stronger for women. There was no
support for the proximity of children and positive attitudes
toward gains in leaving work among women. The variable
proximity of children was operationalized into: same

community, split, different community, abroad, and childless

22

(Anson et al., 1989). This researcher questions the
operalization used in this study as to its usefulness in
understanding the relationship among variables.

Anson et al. (1989) suggested that preretirement
relations, modified by proximity of children, influenced the
results. In summary, this research found no significant
gender differences in attitudes toward losses in
retirement. However, women's attitudes toward gains in
entering retirement and gains in leaving work were more
positive than men's. The researchers inferred that this is
a result of employed women's housework responsibilities
which constrain their social activity and enhance conflict
between their family roles and work roles. Family appeared
to be equally important for men and women in the study on
the verge of retirement. The researchers cautioned that
this study was conducted in Israel where the fairly
traditional culture has a strong family orientation. The
researchers emphasized the importance of considering family
relations as a factor in understanding retirees' attitudes
to the transition.

In summary, although there is diversity in family
relationships in later life, some common themes are that
families are contracting, people retire, parents need care,
and health difficulties are experienced. Relationship
patterns from earlier years continue as adult children
maintain contact with parents, frequently through the

mother-daughter bond. There are more unmarried women in

23

this age group, and they tend to have larger networks than
men. Other gender differences were not consistently

demonstrated.

E§I§D§_Q§I£_§QDEQID§

One would expect that parent care concerns influence
retirement planning, because there is extensive research to
support that families are interdependent and that children
do maintain relationships with parents throughout life. It
is also apparent that families are providing a great deal of
care for older family members (Brubaker, 1990).

Family help to older people is generally grouped into
personal care, instrumental activities inside and outside
the home, home maintenance and repair, emotional support,
and linkage services (Brody 8 Schoonover, 1986). The
distribution of these tasks appears to be gender specific.
Personal care and instrumental services generally are
provided by spouses or by adult daughters. Sons tend to
help with money management. Daughters are three times more
likely than sons to share their household with a dependent
elderly parent.

Families are the primary source of care for the frail
and/or disabled elderly (Stone, Cafferata, & Sangl, 1986).
Moreover, informal caregiving is an important aspect of our
economy because of the escalating cost of health care for
the elderly. It is important to strengthen the informal
support systems in order to maintain the elderly in the
community as long as possible and thus curtail some of the

cost of these services.

24

Therefore, Stone et al. (1986) examined a sample of
1924 persons who were informal caregivers assisting frail
and/or disabled elderly persons in 1982. In 1982
approximately 2.2 million caregivers aged 14 or older
provided unpaid assistance to 1.2 million
noninstitutionalized elderly. The majority of the
caregivers (71.5%) were female. Adult daughters were 28.9%
of the group. Approximately 70% were primary caregivers.
Daughters (23%) were more likely to assume primary
responsibility with no assistance than were sons (10.83%).
Overall, 82.4% of the daughters were caring for mothers
compared to 64.2% of the sons. There were no gender
differences in living arrangements among the children. In
general, incomes were in the low to middle range.

Some of these caregivers (9%) quit working in order to
provide the care. Again there were gender differences with
12% of daughters compared to only 5% of the sons leaving
their jobs. Other experiences with working to accommodate
care responsibilities included cutting back on hours,
rearranging schedules and taking time off without pay.
Daughters were more likely than sons to make these work
adjustments.

Caregiving tasks averaged 4 hours a day. Caregiving
included personal hygiene activities, help with getting in
and out of bed, household tasks, shopping and
transportation, and helping with financial matters.
Daughters were more likely than sons to assist with personal
hygiene activities and spend extra time on household tasks.

There were no gender differences with respect to shopping

25

and/or transportation; however, this information included
spouses as well as child providers. There were no
statistically significant differences in the perceived
health status among the primary caregivers. Secondary
caregivers were twice as likely to rate their health as
excellent.

Brody and Schoonover (1986) sought to clarify the
effects of women's work status on patterns of parent care.
Their sample included 150 families with an elderly disabled
widowed woman whose principal caregiver was a married
daughter. There was considerable diversity in demographic
and socioeconomic factors. The working daughter/mother
group was somewhat younger than the nonworking
daughter/mother group. A large proportion of the groups
were shared households.

Hours of help were determined for seven categories:
personal care, housework and laundry, meal preparation,
using the telephone, managing money and arranging needed
services, grocery shopping and transportation, and emotional
support. There were no significant differences in the
number of hours of help received by mothers in the two
work-status groups of daughters. The most frequently
provided types of assistance were shopping, transportation
and emotional support. On two types of tasks, there were
significant differences in the number of hours of help
between working and nonworking daughters. Working daughters

provided fewer hours of help with personal care and meal

26

preparation. However, there was greater involvement by
other family members and paid helpers for the working
daughters group.

Opinions about parent care were the focus of a study by
Brody, Johnsen, and Fulcomer (1984). The sample of 403
included three generations of women assumed to be the care
recipients and the caregivers of the present and the
future. The researchers were interested in whether the
recent demographic and social changes that have occurred in
our country have resulted in differences in opinions about
parent care across generations.

The subjects were asked what adult children should do
in a hypothetical situation of an 89-year-old widowed mother
who needs help with daily activities. Another measure was
the women's ranking of preferences among helpers of six
possible providers for selected services. All generations
thought adult children should adjust entire family schedules
in order to help their mothers. The youngest women were
most likely to feel this. Expecting a nonworking married
daughter to adjust her family schedule showed the highest
percentages of all generations. They also believed that
expenses for professional care were a responsibility of
adult children. Although the subjects generally did not
expect adult children to adjust work schedules, they were
more likely to expect working daughters rather than working
sons to do so. And unmarried working daughters were

expected to do so more than married working daughters.

27

Household sharing was not supported by the older two
generations. However, all generations considered sharing a
household with an elderly mother more appropriate for a
nonworking married daughter or an unmarried daughter. The
generations did differ as to who should provide services,
with the younger generation more receptive than the oldest
generation to use formal services for instrumental tasks.
Male helpers for personal care were unacceptable for all
generations. The authors concluded that these findings
suggested an increasing involvement of women in care of
elderly relatives as well as a commitment of women to help
their aging parents. There were also warm bonds among all
generations.

Rather than focusing on primary caregivers, Matthews
(1987) advocated studying parent care from a family
perspective. Ways that families can be described include
using structural dimensions such as size, gender ratios, and
geographic proximity. Affective dimensions such as quantity
and quality of interaction among members and how members
feel about one another are also important descriptors.

Matthews (1987) studied 50 families, defined as the
group of adult siblings with at least one parent aged 75+.
The subjects included 100 daughters, 50 pairs of sisters,
with different employment statuses between the sisters
within the pair. Families were categorized according to the
three types of help provided to old parents. Almost half of
the families included only the two sisters. The 62 parents
in the study, age 73 to 97, ranged from being totally

dependent to almost completely independent.

28

Help common for all families included: giving advice,
providing personal services, and giving emotional or moral
support. There was statistical support for structural
characteristics of the families having an effect on the way
responsibility is divided. When the two daughters were the
only siblings in the family, they reported sharing equally
in providing each type of help. In families that included
four or more siblings, a much higher proportion described
that some helped, others did not. Families that included
brothers were also more likely to be described that way.
Geographic dispersion is related only to providing emotional
or moral support. For affectual solidarity, there was some
evidence that all members of sibling groups described as
”close" were more likely to contribute than those described
as "mixed". There was no support for a relationship between
the way responsibility is divided and perceptions of how
adequately the needs of the parents were met. A major
limitation of this study was that information was collected
from two family members and there was low agreement on
perceptions of how responsibility was divided.

Gender and care were addressed by Montgomery and Kamo
(1987). They analyzed how sons and daughters differ in
their caregiving activities and experience as well as
factors that influence the experience. Subjects included
541 families caring for their impaired elders. Primary
caregivers numbered 337 and were within a one hour driving
distance from the elderly person. Caregiving activities
were grouped into transportation activities, personal care,

meal related functions, and paper work matters. Burden was

29

divided into objective and subjective aspects. Another
concept measured was love and affection which also included
obligation or duty.

There were 64 sons and 273 daughters in the study.

They were similar in age, marital status, and health. For
single subjects, sons tended to be "never married" while
nonmarried daughters included more divorced or widowed
persons. Although a larger percentage of sons were employed
full time, 50% of the daughters worked. Sons had higher
household incomes than daughters.

Sons and daughters were equally likely to live in the
same household with the parent. Daughters reported spending
more time in all types of tasks than sons except they spent
equal time with financial and business matters. Daughters
also provided care for a longer period of time. Even though
daughters spent substantially more time in caregiving
activities, sons reported equal levels of burden. This
research did demonstrate that sons are involved in care.

The researchers concluded that sons are often
underrepresented in care activities because they are less
likely to continue to help throughout the entire length of
their parents' dependency period.

Another aspect of parent care involves the differential
experiences of sons and daughters providing parent care, to
include the consequences to the caregivers (Horowitz,

1985). Horowitz's sample included 25 males and 71 females
who were primary caregivers. The two dependent variables
were the extent of caregiving involvement and caregiving

consequences. The high percent of female primary caregivers

30

provided evidence that caregiving is predominantly a female
role. The men in the study became caregivers by default
because there were no females available. The subjects were
very involved in the care of their impaired parents and more
than one-fourth shared the household. Differences in
specific types of care given were present. Daughters were
more likely to help with "hands-on" assistance. When the
care was less gender-specific or male-oriented, sons were no
different than daughters. Both provided their parents with
emotional support. In general, the sons provided less
extensive support. Also, the men tended to depend on their
spouses for help which thus extends it to a female role.
The care experience affected sons less negatively then it
did daughters. Horowitz explained the burden felt by women
as being a result of the multiple demands placed on women.

Recognizing the importance of a future perspective
related to caring for an impaired elder, Rakowski and Clark
(1985) examined the future perspectives of both caregivers
and care-receivers. The study included 90 pairs of family
members providing assistance to an ill or impaired relative
and the individual receiving care. Care-receivers had a
mean age of 75.6 years. The care providers included 47%
daughters, 23% spouses, 16% sons, and 14% friends or
relatives. The mean age of caregivers was 54.5 years with a
mean formal education of 13.5 years.

Future outlook was defined in terms of limitations in
planning with a range from no future outlook restrictions
through restricted to extended range of planning

limitations. Unfavorable versus favorable future of the

31

care-receiver was also ascertained. Zero-order correlations
demonstrated that restricted future outlook among caregivers
was associated with giving help in a greater number of areas
and citing a greater number of care-receiver health
problems. Multiple regression analysis demonstrated trends
toward more restricted future outlook when providing help in
a greater number of areas and providing assistance for 6 or
more hours a week.

Gender was not a statistically significant factor in
these analyses. A subgroup of caregivers that had a
markedly lower future outlook score and were giving help in
a larger number of areas of daily life stated that the
prospect of continued assistance negatively affected their
future outlook. Rakowski and Clark (1985) concluded that
difficult caregiving situations can be associated with a
less positive future outlook. Care-receivers in this study
were relatively healthy, not bedridden and/or critically
ill.

Using qualitative methodologies of the phenomenon of
care, Dressel and Clark (1990) were critical of studies
employing gender-based dichotomies which tend to reinforce
ideologies about gender and family care. The theoretical
framework from which they operated is symbolic
interactionism which assumes that the meanings given to
family care are socially constructed, influenced by
religious, political and economic systems as well as family
culture. There were three main components from the
standpoint of the individual actors: behaviors, feelings,

and cognitions which in turn manifest a concern.

32

Data for their study were collected through diaries,
descriptions of family care situations and the researchers'
own reflections on family care. A definition of what
constitutes family care was the focus of the diary
guidelines. Even though the researchers implored men to
participate in order to get equal numbers of men and women,
of the 38 diaries, 26 were from women and only 12 were from
men. Three themes about family care emerged: anything that
one does for or with a family member; so much of family care
consists of routine, common-place, or ordinary activity; and
acts of care and feelings of caring are thought to be
inextricably intertwined. The authors concluded that women
tended to underestimate the amount of care they do, because
they do not count the ordinary activities as men do and take
them for granted as part of their lives.

There was evidence that acts of care might be
self-directed rather than other directed. For example, the
women's need to provide care came from desires to make
connections with other family members, whereas men's
self-beneficial motives were most likely to be personal.
Also of interest was that women tended to anticipate the
needs of others more than men. Although this study did not
include examples specific only to care of parents, it did
help to explain the concept of family care. Also of value
to understanding the present study is the fact that the
authors were careful to avoid a dichotomous view of gender
and yet they found differences between men and women related
to family care issues. One striking difference is that 75%

of the women indicated feelings at odds with their care

33

behaviors, while the majority of men did not report this
emotive dissonance. The idea that instrumental and
expressive care behaviors can be viewed dichotomously was
not supported. Host family care situations were
multifaceted and thus gender distinctions surrounding the
instrumental-expressive dichotomy are not useful.

In summary, the research reviewed on parent care
demonstrated that mothers of working women receive the same
amount of care as mothers of nonworking women; however, some
of it is through paid services and other family members
rather than directly from the working daughter. The studies
also affirmed that females are the primary caregivers of the
elderly, tend to underestimate the amount of care they do,
and make more changes in work status than males. Nonworking
married daughters are expected to change family schedules
and daughters are expected to adjust work schedules more
than sons, with unmarried daughters more so than married.
Male helpers for personal care are generally unacceptable;
however, sons and daughters are equally likely to live in
the same household with the parent. Furthermore, caregivers
who are in difficult caregiving situations tend to have a

less positive future outlook.

9.9.0512:

As has been demonstrated in the studies reviewed, the
research on retirement has focused minimally on gender
issues. However there are differences in gender related to
work careers, family relationships and caregiving.

Therefore, gender was a focus for the current study because

34

women's experiences are often distorted when men's lives are
used as standards for comparison (Thompson, 1987). Stacey
and Thorne (1985) advocated a transformation of knowledge
through a feminist perspective which places women at the
center. Feminists are challenging myths about women and
dealing with women's concerns, particularly within our
gender-stratified society (Komarovsky, 1988). There is an
attempt to causally explain the phenomenon of gendering and
stratification in society (Walker & Thompson, 1984). Gender
differences need to be understood as socially constructed
and historically changing (Thompson, 1987). Women's
retirement experiences thus should be analyzed as they
relate to the gender issue of socialization to an "ethic of
care" (Osmond, 1984).

As previously discussed, feminists argue against using
gender as a dichotomous variable in research (Dressel &
Clark, 1990). Since gender is socially constructed, it
tends to stereotype our understanding of people. We then
derive conclusions about issues based on our assumptions
about gender, especially in relationship to family and care
issues. Therefore, there is some difficulty within feminist
theory in terms of defining concepts, because the theory and
its methodology suggest a subjective approach to theory
development rather than an objective approach. Subjective
approaches tend to discourage categorizing people or
variables, which serves to objectify people and their
reality (Burr, Herrin, Say, Beutler, & Leighet, 1988;
Thompson, 1987). Gender has been used as a variable;

however, gender is really the central theoretical concept of

35

feminist theory (Stacey & Thorne, 1985). The sex/gender
system concept is defined in terms of how the human
biological sex is shaped by social intervention (Thorne,
1982).

Concepts of interest to feminists include family and
society, ideologies in the family and its connection with
the oppression of women, symbolic meaning and consciousness.
Feminist theory is very concerned with values; feminists are
pursuing a free and fair society (Thompson, 1987).

Brody (1990) discussed how values influence behavior.
She noted the "traditional" value that care of the elderly
is a family responsibility and the role of the women in the
family. Demographic trends and socioeconomic changes have
increased the demand for parent care and have reduced the
capacity of adult children to provide the care. The ”new”
value that women should have more equal roles with men has
caused an increase in working women; however, it has not
replaced the ”traditional" value about parent care. Based
on an extensive review of the literature on values, Clifford
(1991) concluded that there is little agreement on a
language to explain the meaning of values. Rescher (1982)
offered explanations for how values are manifested in
deliberation and decision making.

An explanation for the influence of values on decision
making at retirement can be assumed to be related to moral
development and the socialization process. An understanding
of moral development was provided by Kohlberg (1981) who
identified six developmental stages in moral reasoning.

More recent work suggested that there are four levels each

36

of which follows a clear developmental progression (Greeno &
Maccoby, 1986). Gilligan's (1982) theory of moral
development in women contrasts with Kohlberg's theory of
moral development. The transition from level 3 to level 4
is most relevant when comparing Gilligan's and Kohlberg's
theories. According to Kohlberg, level 3 marks the first
stage of adult reasoning and focuses on bonds of trust with
others. In this stage one makes decisions so that valued
others are not hurt. Individual interests are of a lower
priority than relationship issues. Level 4 moves the
individual's reasoning to a societal level where issues are
considered in terms of law or justice that must be
maintained for the good of society. Studies using this
coding system often show women remaining at level 3, which
is considered a less mature development. However, the
theory has been derived from studying men.

Chodorow (1974) concluded that the socialization of
girls influences them to be involved with and connected to
others, whereas boys are encouraged to deny this
involvement. Chodorow argued that "...feminine personality
comes to define itself in relation and connection to other
people more than masculine personality does" (p. 44).

Relationships and parent care issues will likely
greatly affect decisions made by women. Differences in
family and parent care decisions/concerns about retirement
between women and men can probably be related to moral
development theory as explained by Gilligan. Additional
insight comes from Bowers (1987) who identified a category

of care-giving called anticipatory; people alter their lives

37

"just in case" they need to provide care. Both men and
women feel an obligation to care for parents but this
apparently does not affect the actual care-giving; women

provide more care (Finley, 1989).

W

Research on retirement has been minimally inclusive of
the unique needs of women, particularly considering the
changing demographics. There was consistent evidence for
the active role women play in maintaining family
relationships and providing the major part of parent care.
Variables that were associated with retirement included
health, age, income, and educational level. Further
explanations of these phenomena were necessary and were the

focus for this dissertation.

W

The theoretical framework that served to organize the
consideration of retirement by women, when family and parent
care issues are a concern, was Gilligan's (1982) theory of
moral development of women within a human development,
ecological perspective. Women's development occurs within
the family (microsystem) which reinforces societal values
(macrosystem) and influences women to consider others when
making decisions. It was assumed that women and men are
both concerned about their physical and social/cultural
environments, thus significant differences would not be
present related to these issues and retirement. Women,

however, motivated by a value orientation based on a "care

38

ethic", would be more concerned about family members than
men when considering retirement issues. According to
Gilligan, concern for self is also considered when making
decisions. Other factors demonstrated in the review of
research as affecting retirement included financial
security, health, and educational level. Therefore, the
developing individual, influenced by the resources and
demands of health, parents' dependency, finances, assistance
to parents, age, educational level, and employment status,
and affected by values learned through socialization to
gender identification (macrosystem), develops attitudes
about interdependence with family (microsystem) that affect
thinking about retirement. These variables are diagrammed

in Figure 1.

39

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

G E N D E R

w

[1!

-l

w

F!

2
Health Ell
Parents' Dependency 2
Income -]
Assistance to Parents ——h-

t-] i‘
Age 2
Educational Level -
Employment Status :

2

C)

 

 

Family I Parent
Care Concerns

 

 

 

Health

Parents' Dependency
Income

Assistance to Parents
Age

Educational Level
Employment Status

 

 

 

Environmental

Concerns

 

 

Figure 1. Promsed model of interrelationships of variables

 

40

W

Based on a review of the retirement research, the
general questions that were addressed in this research were
how gender affects both family and parent care concerns when
thinking about retirement. Family concerns included desire
for proximity to family and the amount of influence family
members have on retirement decisions. Parent care concerns
had to do with anticipated parent care responsibilities and
associated placement of parents for care. Placing a parent
for care into a nursing home is known to be a devastating
experience for adult children (Brody, 1990). There was also
reason to believe, from the review of research, that other
factors are influential during the retirement process. For
example, financial security tends to encourage one to retire
and good health stimulates one to continue working (Karp,
1989).

Specifically, the research questions were

1. What is the relationship between gender and family
concerns when thinking about retirement? Do educational
level, employment status, income, age and health of
respondent, dependency of parents and assistance to parents
interact with gender to affect the relationship of gender to
family concerns when thinking about retirement?

2. What is the relationship between gender and parent
care concerns when thinking about retirement? Do
educational level, employment status, income, age and health

of respondent, dependency of parents and assistance to

41

parents interact with gender to affect the relationship of
gender to parent care concerns when thinking about
retirement?

3. What is the relationship between gender and the
importance of selected environmental characteristics

(physical and sociocultural) during retirement?

CHAPTER THREE -- METHODOLOGY AND PROCEDURE

The data used to examine the relationship of gender to
family and parent care concerns in retirement planning by
single men and women came from the single men and women in
the Research Project (W-176) titled, ”Housing and Locational
Retirement Decisions: A Study of Preretirees in Four States"
(McFadden, Brandt, Schiamberg, Stenberg & Sward, 1991).

This was a Western Regional project supported by the

Agricultural Experiment Stations at Utah State University,
Oregon State University, Michigan State University and the
University of Utah with its Cooperative Extension Service.

The objectives of W176, Housing and Locational
Decisions of the Maturing Population: Opportunities for the
Western Region, were to:

1. Develop a profile of selected aging populations,
including those who relocate, make seasonal moves, or age
in-place.

2. Identify considerations relevant to residential
characteristics, support services, and finances important to
informed housing decisions. 3

3. Compare rural and urban residents as to their mid-
and later-life housing and location decisions, especially
rural directed relocation.

4. Develop decision making criteria and strategies for
family mid- and later-life housing and locational choices,
and compare the aging population's housing and locational
needs and choices and the rural communities' view and

policies (McFadden et al. 1991, pp. 4-5).

42

43

W

The sample for the total study was developed by Survey
Sampling, Inc., (Fairfield, Conn.) utilizing telephone
listings and then targeting the age of the heads of
households. Counties in the four states with high portions
of 40 year olds and over were identified. Urban and rural
populations were sampled as well as seasonal movers. Each
state was sampled in order to meet minimum sample size
requirements for each age stratum. This age-stratified
random sample of each state's population of heads of
households between 40 and 65 allowed for adequate numbers to
compare those near retirement and those with considerable
time until retirement. Also included was a random sampling
of 10% of the paid membership of the Oregon Extension
Homemaker's Council. The three western states represented
were Idaho, Oregon, and Utah. Michigan was the north
central state sampled.

All states used the same questionnaire which was mailed
in early Spring 1990. The questionnaire included eleven
pages, containing 42 questions, plus the cover and was
printed in booklet form (8" X 10 1/2") (see Appendix A). A
presurvey information postcard was sent as well as a
follow-up postcard, and subsequent letters to those who had
not responded. The questions were developed upon agreement
among the investigators. An extensive review of literature
and previously stated objectives guided the questionnaire
development (McFadden et al. 1991). Approval had been

44

obtained from UCRIHS at Michigan State University for the
original study as well as the current dissertation (See
Appendix B).

The sample was selected to be representative of the
population in the four states between the ages of 40 and
65. Persons of all income levels, occupational classes and
educational levels were represented (McFadden et al. 1991).
The sample for Idaho, Oregon, and Utah was planned to be 850
each and for Michigan 1400. There were also 506 mailings to
the Oregon Extension Homemaker's Council. The response rate
was 57% in Utah, 54% in Oregon, 53% in Idaho and 24% in
Michigan. As a result, there were 1438 usable
questionnaires: 373 from Idaho, 382 from Oregon, 406 from
Utah, and 277 from Michigan.

The sample for this study included the single men and
women from the W-176, 1991 Project. There were 70 men and
112 women. Single subjects were selected in order to remove
the limitation from the original project that one could not
be sure who had actually completed the questionnaire in
married households. Also because the sampling procedure
selected heads of households, it is possible that female
subjects were not equally as likely to be sampled. The
original sample was instead representative of the population
of heads of households and thus generalizable to the general
population of heads of households.

Since the major hypotheses for the present research
involved differences between men and women on specific items
on the questionnaire, analysis of the results for single

subjects removed the possibility that the men and women

45

influenced each other's responses in married households.
Demographic and descriptive information on the W176 sample

is given in o ' a c t' et' e

W (McFadden et al- 1991)-

WW
Demographic and descriptive information is reported
here on the sample composition relative to gender and extent

of thinking about retirement, marital status, age,
employment status, usual occupation, education, and income.
These demographic and descriptive data are presented in
order of the questions on the survey instrument identified
by Q and then the number of the question as found on the
actual questionnaire (See Appendix A).

It was determined that it was appropriate to ask the
subjects to respond to questions about retirement at this
time in their lives. As can be seen from Table 1, in
response to the question, "To what extent have you started
thinking about retirement?", most of the subjects had done
some thinking about retirement. There were similarities
between women and men with only 9% of women and 11.4% of men
responding NOT AT ALL.

The subjects represented different aspects of single
marital status. Table 2 reports the percentages of never
married, separated, divorced, and widowed subjects. Divorce
was the most common status for both genders, 70.5% for women
and 55.7% for men. For the current study, the unmarried

were 18% of the data set from which the sample was drawn.

46

Consistent with findings by Barresi and Hunt (1990) of the
unmarried elderly, women were a higher percent in all the

categories of unmarried (widowed, divorced, and never

Table 1
WWW;

 

 

 

Women Men
Extent Frequency Percent Frequency Percent
NOT AT ALL 10 9.0 8 11.4
A LITTLE 29 26.1 14 20.0
SOME 36 32.4 26 37.1
A GREAT DEAL 36 32.4 22 31.4
Table 2
W

Women Men
Marital Status Frequency Percent Frequency Percent
NEVER MARRIED 15 13.4 23 32.9
SEPARATED 1 .9 6 8.6
DIVORCED 79 70.5 39 55.7

WIDOWED 17 15.2 2 2.9

 

47

married) except for separated. In 1988, families with
married couples in the U.S. comprised 79.5% (U.S. Department
of Commerce, 1990). Thus, the subjects used for the current
research were fairly representative of the working
population with a single marital status.

The subjects ranged in age from less than 35 to over
60; however, 68.5% of the women and 73% of the men were
between 40 and 54 years of age (See Table 3). The mean age
for women was 49 and for men was 44.5. The difference was
significant at the p<.001 level by one-way ANOVA (See Table
4). The women in the study were older by a few years.
Although there was an age difference, the mean ages for both
men and women were consistent with the developmental tasks
of people in the middle years.

Since it was relevant to the study to have subjects who
would be interested in considering retirement, it was
important to ascertain whether or not the subjects were
currently working. Most of the subjects were working either
full or part time as can be seen from Table 5. No women and
2 men were on a transitional retirement plan. Originally,
employment status was considered in the analysis as a
possible intervening, independent variable. However, based
on the lack of variability in this descriptor, it will be
excluded from further analysis since it does not
discriminate among subjects (Polit & Hungler, 1983, p. 328).

A large number of the subjects were either in
managerial jobs or were professionals (See Table 6). For

men, this was 51.4% and for women 45.7%.

48

 

 

 

 

Table 3
59.1.1218.

Women (n=112) Men (n=70)
Age in Years Frequency Percent Frequency Percent
LESS THAN 35 5 4.5 4 5.7
35 TO 39 4 3.6 9 12.9
40 TO 44 26 23.3 26 37.3
45 TO 49 27 24.5 16 22.8
50 TO 54 23 20.7 9 12.9
55 TO 59 14 12.6 5 7.1
60 AND OVER 13 11.7 1 1.4
Table 4
W
W F 3..
Between Group 838.036 1 838.036

13.730 .000
Within Group 10986.607 180' 61.037
Total 11824.643

 

49

 

Table 5
Ennlexment_§tatus_9222

Women (n=112) Men (n=70)
Employment Frequency Percent Frequency Percent
FULL TIME 88 79.3 58 85.3
PART TIME 11 9.9 2 2.9
TRANSITIONAL 0 0.0 2 2.9
HOMEMAKER 3 2.7 0 0.0
UNEMPLOYED 7 6.3 6 8.8
RETIRED 2 1.8 0 0.0

 

The subjects represented a high educational level, as
compared to the U.S. population, with 35.4% of the women and
38.5% of the men holding at least a bachelor's degree (See
Table 7). Only 3.6% of women and 4.1% of men had not
graduated from high school. Of persons in the United States
25 years and older in 1988, 76.2% had completed high school
and 20.3% had completed college (U.S. Department of
Commerce, 1990).

There were differences in income between the men and
women. For women the median income was between $20,000 and
$24,999 and for men it was between $25,000 and $34,999 (See
Table 8). An income of $35,000 or more was earned by 18.9%

50

 

Table 6
W

Women Men
Occupation Frequency Percent Frequency Percent
SERVICE 9 8.6 3 4.4
LABORER 3 2.9 4 5.9
OPERATIVE 6 5.7 13 19.1
CRAFTS 0 0.0 5 7.3
CLERICAL 30 28.6 4 5.9
SALES 8 7.6 4 5.9
MANAGERS 12 11.4 11 16.2
PROFESSIONAL 36 34.3 24 35.3
STUDENTS 1 1.0 0 0.0

 

51

of the women and 27.9% of the men. The men generally earned
a higher income, perhaps in part due to the higher

educational level and the occupational differences.

 

Table 7
WW

Women (n=110) Men (n=70)
Level Frequency Percent Frequency Percent
LESS THAN 12 YEARS 4 3.6 3 4.1
HIGH SCHOOL GRAD 24 21.8 10 14.3
TECHNICAL SCHOOL 8 7.3 10 14.3
SOME COLLEGE 31 28.2 13 18.6
2YR COLLEGE DEGREE 4 3.6 7 10.0
BACHELOR'S 26 23.6 15 21.4
MASTER'S 9 8.2 8 11.4

DOCTORAL 4 3.6 4 5.7

 

Table 8

 

 

Inseme.9:12
Women (n=112) Men (n=70)

Yearly Income Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

LESS THAN $10,000 12 10.8 5 7.4
$10,000 TO $14,999 19 17.1 6 8.8
$15,000 TO $19,999 12 10.8 7 10.3
$20,000 TO $24,999 21 18.9 5 7.4
$25,000 TO $34,999 23 20.7 20 29.4
$35,000 TO $49,999 16 14.4 9 13.2
$50,000 TO $64,999 4 3.6 6 8.8
$65,000 TO $79,999 1 .9 4 5.9
$80,000 TO $94,999 2 1.8 3 4.4
$95,000 OR MORE 1 .9 3 4.4

Wigs

The research design for this study was descriptive and
cross-sectional, focusing on the current status of existing
relationships between single men and women, and family and
parent care concerns in retirement planning. As discussed
in the review of research chapter, gender differences have
been demonstrated in research on retirement. Educational

level, income, health, and activities during retirement are

53

also important variables related to retirement and were,
therefore, included in the examination of the differences

between men and women on family and parent care concerns.

92erational_2efinitigns_9f_The_Eesearch_!ariables

The major independent variable in this study was gender
(See Table 9). Other intervening, independent variables
included factors known to be related to or affect
retirement. Some of these were scores on specific questions
on the survey instrument, while others were demographic in
nature. The dependent variables were the scores from
specific questions on the survey instrument which measured
retirement concerns about family, parent care, and physical
and sociocultural environment (See Appendix A).
Independentrzariables

The seven independent variables are shown in Table 9
and defined in order as follows:
(1) gengez was a category for Q32.
(2) Sebjee;;e_fiee1§h was derived from a score on Q37. The

question was "Describe your current health" Respondents
could choose either EXCELLENT, coon, FAIR, or POOR. The
scores were recoded from the original numbers on the
questionnaire so that the possible range of scores was 1-4,

with the higher the score, the better the health.

54

Table 9
Mable:

 

BMW
X1 Gender

X2 Subject's Health

X3 Parents' Dependency

X4 Income

X5 Current Assistance to Parents
xs Age

X7 Educational Level

W

X8 Family Concerns
A Family Proximity
B Family Influence
X9 Parent Care Concerns
A Parent Care Influence
3 Moving Parent
1 Care Facility
2 Subject's Home
C Anticipated Assistance to Parents
X10 Concerns about Physical Environment
X11 Concerns about Social/Cultural Environment
A Economics and Safety
B Convenience

C Personal Enrichment

 

55

(3) EAIEDI§L_D§DQDQ§D§Y was derived from a score on Q18a.

The question stated "To what extent are your parents or
spouse's parents independent or dependent? Father, mother,
spouse's or partner's father, and spouse's or partner's
mother were listed next to the following choices: VERY
INDEPENDENT, INDEPENDENT, SOMEWHAT INDEPENDENT, DEPENDENT,
VERY DEPENDENT, DOES NOT APPLY OR DECEASED. Each choice was
defined by a statement that followed the choice: VERY
INDEPENDENT - able to live in own home and come and go as
please, physically active; INDEPENDENT - lives in own home
but receives help on a nonregular basis with transportation;
SOMEWHAT INDEPENDENT - lives in own home but receives help
daily; DEPENDENT - lives with a caretaker in own home or
caretaker's home; VERY DEPENDENT - resides in nursing home
facility; DOES NOT APPLY OR DECEASED. The higher the score,
the more dependent. There was a possible range of 1-5. A
mean was calculated for parents or if Does Not Apply or
Deceased was selected for either father or mother.

(4) Ineeme was derived from a rank on Q42 which gives 10
categories to describe family income ranging from less than
$10,000 to $95,000 or more. The higher the rank, the higher
the income.

(5) gg2Ien;_Aee1e§enee_§e_£e;en§e was derived from a score
on Q18c (first part), "Do you currently...assist...your
parent(s) in any of the following ways?" Respondents were
asked to circle YES or NO in reference to specific

activities: financially, paying bills/taxes,

 

56

transportation, housecleaning, meals, personal hygiene, and
shopping. The higher the score, the more assistance was
provided. The possible score range was 0-7.

(6) Age was measured in years (See Q38).

(7) EQHQAEiQDAl.L§Y§l was derived from a score on Q41 which
asked the respondent "your highest level of education".
Three categories were used for analysis: less than 12
years, high school graduate or equivalent, and greater than
high school. The greater than high school category included
technical or trade school beyond high school, and from some
college through a graduate or professional degree. There
was, thus, a range of 1-3 possible, with the higher the
score, the more education.

Win12:
As shown in Table 9, the primary dependent variables in

this study were We and We
Other dependent variables included Concerns about Physical
Environment and Social/Cultural Environment.
Operationalization of variables was through scores on
selected questions.

(8) Was

Family Concerns related to all generations and there were
two separate scores for reflecting these concerns.

a. Family Proximity score was derived from lei. This
question asked the respondent to circle a number, 1 to 4, in
relationship to "How important are each of the following
characteristics in your choice of a community in which to

live during the_f1:e§_een_yee;§ of retirement?" One
characteristic listed was Proximity of Family with VERY

57

IMPORTANT, SOMEWHAT IMPORTANT, NOT TOO IMPORTANT, and NOT AT
ALL IMPORTANT as possible choices. The scores were reversed
from the original format so that the higher the score, the
greater the importance.

b. Family Influence score was derived from
Q21b,d,e,f,g,h,i. This item measured the influence of
family members (parent, child, grandchild, sibling, other
relative, and housemate) on retirement decisions. The
question stated, "For each of the persons listed below,
indicate heg_mgeh_1nfilgenee they will have on your
retirement decision of ghen_en§£e;_xheze to retire".
Responses included STRONG, MODERATE, SLIGHT, NONE, and DOES
NOT APPLY. The scores were reversed from the questionnaire,
so that the higher the score, the greater the influence of
family. Since each subject did not have all possible family
members about whom to respond, the mean (range 1-4) was used
in order to compensate for the "does not apply" responses.
(9) We
Parent care concerns had to do with nurturing the older
generations only and were measured with four separate
scores.

a. Parent Care Influence score was derived from scores
on Q18d which addresses how current or anticipated parent
care responsibilities influence retirement plans. The
question stated, ”To what extent do your current or
anticipated parent care responsibilities influence yee;
retirement plans?" Five separate plans were listed and
included Time of retirement, Housing choice during

retirement, Geographical location, Use of retirement income,

58

and Need for employment during retirement. Four responses
were possible: NOT AT ALL, SLIGHTLY, A GREAT DEAL, and DO
NOT KNOW. Since DO NOT KNOW was not a meaningful measure
for the current research, a 3 point scale was used ranging
from Not At All to A Great Deal for the 5 items with a score
range of 1-15. The higher the score, the greater the
influence of parent care on retirement plans. The mean was
used for those who stated Do Not Know so that subjects were
not eliminated.

b. Moving Parent included two separate scores, one
which addresses how difficult it would be to move a parent
into a ge;e_£eeiliey (Q20c), the other how difficult it
would be to move a parent into the Sebjee;;e_fleme (Q20f).
Responses included NOT DIFFICULT, DIFFICULT, and VERY
DIFFICULT with a score range on each item of 1-3. The
higher the score, the greater the difficulty. 3

c. Anticipated.Assistance to Parents was derived from a
score on Q18c (second part) ”Do you...anticipate in the
future assisting your parent(s) in any of the following
ways?" Respondents were asked to circle YES or NO in
reference to specific activities: financially, paying
bills/taxes, transportation, housecleaning, meals, personal
hygiene, and shopping. The higher the score, the more
assistance was anticipated. The possible range is 0-7.

(10) MW

Physical Environment Concerns were measured with parts of
the Comfort Features section of Q12 in order to give some
indication of whether selected physical environment

characteristics are important in choosing a community in

59

which to live during the first ten years of retirement.
Items aa. Warm temperatures, dd. Low humidity, and gg.
Seasonal changes were used and the responses were reversed
from the original format so that the higher the score, the
more important are these features. This is a 4 point scale
including NOT AT ALL IMPORTANT, NOT TOO IMPORTANT, SOMEWHAT
IMPORTANT, and VERY IMPORTANT with possible scores ranging
from 3-12.

(11) WW
Social/Cultural Environment Concerns were measured with 3
separate scores from Q12 which included characteristics
important in choosing a community in which to live during
the first ten years of retirement. The responses possible
are on 4 point scales including NOT AT ALL IMPORTANT, NOT
TOO IMPORTANT, SOMEWHAT IMPORTANT, and VERY IMPORTANT. The
scores were recoded from the original format so that the
higher the score, the more important are the community
characteristics.

a. Economics and Safety was derived from the mean score
on 4 items, 012 a-d, with possible scores ranging from
4-16. Items included: Low cost of living (e.g., food,
housing), Low utility rates, Employment opportunities, and
Low crime rate.

b. Convenience was derived from the mean score on 4
items, Q12 e-h, with possible scores ranging from 4-16.
Items included: Convenient air transportation, Shopping
mall, Medical facilities and Public Transportation.

c. Personal Enrichment was derived from the mean score

on 5 items, Q12 j-n, with possible scores ranging from 5-20.

60

Items included: Educational opportunities, Library
facilities, Your preferred place of worship, Volunteer

opportunities, and Cultural opportunities.

W
The assumptions for this research included
1. The respondent was able to consider the prospect of
retirement and its meaning during this preretirement phase
(Karp, 1989).
2. Retirement was personally defined by the research
participant as a status change in the future related to a
job and included the decision making part of the process of
planning for retirement.
3. If the decision to be made was difficult for the
respondent, the respondent's values were confronted; and
therefore the answers may have reflected a resolution of a

value conflict.

B§§§§I£h_HYRQ§h§E§§

Based on the review of literature and the research
questions, the following hypotheses were proposed for the
analysis of the relationship of gender to family and parent
care concerns in retirement planning by single men and
women:

H1: Females will score higher on Family Proximity than

males.

61

H2: There is no interaction between Educational Level,
Subject's Health, Parents' Dependency, Income, Current
Assistance to Parents, and Age in explaining the
relationship between gender and Family Proximity.

H3: Females will score higher on Family Influence than
males.

H4: There is no interaction between Educational Level,
Subject's Health, Parents' Dependency, Income, Current
Assistance to Parents, and Age in explaining the
relationship between gender and Family Influence.

H5: Females will score higher on Parent care Influence than
males.

H6: There is no interaction between Educational Level,
Subject's Health, Parents' Dependency, Income, Current
Assistance to Parents, and Age in explaining the
relationship between gender and Parent Care Influence.
H7: Females will score higher on Difficulty Having Parent
into Care Facility than males.

H8: There is no interaction between Educational Level,
Subject's Health, Parents' Dependency, Income, Current
Assistance to Parents, and Age in explaining the
relationship between gender and Difficulty'MOVing Parent
into Care Facility.

H9: Females will score higher on Difficulty'Moving Parent
into Subject's Heme than males.

62

H10: There is no interaction between Educational Level,
Subject's Health, Parents' Dependency, Income, Current
Assistance to Parents, and Age in explaining the
relationship between gender and Difficulty Moving Parent
into Subject's Heme.

H11: Females will score higher on Anticipated Assistance to
Parents than males.

H12: There is no interaction between Educational Level,
Subject's Health, Parents' Dependency, Income, Current
Assistance to Parents, and Age in explaining the
relationship between gender and Anticipated Assistance to
Parents.

H13: Gender is not related to concerns about Physical
Environment.

H14: Gender is not related to Concerns about Economics and
Safety.

H15: Gender is not related to concerns about convenience.
H16: Gender is not related to concerns about Personal
Enrichment.

W121!

The instrument used for this dissertation included
portions of the one used in the W-176 project (See Appendix
A for entire questionnaire). The total instrument had been
modified from the one developed for the initial data
collection in 1987 for the Western Region project, W-176.
In order to compare the two samples in W-176 an attempt was
made by the researchers to minimize the modifications. A

meeting of investigators and numerous conference calls and

63

facsimile transmittances facilitated agreement among the
investigators during the revision of the instrument.
Further aspects of content validity were addressed as the
process was guided by an extensive review of literature and
the stated objectives.

Internal validity was considered in that preparation of
the actual questionnaire was done at one university so that
there was a consistent questionnaire for all respondents,
thus providing the same visual and conceptual image to all
subjects. Other aspects of validity were addressed by the
care that was taken with the cover letter, questionnaire
cover design, and format of questions. Two threats to
content validity were addressed. In order to decrease one
threat to validity, that of social desirability, the
respondent's answers were confidential so that the
respondent would be less likely to answer the way s/he
thought s/he should answer. Another threat to validity is
the concept of acquiescence. It has been found that
respondents tend to agree with positively stated questions
(Crano & Brewer, 1973; Polit & Hungler, 1983). This threat
was minimized in that some possible responses started with a
strong agreement, while others started with a strong
disagreement with the statement.

W-176 research questions were designed to "...conform
to basic principles of writing questions for mail
questionnaires” (McFadden et al., 1991, p. 8). The overall
length of the questionnaire was not to exceed 12 pages which
is generally considered an acceptable length for maintaining

subjects' attention. Informal testing of the questionnaire

64

on sample subjects was done in each state in order to refine
the instrument in terms of clarity of wording (McFadden et
al., 1991). The sample size was relatively large which
reduces another risk to validity. Statistical tests to
evaluate the effect of extraneous variables were done by
this researcher so that the real relationship between gender
and the dependent variables could be determined (Polit &
Hungler, 1983).

As discussed in the review of literature, there is
little in the retirement research related to family and
parent care concerns especially concerning gender
differences. The instrument used for this dissertation
measured personal perceptions and reactions, which were
subjective in nature, focusing on an individual's responses
to concerns in retirement planning on a continuum from
negative to positive (Crano & Brewer, 1973). The Likert
model was the most frequently used approach to generation of
reliable attitude measurement devices (Crano & Brewer; Polit
& Hungler, 1983). On each item a respondent must indicate
the level of agreement or disagreement.

One aspect of reliability was the degree of
interrelationship between items on the questionnaire (Crano
& Brewer, 1973). Coefficient Alpha is the average interitem
correlation of all items constituting a scale, an estimate
of the reliability of the total scale when each item is
employed as a test in the generation of this estimate
(Cronbach, 1951). If Coefficient Alpha is in the .80s, then
it is a satisfactory criterion of internal consistency and

fulfills the basic requirement for Operationalization of the

65

concept (Crano & Brewer). However, the reliability
coefficient is a function of the number of items in the
scale and for this study, there are several variables with
few items (Polit & Hungler, 1983, p. 394).

Where logical, internal consistency of scales used for
this dissertation was evaluated to establish reliability.
Four areas of the instrument were evaluated for reliability:
Parent Care Influence; and components of Concerns about
Social/Cultural Environment: Economics and Safety,
Convenience, and Personal Enrichment. Cronbach
(Coefficient) Alpha Reliabilities are reported on Table 10.
Alphas for Parent care Influence demonstrate a satisfactory
reliability. For Economics and Safety the Alphas are low.
It is noteworthy that removing the Employment Opportunities
question improves the Alpha to .7079. The Alpha for
Convenience was slightly below satisfactory at .7517.
Personal Enridbment was satisfactory at .7977 but could be
improved to .8380 if the Preferred Place of Worship question

were removed.

66

Table 10

 

 

 

Variable Alpha Standardized Alpha
Parent care Influence .8967 .8973
Economics and Safety .5952 .6583
Convenience .7517 .7596
Personal Enrichment .7977 .8069
We

The primary issue this dissertation addressed was the
relationship of gender to family and parent care concerns in
retirement planning by single men and women. Inferential
statistics were used to test the hypotheses. The main
technique was One-way ANOVA, using one independent
categorical variable with "2" levels (male and female) and
each continuous dependent variable. For ordinal data, and
where the data did not meet the assumptions for ANOVA, the

Mann-Whitney U was used.

67

Multiple regression was initially considered for
further explanation of the variances of the dependent
variables. Multiple regression would have enabled the
investigator to use all the independent variables in
explaining the variance in the dependent variables as well
as to study the interactions. In order to determine if
multiple regression would be useful, zero-order correlations
were calculated between all the variables. The best
variables (predictors) to use are those that are highly
correlated with the dependent variable, but not highly
correlated with the other independent variables. However,
the results of zero-order correlations suggested that there
was no reason to proceed with multiple regression. This is
consistent with the conclusion by Keith (1985) on the
background variables: age, education, occupation, health,
income, and employment status. Keith (1985) found that
these background variables did not explain, in relationship
to gender, the evaluations by the unmarried of work,
retirement, and happiness.

Another statistical option was ANCOVA which is used "to
measure group differences after allowing for other
differences between subjects" (Munro, Visintainer & Page,
1986, p. 218). It controls "for other variation in the
dependent variable that comes from separate measurable
variables that influence all the groups being compared"
(Munro et al., p. 218). In ANCOVA this variation is
extracted and a more accurate difference between groups can
be estimated. Using variables that are highly correlated

with the dependent variables as covariates with Gender was

68

considered in order to help explain the differences between
men and women on specific dependent variables. The
covariate should be at the interval or ratio level although
ordinal data may sometimes be treated as interval. As with
multiple regression, there was no reason to proceed with
ANCOVA analysis.

Although there were unequal numbers of men and women in
the sample of single men and women (unequal "n's"), ANOVA
techniques address this methological issue (Linton, Gallo, &
Logan, 1975). ANOVA is considered "robust" in "...that even
if the assumptions are not rigidly adhered to, the results
may still be close to the truth" (Munro et al. 1986, p.
176). Moreover, the assumptions about the dependent
variable, that of normality and homogeneity of variance
(groups should have equal variances), were tested so that
nonparametric statistics were used rather than ANOVA in
those situations where the assumptions were not met.

The dependent variables included four major conceptual
ideas: Family Concerns, Parent Care Concerns, Concerns about
Physical Environment, and Concerns about Social/Cultural
Environment. All but Physical Environment have
subdimensions. However, summing scores on the subdimensions
was not done, because each subdimension measured a different
aspect of the dependent variable and/or the questions were
formed in such a way that it did not allow for summing
(Polit & Hungler, 1983). A p<.05 was be required to accept
all hypotheses.

CHAPTER FOUR -- RESULTS

g l !° E E ! E J .

The data analysis included (1) descriptive analyses and
(2) testing of the hypotheses. For the descriptive section,
the sample composition with a discussion of gender
differences is presented related to selected proposed
intervening variables. Inferential statistics are presented
for testing of the hypotheses. Correlations between the
independent variables and the dependent variables were done
to determine the efficacy of doing regression analyses.
One-way ANOVA and Mann-Whitney U statistical techniques were
used to determine differences between men and women on the
variables. The analyses were on the sample of 182 single
subjects: 112 women and 70 men selected from the Research
Project (W-176).

The Social and Economic Sciences Research Center,
Washington State University, completed the data entry for
all states, prepared state data files, a regional data file,
and SPSS-X programs to read the files. If more than one
item were circled or a clear response was not indicated, a
value for missing data (number "9") was entered.
Verification of data was done by a double entry system
(McFadden et al. 1991).

69

70

so ' ° e a sis

Based on the review of research, several descriptive
variables were considered as possible intervening variables
in the relationship between gender and the dependent
variables. They are discussed here as they were considered
for regression. .

£921§§§§L_fl£el&h was found to have little variability,
with both men and women reporting good or excellent health
most frequently, the mode being excellent (See Table 11).
Only 1 female and 2 males reported poor health. The
difference was not significant using the Mann Whitney U
statistical technique for ordinal data (See Table 12).
Therefore, this variable was not considered for regression

or for hypothesis testing.

 

Table 11
Subjectsl_flsalth

Women (n=112) Men (n=69)
Health Level Frequency Percent Frequency Percent
POOR 1 .9 2 2.9
FAIR 10 8.9 5 7.2
GOOD 48 42.9 26 37.7

EXCELLENT 53 47.3 36 52.2

 

71

 

 

Table 12
- 'e 's e
Gender Number Mean Rank U z p
MALE 69 93.25
3709.0 -.5024 .6154
FEMALE 112 89.62

 

2e:en;e;_nepengeney was another variable considered as
intervening. Eegenee;_2epengeney included five dependency

ranks possible for parents, from very independent to very
dependent. Parents for both men and women were quite
independent and there was little variability (See Table
13). The difference was not significant by ANOVA (See Table
14). Therefore, this variable was not considered for
regression or for hypothesis testing.

As was discussed in the Methods Chapter (Table 8),
there were differences in Ineeme between the men and women.

The data were collected in such a manner that it was ordinal

72

 

 

Table 13
Parentsi_nenendenex

Women (n=112) Men (n=70)
Level Frequency Percent Frequency Percent
V/INDEPENDENT <2 73 65.2 54 77.2
INDEPENDENT 2-<3 21 18.8 11 15.7
S/INDEPENDENT 3 8 7.1 1 1.4
DEPENDENT 4 5 4.5 3 4.3
V/DEPENDENT 5 5 4.5 , 1 1.4
Table 14

SunnarY_2f_ANQYA_fer_£arentsl_nenendensx

 

Seuree_cf_Yariance. SS df. MS F n
Between Group 3.195 1 3.195

3.201 .075
Within Group 179.641 180 .998
Total 182.835

 

73

in nature. Therefore, the Mann-Whitney U statistical
technique was used in order to evaluate if the differences
were significant. The difference was significant at p=.003
level (See Table 15). Thus Ineeme was considered an
intervening variable in the relationships between gender and

the dependent variables.

Table 15
WW

 

Gender Number Mean Rank U z p

 

MALE 68 104.63
2779.0 -2.9942 .0028
FEMALE 111 81.04

 

W can be seen in Table 16.
Most of the subjects, 66% of the women and 81% of the men,

were not providing assistance to parents. However, the mean
assistance provided by men was .34 with a range of 0 to 3
activities performed. For women, the mean was 1.09 with a
range of 0 to 7 activities performed. Because these
variables did not have a normal distribution and the

variances between the men and women were not equal, the

 

74

Mann-Whitney U statistical technique was used and
demonstrated significant differences between men and women
at the p=.01 level (See Table 17). Women reported providing
more assistance to parents than men. Thus ngrent
Aegietenee_§e_2e;en§e was considered an intervening variable
in the relationships between gender and the dependent

variables.

Table 16
WW

 

Women (n=112) Men (n=70)

Activities Frequency Percent Frequency Percent
NONE 74 66.1 57 81.4
ONE 9 8.0 5 7.1
TWO 8 7.1 5 7.1
THREE 4 3.6 3 4.3
FOUR 8 7.1

FIVE 3 2.7

SIX 4 3.6

SEVEN 2 1.8

 

75

 

 

Table 17
1211-111 1: 0 .- ‘1 ;=:° 11:1 ‘ 0 '-. ‘1 — :10. ’10.‘
Gender Number Mean Rank U z p
MALE 70 81.44

3215.5 -2.5749 .0100
FEMALE 112 97.79

 

Age differences existed between men and women as was
presented and discussed in the Methods Chapter (Table 3).
Men ranged in age from 30 to 65 with a mean of 44.5 years
old. Women ranged in age from 30 to 72 with a mean of
48.91. The difference was significant at the p<.001 level
by one-way ANOVA (See Table 4). The women in the study were
older. Thus Age was considered an intervening variable in
the relationships between gender and the dependent
variables.

As indicated in Table 7, the subjects represented a
high Eggeeeienel_Leye1 with 35.4% of the women and 38.5% of
the men holding at least a bachelor's degree. Most subjects
were high school graduates or above with only 3.6% of women
and 4.1% of men not graduating from high school. Gender

differences in educational level were not significant using

76

the Mann-Whitney U statistical technique (See Table 18).
Therefore, this variable was not considered for regression

or hypothesis testing.

Table 18
WW

 

Gender Number Mean Rank U z p

 

MALE 70 94.06
3601.0 -1.0010 .3168
FEMALE 110 88.24

 

Because of the concern that the variables that were
different for men and women, income, current assistance to
parents, and age, may be factors in distinguishing
differences between men and women on the dependent’
variables, zero-order correlations were done between each of
these variables and the dependent variables (See Table 19).

The selected independent variables, Ineeme, SELLER;
Ageieeenee_ee_flezenee, and Age, were significantly
correlated with several dependent variables although at a
low level (.1512 to .3202), according to Munro, Visintainer,
and Page (1986). Those >.2100 will be discussed.

Correlations between Age and the variables of interest in

77

this study were either not significant or had very low
correlations. Thus, the age differences did not appear to
be a factor in this study.

Ineene was correlated with Eeegemiee_egg_§efe§y at ;=
2688, p<.01. As Income increases, importance of Economics
and Safety issues decreases. Using Income as a covariate
with fienge; might help explain the differences between men
and women on Economics and Safety; however, the income data
are ordinal not interval. ANCOVA techniques assume that the
covariate is interval and if the data are grouped so that
they are interval, the differences between men and women on
income will be lost, because of the way the data were
collected. Therefore, the income variable was not pursued

further in relation to hypothesis testing.

The correlation between MAW
and Eem11y_1nfleenee was .2161, p<.01. As Current

Assistance to Parents increases, the Influence of Family on
retirement plans increases. In this case the assumption

that the covariate, Current Assistance to Parents, be

78

 

Table 19
- e V ' b

Variable Independent

Income Assistance Age
Dependent
Fam Proximity -.0205 .0624 .1678*
Pam Influence -.1512* .2161** .0651
Parent Care Infl -.1419 .2609** .0300
Move-Care Facility -.0186 -.0183 .0215
Move Subject's Home -.1438 -.2166** .0462
Anticipated Assist .0267 .3202** .0491
Physical Environ -.0514 -.0539 .0579
Econ 8 Safety -.2688** -.1015 .1713*
Convenience .0309 .0364 .0973
Personal Enrich -.0184 .0929 .1347

 

*p<.05;**p<.01

79

interval was met. There was homogeneity of variance with
Influence of Family, however, the assumption that this
dependent variable be normally distributed was not met.
Therefore, it was not prudent to use Current Assistance to
Parents as a covariate. Since the correlation was rather
small, there probably was not a great loss in explaining
relationships between variables.
WandW
have a correlation of :3 .2609, p<.01. As Current
Assistance to Parents increases, the Influence of Parent
Care on retirement plans increases. In this case the
assumption that the covariate, Current Assistance to
Parents, be interval was met. There was homogeneity of
variance with Parent Care Influence, however, the assumption
that this dependent variable be normally distributed was not
met. Therefore, it was not prudent to use Current
Assistance to Parents as a covariate. Since the correlation
was rather small, there probably was not a great loss in
explaining relationships between variables. There were no
significant differences by genge; for Parent Care Influence
so adding Current Assistance to Parents to the model did not

appear helpful.

Wandmwm

Bezent_tg_§ubieet;e_fleme were correlated at -.2166, p<.01.
As Current Assistance to Parents increases, Difficulty

Moving Parent into Subject's Home decreases. In this case
the assumption that the covariate, Current Assistance to

Parents, be interval was met. There was homogeneity of

80

variance with Moving Parent to Subject's Home and the
assumption that this dependent variable be normally
distributed was met. There were no significant differences
by Gender for Moving Parent to Subject's Home so adding
Current Assistance to Parents to the model did not appear
helpful. Since the correlation was rather small, there
probably was not a great loss in explaining relationships
between variables.
Wandm
Aneieipeeien were correlated at {2.3202, p<.01. As Current
Assistance to Parents increases, Parent Care Anticipation
increases. In this case the assumption that the covariate,
Current Assistance to Parents, be interval was met. There
was homogeneity of variance with Parent Care Anticipation;
however, the assumption that this dependent variable be
normally distributed was not met. Therefore, it was not
prudent to use Current Assistance to Parents as a
covariate. Since the correlation was rather small, there
probably was not a great loss in explaining relationships
between variables. There were no significant differences by
genge; for Parent Care Anticipation so adding Current
Assistance to Parents to the model did not appear helpful.

5 E E 1. l E J .
Based on the review of literature and the research
questions, it was originally hypothesized that Subject's
Health, Parents' Dependency, Income, Current Assistance to
Parents, Age, and Educational Level, would interact in

explaining the relationships between Gender and some of the

81

dependent variables. However, as previously discussed,
based on an analysis of the differences by gender for these
variables, zero-order correlations, and limitations of the
data, H2, H4, H6, H8, H10, and H12 have been eliminated.
The remaining hypotheses examine gender alone with the

dependent variables.

W
Given the limitations of the data and preliminary

analyses as discussed previously, there were 10 hypotheses
remaining to be tested. Thus, the hypotheses have been
renumbered and presented here with the results of the
analyses.
W
Females will score higher on Family Proximity than males.
This hypothesis was developed as a result of research
by Szinovacz (1986-87) and Gilligan (1982) who demonstrated
the importance of family to women when they make decisions.
Beeglee. Both men and women varied in the importance
they placed on Proximity to Family in the first ten years of
retirement (See Table 20). For men, the importance of
Proximity of Family ranged from 1 to 4 with a mean of 2.76,
a little less than Somewhat Important. For women, the range
was 1 to 4 with a mean of 3.23, a little more than Somewhat
Important. The difference was significant at the p<.001
level using the Mann-Whitney U test (See Table 21).
Proximity of Family was more important to women than men the
first ten years of retirement. The hypothesis was

supported.

82

 

 

Table 20
Wain

Women (n=107) Men (n=70)
Importance Frequency Percent Frequency Percent
NOT AT ALL 7 6.5 8 11.4
NOT T00 12 11.2 19 27.1
SOMEWHAT 37 34.6 25 35.7
VERY 51 47.7 18 25.7
Table 21

WW

 

Gender Number Mean Rank U z p

 

MALE 70 73.78
2679.5 -3.3850 .0007
FEMALE 107 98.96

 

83

ot 3

Females will score higher on Family Influence than males.

As with the first hypothesis, research supports the
importance of family to women when they make decisions.

(Beeglee, Subjects varied in the Influence of Family on
retirement decisions (See Table 22). For men, no one
reported family to have a strong influence. Men had a mean
of 1.91 demonstrating that family had a little less than a
slight influence on retirement decisions. For women the
mean was 2.22, a little more than a slight influence. The
difference was significant at p=.014 using the Mann-Whitney
U statistical technique (See Table 23). Women feel that
family will influence their retirement decisions more than

men. The hypothesis was supported.

Table 22
We

 

Women (n=107) Men (n=69)
Influence Frequency Percent Frequency Percent
NONE 41 38.3 34 48.9
SLIGHT 42 39.1 28 40.3
MODERATE 19 17.8 7 10.0

STRONG 5 4.7 0 0.0

 

84

 

 

 

Table 23
Mannzflnitnex_fl_for_£amilx_Influeaee_and_§ender
Gender Number Mean Rank U z p
MALE 69 76.74

2880.0 -2.4626 .0133
FEMALE 107 90.03
anethesis_1

Females will score higher on Parent Care Influence than
males.

Stone et al. (1986) found that daughters were more
likely than sons to make work adjustments or leave their
jobs to care for the elderly. Also women tend to provide
more care to the elderly than men. Therefore, it was
believed that parent care would influence women more than
men in planning for retirement.

BeegLEe, Most of the subjects did not feel there was
Parent Care Influence on their retirement decisions, with
69.6% of the women and 71.5% of the men responding NOT AT
ALL (See Table 24). For men, the mean was 1.47 and for the
women 1.57, both of which demonstrated very little influence
from parent care. There was no significant difference

between men and women using Mann-Whitney U (See Table 25).

85

This hypothesis was not supported. There were no
significant differences between men and women relative to

the influence of parent care on retirement decisions.

Table 24
E l : I E] E ti ! E . .

 

 

 

 

Women (n=106) Men (n=63)

Influence Frequency Percent Frequency Percent
NOT AT ALL 74 69.6 45 71.5
SLIGHTLY 24 22.5 15 23.9
A GREAT DEAL 8 7.5 3 4.8
Table 25

- U t u
Gender Number Mean Rank U z p
MALE 63 80.51

3056.0 -.9708 .3316
FEMALE 106 87.67

 

86

mm
Females will score higher on Having Parent into Care
Facility than males.

As with parent care issues, it was believed that
dealing with all issues related to parents would affect the
planning of retirement for women more than men.

Beeglee, The Difficult and Very Difficult to Move a
Parent into a Care Facility responses were selected by most
of the subjects (See Table 26). Only 4.9% of the women and
11.1% of the men would find it Not Difficult. For men, .
there was a mean of 2.48 and for women 2.58 on this item.
The difference was not statistically significant using the
Mann-Whitney U statistical technique (See Table 27). The
hypothesis was not supported. There was no statistically
significant difference in the perceived difficulty men and

women would feel moving a parent into a care facility.

 

Table 26
Wain

Women (n=102) Men (n=63)
Difficulty Frequency Percent Frequency Percent
NOT DIFFICULT 5 4.9 7 11.1
DIFFICULT 33 32.4 19 30.2

VERY DIFFICULT 64 62.7 37 58.7

 

87

 

 

 

Table 27
- n e ac' 't and Ge de
Gender Number Mean Rank U z p
MALE 63 79.87
3016.0 -.7686 .4421
FEMALE 102 84.93
W

Females will score higher on Moving Parent into Subject's
name than males.

As with parent care issues, it was believed that
dealing with all issues related to parents would affect the
planning of retirement for women more than men.

Beeglee, For both men and women, it would be a little
less difficult to Move a Parent into the Subject's Homethan
into a Care Facility. Whereas only 4.9% of women and 11.1%
of men would not find it difficult to move a parent to a
care facility, 30.3% of women and 34.8% of men would not
find it difficult to Move a Parent into the Subject's Home
(See Table 26 and Table 28). The mean for men was 1.97 and
for women was 2.02, which represents it being a difficult

decision. The difference was not statistically significant

88

 

 

Table 28
MQY§_2§I§n§_£Q_MY_HQm§

Women (n-99) Men (n=69)
Difficulty Frequency Percent Frequency Percent
NOT DIFFICULT 30 30.3 24 34.8
DIFFICULT 37 37.4 23 33.3
VERY DIFFICULT 32 32.3 22 31.9
Table 29

 

 

 

Between Group .098 1 .098

.151 .698
Within Group 107.902 166 .650
Total 108.000

 

 

89

using one-way ANOVA (See Table 29). The hypothesis was not
supported. Men and women do not differ relative to the
difficulty of moving a parent into their home.
Wheels—6
Females will score higher on Anticipated Assistance to
Parents than males.

Because women generally provide more care to parents
than men, it was believed that women would anticipate
providing more assistance in the future to parents than men

would.

 

Beaglee. The range for Anticipated Assistance to
Parents was 0 to 7 activities with 38.4% of women and 32.9%
of men reporting no anticipated assistance (Table 30). The
mean for men was 2.82 and for women 2.74 activities. The
difference was not significant using the Mann-Whitney U
statistical technique (See Table 31). Men and women did not
differ in their anticipated assistance to parents. The

hypothesis was not supported.

Table 30

90

Angieipeteg Ageieeenee :9 Eeren§s

 

 

 

 

Women (n=112) Men (n=70)
Activities Frequency Percent Frequency Percent
NONE 43 38.4 23 32.9
ONE 6 5.4 5 7.1
TWO 10 8.9 8 11.4
THREE 5 4.5 8 11.4
FOUR 13 11.6 5 7.1
FIVE 13 11.6 7 10.0
SIX 5 4.5 1 1.4
SEVEN 17 15.2 13 18.6
Table 31
1.41".“ 1‘. .1 0 0 1-- = -1°. 1-
Gender Number Mean Rank U z p
MALE 70 92.98
FEMALE 112 90.58

 

_ J—nl

91

W111
Gender is not related to Concerns about Physical
Environment.

In order to view the subjects from an ecosystem
approach, this hypothesis was tested. There was nothing in
the literature to suggest differences between men and women
as to concerns about physical environment in retirement
planning.

Beaglee, Most subjects found Physical Environment
Somewhat Important with 56% of the women and 52.8% of the
men so responding (Table 32). Men had a mean on these items
of 2.96 and women had a mean of 3.06, therefore, subjects
generally found these concerns Somewhat Important. The
difference between men and women was not significant using
one-way ANOVA statistics (See Table 33). This hypothesis
was supported. Men and women did not differ on concerns

about physical environment during retirement.

 

 

 

92
Table 32
v' o t
Women (n=109) Men (n=70)
Importance Frequency Percent Frequency Percent
l

NOT AT ALL 1 .9 1 1.4
NOT T00 38 34.8 27 38.6
SOMEWHAT 61 56.0 37 52.8
VERY 9 8.3 5 7.1
Table 33

 

 

 

Between Group .434 1 .434

1.557 .214
Within Group 49.392 177 .279
Total 49.827

 

93

amtheeiu
Gender is not related to Concerns about Economics and
Safety.

In order to view the subjects from an ecosystem
approach, this hypothesis was tested. There was nothing in
the literature to suggest differences between men and women
as to concerns about economics and safety in retirement
planning.

BeeQLEe. Both men and women most frequently selected
as Somewhat Important Economics and Safety in the choice of
the community in which to live the first ten years of
retirement (See Table 34). For men, 62.9% felt it was
Somewhat Important and for women, 61.4%. However, 27.5% of
women and 11.4% of men found it Very Important. The mean
for men was 3.24 and for women 3.50. The difference was
significant at p<.001 using the Mann-Whitney U statistical
technique (See Table 35). Women had more concerns about
economics and safety than men. The hypothesis was not

supported.

 

94

 

 

 

Table 34
WW

Women (n=109) Men (n=70)
Importance Frequency Percent Frequency Percent
NOT AT ALL <2 0 00.0 1 1.4
NOT TOO 2-<3 12 11.0 17 24.3
SOMEWHAT 3-<4 67 61.4 44 62.8
VERY 4 30 27.5 8 11.4
Table 35

MW

 

Gender Number Mean Rank U z p

 

MALE 70 73.29
2645.0 -3.5063 .0005
FEMALE 109 100.73

 

95

W
Gender is not related to Concerns about Convenience.

In order to view the subjects from an ecosystem
approach, this hypothesis was tested. There was nothing in
the literature to suggest differences between men and women
as to concerns about convenience in retirement planning.

Beeelee. The majority of men, 58.5%, felt Convenience
in the choice of the community in which to live the first
ten years of retirement to be Not Too Important (See Table
36). However, the majority of women, 50.1%, felt it to be
Somewhat Important. The mean for men was 2.65 and for women
3.03. The difference was significant by one-way ANOVA,
p<.001 (See Table 37). While men tended to find convenience
Not Too Important, women found it Somewhat Important. The

hypothesis was not supported.

 

Table 36
Misuse

Women (n=106) Men (n=70)
Importance Frequency Percent Frequency Percent
NOT AT ALL <2 5 4.7 7 10.0
NOT TOO 2-<3 35 33.1 41 58.5
SOMEWHAT 3-<4 53 50.1 18 25.8

VERY 4 13 12.3 4 5.7

 

96

Table 37
W

 

W $8 of his F n
Between Group 6.008 1 6.008

15.114 .000

 

Within Group 69.171 174 .398
Total 75.180
MILE

Gender is not related to Concerns about Personal Enrichment.

In order to view the subjects from an ecosystem
approach, this hypothesis was tested. There was nothing in
the literature to suggest differences between men and women
as to concerns about personal enrichment in retirement
planning.

Beaglee. Personal Enrichment was Somewhat Important in
a community the first ten years of retirement for 40.7% of
the women and only 22.8% of the men (See Table 38). The
mean for men was 2.44 and for women 3.10. The difference
was significant by Mann-Whitney U, p<.001 (See Table 39).
Women were more concerned about personal enrichment in
retirement. The hypothesis was not supported. Women
generally find personal enrichment Somewhat Important,

whereas men find it Not Too Important.

97

 

 

 

 

 

Table 38
W
Women (n=108) Men (n=70)
Importance Frequency Percent Frequency Percent '
NOT AT ALL 5 4.6 16 22.8
NOT T00 37 34.4 36 51.5
SOMEWHAT 44 40.7 16 22.8
VERY 22 20.4 2 2.9
Table 39
- ' e
Gender Number Mean Rank U z p
MALE 70 62.24
1872.0 -5.7032 .0000
FEMALE 108 107.17

 

Discussion of the results will be presented in the next

chapter.

CHAPTER FIVE -- DISCUSSION, IMPLICATIONS, AND CONCLUSIONS

W

The main objective of this study was to analyze
differences between single men and women regarding their
concerns for family and parent care in retirement planning.
Family concerns included desire for proximity to family and
the amount of influence family members have on retirement
decisions. Parent care concerns had to do with anticipated
parent care responsibilities and associated placement of
parents for care. There was also reason to believe, from
the review of research, that other factors would be
influential during the retirement planning process.
Therefore, the research questions were:

1. What is the relationship between gender and family
concerns in retirement planning? Do educational level,
employment status, income, age and health of respondent,
dependency of parents and assistance to parents interact
with gender to affect the relationship of gender to family
concerns in retirement planning?

2. What is the relationship between gender and parent
care concerns in retirement planning? Do educational level,
employment status, income, age and health of respondent,
dependency of parents and assistance to parents interact
with gender to affect the relationship of gender to parent
care concerns in retirement planning?

3. What is the relationship between gender and the
importance of selected environmental characteristics

(physical and sociocultural) in retirement planning?

98

 

99

The following hypotheses were tested to accomplish the
objectives of this research:

H1: Females will score higher on Family Proximity than
males.

H2: Females will score higher on Family Influence than
males.

H3: Females will score higher on Parent Care Influence than
males.

H4: Females will score higher on Difficulty Moving Parent
into Care Facility than males.

H5: Females will score higher on Difficulty Moving Parent
into Subject's name than males.

H6: Females will score higher on Anticipated Assistance to
Parents than males.

H7: Gender is not related to concerns about Physical
Environment.

H8: Gender is not related to Concerns about Economics and
Safety.

H9: Gender is not related to concerns about Convenience.
H10: Gender is not related to Concerns about Personal
Enrichment.

The instrument (See Appendix A) used for this
dissertation included portions of the one used in the W-176
project titled, "Housing and Locational Retirement
Decisions: A study of Preretires in Four States" (McFadden
et al., 1991). The sample selected for the current analysis

included the single men and women from the W-176, 1991

.5—

 

100

 

Project. There were 70 men and 112 women. This chapter
includes a discussion of the demographic results, the

analyses of the hypotheses, implications, and conclusions.

DemographiLEindings
We
The subjects represented different types of single
marital status. According to Barresi and Hunt (1990), the
unmarried elderly over 55 make up 37% of the total group.

For the current study, the unmarried were 18% of the data

 

set from which this sample was drawn. However, the data set
did not include many subjects over 60 and did include
subjects younger than 55. Consistent with findings by
Barresi and Hunt, women represented a higher percent in all
the categories of unmarried (widowed, divorced and never
married) except for separated. Thus the subjects used for
the current research were fairly representative of the
working.population of a single marital status.
A9:

The subjects ranged in age from less than 35 to over
60; however, 68.5% of the women and 73% of the men were
between 40 and 54 years of age. The mean age for women was
49 and for men was 44.5. Thus, the subjects were a little
younger than the subjects, who were in the 503 and 605, in
the Karp (1989), Palmore et al. (1985), and Keith (1985)
studies. Karp (1989) concluded that people in their 503
begin to think about the future.

101

W111

Both men and women in this study reported good to
excellent health with little variability demonstrated in
this variable. Palmore et al. (1985) found that health
variables were not important predictors of retirement at
normal ages, and if subjects were in good health they would
be less likely to want to retire (Karp, 1989). Martin
Matthews and Brown (1987) found no differences by gender for
health as a reason to retire. Since most of these subjects
were still working and healthy, this demographic variable
provided no new insight into an understanding of retirement
and supports the fact that most people in this age group who
are working are healthy (Barresi & Hunt, 1990).
IDQQEQ

According to census figures for 1988, the median family
income was $32,191 (U.S. Department of Commerce, 1990). The
women in this study earned significantly less money than the
men. For women the median income was between $20,000 and
$24,999 and for men it was between $25,000 and $34,999.
Therefore this finding is consistent with the fact that in
our society generally men earn more money than women. The
subjects, therefore, were representative of the US
population on the income variable.
W

Parents for both men and women were quite independent
with little variability demonstrated on this variable. Many
of the studies on parent caregiving explore issues related

to caregiving for dependent parents (Brody 8 Schoonover,

 

102

1986; Stone et al., 1986). Rakowski and Clark (1985)
provided insight into caregiving issues for relatively
healthy subjects. They concluded that difficult caregiving
situations can be associated with limitations in planning
for the future. Therefore, it seems reasonable that the
subjects in the current research would perceive the future
fairly realistically if one considers that their parents
were quite independent.

W

The mean assistance to parents provided by men was .34
with a range of 0 to 3 activities performed. For women, the
mean was 1.09 with a range of 0 to 7 activities performed.
This difference was statistically significant. These
findings are consistent with the research and literature on
caregiving.

Horowitz (1985) found gender differences in the type of
care provided to parents and explained that caregiving is
predominantly a female role. Daughters were more likely to
help with "hands-on" assistance. Sons were no different
than daughters when the care was less gender-specific or
male-oriented. Both provided emotional support. However,
the men tended to rely on their spouses for care. Brody and
Schoonover (1986), Montgomery and Kamo (1987), and Stone et
al. (1986) also found that caregiving is gender specific
with females providing more care and being more likely to
adjust their lives and work to accommodate caregiving
activities. Dressel and Clark (1990) concluded that women
count care activities differently than men, and Finley

(1989) stated that women provide more care.

 

 

103

As discussed in relationship to parents' dependency,
Rakowski and Clark (1985) concluded that difficult
caregiving situations can be associated with limitations in
planning for the future. Therefore it seemed reasonable
that the subjects in the current research would be
influenced by the amount of current assistance to parents
when perceiving the future.

W1

Men and women did not differ significantly on this

variable. Most subjects were high school graduates or

above.

W

W
Females will score higher on Family Proximity than males.

For men, the importance of Family Proximity ranged from
1 to 4 with a mean of 2.76, a little less than Somewhat
Important. For women, the range was 1 to 4 with a mean of
3.23, a little more than Somewhat Important. The difference
was significant at the p<.001 level by Mann-Whitney U.
Proximity of family was significantly more important to
women than men during the first ten years of retirement.

Szinovacz (1986-87) found in her study of retired women
that family needs were frequently named as a reason for
retirement. In such cases the women preferred a later
retirement but were not necessarily less satisfied with
retirement. They did however, feel a disruption in goals.
Barresi and Hunt (1990) concluded that although spouse and
children may be lacking in unmarried elderly, siblings are

104

important as well as friends, nieces, nephews and cousins.
Anson et al. (1989) found partial support for proximity of
children and gains in entering retirement. Thus this
research finding is consistent with the literature and
Gilligan's (1982) theory which was developed from studying
young women. Women were very much influenced by how their
decisions would affect other people and the theory thus was
useful for understanding older women as in the current
research.

WM

Females will score higher on Family Influence than males.

For men, there was less influence from family on
retirement decisions than for women. The mean for men
(1.91) corresponded to less than a slight influence and for
women (2.22), it represented more than a slight influence
response on the questionnaire. The difference was
significant at p<.01 using the Mann-Whitney U statistical
technique. Women felt their retirement decisions would be
influenced by family more than men did.

This finding conforms with previous research such as
Szinovacz (1986-87) who found that for women a frequent
reason for retirement was family needs. Martin Matthews and
Brown (1987) reported that women were more likely then men
to retire for reasons of health of spouse or other family
members (7.2% for women versus 1.1% for men). Thus
Gilligan's theory, derived from studying adolescent women,
was again supported in this research. Women appeared to
consider others to a larger extent than men did when making

retirement decisions.

105

Hypethesis 3
Females will score higher on Parent Care Influence than
males.

For men, the mean on this variable was 1.47 and for the
women, 1.57, both of which demonstrated very little
influence from parent care. There was no significant
difference between men and women using the Mann-Whitney U
statistical technique. This finding seems inconsistent with
two other findings. Women in this study were providing
significantly more care to parents than men and they were
more influenced by family than men when considering
retirement.

There is research and literature to support differences
between men and women on this variable. Troll (1986) states
that there is continuity in the patterns of contacts that
have been established in earlier years. Martin Matthews and
Brown (1987) discovered that women were more likelythen men
to retire for reasons of health of spouse or other family
members (7.2% for women versus 1.1% for men). Stone et al.
(1986) found that the majority of the caregivers to the
frail elderly in their research were female, 28.9% of whom
were adult daughters. They also demonstrated that daughters
were more likely than sons to make work adjustments or leave
their jobs to care for elderly.

Rakowski and Clark (1985) found that future outlook was
negatively affected as current care to parents increased.

In their study a subgroup of caregivers who had a markedly
lower future outlook score and were giving help in a larger

number of areas of daily life stated that the prospect of

t

106

continued assistance negatively affected their future
outlook. Yet in the current analysis, when specific
references to parent care influencing retirement were
requested, there were no statistically significant
differences between men and women, although a small actual
score difference was seen. There were similarities in the
health of the care-receivers in the studies so that
influence was removed. Perhaps women have already made
adjustments in order to provide the parent care they are
currently doing. Perhaps as is evident in Brody et al. i
(1984), women of all generations believe that daughters
particularly unmarried daughters are expected to adjust work
schedules more than sons. This assumed value may be
operating in the present study and the women are not
conscious of the values affecting their decision.

A limiting factor in the current study was that there
was a Do Not Know response possible, so that variability in
responses may have been lost, resulting in measurement
bias. Polit 8 Hungler (1983) stated that the Do Not Know
response may encourage "fence-sitting."

As discussed in the review of literature, the concept
of care is complex. For this study, care was not defined
for the respondents in this question. One can not be sure
what the respondents had in mind as to "care". It did
follow a question that asked about specific activities,
however. Women do count care activities differently than
men. They tend to underestimate the amount of care they do,
taking ordinary activities for granted as part of their

lives (Dressel 8 Clark, 1990).

107

Women tend to help with the personal care and
instrumental services whereas men tend to help with money
management (Brody 8 Schoonover, 1986). In retrospect,
including on the questionnaire additional ways of assisting
parents would expand that concept more clearly. Assistance
with business matters is a fairly common activity provided
(Montgomery 8 Kamo, 1987) as is administering medications to
disabled parents (Stone et al. 1986). Often researchers
include psychological support type items as well as
instrumental type help (Walker 8 Pratt, 1991).

Females tend to experience more adverse effects from
caregiving than males (Biegel, Sales, 8 Schulz, 1991).
Biegel et al. hypothesized that women look forward to being
free from child care responsibility. Being reinvolved in a
caregiving role may be very upsetting to the older women.
Another factor may be the qualitative differences between
care by men and women. Women may feel they must always do
more, whereas, men are more able to set limits and involve
others in the care. Research on the differing experiences
of men and women related to caregiving of the elderly needs
to be done. The nonsignificant findings from this research
supports the notion that men become more nurturing with age.

There are implications for education for women in that
if women are providing a large share of parent care, they
need to plan appropriately for it so that they can minimize
the stress associated with adjusting to retirement and

providing parent care. Women may not be in touch with the

 

108

realities of parent care responsibilities. There is also a
need for communities to provide help to care providers
(Stone et al. 1986).

11119931138114

Females will score higher on Having Parent into Care
Facility than males.

For both men and women it would generally be difficult
to very difficult to move a Parent into a Care Facility.
For men, there was a mean of 2.48 and for women 2.58 on this
item. Although women found it more difficult than men, the
difference was not statistically significant. For the
single men and women in this study, gender was not a
statistically significant factor in difficulty moving a
parent into a care family. There has been no definitive
research on this variable related to gender differences.

The premise for this hypothesis was that a woman, very
influenced by other people when making decisions (Gilligan,
1982), would have her values confronted and be more affected
by having to make this decision then a man would.
Sensitivity to how the parent might feel and/or feeling she
had failed as a care provider was assumed to make this
decision more difficult. However, the hypothesis was not
supported.

The prospect of having to make the decision to move a
parent into a care facility is becoming a reality for more
and more people as our population ages. The number of
persons 85 and older is increasing, and this older
population has the most need for extensive care (Brody,

1990). As a society we are unrealistic if we assume the

109

care of the elderly can be handled by families, which often
assumes women. It is also relevant that women are less able
than men to afford to pay for care facilities for self or
parent (American Association of Retired Person, 1989).
Future research should clarify the issues related to moving
a parent into a care facility. Society needs to be
responsive to this concern felt by people approaching
retirement.

W

Females will score higher on Moving Parent into Subject's
name than males.

For both men and women, it would be a little less
difficult to Move a Parent into the Subject's Home than into
a care facility. The mean for men was 1.97 and for women
was 2.02, both representing a difficult decision. Although
women found the decision more difficult then men, the
difference was not statistically significant.

The research in the area of parents living with their
children demonstrates inconsistencies relative to the
probability of living with a son versus a daughter. Some of
the literature supports the fact that old people who live
with a child are more likely to live in their own home with
a daughter than a son. In such cases, it is more likely to
be an unmarried daughter than a married one (Troll, 1986).

The research by Brody et al. (1984) evaluated opinions
of three generations of women assumed to be the caregivers
and care recipients of the present and the future. Although
the older two generations did not support household sharing,

[all generations felt that it was more appropriate for a

 

110

daughter to share a household with an elderly mother than a
son. A nonworking married daughter or an unmarried daughter
was considered the most appropriate.

Brody and Schoonover (1986) found that daughters are
three times more likely than sons to share their household
with a dependent elderly parent. However, Montgomery and
Kano (1987) found that there was equal likelihood of a
parent living with a son or a daughter. Moreover, Stone et
al. (1986) found no differences by gender in living
arrangements. The Stone et al. and Montgomery and Kano
studies reflected living arrangements for frail and/or
disabled elderly. Although there were no gender differences
in living arrangements, daughters did provide more care than
sons.

It is difficult for both men and women to make the
decision to move a parent into one's home, and there is
inconsistency in the literature related to whether the older
parent is more likely to live with a daughter or a son. The
results of the current research suggest that even though it
is a difficult decision for both the men and women in this
study, the perception of difficulty may not be related to
the living arrangements currently found in the literature.

A factor that should be addressed in future studies is
whether the level of care needed by the parent is related to

the living arrangements.

 

111

W
Females will score higher on Anticipated Assistance to
Parents than males.

Anticipated assistance to parents ranged from 0 to 7
activities including such matters as financial help and
personal care. The mean for men was 2.82 and for women
2.74. The difference was not significant. This finding was
unexpected based on the fact that women currently were

providing more care than men and providing current care is

 

slightly positively correlated with anticipated care
(33.3202 p=.01). Also, Brubaker (1990) states that the
relationship patterns established in earlier years continue
into the later years.

Perhaps looking at specific care activities rather than
a total would provide explanations. Many research findings
suggest that men tend to take care of the tangible or
”instrumental” tasks like shopping, indoor tasks and paying
bills/taxes. The "psychological" support activities include
contact and emotional supportive activities as measured by
Walker and Pratt (1991). The "psychological" support
activities were not measured as thoroughly as the
”instrumental" in the current study. This could explain the
lack of differences between men and women on the assisting
your parent questions. Or as discussed with other care
issues, the acceptance of routine care activities by women
may make them less conscious of how much they do. Perhaps
these women count care activities differently than men and

take it for granted (Dressel 8 Clark, 1990)

112

Montgomery and Reno (1987) found that daughters
reported spending more time in all types of parent care
tasks than sons except for equal time with financial and
business matters. Daughters also do so for a longer period
of time. Even though daughters spend substantially more
time in caregiving activities, sons report equal levels of
burden. Perhaps the differences in perception of burden '
influence retirement plans. Even though sons provide less

care, they perceive the necessity to plan for it more so

 

than daughters because it affects them more. Perhaps the
findings reflect a lack of change in what women expect to
provide in the future based on current care.

As discussed previously, there are implications for
education for women in that if women are providing a large
share of parent care, they need to plan appropriately for it
so that they can minimize the stress associated with
adjusting to retirement and providing parent care. Social
policy needs to reflect the need for support to women who
provide this care.

W
Gender is not related to Concerns about Physical
Environment.

Men had a mean on these items of 2.96 and women had a
mean of 3.06; therefore, subjects generally found these
concerns Somewhat Important. The difference between men and
women was not significant.

This hypothesis was tested in order to reinforce
similarities in women and men on nonfamily issues thus

demonstrating more strongly the importance of family issues

113

for women. Research on concerns about the physical
environment by gender have not been a focus for study. This
research did not support gender as an issue in relation to
physical environment in retirement planning.

W

Gender is not related to concerns about Economics and
Safety.

The mean for men was 3.24 and for women 3.50. Both men
and women rated economics and safety quite important. Women
rated economics and safety as more important then men,
however, and the difference was significant by Mann-Whitney
U, p<.001. This finding was unexpected; however, in
retrospect one might expect women to be more concerned about
economics and safety issues because their income is
significantly lower than the men in this study. Women may
need to plan more carefully in order to purchase necessities
and have enough money to live in safe areas. Some older
women may have safety and security concerns about driving to
get to services and/or not want to drive alone.

Palmore et al. (1985) found that income distinguished
retired working men and women from the nonworking retired,
although less education and lower occupational status were
also factors with men. They also found from the RHS data
set that retirement resulted in extra-work interests for
unmarried women. Their RHS analysis was the only large data
set with information about both men and women in which
working after retirement could be examined. Women were
somewhat less likely to continue work after retirement;

however, those women who did work tended to work more weeks

 

 

 

114

in the year. Further analysis on women working after
retirement was not done because "there were too few women to
permit meaningful analysis" (Palmore et al., p. 86). Based
on the current analysis, which suggests that women are more
concerned about economics and safety issues including
employment opportunities during the first ten years of
retirement, further research should examine women's interest
in safety, economics, and employment during retirement.
W

Gender is not related to concerns about Convenience.

The mean for men was 2.65 and for women 3.03. The
difference was significant by ANOVA, p<.001. While men
tended to find convenience Not Too Important, women found it
Somewhat Important. As with Hypothesis 8, this finding was
unexpected; however, in retrospect one might expect women to
be more concerned about convenience because their income is
significantly lower than the men in this study. It may be
that women's lesser financial resources make it more
important for them to be near supportive facilities such as
medical facilities and public transportation. Safety
concerns, and wishing to conserve energy and time and avoid
stress, may also be important factors in the desire for
convenience. This information helps in our understanding of
women and retirement. Further research needs to examine

this issue for women.

 

 

 

 

115

W
Gender is not related to Concerns about Personal Enrichment.
The mean for men on this variable was 2.44 and for
women 3.10. The difference was significant by Mann-Whitney

U, p<.001. Women are more concerned about personal
enrichment than men. Additional items on Question 12, not
used to measure this variable because they tend to be more
interesting to men than women, were categorized under
Recreational Facilities. Those items could be
conceptualized as being associated with Personal Enrichment
because of the social quality of the activities (See
Appendix A). Thus, the results of this hypothesis should
not be interpreted to mean that men are less interested in
social activities than women.

In the DSLS data set, Palmore et al. (1985) discovered
that both retired men and women had increased time spent in
hobbies but men also had increased frequency of church
attendance. There was no relationship between retirement
and participation in formal organizations. Szinovacz
(1986-87) found that a common reason for retirement for
women was leisure interest. She also identified that it is
only when women are unable to pursue leisure interests that
there are negative effects on retirement satisfaction.
Martin Matthews and Brown (1987) were interested in the
differing retirement experiences of men and women. One
finding was that women were more likely to report an

increase in their social activities during retirement.

116

Antonovsky and Sagy (1990) concluded that an important
developmental task for those going through the retirement
transition is active iDYOIVEEEEE- The current research
finding suggests women may be aware of what environmental
enrichment resources they will need in retirement in order
to be actively involved in finding things to do with the
hours freed up. This helps in our understanding of women
and retirement. As did Martin Matthews and Brown (1987),
this researcher concludes that the social involvement of

women in retirement needs further study.

W

Palmore et al. (1985) addressed the concern that most
studies on retirement focus exclusively on men. Because of
increased interest in gender differences, and, particularly,
since labor force participation has increased among women,
we need to clarify the evidence on gender and retirement.
The current analysis did indeed support differences between
men and women on retirement planning issues related to
family concerns and some community characteristics during

retirement.

1' '! !I
1. Operalization of the variables was done with an existing
data set. No instruments have been developed and validated
that measure family and parent care concerns in retirement
planning. Thus, measurements of these concepts may not be
valid. The instrument did not differentiate among subjects

on some variables.

117

2. Asking one person to respond to questions related to
future parent care may not accurately reflect how parent
care responsibilities are anticipated to be divided among
siblings or other family members (Spitze 8 Logan, 1990).
3. The income data were collected as ordinal rather than
interval data. The groupings did not adequately allow for
income to be used as a covariate.

4. With analysis, the Parent Care Influence variable may
have been very muddled either because of the Do Not Know
Column or because of combining the current and anticipated
care ideas in one question.

5. The variables reflected perceptions of the subjects,
which raises the question as to how accurate some of the
measures were. For example, parent's dependency and
assistance to parents were opinions rather than objective

measures by the researchers.

0 s c

While Parent Care Concerns gender differences were not
significant in this research, since women tend to provide
much of the care to parents, further studies are needed to
clarify how women anticipate and plan for parent care during
retirement planning. Palmore et al. (1985) also discussed
the question of who the appropriate comparison group should
be when studying women and retirement: men or older
housewives. If, as with this study, one is concerned with
planning for retirement, then all studies that report
findings on workers who are anticipating retirement should

differentiate findings by gender.

 

118

Future studies on retirement planning should use
qualitative methods as well as quantitative methods since
there is little of a qualitative nature in the retirement
literature. A question that could be posed to the
informants is "What are your concerns in thinking about
retirement?” Qualitative methods would also help us
understand what it must be like for women to return to a
caregiving role after looking forward to being free from
child care responsibilities.

Of value also would be to obtain ethnic and racial
information when doing research on retirement to see if
there are differences. One of the studies reviewed for this
research was done in Israel, and the authors concluded that
gender differences in relationship to family and retirement
were not as apparent there and could be attributed to the
culture (Anson et al., 1989).

It would be appropriate to develop instruments for
couples planning retirement and also obtain separate
information from each person in the dyad. This would
provide an understanding of how a couple involves its
members in retirement planning and include couple issues.

The subjects in this study included widows as well as
divorced and never married. Future research should examine
the relevance of these differing single states and issues
related to retirement. V

Although the women in this study were a few years older
than the men, age was not highly correlated with the
variables. Future studies should examine the importance of

age differences and retirement issues.

 

119

The men in this study were very concerned about parent
care issues. Future studies should examine the concerns men
have about parent care in retirement planning. It would
also be interesting to determine how the mother/daughter

relationship affects parent care concerns.

I J' I ll !'

Parent care as an issue in women's lives has not
received the attention that the nurturing of children has
(Abel, 1986). Stone et al. (1986) concluded that we need to
strengthen informal support systems in order to maintain the
elderly in the community as long as possible and thus
curtail some of the cost of these services. However, if the
expectation is that women will provide the care, then women
will have limitations on their lives similar to the
limitations that they experience during the childbearing and
childrearing years (Abel, 1986). The current government
administration and movements nationally are empowering women
and attending to women's issues. Therefore, the time is
ripe for government policies to be developed to provide
support to the elderly so that women will not be affected
adversely.

Business policies frequently address retirement issues
through programs for employees. Often these programs
concern themselves with financial planning for retirement.
These programs also need to be cognizant of the special
needs of women related to family, parent care, and community
characteristics. Family leave policies with parttime

opportunities may be appropriate for some families as they

 

120

deal with parent care responsibilities, yet want to return
to work full time at a later date. Insurance packages
offered by businesses should consider providing payments for
care providers in the home. Day care for family members
could be provided at the worksite. Educational programs,
within businesses and community services, should address the
issues of family, parent care, and community characteristics
as they relate to the unique concerns of women planning for
retirement. Support groups within businesses or the
community can be useful for helping women plan for and

anticipate retirement.

W

This research demonstrated that there are differences
between men and women in retirement planning. Thus, there
is value in conceptualizing retirement differently for men
and women. There is also value in considering retirement
from an ecosystem model. As demonstrated in this research,
issues of importance to people making decisions about
retirement include the physical as well as the sociocultural
environments.

The family ecological framework (Bubolz & Sontag, 1993)
integrated with Bronfenbrenner's (1979) human development
model was extended and offered explanations of the
development of older people planning retirement. The family
microsystem is a concern to people planning retirement as
was demonstrated by the importance single men and women
placed on family proximity and influence. however, these

family issues were greater for women than for men. The

 

121

mesosystem of the work environment is a large factor in
women's lives. The exosystem is also an important factor
for women planning retirement in that formal institutions
need to be involved in such issues as the timing of
retirement, financial resources, parent care, and community
development, in order to improve women's lives.

There was support for the theory that women's values
influence the decision making process related to family and
sociocultural aspects of the preferred retirement
environment (Bubolz & Sontag, 1993). Gilligan's (1982)
theory within an ecological framework was also helpful for
understanding women and retirement. According to Gilligan
(1982), the "caring" value of women related to family and
other people is hypothesized to be a result of cultural
influences during their early development. Cultural
influences result from the macrosystem ideologies that
affect how women perceive their role in society related to
feelings about the family and parent care.

This research supports the proposition that there is a
gender basis to social and cultural life issues in planning
for retirement (Thorne, 1982). Our perceptions about women
and retirement have not changed with the times, and the
current chronosystem should stimulate us to rethink
retirement for women. Macrosystem ideologies need to be
confronted. Thus, the theories that were supported in this
research make it imperative that future research examine the

unique concerns of women and retirement issues.

 

 

122

Conclusions

There have been few studies that have considered issues
related to retirement differently for men and women. This
study demonstrated areas where there are differences between
single men and women as they consider retirement. This
study provided information on the perspectives of single men
and women, demonstrating that there are significant
differences by gender. A general perspective on retirement
is that it is a male issue, when in fact it is also an issue
for women. Therefore, we need to rethink our previous
understanding of retirement as a genderless issue and/or
more relevant for men than for women. It appears from these
data that we need particularly to consider family concerns
and some sociocultural concerns such as economics, safety,
and convenience as they relate to gender. Women also need
to be more cognizant of parent care responsibilities as they
plan for retirement. Certainly future retirement research
should distinguish between findings for men and women. In a
practical sense, developers of retirement communities should
consider income and gender as they relate to economics,
safety, and convenience. In order to assist women with
retirement decisions, we need to understand their special

needs and concerns and provide the necessary supports.

 

 

 

 

LI ST OF REFERENCES

LIST OF REFERENCES

Abel, E. K. (1986). Adult daughters and care for the
elderly- Eeminis§_§tndie§. 12(3). 479-497-

Allen. K- R. (1989). Single_wgmenlfamilx_ties. Newbury Park.
CA: Sage.

American Association of Retired Persons. (1989). A_p;afii1a
gfi_g1§az_Amarigan§. Washington, DC: Author.

Anson, 0., Antonovsky, A., & Sagy, S. (1989). Family,
gender, and attitudes toward retirement. §ax_391a§,
2Q(7/8), 355- 369.

Antonovsky, A., & Sagy, S. (1990). Confronting develo mental
tasks n the retirement transition. In§_§agantglggiat,
19(3), 362-368.

Barresi, C. M., & Hunt, K. (1990). The unmarried elderly:
Age, sex, and ethnicity. In T. H. Brubaker (Ed. ), Family
(2nd ed.) (pp. 169- 192).
Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

Biegel, D. E., Sales, E., & Schulz, R. (1991L family
2arégixing_in_2nrgnis_illnes§- Newbury Park CA: Sage.

Bowers, B. (1987). Intergenerational caregiving: Adult
caregivers and their aging parents.

Seisnge 2(2). 20- 31-

Brody. E- H- (1990) fl2men_in_the_middlei_2neir_narsntzsare
yaara. New York: Springer.

Brody, E. H., Johnsen, P. T., & Fulcomer, M. C. (1984L What
should adult children do for elderly parents? Opinions
and preferences of three generations of women. Jgazna1_gfi

gerontology. 39(6). 736-746-

Brody, E. M., & Schoonover, C. B. (1986). Patterns of
parent-care when adult daughters work and when they do

not. The gerontologist. 2§(4). 372-381.

Bronfenbrenner, U- (1979)- The_es2l2gx_gf_human_dexelgnmenti
° . Cambridge, MA: Harvard
University Press.

Bronfenbrenner, U. (1986). Ecology of the family as a
context for human development: Research Perspectives.

Dexeleemental_2§xshglegx. 22(6). 723-742-

123

 

 

124

Brubaker! T- H- (Ed-)- (1990)- MW
1112 (2nd Ed.). CA: Sage.

Bubolz, H. M., 8 Sontag, H. S. (1993). Human ecology theory.
In P. Boss, W. Doherty, R. La Rossa, W. Schumm, 8 S.
Steinmetz (Eds. ), '

. New York: Plenum.

Burr, W. R., Herrin, D. A., Say, R. D., Beutler, I. F., 8
Leigh, G. K. (1988L Epistemologies that lead to primary

explanations in family science. £amily_§gianga_3_yi§fl, 1,
185-210.

Chodorow, N. (1974). Family structure and feminine
personality. In H. Rosaldo 8 L. Lamphere (Eds.), ngany
(pp 43-66). Stanford, CA: Stanford
University Press.

 

Clifford. H- (1991). MW
WWW
° ' <-> e s t . Doctoral

Dissertation: Michigan State University.

Crano, W. D., 8 Brewer, H. B. (1973).
in_aggia1_pay§nglggy. New York: HcGraw-Hill.

Cronbach, L. J. (1951). Coefficient Alpha and the internal
structure of tests. EEYQDQEEEIIKQ. 1g, 297-334.

Dressel, P. L., 8 Clark, A. (1990). A critical look at
family care- MW. 52(3).
769-782.

Finley, N. (1989). Theories of family labor as applied to
gender differences in caregiving for elderly parents.

WWW 21(1) . 79-86.

Gilligan, C. (1982). ° °
' . Massachusetts: Harvard
University Press.

Greeno, C. G., 8 Maccoby, E. E. (1986). How different is
the "different voice"? In L. K. Kerber, C. G. Greeno 8 E.
E. Maccoby, Z. Luria, C. B. Stack, 8 C. Gilligan. On In a
different voice: An interdisciplinary forum.

Elana:
12nrnal_2f_K2men_in_£nltnre_and_§221etx. .11(2). 304-325-

Henretta, J. C., Chan, C. G., 8 O'Rand, A. M. (1992).
Retirement reason versus retirement process: Examining
the reasons for retirement typology.
WW. 51(1). 81-7-

Horowitz, A. (1985). Sons and daughters as caregivers to
older parents: Differences in role performance and
consequenceS- Ths_§§rgnfglggi§§. 25(6). 612-617-

 

 

125

Karp, D. A. (1989). The social construction of retirement

among professionals 50- 60 years old. Ina_§azgntglggi§§,
23(6), 750- -760.

Keith, P. M. (1985). Work, retirement, and well-being among

unmarried men and women. Ina Gerontologist, 25(4),
410-416.

Keith, P. M., 8 Wacker, R. R. (1990). Sex roles in the older
family. In T. H. Brubaker (Ed. ),

lataz_111a (2nd ed.) (pp. 115- 141). Newbury Park, CA:
Sage.

Kohlberg. L- (1981). Ihe_nnil9s2nhx_2f_mgral_dexslgemento
San Francisco, CA: Harper and Row.

Komarovsky, M. (1988). The new feminist scholarship: Some
precursors and polemics- l2u:nal_2f_narriage_and_tne
, 59, 585-593.
Linton, M., Gallo, P. 8., 8 Logan, C. A. (1975). Ina
. . . . d
atatiatiga. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.

Martin Matthews, A., 8 Brown, K. H. (1987). Retirement as a
critical life event. Baaaar§h_9n_5ging, 2(4), 548-571.

Matthews, S. H. (1987). Provision of care to old parents.
Resear§h_9n_bsing. 2(1). 45-60.

McFadden, J. R., 8 Brandt, J. A. (Eds. ). Schiamberg, L. B.,
Stenberg, L. 8 Sward, M. A. (1991). nagging_and

 

Jocat . t euen 0‘ ‘ 01" ' -2 e 9. a ;
1n_figa;_§ga;a§_(Research Report 139). Logan, UT: Utah
State University.

Montgomery, R. J. V., 8 Kamo, Y. (1987). s tw
sens_and_deugnt2rs_in_nerental_saregixing- Paper

presented at the annual meeting of the Gerontological
Society of America. Washington, DC.

Munro, B. H., Visintainer, M. A., 8 Page, E. B. (1986).
a
Philadelphia: Lippincott.

Osmond, M. W. (1984 ). Feminist research and scientific
criteria. Journal_9f_£amilx_1§sue§. 5. 571-576.

Palmore, E. B., Burchett, B., Fillenbaum, G. G., George, L.

K-. &Wa11man. L- H- (1985) Betirsment1_§auses_and
ggnaggagngaa. New York: Springer.

Parsons, T., 8 Bales, R. F. (Eds). (1955).
s92ializati2n1_and_in§era2tign_nrgsss§. Glencoe. IL: Free
Press .

Polit, D. F., & Hungler, B. P. (1983). -
Erinsiples_and_meth2d§- Philadelphia: Lipplncott

jaggm—ww--v

 

126

Rakowski, W., 8 Clark, N. M. (1985). Future outlook,
caregiving, and care-receiving in the family context.
0 ' , 15(6), 618-623.

Rescher. N- (1982)- IntrQdustign_t2_xalge_§heerx-
Washington, DC: University Press of America.

Spitze, G., 8 Logan, J. (1990). Son, daughters, and

intergenerational social support. ggaznal_gf_uarriaga_aag
the_£amilx. 52(2). 420-430-

Stacey, J., 8 Thorne, B. (1985). The missing feminist
revolution in sociology. fig;ia1_2:gblam§, 32, 301-316.

Stone, R., Cafferata, G. L., 8 Sangl, J. (1986). Caregivgzs

' ' Rockville, MD:

National Center for Health Services Research and Health
Care Technology Assessment.

Szinovacz, M. (1986-87). Preferred retirement timing and
retirement satisfaction in women.
e , 25(4), 301-317.

Thompson, L. (1987). Objectivity ang aabjagtiyity in
feminist_and_famdlx_ssien§e- Paper presented at the
National Council on Family Relations Conference. Atlanta,
GA.

Thorne, B. (1982). Feminist rethinking of the family: An
overview. In B. Thorne 8 M. Yalom (Eds.),
° (pp. 1-24). New York:
Longman.

Troll, L. E. (Ed.). (1986). Family issues in current
gerontology. New York: Springer.

US Department of Commerce. (1990).
Washington, DC: US Government Printing Office.

Verbrugge, L. M. (1984). A health profile of older women
with comparisons to older men. 3aaaazgh_gn_5g1ng, §(3),
291-322.

Walker, A. J., 8 Pratt, C. C. (1991). Daughters' help to
mothers: Intergenerational aid versus caregiving. ggnnnal

I 11(1) I 3.12:

Walker, A. J., 8 Thompson, L. (1984). Feminism and family
studies. igurn§l_gf_£amilx_ls§ues. 5. 545-570-

 

 

 

 

GENERAL REFERENCES

 

GENERAL REFERENCES

Ajzen, I., 8 Fishbein M. (1980). att
prsdisting_sosial_behaxior- NJ: Prentice-Hall-

Boulding, K. (1985). finnan_bg§tarmaa§. New York: Sage.

Bubolz, M. (1973). yalaaa. Unpublished paper. Department of
Family and Child Sciences, Michigan State University:
East Lansing, Michigan.

Bubolz. h- (July 16- 19 1988) Tniaking_for_etnioal_astion
1 - t

 

Paper presented for Second International Conference on
Thinking and Problem-Solving in Home Economics. Columbus,
OH: The Ohio State University.

Clifford, M. (Fall 1989). Toward an explanation of the
interrelationship among universal human needs, values,
and goals: An ecological perspective.

IEHBHl119'21-

Gilligan, C., Lyons, N. P. 8 Hanner, T. J. (Eds.) (1990).
Making_ggnnagtigna. MA: Harvard University Press.

Jacobson, M. (November, 1970). Values I. Extan§19n_finllatin
- ' Michigan State University:
Cooperative Extension Service.

Packard, J., 8 Ferrara, M. (1988). In search of the moral
foundation of nursing- Adxanoss.in.fluzsins_figienss.
19(4), 60—71.

Paolucci, B. (1985). Values and family management, Parts I 8
I. Unpublished papers for PCB 810 prepared for the
Beatr ce Paolucci Symposium. East Lansing, MI: Michigan
State University.

Peterson, G., Hey, R., 8 Peterson, L. (May 1979L
Intersection of family development and moral stage

frameworks: Im lications for theory and research.
J2urnal_of_Marr£age_and_ths_£amilx. 229-235-

Reed, P. (1989). Nursing theorizing as an ethical endeavor.
Ad2ansss.in.flnrsing_soienoe. 11(3). 1-9-

Ruddick, S. (1982). Maternal thinkin . In B. Thorne (Ed.)
with M. Yalom, '
gnaatigna. New York: Longman.

127

128

Whitbeck, L. 8 Gecas, V. (1988). Value attributions and
value transmission between parents and children. agaraal

WW. :9. 829-840.

 

 

APPENDICES

 

APPENDIX A

 

APPENDIX A

The Questionnaire

EXPERIMENT STATIONS AT THE UNIVERSITY OF IDAHO, OREGON STATE UNIVERSITY, UTAH STATE

 

JOINTLY SPONSORED BY AGRICULTURAL

‘ \\~\
“\ TO
RETIREMENT

F“ W
fl; 0C3;

Community and Housing
Choices

* 'I' 'I‘ * 'I' * 'I‘ A STUDY OF RETIREMENT CHOICES AND CONCERNS IN FOUR STATES * ’I‘ * * 'l‘ **

AIISUJAINI'I 31V1$ NVDIHDIW ONV MISUBAIND JIVIS

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

***********
***********

Your help with this effort is greatly appreciated! Thank you!

129

 

 

130

APPENDIX A

The Questionnaire

THINKING AHEAD . . .

Q-l Sanpecplestartplandrqearlyformtir-Itudothenuitultillatar.
Mahatym? mmtmmymmmaMM?
(Placizchannmr)

NFNTML
aumm
5n:
AGHREN.

0-2 Wm“mleymrage,doymfulymmmm, them,
orlessplanumforretix-utt? (Chisholm)

OUNH

; HMO-0
: aga

mmmmww nit-dump
,fmmmmabmmmm

5

0-3

3

NRNDTDEMHHNP
SHMNNEMMLMWTEMEIM'
KEEQHUWKHDEMMIM‘

MMWNMMh,m
mummmm‘? (draconian-r)

n—mmmm, 1mm

, emporium
l-nmmm, atrium
Wmmmmm

5%;

i
:5 ””“ E
g:

as
i
3

mototohmanctlyimuwfllmin. Plea-a
yummautyurymmmwutymmCu)
mmmm. (Wininynr(s)a:dndt

2
iii
5.5 HHHH
.g3

8

i

.—————YflRKflDfiMflDEflE

mmmmmmmmtm
mm, rpm”)

 

[an Dmmmm

Dram

 

 

 

 

 

auup

 

 

 

131

APPENDIX A

The Questionnaire

WHERE TO LIVE 2

Q-7 Again,iffreetodnose,w:idzofunfouwimbestm,withina20
' niledistarm,theMormimimymwulldmudm1flmtolive
mmmfimofmtiramt? (Plaoeletterofdniceinoad:

box)
Anammmatwrmmmwsoomoomm
[3mm anacnmmmmmumrcmrisomoomwofim
curtaxmazmatwmmmmsomoomumooo
D..Ac1mazmmwrmnmmzo,ooom49,999
DIMLIKE annexmryazmmwmumrcmriomoomioam
p..Aa1mmRm1mwmnm-srmz,soomo,999

Q-B W(ormgim)dnreymwundmlihtolive,stmmld
ywwefumtmmmmmmofmimxfl
(Circleaue)

UIJDUNH

Q-lo Iffreetodnoee,untmmimm.wundymutlm, accord
retimt? (Writeletterofeadmdniminoadlbat)

[:]uxmxzma AI".annnuzmrumuaam1naazns,anqmmazns
a..tnnnnn<rimmummns
swam <:u.nmumccm1umun§s
xsrnne o
s
p
unsrnms c..namsunmm;wmn1£(mn

Q-mSGneretixedpeqaleliwatanlmpartofmyuruduwm-axing
ttxemixderofflnyear. midtofmefolladingb-td-ncribesmatymm
ymmldliketodomflnmofyurmimlfl (Circlema

umber)
1 IMATGIEEDEALLYDR (SkiptoQ-u)
r“"‘”“'“‘“2 IJVEATWIOGTIGMMWMYBRMomQ-m)

i"“~‘-’*Q-11b Rmymarelbtatyamprinaryhma,mwmottnr
location be? (Circleannflzer)

1 ammormosmzmwmm
2 ammmmm
3 mmmmm

132

APPENDIX A

The Questionnaire

3 COMMUNITY CHARACTERISTICS

Q-12 Havinportantareeadmoffiufolladmdnracteristiminyumdnioeofa
' mammmnwmmmum. (Circle
camera-3mm)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

VERY scrum M111) MATALL
MI W mar mar

a.Iowoostoflivim

(food,rnisi.rq,etc.)....1 2 3 4
b.10wutilityrates......1 2 3 4
c.mploywmqpornmitJ.-...1 2 3 4
d.Iowcrimerate..‘......1 2 3 4
W‘m
13.th

transportatim.......1 2 3 4
f.quingmll........1 2 3 4
gowm 0.0.0.1 2 3 4
h.Public ....l 2 3 4
i.Pnufldtytofhdly .. .. .1 2' 3 4
man-mm
j.m:atimalomcrunitin..1 2 3 4
k.Libra:yfacilitiu......1 2 3 4
1.Yan'preferrudplaca

ofumship.........1 2 3 4
m.Volmteerqporumiti....1 2 3 4
n.mluralqpcrumiti.....1 2 3 4
mammal.
o.Fishing ..... ......1 2 3 4
p.Boatirq ..... ......l 2 3 4
q.C2npin;...........l 2 3 4
rlm 0.00.00.0001 2 3 4
s.Tennis...........1 2 3 4
tom: ......OOOOOOI 2 3 4
u.avimirq...........1 2 3 4
v.3:ectatorspozts

(football,basictban)...1 2 3 4
SonicFeatm'es
w.Nearocean..........1 2 3 4
x.Nearlakeorrivur......1 2 3 4
y.Nearmim........1 2 3 4
z.Lotsoftr-asani

snag; .. ... ..... l 2 3 4
unfortFeath
aa.?larmtaperatln‘s......1 2 3 4
wommmOOOOOOOOI 2 3 4
oc.Nosrminwint¢r......1 2 3 4
aomwty0000000001 2 3 4
-.maltim 00......1 2 3 4
£10wa1tim0000000001 2 3 4
g.Seasonaldmgas.......1 2 3 4

133

APPENDIX A

The Questionnaire

i
i
a
'5
E
i
a
5
SI
i
E

i i

1 1 mmmmmwmm

2 2 mmwmmommmam
mmormm

3 3 WOFMXOIMMHIRESNCITLAM)

Q-14Fhmleunwillirgtoaooeptdiffermtlanlsoflocnlmdicalsuvicein
finirwities mstedbelwaresixlmelsofmdicnlsezvioesfrunleast
tomst.Pleasecirclefl1enmerof;hg_Wymm
mummmmmmwmm
nigutbelocated. (Circlemexuber)

mmmsmvxcz

ammm,mm

ammm,mm

mmm,ammmamm
WWISMIE

mmmmmmmmm
13m

mmmwmmmmmmmm
WWW

Q-lSAllflaimsoasidered,wmldymprefe:-toretixeinormarunounmity
umymmvliveorsanadmelse? (Circleanrulber) .

0 UI QUNH

mmmm
mmmm
WWW“
mammals:

Q—16Allthingsamsidered, howlflcelyareywtommyfrmyun'pneent
mityumymretin? (Circlecnenlber)

DUMP

bUNH

Q-17Havlmlyyearshaveymuvedin(m'mar)memnmityinmidzyumm
hmislocnt-d?

WOFMINCRWMSW

 

134

APPENDIX A

The Questionnaire

5 CARE OF PARENTS

andnmfamdbymnynidile-agedmimmmewithfmmuum
camofagimparutfls). 'mefolladirqqnstimaskabmtfinmmuzidzym
maforyun'parmt(s)uumermltirgiapactmyumretimtplam. '

Q-mmmatMmmm'sorspane'smWorW?
Ifallaredecaasedam/ordoeemtapply,pmcaedtoQ-19mpage6. (Circle
mnfluforafipenm)

W: abletoliveinamtuearuouaeardgo
asplease:flnysia:llyactiva.
, m:livesinamhunmtmivum1pma
; Whasiswiflxtruuportatjm.
C, ‘ W: liminanhtnmtncaim
helpdaily.
‘ u: live-withaaminamtxnor
aretaker'shcn.
mm: mid-“mm

 

Q
\

m 5 , W
a e‘ g 3* a ‘5
if ‘3" ’T 7 ‘3‘
a. Year fault . . . . 1 2 3 4 5 6
b. Yam-anther . . . . 1 2 3 4 5 6
c. Your spamme's or
partner's father . . 1 2 3 4 5 6
d. Your spans's or
partmr's ”that . . 1 2 3 4 5 6

Q-lewaardoyurparmtsudymrapana'sufl/a'm'smumfm
ym? (Circleannmarforaampuim)

‘ .. -.VM» - ...-1...

 

 

Live live in Start Had-rate my was not
with out. distan- distama amly
n unity (la- (50-300 (no than 3 2
.‘ i 50 mil.) nil.) 303-11.) 3 g
a. Your father ......1 2 3 4 5 6
b. Yam-anther ......1 2 3 4 5 6
c. Yon:- spouse's or
partner's father..1 2 3 4 5 6
d. er spans's or
partmr's mu}. 2 3 4 5 6

Q-lacDoyouaxrrIntly, oranticipateinttu mun, assistirgyurpamttu) in
any of me follwin; says? (91:13 allfllat quay) l:

wvuflnb-an. -

; omtlymist giant-mm

a

T .
' as u: ‘ ‘ as x:

 

O O O O O D
O O O D O D O
O O O O D O D
HHHHHHH.
”unnuuwa

135

APPENDIX A

The Questionnaire

Q-fldlbdntaxtmtdoyumamtormticipatadflmmibflities
inflmmmplam? (Cimleannmarfaaamitu)

 

7

 

;IDI'M‘ am norm-
. i? '3' 3'
a.Tinofretir.nt ...... 1 2 3 4
summon-1m
retirmnt .. . 1 2 3 4
c.6eografixialloatim
torrent—mt ....... 1 2 3 4
d.Useofreti.rI-It
imam ........... 1 2 3 4
grandam
(tn-1mm ...... 1 2 3 4

HOME MAINTENANCE

o—umnamammmmmummmm
adapts. Plan-immiymgutthamdQImudhwymmm
wtttudrnaftarm. (Mummaadamkmmm
aft-rm. ummnnmmmty affirm-inland:
INA-(basnotqud

I m “Imam-“I Imam

 

 

m W W
Bela: triad/relative WV.
1: Hiram Hindparun
i; i I
sass ? E; ‘ I I
vi it? v
a.
yard....123 ...... 12345 ....... 12345
Immunity
m...123 ...... 12345 ....... 12345
amazingm
hm,e.g.
mimwinbw,
m1“
mm. 1 2 3......12345.......12345
1mm '
imitblxn.123 ...... 12345 ....... 12345
c.5pecialclaanim
Mug.
mum,
“unknowns,
W
m...123 ...... 12345 ....... 12345
arm-mm;
m..123 ...... 12345 ....... 12345
whiz-min;
m..123 ...... 12345 ....... 12345

136

APPENDIX A

The Questionnaire

7 DECISIONS

Q-zoufeisauriasofdecisial. mmammmmmmut
mummmmm. Wbymmitwmldbe
,forymto'nheadxofmfollarimd-cisiau? (Muhammad:

 

 

 

 

acisim)
I m van lunar
mm mm m APPLY
.- 3. E
Hummus E I ?
mmmmmmmm
mmmmum.....1 2 3 an
sumac-mute
anapartlult............1 2 3 m
c.1unpar-Itorin-1utoa
mafacility............1 2 3 BIA
d.lbvawtoacanfacility ....1 2 3 m
minim-elftoamfacility ....1 2 3 m
Intuit-Minnow“... ....1 2 3 on
g.lbvain-lwintouyu-.......1 2 3 an
mmmltchndbadtim-y
“OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOI 2 3 m
i.mamltdzild(m)am
Withoqtmwl 2 3 m
j.lhcidetoaharehcnwith
mldomtmull.....1 2 3 m
*mmmmotm
stauforutim........1 2 3 m
Litantomstaufa:
m.............1 2 3 m
\mSellhantomuuyfa'
mum.......1 2 3 [24A

Q-21Qn'retirumtdaciniaunybainflu-ndbyodnrm. Poraadxottha
list-dbelw, memmmm
macaw-«mum. (Circlaannmarfor
eadxodnrpanm)

i

 

 

; Mammalian.

ISM mm m ‘M

m
g I !
amnuamnm t I '5 V I
magnum-patch: ...... 1 2 3 4 m
bOW‘.) 00.0.00... 1 2 3 ‘ m
c.1n-l-i(s)..........1 2 3 4 m
dom(m).000000000 1 2 3 ‘ m
e.Grufidtild(m)....... 1 2 3 4 m
f. Bruckner“) artist-us) . . . 1 2 3 4 m
g.Otheroldernlativa(s) ... 1 2 3 4 an
h. Ottnrmnlativus) . . 1 2 3 4 m
i.lhn-ate(s).........1 2 3 4 no;

 

137

APPENDIX A

The Questionnaire

RESOURCES 8
QuinnmuurnMnnm.,wmnrumnfimsaflbfiunnnnunan
muwnluumm mflautummrmynumuhlgumngubuHI ’

«tun. (dmhamnuhrflrudunwm)

 

 

 

 

 

Elma mmm manna mums
mums s a? IHMIEM! Manna 1am
mscmpaaumlmwu-m. ' 3 E V

mmtmwuu-mtmmn....1 2 3 4
buwmmymuunmumru
«andnunnmdmmmm ...1 2 3 4
cakmflnaMm-memmdto
numnnwms ........1 2 3 4
d.&yunqna1mtnuwan...1 2 3 4
e.myaummhnl.........1 2 3 4
(.myanaudmm ......1 2 3 4
g.nmae-mqnmcmammu-I
It: nun-mdmmmn. ....1 2 3 4
bunnUnurmu-flq-m”....1 2 3 4
.aqmnunmmununnn
Janna ....... ....1 2 3 4
j. nut-nuphmmg.......1 2 3 4
Km.“ 0000000000001 2 3 ‘
leunrwuuamuq
mm 00000000 01 2 3 ‘
Ibnmmum-cmmyhm......1 2 3 4

@flrhueMflauitumotm-hflaflgdnheamanLunmfl
nun-mgmulurwn-ufimupnnmumu;(dmhcmmuurnr
ununmm

 

{23,A 1:3,er noun-I
: my?

3
i
3

UUU

 

 

 

m!hflyu1flflhu........
n.mmma-hum3.........

On

0

g

E

0

0
up HHH H up» H IHHH H‘”*E
u» nu» u an» u can» N'E'W'E

UU iUUU U UUU U

 

138

APPENDIX A

The Questionnaire

9 YOUR PRESENT HOME

Q-24mtisflnzipoohotmmm2 _____ mun:
Q-anuntu-inuudIymam-mlyliw: (cu-chain“)

mum:
mmmmmmwm
mummam

"(Plea-om)

Q—26Hfidaotfinto11wimb-tchucrihsyuxrmm? (nun-circle
menu)

0UNH

 

 

amouuw
2
v
§
§
2

mamas. “MARIN
0-27ihv-Iymmymnvdinyurmu-‘I
mammm'm

Q-zamurinyurlih, Wthmmbvoymnh? Inmate
-mamm.m,¢mmmus. mm

tin
ya: nun-Mama”. (H11:-M)

 

mmmmu.s.

uncut—mums.

wahmmtummaoo-muamuuaw
mm (1) yarn-snowmen, (2) mummyu
midtown, «(3) mmmwmmmummuw.

(Marmara-pm) _
‘ my own”: 'nnnnxnul

flunmnnms sauna tuxnnmm
sum 5 z
1r i V}
mac-dummy: ........ 1 2 3
humid-m ........ 1 2 3
armorial-nanny: .. ...... 1 2 3
d. 1:111de . ....... 1 2 3

 

2
2
2
o-aomamwmmmmmamm
who? mmmam,mtmhu-t,a
mumw. (macaw)

sun.-
r
3

 

139

APPENDIX A

The Questionnaire

10

Q-311nyumqainimuufldyummmbntmmgo,abwttmrigxtsize,or
too-nlltoryun'medn'imntir-unt. (endow-nu)

1* mom
2 ammmusm
3 mom
Q-32Anym (Manna): Um Drum-3

Q—33Rntisyun'am-r1ta1m? (Meander)

mm!!-
m
m
m
m

Q-Mlbuuaymlo, WM, 11v.inyurh.?(¢irc1¢an
nu) .

MOUNH

o-ssmmwmmmunuhwmmnmmym
WIN-aunt. (mama-QM)

Quit-3000*

 

I unlnaranazi]

a.m11dzm(agn18a'1.)

mlivinginyurh-z 1 2 3 4 Sat-x.
Emmanuel-1‘)

udmtlivinginyuzr

11.: 1 2 3 4 53m
e. um:- (cg-19am)
udliviminyun'nnz 1 2 3 4 Sam

<1. mm: (gamut-m)

urinatnvixqinymr
In: 1 2 3 4 5mm

Q-36Ilutisflnageottlnyurg-Itdlfld? (flung-mu)
ammonia

 

Mmmmmwmm'wmmmtm
(itywlnvocnn). (Mamcmlmthom

Q-3‘I batman-$11.10;: flan-aibyurm's hath:
1m 1m
2mm 2mm
3mm 3m
4m 4m

 

 

140

APPENDIX A

The Questionnaire

 

mm
4m
5m
6-.
mmmmmw
' (CWM)?
Joanna 3mm:

 

 

odlmthmmlmlotdndm? (madam)
MBMWMdM‘? (Graph-Wm)

1

“~30 “DUMP

can. usuup ‘—

mum

Ins
umuanntaununcn

a!
scam

E

' m
anmtawmnunnsamt
(unummnanmm)

unscramnwvayuanms

mmmo-mmmnum

1989 (Plan. circle the m ot the
1 m MN $10,000 6 $35,!!!) '10 $49,999
2 $10,000 '10 $1 .999 7 $50,000 '10 $64,999
3 $15,000 '10 $19,999 8 $65,000 '10 $79,999
4 $20,000 '10 $24,999 9 $30,000 '10 $94,999
5 $25,000 1.0 $34,999 10 $95,000 a! in!
mm we my luv. ovum 91-

 

yumwmmnmywm. Mm.

 

 

APPENDIX B

 

AHIPEDUDIXIIB

UCRIHS Approval Letter

MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY

 

mummmm ' mmmo-mm-mnu
ANDMNTI-IIGIAWATEIOIOOL

August 24, 1992

Phyllis Gendler
2469 Algonquin Ct., 83
Grand Rapids, MI 49505

IRE: IRELATIONSKIP’OF'GENDER‘TO EKHILY.AND RARENT'CARE'OONCERNS‘WREN
RETIREMENT IS PLANNED BY SINGLE MEN AND WOMEN, IRE ’92-371

Dear us. Gendler:

I an pleased to advise that because of the nature or the proposed
research, it was eligible for expedited review. This process has
been conpleted, the rights and welfare of the husan subjects appear
to be adequately protected, and your project is therefore approved.

You are reninded that UCRIHS approval is valid for one calendar
year. If you plan to continue this project beyond one year, please
sake provisions for obtaining appropriate nouns approval prior to
August 13, 1993.

Any changes in procedures involving hunan subjects nust be reviewed
by the UCRIHS prior to initiation of the change. UCRIHS nust also
be notified promptly of any problens (unexpected side ettects,
cosplaints, etc.) involving human subjects during the course of the
work.

Thank you for bringing this project to our attention. If we can be
of any future help, please do not hesitate to let us know.

 

University Committee on search
Involving Human Subjects (UCRIHS)

DEV/pin

Dr. Lawrence Schiamberg

um I. s- M Arms/w WV Wise

14].

 

"‘WEI/@fiflfllflfllfllflflflfl'fllEs