“I...“
,2; w m"

,4.

T7145. “0
W
323;. ..

a;
3:1: «5 ;..
. .’ ‘l
v. '3’};
1 u

5;; A 4‘3?!
gm $3?

 

2:?
3

w

J

"in

-. wr-

 

 

MICHI IGAN STATEUN

l! 'l ll ll lllllllllllllllllllllllllllll

3 12901561 9103

ll

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

LIBRARY

Michigan State
University

”O‘CM I

F

 

 

This is to certify that the
thesis entitled
SCL'CIAL SURPORT OF MARRIED PERSONS IN THE UNITED STATES

AND ITALY

presented by

L] N , YU-HSI

has been accepted towards fulfillment
of the requirements for

M-A- degree in , Sociology—Urban Studies

 

Ale/W

Major professor

Bantu/f7 /9C’

 

0-7639 MS U is an Affirmative Action/Equal Opportunity Institution

 

1hr , Ulh“x“n-’v .

PLACE ll RETURN BOX to remove thte checkout from your record.
1'0 AVOID FINES return on or More date due.

DATE DUE DATE DUE DATE DUE

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Waits-0.1

 

SOCIAL SUPPORT OF MARRIED PERSONS IN THE
UNITED STATES AND ITALY

BY

Lin, Yu-hsi

A THESIS

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

MASTER OF ARTS

Department of Sociology
and
Urban Affairs Program

1996

ABSTRACT

SOCIAL SUPPORT OF MARRIED PERSONS IN THE
UNITED STATES AND ITALY

B!

Lin, tu-hsi

The data used in this study is 088 data collected in
1986 and 1987. This study examines the roles of kin and
friends in married persons' social network and social-support
choices in the United States and Italy. It also uses logistic
regression to examine the impact of education on the choices.
Social support choices refer to whom married persons turn to
when they have problems with their spouses, feel depressed or
need advice on making important changes in life. IResults show
that Americans generally associate with best friends more
often than with kin, and Italians associate with kin more
often than with friends. In addition to education, other
factors also impact married persons' choices of helpers, such

as gender, social class, and culture.

Copyright by
Lin , Yu-hsi
1996

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Writing a quantitative research paper is a great
challenge to me. I would like to express my gratitude to
Dr. Stan Kaplowitz, Dr. John Schweitzer, and Dr. Gold.

Dr. Kaplowitz, my advisor, gave me detailed instruction
in statistics and writing. I thank Dr. Schweitzer for his
instruction in statistics and his encouragement.

My thankfulness also goes to Dr. Gold, who
suggested that I make a cross-cultural comparison for my
thesis. He advised me on writing styles, literature review

and how to enrich the discussion section.

iv

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page
LIST OF TABLES Vi
INTRODUCTION 1
REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE 4
Support from Kin and friends 4
Gender Roles and Mental Health of Married 8
Persons
Social Network 8 Social Support of Married 11
Persons
METHODS 20
Data 20
Subjects 21
Sampling 21
Summary of Hypotheses 22
RESULTS 24
DISCUSSION 46
LIMITATIONS 56
CONCLUSION 57
APPENDIX 59

LIST OF REFERENCES 61

Table

Table

Table

Table

Table

Table

Table

Table

Table

Table

LL9T<JFfTAJHJES

(USA Male 8 Female) .
Frequency of visiting best friends and kin

(USA Male & Female)
Frequency of other contact with best friends
and kin

(ITALY Male & Female)
Frequency of visiting best friends and kin

(ITALY Male & Female)
Frequency of other contact with best friends
and kin

Unstandardized logistic regression
coefficients for the effect of education
on choices of helpers

(U.S. Males & Females)
Choices of helpers (indicated by valid
percent) on three situations

(Italy Male & Female)
Choices of helpers (indicated by valid
percent) on three situations

Comparison of.American & Italian males'
and females' tendency to seek help from
spouse for advice and depression

Comparison of American & Italian
subsamples in help seeking from spouse
for advice and depression

Proportions of male and female kin from
whom both 0.8. and Italian respondents
seek help for family problems, depression
and advice~

vi

Page
26

27

29

31

34

35

35

39

41

45

INTRODUCTION

Social support is considered a positive way of coping
with stress or life events and has been widely researched.
This paper examines the roles of kin and friends in married
people’s social network and social-support choices in the
United States and Italy. I chose married people because
they account for a larger percent of the population than the
unmarried, widowed and divorced and because marital status
and mental health are closely related (Lin, Dean & Ensel
1986).

Social support refers to the perceived or actual
instrumental, informational (cognitive) and expressive
(emotional) support provided by the community, the social
network, and the confiding partners (Lin et a1. 1986).
Instrumental support includes material goods and services
(such as child care, housekeeping, or money donations) which
help one solve practical problems; emotional support
involves admiration, respect, love, caring, acceptance,
intimacy, and "unconditional positive regard" which increase
one's self-esteem and self-worth; informational support
includes advice, guidance, and knowledge which help one
understand one’s world, find resources, weigh alternatives,
and take necessary steps to solve problems (Jacobson 1986,
Wills 1985).

Lin et al. (1979) found that at all levels of life

1

2
events people with better social support had fewer
psychiatric symptoms. Pinneau's (1976) study of working men
proved that social support reduces some psychological strain
and stresses. A study of female and male factory workers by
Loscocco and Spitze (1990) shows that work-related social
support from supervisors and coworkers promotes well-being
among males and females, though it does not buffer effects
of other stressful working conditions. Unemployed men who
are not supported show higher levels of cholesterol,
illness, and self-blame than did the supported counterparts
(Gore 1978).

The family structure in the 0.8. has undergone
dramatic change. The majority of Americans never lived in
an extended family (Reiss 1971), and one woman in five was
employed outside the home in 1900 (statistical Handbook on
the American Family). The more common nuclear-family form
than extended family nowadays and the increasing number of
employed married wbmen must have large impact on the social
network and the social-support choice of married people in
general. The social-support choice in this paper refers to
whom married women and men turn to when they have problems
with their spouses, feel depressed or need someone’s advice
on making an important change in life. In addition to the
choice of helpers, how gender and educational status
influence the choices is also examined. The reason I chose
two countries is that the United States is a typical

individualist country and Italy is considered a very family-

3
oriented country though its family structure has transformed
from extended family to primarily nuclear family. It will
be meaningful to additionally compare the impact of culture
on the social network and social-support choices of the

married. ‘

REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE

Support from Kin and Friends

Cassel (1974) suggests that the strongest social
support is provided by the primary groups of most importance
to the individuals -- parents, spouse, siblings, and
children. In addition to one's family, the primary group
consist of relatives and friends. The primary groups are
characterized by:”emphasis on mutual responsibility, caring,
and concern; strong mutual identification, emphasis on the
uniqueness of group members, face-to face interaction and
communication; norms of intimacy, close associations and
bonds, and the provision of affection, security, and
response" (Dean & Tausig 1986, p. 118). Family members have
a mutual obligation to provide emotional and material
support every day and in times of critical events (ibid),
even though this obligation is not always met. In addition,
a confiding relationship, an intimate form of social
support, is regarded as a primary relationship. Dean and
Tausig defined a confidant relationship as the presence of
someone the respondents felt he/she could trust and talk to
(ibid p. 122-23). Lowenthal and Haven (1968) found that a
confiding relationship, can be built between spouses, good
friends, and even neighbors.

Fischer (1982) argues that "modernization and

urbanization break down the family through strains that

4

5
drive members apart and seductions that pull them apart;”
consequently, kin care for, sacrifice for and share with one
another less (p. 81). Industrialization, urbanization and
capitalism largely account for the prevalence of
individualism and nuclear family in the U.S nowadays‘, and
they also draw many more women into the labor force than
before. In addition, easy access to social activities in
urban areas have increased people's association with
friends. Naturally, the composition of men's and especially
women's social networks have changed dramatically.

In individualist countries, people emphasize self-
reliance and do not sharply distinguish ingroups (family and
good friends) from outgroups (Triandis et al. 1988). Social
relations, which are more temporary and voluntary, occur in
small groups; individuals have few obligations to ingroups
but receive less social support, resources or security from
them (ibid); people have greater skills in making new
friends and leaving new social groups (ibid). It seems that
kinship involvement becomes selective. ”People largely
maintain kin ties out of a sense of concern and obligation,
whereas they maintain nonkin ties because of compatibility

and enjoyment" (Fischer 1982).

 

2. Donohue (1990) holds that capitalism, with its "get-ahead"
individualism released the individual from the grasp of
kinship, community and inherited status. Reiss (1971)
attributes industrialization to the breaking down of extended

family and argues that the geographic mobility required by
industrialization also reduced the likelihood of extended
family becoming common.

6

A married person's social network primarily consists
of the friends and the kin s/he contacts or visits. Visits
and contact are not done only when they are faced with
problems. Peoples' selective kinship involvement and better
social skills in the individualist cultures raise a few
interesting questions: How often do married people in the
U.S. associate with the kin? Whom do they frequently visit
or contact? Do they associate with friends more often than
with kin ?
Hypothesis 1a: Married persons in the 0.8. generally contact

or visit best friends more often than kin.

Driven largely by urbanization, the nuclear family
became prevalent in central and northern Italy from 1915 on,
and southern Italy also has nuclear family households and
small household size (Barbagli & Kertzer 1990). Despite the
small household size, kinship relations have become "an
instrument that the individual can manipulate to strengthen
his position on the labor market” (Piselli 1981). Raggio
(1990) argues that "the links between family units and the
network of solidarity among consanguineous kin constitute a
rigorous and binding code that conditions individual
strategies to the interests of the group..." Family is
referred to as a social group, which includes "all blood and
in-law relatives up to the fourth degree as well as those to
whom one is related through godparenthood" (Tomasi 1972 p.
10). In some areas, there is strong group solidarity and

attachment to the land owned by the family, and extended

7
kinships dominate over.individual family units (Levi 1990).
Compared with Americans, Italians are fiercely loyal to the
extended family and heavily involved with its members
(Pearlin 1971).

Triandis et a1. (1990) argue that collectivist
cultures are characterized by family integrity,
interdependence within the ingroup, emotional attachment to
the ingroup, and ingroup harmony. People have fewer skills
in making new friends, but friends imply a life-long
intimate relationships (Triandis et a1. 1988). These
characteristics can be found in many Italians. Though
Northern Italy is not considered as family-oriented as
Southern Italy, Italians in general value kin relationships
more than relationship with people outside the family. ”No
Italian who has a family is ever alone" (Nelli 1983). In
the Italians’ viewpoints, the immediate family comprises
"the only people in the world that you can really trust”
(ibid p. 132). Therefore, we may predict that people in
Italy associate with kin more than with friends.

Hypothesis 1b: larried persons in Italy generally contact or
visit kin more often than friends.

Whom do married persons turn to first when they have
family problems, feel depressed or need advice? Kin,
spouse, and friends must be important sources of support to
them. In addition to these three, from whom will they
consider seeking help?_ Suppose Italians have stronger kin

relationship than Americans, will the strength of kin

8

relationship impact married persons' choices of helpers?
Will gender and socioeconomic status influence their
choices? What other factors influence their choices? These
are the questions to be answered in this paper. Before
answering these questions, it is necessary to know if
married men and women benefit from marriage equally. It is
because the degree of gender equality of married couples
impacts the amount of support received from their spouses.
Gender Roles and Mental Health of Married Individuals

Because marriage is the expected norm of individuals
and considered the most emotionally stable state of adult
life, single individuals are constantly subjected to
pressure to conform to the norm, and failure to do so
contributes to a less than desirable psychological state
(Ensel 1986). In general, being married is better for one's
mental health (Vanfossen 1981). Marriage contributes to
individuals' better mental health in two ways. First,
marriage offers an opportunity for confiding and intimate
interactions, which leads to psychological comfort and
support. Second, marriage allows the pooling of personal
resources of two partners, thus allowing better coping with
social problems and stressors (Lin & Westcott, 1991 p. 214).

Lin, Dean andEnsel (1986) hold that.married couples
have lower rates of mental distress than unmarried people.
Single, divorced or widowed.women have lower rates of mental
problems than single, divorced or widowed men. However,

among the married, women have higher rates of mental

9
distress (p.284) -- two and a half times as many as men
(Hobfoll 1986). -These findings indicate that men benefit
more from marriage than women. "

'The fact that married women are much more depressed
than.married men can be accounted for from different
perspectives. First, according to the ”exposure
hypothesis,” women are more often depressed than men because
”their different roles expose them to greater number of
stressors or chronic strains (Rosenfield 1980). Second, the
"vulnerability hypothesis” suggests that women are more
often depressed than men because ”they are more vulnerable
to the deleterious effects of stress", not because they are
more exposed to stressors (Kessler & McLeod 1984). Third,
women are less likely than men to receive the social
supports they need from their spouses (Bernard 1971 p. 69).
Studies also show that more wives than husbands report low
levels of spouse reciprocity, e.g., 36 percent of the wives
and 28 percent of the husbands agree that they give in to
the wishes of their spouses rather than vice versa
(Vanfossen 1986). According to the exchange theory,
relationships between two individuals are most likely to be
maintained as long as partners provide equal amount of, and
equally important, benefits for each other (Kelley 8 Thibaut
1978). This theory can be applied to marital relationships:
The more equitable the marriage relationship is, the less
stressed women are.

Two perspectives may explain why women receive less

io
spouse support. First, functionalist theory suggests that
the division of labor within the family, based on
reproductive roles, delegates the tasks of providing
nurturance and emotional support to women, while the tasks
of achievement and accomplishment in the external
environment to men (Parsons 1949). In other words, women
play the expressive role and men play the instrumental role.
Therefore, it is not appropriate for males to exhibit
emotional-expressiveness (Turner 1994 p.523). Second, the
conflict theory suggests that women's lesser support within
the family results from the institutionalized male dominance
prevalent in industrial society (Vanfossen 1986 p. 69). The
”devaluation of femininity,“ a natural outcome of such male
dominance, may lead to the lessened respect wives sometimes
receive from their spouses and children (ibid). Many women
with high-status jobs may experience much stress partly
because their spouses do not emotionally support them.
Their husbands may think that the wives' demanding jobs
distract them from attention to the family or feel inferior
to them because they earn more income.

In the U.S. though gender inequality between a married
couple still exists, it is widely recognized that their
marital relationship is more equal than that in many other
countries. Many couples regard sharing thoughts, feelings,
tasks, values, or life goals as the greatest virtue in a
marital relationship (Bellah et al. 1986 p. 91). Tamosi

(1972) holds that in Italy the husband is the head and lord

' 11.

of the nuclear family: Not only his children but also his
wife are expected to obey him. Despite the strong family
feeling, a husband only occasionally shows his affection for
his wife openly. Popular consent allows the father to
discipline his children and his wife (pp. 10-11). Pearlin
(1971) holds that many women in Italy are irritated by their
disadvantaged position not because they do too much but
because their husbands acknowledge too little. ”They want
appreciation and esteem as worthy persons" (ibid p. 146).
Social Network & Social Support of Married Persons

Though the prevalence of nuclear family and
individualism may reduce the amount of contact with family
members, the kin (parents, siblings, children, relatives)
should still be important members of married couples' social
network. Bedford (1989) holds that.expressive supports are
not as dependent on physical proximity as instrumental
support. Even though married people do not live with their
parents, siblings or children, these family members can
still provide them with emotional and informational support.

In addition, friends should also be important members
of married personS' social network. According to Kandel
(1978), friendships are based on shared values and-
attitudes, affection, expectations of mutual pleasure or
benefit. Bedford (1939) also argues that friendship is
formed and maintained on the basis of attraction and mutual
interest and that it specializes affective supportive

functions rather than instrumental functions. Family

12
members would be assessed negatively for not performing
support functions, especially in times of crisis. Yet,
friends do not have obligations to the individual and
therefore would not be assessed negatively for not providing
social support (Antonucci 1985). Thus, when support is
provided by friends, it is assessed very positively (ibid).
Booth (1972) found that women have greater propensity for
same-sex close friendship than men because women are
socialized to be more passive in opposite-sex contact.
During certain phases of females' lives, friendships with
other females are as supportive and intimate as
relationships with husbands or male partners (McLanahan et
al. 1981).

Education is a source of great social opportunity
(Fischer 1982). Studies have shown that educated people are
involved with a larger number and more diverse types of
nonrelatives than are comparatively uneducated people. The
lower and working class has relatives; the middle class has
friends (Allan 1979). Because of geographic mobility, the
middle class tends to be cut off from the support of
relatives and is more likely to rely on friends (Oakley &
Rajan 1991).

Do married men and women differ in their size of
social network? According to Turner (1994), women have
significantly larger networks than men, generally report
receiving more social support (especially emotional support)

than do men, and experience more support from same-gender

13
friends. The perceived support among women can be explained
by more frequent contact with network members and by the
tendency to maintain more kin relationships (ibid pp. 521-
22). Gender role differences may also impact the amount of
social support received. The instrumental role is
characterized by independence and rationality and the
expressive role by compassion and supportiveness (ibid p.
523). Therefore, feminine characteristics seem more
compatible with seeking and providing social support, and
masculine characteristics tend to inhibit help seeking
(ibid). Though Turner does not specifically refer to
married women, it is reasonable to say that married women's
social network size is larger than men’s.

Though women and men do not receive equal support from
their spouses, the spouse is often viewed as the key
resource of support networks for most adults (Ensel 1986 p.
186). The marital relationship is a primary resource for
mitigating the effects of stressful life events, providing
emotional support and affirming one's identity (Campbell
1980). Ensel (1986) holds that ”a healthy mental state
requires sharing and confiding with intimates" (p. 287).
Depression is a problem requiring expressive action; the
stronger the social tie used for expressive problems, the
lower the depression (ibid). Ensel's study also shows that
help from a spouse is related to a lower level of depressed
mood than help from any other tie (Ensel et el. 1986 p. 317)

and that the majority of the male and female respondents in

14
their study choose spouse/lovers as opposite-sex confidants
(p. 299). Therefore, we can predict that married people
would most likely turn to their spouses first when they are
depressed. ’

No research that I am aware of has been done on how
educational level impacts a married person's first choice of
their spouses as helpers. In Cutrona and Suhr's (1992)
study of supportive interactions, marital relationship
impacted whether a married person will seek help from the
spouse when s/he is depressed. Couples who were more
satisfied with their marriages provided a greater number of
supportive behaviors to their spouse (ibid). In other
words, those satisfied with their marriages received more
emotional support from each other. We can also predict that
they would more likely seek help from their spouses when
they feel depressed. Married persons of different
educational statuses may encounter different types of
stress. Yet, sources of depression did not affect the
choice of spouse (ibid). Both husbands and wives welcomed
emotional support no matter what type of stress they were
facing (p. 130). Therefore, we may predict that their
educational status seems to have little impact on the choice
of their spouse as the first helper since one's spouse is
the primary source for emotional support which requires
sharing and confiding.

Hypothesis 2a: lhen a married person feels depressed and
wants to talk about it, s/he would most ikely turn to

15
her/his spouse first for help, no matter what educational
level s/he is at.

For those who do not turn to their spouses first when
they are depressed, perhaps their spouses are unexpressive,
dominant or self-centered. So, they may turn to trustful
confidants, such as kin members or friends, for help.

Gender inequality in some cultures, such as Italian culture,
is much larger than that in the 0.8., which may tremendously
decrease married women's help seeking from their spouses.

The spouse also plays an important role in providing
informational support. In Lin & Westcott’s (1991) study,
when married respondents confronted with a major life event,
between 50 and 65 percent of them sought support from their
spouses (p. 215). Making an important change, such as
finding a new job or moving to another part of the country,
is a major life event for the married people. The main
reason that they turn to their spouses for advice first is
that major life events have great impact on the future well-
being of the two partners. If they do not turn to their
spouses first, it is probably because they anticipate that
their ideas would be rejected by their spouses or because
they are not satisfied with their marriages.

Enckrole (1991) argues that the nature of help
expected and the nature of the topic itself affect whether a
person seeks help from a particular close relationship.

Even when the topic itself is not off limits or sensitive

but unhelpful responses are anticipated, support seeking is

16
likely to be inhibited (p. 170). In Cutrona and Shur's
(1992) study, ninety percent of married couples offered some
kind of advice to their spouse when the latter disclosed an
important stressor in life to them. Making an important
change in life can be regarded as an important stressor.
Moreover, the couples satisfied with their marriages offer a
greater amount of advice to their spouse than unsatisfied
couples do (ibid p. 121). In other words, couples less
satisfied with their marriage receive less advice from their
spouses because ”advice is perceived as an effort by the
spouse to assert control or dominance" (Rogers and Farace
1975). We may say that the more equal the marriage
relationship is, not only the more advice will a married
person be offered by his/her spouse but also the less likely
s/he is to perceive the spouse' advice as a means of
control.

No research that I am aware of has been done on
whether educational status will impact the likelihood of
seeking advice from one's spouse. However, there is a
positive correlation between education and quality in
marriage relationship (Bowman 1990). Generally speaking,
gender equality between a couple is an important element of
a good marriage relationship. The more educated a married
couple is, the more equal their relationship is and the more
likely they will turn to their spouse for advice.

Hypothesis 23: when a married person needs advice on an

important change in her/his life, for example about a job,

17
or moving to another part of the country, the more education
s/he has, the more likely s/he would turn to her/his spouse
first for help.

Ensel et al. (1986) also argue that women are
socialized into emotional sustenance and seen as primary
confidants for both genders (p. 288). In addition, men
primarily depend on their spouse and women rely on more
varied sources of support (Antonucci 1985, p. 32).
Therefore, we can also predict that husbands would more
likely turn to their wives than wives would turn to their
husbands when they feel depressed or need advice for
important decisions in life.

Hypothesis as: A married man would more likely turn to his
spouse than his spouse would turn to him when he feels
depressed or needs advice for making an important change in
life.

Marriage contributes to one's psychological well-
being, but it is also a substantial source of conflict.
Life events that involve negative interactions with one's
spouse rank among the most stressful (Turner 1987).
Furthermore, "relations with spouse changed for the worse,
without divorce or separation" is also very stressful
(Dohrenwend, Krasnoff, Askenasky, 8 Dohrenwend 1978).
Turner (1994) argues that women appear to be more adversely
affected by marital conflict than men (p. 535). When faced
with marital problems, women are more likely than men to

seek advice or support. Based on the previous discussion

18
that friendship serves the function of affective support and
that the middle class relies on friends more often than the
working class, it is very likely that married persons of
higher educational status will more likely turn to friends
first for family problems. They turn to friends not
necessarily for gaining advice but primarily for talking
about their problems so as to reduce their stress. Those of
lower educational status will turn to kin first. In
addition, problems with a spouse may have different causes,
and some of them may not be appropriate to be discussed with
one's parents, siblings or children. Therefore, friends and
psychologists seem to be good helpers for some marital
problems.
Hypothesis 2d: When a married person is upset about a
problem with his or her spouse and has not been able to sort
it out with them, s/he would turn to her[his friend or kin
first for help. Those with low educational status will
more likely to turn to kin first, and those with middle or
high educational status will more likely turn to friends
first.

Though each gender is seen as serving the other gender
in a mutually comforting capacity, it is well accepted that
a female confidant is better than a male confidant in
providing emotional support for both genders (Lin et al.
1986). Women see themselves as more positively expressive
(sweeter and kinder) than men see themselves (ibid. p. 289).

In Lin et al.'s study, 58 percent of the married males had

19
female confidants, and 43 percent of married females choose
male confidants (p. 296). In addition, females help more
with relationship-oriented problems than males (Eagly &
Crowley 1986).
Hypothesis 3: The gender of the confidant or helper plays an
important role. When having family problems, feeling
depressed or needing advice, married persons in the 0.8. and
Italy, who do not turn to their spouses first, will more

likely turn to female kin for help than to male kin.

METHODS

Data

The data used in this paper are called ISSP
(International Social Survey Program) data, part of the
General Social Surveys (GSS) carried out by the National
Opinion research Center (NORC), University of Chicago. The
data, with the topic "social network and social support
systems," were collected in the U.S. in 1986 and in Italy in
1987 and made available by Inter-University Consortium for
Political and Social Research (ICPSR) in Ann Arbor Michigan.
The data of the U.S. subjects were collected through self-
administered questionnaire and that of the Italian subjects
were collected through personal interview.

ISSP's study of ”social network and social support
systems" supplements regular national social science surveys
in the following countries: West Germany, Great Britain,
United States, Italy, Austria, Australia, and Hungary. The
data contains more than one hundred variables, providing
detailed information of respondents' contacts with relatives
and friends as well as information on where they would turn
to for help when they need instrumental support (household
assistance, borrowing a large sum of money and minor
illness), emotional support (talking with someone when faced
with depression and family problems), and informational

support (seeking advice on making an important change in

20

21
life). This paper only deals with emotional and
informational support.
Subjects

The subjects of the U. S. sample are English-speaking
persons 18 years of age or over, living in non-institutional
arrangements within the U.S.

The total of married people in the U.S. sample is
about 826 (femalea 443, male: 383). 51.2 percent of males
and 52.1 percent of females are between 25 and 44 years old.
The mean of years in school is 12.73 for males and 12.55 for
females. The employment rate is 78.5 percent for males and
49.6 percent for females. The mean number of best friends
is 8.1 for male subjects and 6.36 for female subjects. 11.6
percent of respondents never attend church.

The total of married people in the Italian sample is
676 (Male3 338 Female= 338). 40.2 percent of males and 46.1
percent of females are between 25 and 44 years old. The
mean of years in school is 9.97 for males and 9.62 for
females. The employment rate is 76.6 for males and 31
percent for females. The mean number of best friends is
3.78 for males and 3.51 for females. 96.2 percent of
respondents are Catholics and 12.7 percent never attend
church.

Sampling

The sample is a multi-stage area probability sample.

The units used for sampling are Standard Metropolitan

Statistical Areas (SMSAs) or non-metropolitan counties.

22

These SMSAs and counties were stratified by region, age and
race for selection. In the second stage, the units of
selection were block groups (3G3) and enumeration districts
(EDs), which were stratified based on race and income before
selection. In the third stage, blocks were selected with
probabilities proportional to size. In places without block
statistics, measures of block size were obtained by field
counting.

The sample type of Italian subjects was probability
with quotas, and the sample was representative of Italian
population. No further sampling information of Italian

subjects is provided by the ISSP.

Summary of Hypotheses
Hypothesis 1a

Married persons in the U.S. contact or visit best
friends more often than kin.

Hypothesis 1b

Married persons in Italy contact or visit kin more
often than best friends.

Hypotheses 2

Strongest social support is provided by the primary
group. For a married person, the most important
member in the primary group is his or her spouse.
Therefore, we have the following hypotheses:

2a) When a married person feels depressed and wants to
talk about it, s/he would most likely turn to her/his
spouse first for help, no matter what educational
levels s/he is at.

2b)

2c)

2d)

23

When a married person needs advice about an important
change in her/his life, for example about a job, or
moving to another part of the country, the more
education s/he has, the more likely s/he would turn to
her/his spouse first for help.

A married man would more likely turn to his spouse
than his spouse would turn to him when he feels
depressed or needs advice for important decisions in
life. -

When a married person is upset about a problem with
his or her spouse and has not been able to sort it out
with them, s/he would turn to her/his friend or kin
first for help. Those with low educational status
will more likely turn to kin first, and those with
middle or high educational status will more likely
turn to friends first.

Hypothesis 3

The gender of the confidant or helper plays an
important role. When having family problems, feeling
depressed or needing advice, married persons in the
U.S. and Italy, who do not turn to their spouses
first, will more likely turn to female kin for help
than to male kin.

RESULTS

Hypothesis la states that married persons in the U.S.
visit or contact friends more often than kin. To test
hypothesis 1a, the frequencies of married men and women
visiting their kin (father, mother, brother, sister, son,
daughter, and relatives) and friends are obtained. The
frequency categories include "living in the same household,"
"several times a week," ”once a week,” "once a month,”
"several times a year,” and "less often.” Because the data
is ordinal, the mean is not a perfect measurement. However,
median is not a good measurement and is not used, because
each group has the same median, ie, 5.

Because of the way the frequencies are coded (e.g. the
same household= 1, daily= 2, once a month= 5), the smaller
value of mean frequency of visits and contacts means more
frequent visits and contacts. Examining the ranking of mean
frequencies in Table 1.1, we see that married people in the
U.S. visit best friends most frequently, followed by
visiting sons and daughters (all three frequencies are
between several times a week and once a week). On the
average, they visit parents and relatives at least once a
month, while visiting relatives a little more frequently
than visiting parents. Siblings are least visited, but at
least several times a year.

In addition to comparing mean frequencies of visits

24

25
and contacts, the Wilcoxon signed-ranked test is conducted
to test the null hypothesis that there is no difference
between the mean frequency of visiting best friends and that
of visiting any kin member. If the test for visiting best
friends vs. son (the kin member most frequently visited) has
a significant p value, there is no need to compare best
friends with other kin members. Thus, we may reject the
null hypothesis and conclude that best friends are most
frequently visited in the U.S.

The same test can be conducted to see if there is
difference between the frequency of contacting best friends
and that of contacting other kin members. The one-tailed
rather than 2-tailed p value is examined because the ranking
of percentages was not looked at before hypotheses 1a and 1b
were made.

Based on the results of Wilcoxon test, the p value is
significant when best friends and sons are compared in terms
of their frequencies of being visited. Since the son is the
most frequently visited among the kin, we can predict that
the p values will be even more significant when comparing
best friends and other kin groups. Therefore, we may
conclude that married persons in the U.S. generally visit

best friends more often than any of their kin.

26
Table 1.1 (081.Male 8 Female)

Frequency of visiting best friends, parents,
siblings, children, and relatives

best mother father sister brother daughter son relatives
friend
1. .4 1.9 1.0 .5 .7 16.6 23.2 1.8
2. 14.9 8.3 9.9 4.2 4.5 13.2 10.7 9.7
3. 19.2 19.3 15.1 7.2 7.3 15.2 11.7 14.6
4. 26.8 19.5 17.4 16.3 14.1 15.2 14.0 19.5
5. 19.4 15.7 17.4 20.8 18.4 14.2 13.7 23.8
6. 12.1 19.3 19.0 21.7 27.2 14.5 17.7 18.9
7. 7.2 15.9 20.3 29.2 27.7 11.1 9.3 11.8
100 % 100 % 100 % 100 % 100 8 100 % 100 % 100 %
MEAN 3.2 4.6 4.78 5.34 5.37 3.85 3.75 4.57

Note: 1=same household, 2=daily, 3=several times a week,
4=once a week, 5=once a month, 6=several times a year,
7=less often

N 773 517 385 595 602 296 300 774

Ranking of frequencies from high to low: best friends > son
> daughter > relatives > parents > siblings

Wilcoxon Matched-Pairs signed-Ranks Test for the Ranking
in Table 1.1

v25 how often visit sons
with V42 how oft. visit best friend
Mean Rank Cases
112.93 100 - Ranks (V42 LT V25)
118.35 131 + Ranks (V42 GT V25)
42 .Ties (V42 EQ V25)
Z = -2.0707 1-Tailed P = .0192
V21 how often visit daughter
with V42 how oft. visit best friend
Mean Rank Cases
104.56 83 - Ranks (V42 LT V21)
110.16 132 + Ranks (V42 GT V21)
54 Ties (V42 so V21)
Z = -3.2100 1-Tailed P = .0006

27.

However, the frequencies in Table 1.2 shows that
married people contact daughters most frequently, followed
by contacting mother (at least several times a week), sons
and best friends (at least once a week)(see table 1.2).
They contact best friends more frequently than father]
relatives and sisters. Brothers are least contacted.

The Wilcoxon test shows that the p values are
significant when comparing best friends with daughter,
mother, father and sister. This means that married persons
contact mother and daughter significantly more often than
best friends and contact best friends significantly more
often than father, relatives, and siblings. Hypothesis 1a

is supported for visits but not for other contacts.

Table 1.2 (USA Male e Female)

Frequency of other contact with best friend, parents,
siblings, children, and relatives
best mother father sister brother daughter son relatives
friend '

-----------------------------------------------------------.
e

3. 23.7 28.1 29.6 18.6 18.3 28.2 29.1 23.1
4. 20.8 21.5 21.6 26.4 24.8 12.7 17.0 25.3
5. 9.2 4.0 9.2 20.3 24.5 5.7 10.4 13.5
6. 11.1 6.1 14.0 15.6 21.8 4.9 7.4 10.8

100 2 100 t 100 t 100 % ‘100 t 100 % 100 z 100 %
MEAN 3.23 2.91 3.45 3.87 4.24 2.63 3.10 3.45

Note: 1=daily, 2=several times a week, 3=once a week, 4=once
a month, 5=several times a year, 6=less often
N= 773 506 379 591 597 245 230 758

Ranking of frequencies from high to low: daughter > mother >
son > best friend > father & relatives > siblings

28
Table 1.2 (cont'd)

Wilcoxon Matched-Pairs signed-Hanks Test for the
Ranking in Table 1.2

V23 other contact w daughter
with V44 other contact with best friends
Z = -4.0775 1-Tailed P = .0000
V7 other contact with mother
with V44 other contact with best friends
2 = -4.7837 1-Tailed P = .0000
V27 other contact with son
with V44 other contact with best friends
2 = -.2847 1-Tailed P = .3879
V11 other contact with father
with V44 other contact with best friends
2 = -2.9874 1-Tailed P = .0014
V15 other contact with sister
with V44 other contact with best friends
= .0000

z = -6.7335 1-Tailed P

Hypothesis 1b states that married persons in Italy
contact or visit kin more often than friends. The
frequencies are coded the same way as those for Americans.
The results are presented in Table 1.3 and 1.4. Table 1.3
shows that married people in Italy visit sons and daughters
most frequently (parents and children either live in the
same household or parents visit children daily), followed by
visiting mother (at least once a week), relatives and
father. They visit best friends (at least once a week) only

more often than siblings (at least once a month). The

_29

Wilcoxon test shows that the p values are significant when
sons, daughters, mother and relatives are compared with best
friends in terms of their frequencies of being visited.

This means at least four kin groups are more frequently

visited than best friends.

TABLE 1.3 (Italy Males 8 Females)

Frequency (valid percent) of visiting best friend,
parents, siblings, children and relatives

 

best mother father sister brother daughter son relatives
friend

1 .4 10.3 7.6 .8 .9 60.7 64.6 6.2
2. 25.1 25.4 25.9 15.0 17.2 16.7 12.9 26.8
3. 23.1 22.9 21.9 15.0 13.5 9.3 9.2 20.4
4. 24.4 18.5 20.7 16.9 16.8 7.4 5.8 21.7
5. 15.8 11.1 10.8 23.9 20.5 1.6 2.5 15.0
6. 6.7 5.7 4.8 14.4 14.3 .8 3.3 6.5
7. 4.4 6.2 8.4 14.0 16.8 3.5 1.7 3.4

100 % 100 % 100 3 100 % 100 % 100 % 100 % 100 %
MEAN 3.67 3.36 3.49 4.46 4.49 1.88 1.85 3.45

Note: =same household, 2=daily, 3=several times a week,
4=once a week, 5=once a month, 6=several times a year,
7=less often _

N= 549 389 251 473 453 257 240 613

Ranking of frequencies from high to low:
children > mother > relatives > best friend > siblings

Wilcoxon Matched-Pairs signed-Ranks Test for the ranking
in Table 1.3

V25 how often visit sons
with V42 how often visit best friends
2 8 -9.0441 1-Tailed P = .0000
V21 how often visit daughter
with V42 how often visit best friends

2 8 -9.7001 1-Tailed P .0000

30

Table 1.3 (cont'd)

V5 how often visit mother
with V42 how often visit best friends
Z = -3.3152 1-Tailed P = .00045
V35 how often visit relatives
with V42 how often visit best friends
Z = -3.3264 1-Tailed P = .00045
V9 how often visit father
with V42 how often visit best friends
Z = -1.0314 1-Tailed P 8.1512

Similarly, married persons in Italy contact daughters,
sons and mothers most frequently (at least several times a
week), followed by best friends/relatives (the same
frequency) and siblings (see table 1.4). The Wilcoxon test
shows that the p values are'significant when the frequencies
of daughter, mother, father, sister and brother are compared
with best friends in terms of how often they are contacted.
This means that married persons in Italy contact only
daughter and mother significantly more often than best
friends.

In short, married people in italy visit most of the
kin more often than best friends but only contact some of
the kin more often than best friends. Hypothesis 1b is

significantly supported for visits, but not for contacts.

31
TABLE 1.4 (Italy Males 5 Females)

Frequency of contact with best friends, parents,
siblings, children and other relatives

 

best mother father sister brother daughter son relatives
friend

100 8 100 8 100 8 100 8 100 8 100 8 100 8 100 8
MEAN 3.02 2.77 3.28 3.46. 3.87: 2.39 2.88 3.02
Note: 1=daily, 2=several times a week,.3=once a week, 4=once

a month, 5=several times a year, 6=less often
N8 547 346 231 463 446 100 85 570

Ranking of frequencies from high to low: daughter > mother >
son> best friends & relatives > father > siblings

Wilcoxon Matched-Pairs signed-Ranks Test for the Ranking
in Table 1.4

V23 other contact with daughter

with V44 other contact with best friends
Z = -3.8887 1-Tailed P = .00005
V7 other contact with mother
with V44 other contact with best friends
Z = -1.7325 1-Tailed P = .0416
V27 other contact with son
with V44 other contact with best friends
2 = -.2251 _ l-Tailed P = .4109
V11 other contact with father
with V44 other contact with best friends
Z = -1.8085 1-Talled P = .0352
V15 other contact with sister
with V44 other contact with best friends
Z = -3.5549 1-Tailed P = .0002

32

Table 1.4 (cont'd)

V19 other contact with brother
with V44 other contact with best friends
Z = -6.9405 l-Tailed P = .0000

Tables 1.1 to 1.4'also show some other interesting
results: a higher percentage of Italian respondents live,
with parents, children and relatives. Less than two percent
of American respondents live with parents, while 7.6 to 10.3
percent of Italians do so. Less than 24 percent of American
respondents live with children, while over 60 percent of
Italians do so. 1.8 percent of American respondents living
with relatives, while 6.2 percent of Italians live with
relatives. The percentages for living with siblings are
very similar in these two countries -- both less than one
percent.

Hypothesis 2 examines the relationship between
education and a married person’s first choice of spouse as a
helper when s/he is faced with depression and needs advice,
and it examines the effect of educational level on a
respondent’s first choice of friends or kin when s/he is
faced with family problems. The percentages of their
choices of various helpers are presented in Table 2.2 and
Table 2.3.

Logistic regression is used to test hypotheses 2a, 2b
and 2d. The results of the logistic regressions are

presented in Table 2.1. For each hypothesis, four groups of

33
respondents (American males and females and italian males
and females) are chosen. First, to test hypothesis 2a and
2b, the values of the dependent variables v57 (help-seeking
choices when feeling depressed) and v59 (help-seeking
choices for advice) are recoded into spouse = 1 and
nonspouse (options other than spouse) - 0. Second, to test
Hypothesis 2d, the values of the dependent variable v55
(help-seeking choices when faced with family problems) are
recoded into 1 = friend (closest friend and other friend), 0
= nonspouse kin (mother, father, daughter, son, brother and
sister) and other options are treated as missing values.
Third, education is the independent variable for testing
hypotheses 2a, 2b and 2d, and education is mean corrected.
A variable which indicates years in school, is used as the
independent variable in the regressions.

Hypothesis 2a states that a married person would turn
to his or her spouse first when s/he feels depressed, no
matter how much school education s/he has. Table 2.2 and
2.3 show that 74.9 percent of American males and 52 percent
of American females turned to their spouses first, while the
percentages of Italian respondents are 61.8 for males and
29.4 for females. These percentages are larger than those
of other options (though 29.4 percent is not very high) and
prove that respondents from all four groups are more likely
to turn to their spouses first than anyone else. Table 2.1
shows that education has a barely significant effect (p

2.0431) on American females' choices of spouse as first

34
helpers. However, there is not a significant relationship
between education and the choices of spouse for the other
three groups. The negative signs.in Table 2.1 may be just

sampling errors. Thus, hypothesis 2a is supported.

Table 2 . 1 ”w

Unstandardized logistic regression coefficients for the
effect of education on choices of helpers

 

W Ecumenism Adria
B B B
Males Females Males Females Males Females
USA .093* .1729** -.004 .0795* .1142** .0952*
Italy .2191*** .1740* . -.0948 .0938 .0098 .1718**
(*= p < .05 **= p<.01 ***- p<.001)

Note: For family problem, v55 is recoded as 1= friend
(closest friend 8 other friends) as nonspouse kin.

For depression and advice, v57 and v59 are recoded as 1=
spouse, 0= nonspouse. ’

35

Table 2.2 (0.8. males and females)
Choice of helpers (indicated by valid percent) on three

occasions
family problem depression advice

male female male female male female
no one 6.0 2.4 1.9 ' 1.7 2.7 1.9
spouse 12.5 9.1 25.2 -§2LQ 1111 15;;
mother 11.4 14.4 1.6 5.9 .5 5.0
father 3.3 2.4 .5 4.0 1.2
daughter 4.4 ' 8.4 1.1 5.2 1.1 2.6
son 4.6 3.3 .8 1.4 2.2 2.6
sister 4.6 8.4 2.4 4.5 .5 2.4
brother 5.2 1.4 1.9 .5 1.3 .2
other relatives 4.1 4.3 1.1 1.4 1.1 1.2
closest friend 18.5 23.2 8.1 20.8 4.3 3.8
other friend 1.4 .7 .5 . .9 .3 .2
neighbor .5 .' .2 .5 .7
someone you .5 .5 1.1 .7 1.1 .2
work with
church, clergy 16.1 16.5 3.0 3.1 1.3 2.1
family doctor 1.1 1.0 1.2
psychologist] 5.4 3.6 .5- .2 .8 .5
psychiatrist '
solicitor,lawyer .3 .2
other .3 .2 .5 .8
N= 367 443 383 443 383 443

TABLE 2.3 (Italy Male 5 Female)
Choice of helpers (indicated by valid percent)
on three occasions

family problem depression advice

male female male female male female
no one 19.8 12.7 5.9 7.1 8.6 8.6
Spouse 7-1 3-0 5115 2211 1111 £112
mother 5.3 16.0 1.8 6.8 .6 7.1
father 2.1 .9 .6 1.2 2.1
daughter 5.9 13.9 1.2 9.5 .6 5.0
son 8.0 5.3 1.8 2.4 2.7 3.0
sister 6.5 14.2 ' 2.4 8.6 .9 1.5
brother 6.2 3.0 .9 1.8 2.1
other relatives 8.0 7.4 1.5 3.6 1.2 2.1
closest friend 24.0 16.9 16.9 25.2 6.2 4.7
other friend 1.2 1.8 1.2 1.5 .3
neighbor .3 .9 3.3 .3
someone you .3 .3 2.1 .3 1.2 .3

work with

36

church, clergy 2.4 2.7 .3 .6 .6
family doctor .6‘ .3 1.5 .9 .3
psychologist, 2.4 1.5 .6
psychiatrist

solicitor, lawyer .6 .6
other .3 .3 .9 .3
N- 338 338 338 338 338 338

Hypothesis 2b states that more educated married
persons would more likely turn to their spouse first when
they need advice on making an important change in life.
Table 2.2 and table 2.3 show that 77.7 percent of American
males and 75.1 percent of American females turn to their
spouses first, while the percentages of Italian respondents
are 73.1 for males and 61.2 for females. These percentages
are much higher than those of other options and prove that
respondents in four groups are more likely to seek advice
from their spouses first than from anyone else. Table 2.1
shows that there is a significant relationship between
education and seeking help from spouse first for all but one
group (Italian males). The positive coefficients indicate
that the more educated a married person is, the more likely
s/he would turn to his or her spouse for advice. This
hypothesis is supported.

- According to Hypothesis 2d, the less educated a
married person is, the more likely s/he would turn to kin
for help with family prOblems; the more educated a married
person is, the more likely s/he would turn to friends. The

unstandardized regression coefficients (B) in Table 2.1

37
range from .093 to .2191. The positive coefficients
indicate that the more educated a married person is, the
more likely s/he would turn to friends first. In addition,
there is a significant relationship between education and
his or her choice of friends as the first helper for all
groups. The relationship is highly significant (p < .001)
for Italian males. Hypothesis 2d is supported.

Hypothesis 2c tests if the likelihood for men to turn
to their wives is greater than that for women to turn to
their husbands for help with depression and advice.

In Table 2.2 and Table 2.3,.the frequencies of v57 (help
seeking choices when feeling depressed) and v59 (help-
seeking choices for advice) are used to know the percentages
of married persons' first choices of helpers in these two
situations. By comparing the percentages of men’s and
women's choices in both countries, we shall know if the
percentages for choosing spouses first are higher for men
than for women. To prove that the results are not sampling
errors, the p values of Pearson's chi-square are examined.
To conduct the chi-square test, the values of v57 (help-
seeking choices when feeling depressed) and v59 (help-
seeking choices for advice) are recoded as 0= nonspouse and
1- spouse.

Because there is some gap between American and Italian
respondents' educational statuses (about 24 8 of Americans
and 12 8 of Italians have college education), two U.S.

subsamples and two Italian subsamples are used to test if

38
education accounts for'the difference between Americans and
Italians. The U.S. and Italian subsamples consist of those
who have university education and those who do not have
university education. The same procedures for testing
hypothesis 2c are applied to the subsamples.

The results in Table 2.2 and 2.3 indicate that the
percentages of American and Italian women who turn to their
spouses when they are depressed are 52.9 and 29.4
separately, while the percentages are 75.1 and 61.2 when
they need advice. However, the percentages of American and
Italian men who turn to their spouses when they are
depressed are 74.9 and 61.8 separately, while the
percentages are 77.7 and 73.1 when they need advice. The
percentages for men are larger than those for women in two
situations, and their difference is more obvious for Italian
respondents.

In Table 2.4 we see that there is a significant
difference in the likelihood of American men's and women's
turning to their spouses for help with depression (p=.000),
but not for advice (p=.385). In addition, the percent
difference for depression (22.9 8) is larger than that for
advice (2.6 8). .

However, for both depression and advice, Italian men
and women differ significantly in their likelihood of
turning to their spouses for help. The P Value is .000 for
depression and .001 for advice. Like American respondents,

the percent difference for depression (32.4 8) is larger

39

than that for advice (11.9 8).

Tlhl. 2.4

Comparison of males' and females' tendency to seek help from
spouse/nonspouse in the 0.8. 6 Italy for depression 5 advice

USA Respondents

Depression Advice
column 8 Male Female Male Female
Nonspouse 25.1% 48% 22.38 24.98
Spouse 24.28 528 11113 12111
M - F 22.9 8 2.6 8
N 371 423 372 421
Sig ,990 ilfié

Italian Respondents

Depression Advice
column 8 Male Female Male Female
Nonspouse 38.2% 70.6% 26.9% 38.88
Spouse 61.83 22.48. 11111 91121
M - F 32.4 8 11.98
N 338 337 338 338
Sig 1999 1921

NOTE: M - F refers to the percent difference between males
and females

The results for testing the subsamples are presented
in Table 2.5. In Table 2.5 we see that among American
respondents with university education, there is no
significant difference between males and females in the
likelihood of their turning to their spouses for help with
depression (p= .077) and advice (p= .318). Among Italian

respondents with university education, there is also no

40
significant difference between males and females in the
likelihood of their turning to their spouses for help with
depression (p= .183) and advice (p= .752).

Because the ch-square test does not measure strength
of association between two groups, it is necessary to
compare the percent difference among well-educated and less
educated respondents. The reason for comparing percent
difference is that it is an unbiased estimate of the
strength of association in the population. From Table 2.5
two conclusions can be made:

(1) In both countries, the percent difference among
well-educated persons is usually smaller than that among
less educated ones. For example, the percent difference for
depression is 11.5 8 among American well-educated people,
while it is 25.8 8 among less-educated people. In the
Italian sample, the percent difference for depression is
15.5 8 among well-educated persons, while it is 33.1 8 among
less-educated ones. (2) Well-educated Americans and
Italians have fairly similar patterns of help seeking for
depression and advice. With regard to advice seeking, well-
educated Americans show a percent difference of 5.5 8 while
well-educated Italians show a percent difference of 3.3 8.
Thus the two percent difference scores differ by only 2.2 8.
By contrast, less educated people from the two countries
differ from each other to a great extent. For advice
seeking, less-educated Americans show a percent difference

of .07 8, while less-educated Italians show a difference of

41

12.1 5. Thus the two percent difference scores differ by
11.9 percent. A

Hypothesis 2c, which states that men would more likely
turn to their spouse for depression and advice than women,
is significantly supported for only American and Italian
respondents without college/university education. Part of
this is a result of the fact that the sample sizes for less-
educated respondents are larger than those for well-educated
ones in both countries, thus making it easier to get

statistically significantly results.

Table 2.5

Percent Difference a P value of Pearson's chi-square
test for American and Italian subsamples

USA Respondents with college education

Depression. amuse
Male Female Male Female
spouse 73.8 8 61.9 8 858 79.5
M - F 11.5 8 5.5 8
N 107 84 107 83
Pearson sig .007 sig .318

Italian Respondents with college education

Mien Adxige
Male Female Male Female
spouse 62.2 8 46.7 8 73.3 8 70.8
M - F 15.5 8 3.3 8
N 45 3O 45 3O

Pearson sig .183 sig .752

42
Table 2.5 (cont’d)

USA Respondents without college education

Depression dvc
Male Female Male Female
spouse 75.4 8 49.6 8 74.7 8 74 8
M - F 25.8 8 0.7 8
N 264 339 265 338
Pearson sig .0000 sig .833

Italian Respondents without university education

ess 89119.9

Male Female Male Female

spouse 61.8 8 27.7 8 73 8 60.4 8

M - F 34.1 8 12.6 8
N 293 307 293 308
Pearson sig .000 sig .001

Note: M - F refers to the percent difference between men and
women in seeking help from their spouses.

Regarding the choices of helpers for family problems
in hypothesis 2d, Tables 2.2 and Table 2.3 also present many
interesting findings. For both U.S. and Italian males and
females, the percentage of turning to closest friends when
they have family problems is higher than that of any other
helper:18.5 percent of U.S. males and 23.2 percent of U.S.
females; 24 percent of Italian males and 16.9 percent of
Italian females. For U.S. respondents, the likelihood of
turning to church clergy for family problems is the second
highest (16.1 percent for males and 16.5 percent for
females). These percentages are much higher than those for

Italian respondents (2.4 8 for males and 2.7 8 for females).

43
U.S respondents also more likely turn to psychologists (5.4
8 for males and 3.6 8 for females) than Italian respondents
(2.4 8 for males and 1.58 for females). For Americans and
Italians, the percentages of turning to psychologists and
clergy for family problems are much higher than the
percentages when they turn to psychologists and clergy for
depression and advice. Yet, Italians are more likely to
turn to no one (19.8 8 for males and 12.7 8 for females)
than Americans (6.0 8 for males and 2.48 for females).

In addition, American and Italian respondents are
similar in the pattern of seeking help for depression and
advice: They predominantly depend on spouses, kin and
closest friends and minimally depend on neighbors, co-
workers, family doctors, psychologists, psychiatrists, and
lawyers. Yet, more American respondents turn to church
clergy for help with depression and advice than Italian
respondents (about three percent for Americans and less than
one percent for Italians).

Hypothesis 3 predicts a greater tendency for a married
person who does not turn to his/her spouse first to turn to
female kin than male kin for help in three situations.

The binomial test is used to test Hypothesis 3. The values
of v55 (help-seeking choices when faced with family
problems) are recoded into male kin (father, son and
brother) = 1, female kin (mother, daughter and sister)- 2,
and other options - missing. This test examines the

proportions of male and female kin from whom four groups of

 

44
respondents (American males and females as well as Italian
males and females) seek help.

Table 3 presents the effect of the gender of the
confidant on the help seeking of respondents from both
countries in three situation. Both American and Italian
women are more likely to choose female kin rather than male
kin to help with family problems and depression (p <.001).
In terms of advice seeking from female kin, the p value is
smaller than .01 for American women and smaller than .05 for
Italian women. So, we can reject the null hypothesis that
females from both countries equally turn to male and female
kin.

Married men in the U.S. are more likely to turn to
female kin than to male kin for help with family problems (p
<.05) but are more likely to turn to male kin for advice (p
<.01). However, the likelihood that they will seek help
from females rather than males does not significantly differ
from 50 8 (i.e. pa .2812). As for married men in Italy,
they turn to male kin for advice more often than female kin
(p2 .031). When they are depressed or faced with family
problems, the proportion of females sought does not differ
significantly from 50 8 (pa :1237 and pa .7091 separately).
This hypothesis is always supported for women and sometimes

supported for men.

45

rants. 3

Proportions of male and female kin from when both 0.8.
8 Italian respondents seek help for family problems,
depression and advice

 

A-W

1. Female Respondents’ Helpers

WW Miss

  

   

Helpers

8 female
total

 

8 female total

 

89 8 '74

    
     

  

8 female total

 

71 8 59

 

  

 

 

2-tailed P

B. Male Respondents’ H

      

 

elpers

 

.0000

.0018

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Helpers 8 female total 8 female total 8 female total
60.9 8 123 61 8 31 22 8 36
l2-tailed p .0191 .2812 .0015

B-Italueenondente

1. Female Respondents’ Helpers

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Wigs 2921199191: 85111129
Helpers 8 female total 8 female total 8 female total
82.7 8 180 89.4 8 94 65.7 8 70
l2-tailed p .0000 .0000 .0121 I

 

 

2. Male Respondents’ Helpers

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Helpers 8 female total 8 female total 8 female total
52.1 8 115 66.6 8 27 26.9 8 26
.7091 .1237 .0310

 

 

l2-tailed p
No e: e igures under WISE;

female helpers.

 

 

are

 

e sum 6? male and
P levels test the null hypothesis

that the proportion of chosen females is 50 8

 

 

 

DISCUSSION

The findings primarily support hypothesis 1a --
married persons in the U.S. do visit friends more often than
all the kin. Among the kin, they visit children most
frequently, visit relatives slightly more often than
parents, and visit siblings the least often. However, the
findings do not support hypothesis 1a that Americans contact
best friends more often than kin because they contact
daughters and mothers more often than best friends.
Obviously, friends play an important role in the social
network of married persons. They may visit or contact their
kin out of obligation. Yet, since they do not have
obligations for friends, they may visit or contact friends
for seeking or offering help or just for socializing
purpose. They regard closest friends as "in-group” members,
and the reason they see friends more often than parents may
be that many of them do not live with or close to parents.
In this sample, siblings are least visited or contacted
among the kin, which may also be the consequence of
geographic mobility, but sibling ties may reemerge in one’s
old age (Cumming & Schneider 1961).

The findings also primarily support hypothesis 1b
-- married persons in Italy visit kin more often than best
friends. Italian respondents visit best friends less

frequently than children, parents and relatives. However,

46

47
the findings do not show that they contact all kin more
often than best friends. They only contact children and
mother more often than best friends. The percentage of them
living with children is three times as large as that of
their American counterparts and for those living with
parents the percentage is five times as large. Young people
in Italy usually stay in the parental home until marriage
and often after marriage (Moors 1990). In addition, from
Tables 1.1 to 1.4 we see that American respondents visit or
contact their kin less frequently than Italian respondents.
Though siblings are least visited, Italians visit siblings
more than once a month. In the U.S. sample, siblings are
visited once a month or less often. All these imply that
Italians have a closer relationship with kin than Americans.
However, U.S and Italian subjects visit or contact friends
almost as frequently -- at least once a week.

Bott (1971) attributes the following factors to
married persons’ relationship with kin: economic ties with
kin, residence and physical accessibility of kin, type of
genealogical relationship, the connectedness of the kinship
network, the presence and preference of "connecting
relatives," idiosyncratic combinations of conscious and
unconscious needs and attitudes. People tend to have closer
relationship with relatives or kin living nearby than with
those living far away. Residence and physical accessibility
is impacted by geographic and social mobility, and dwelling

habits. Geographic and social mobility are in turn

48
influenced by One’s socioeconomic status, economic
structures of a society and culture. On the average,
respondents in the U.S. have more years of education than
Italian respondents, and the U.S. is more industrialized
than Italy. More education makes social mobility easier,
and educational as well as economic opportunities in a
highly industrialized country make geographic mobility very
frequent. Additionally, since American culture emphasizes
independence and self-reliance, contact with relatives
outside the nuclear family is not taken for granted, and
even parent-child relationship is a matter of individual
negotiation once the children have left home (Bellah et al
1986).

Despite the prevalence of individualism, Americans are
forever forming different types of associations --
commercial, industrial, religious, moral, and so on (Bellah
et al. 1986). Individuals are expected to join groups of
his choice. "Getting involved" is the American notion of
the relationship between self and society. This also
explains why Americans associate with friends more than kin.

In contrast, Italy is not as mobile as the United
States. Many Southern Italians live on agriculture, and
education has not been emphasized until the late sixties
(Ozer 1971). The respondents in this sample have an average
of 8 years of schooling. Uneven development in the south
and the north, rigid class stratification, and too many

dialects in the country (Mangano 1971) make geographic and

49

social mobility not as easy as they are in the U.S. Most
Italians (except those living in large Northern cities) also
like to live together in the large blocks of flats rather
than live alone in an enclosed house of one’s own (Bryant
1971). Additionally, Italy is much smaller than America;
geographic proximity also contributes to closer kin ties.
However, some scholars think that among the factors
contributing to close kin relationships, the most important
one is their high value placed on family. Take Southern

Italians for an example, they show great concern for the

‘hwn—eaw. r"

well-being of his immediate family, but he shows "almost
pathological distrust toward persons outside of the small
circle of the family of procreation" (Tamosi 1971). Though
urbanization has weakened kin ties, the power of Italian
family is still much stronger than that of American family.
Given the power of Italian family alone, it is logical to
conclude that Italian respondents associate with friends
less than with kin.

The findings support hypotheses 2a and 2b that when a
married person feels depressed or needs advice on an
important change in life, s/he would most likely turn to his
or her spouse for help, no matter at what educational level
s/he is. These findings suggest that one’s spouse plays an
important role in providing emotional and informational
support. That the percentages of male and female married
persons’ choosing the spouse first when they are depressed

are larger than other options in both countries confirms

50
Ensel’s finding that spousal help lowers the level of
depression more than help from any other tie. However, the
percentage of female respondents who turn to their husbands
first is much lower in Italy than in America. This proves
that Italian women still suffered from gender inequality in
marital relationships when the data was collected in 1987.
This also proves Cutrona and Suhr’s finding that help-
seeking from one’s spouse for emotional support is impacted
by marital satisfaction.

Hypothesis 2c states that a married man would more
likely turn to his spouse than his spouse would turn to him
when he feels depressed or needs advice on an important
change in life. This is primarily supported among American
and Italian respondents without college/university
education. The findings for this hypothesis also indicate
that both American and Italian males without college or
university education rely on their spouses much more than
their spouses rely on them. This suggests that the tendency
for male and female respondents to seek help from their
spouses is influenced more by educational status than by
culture.

In both countries, education does not substantially
impact either a male or a female subject’s choice of spouse
as the first helper with depression. However, education was
found to have a positive impact on married persons’ choices
in terms of informational support. This makes sense because

higher educational status is positively correlated with more

51
equal marital relationship, the more educated a married
person is, the more likely s/he would turn to his or her
spouse for advice. The educational level of American
respondents is higher than that of Italian respondents. So,
the percentage of turning to their spouses first is higher
in America than in Italy. Since gender inequality between
an Italian couple is very common, it is understandable that
only 29.4 percent of all Italian female respondents turn to
their husbands first when depressed because their husbands
are dominant and unexpressive..

Why is there a much higher percentage of them turning
to their husbands first (61.2 percent) when they need
advice? The logical explanation is that the Italian husband
is the head of the household and has more decision power
than the wife. Therefore, wives have to ask their husbands’
opinions first before making important decisions.

As for seeking help for family problems, education
also has a significant effect on both American and Italian
respondents’ choices of kin or friends as first helpers.
The findings support hypothesis 2d that a less educated
married person is more likely to turn to kin first for help
with family problems but a more educated married person
would turn to friends first. iThis can be explained by
noting that the lower class have fewer resources (such as
time, money and energy) to associate with friends than
middle and upper class. Some researchers argue that the

middle and upper class retain more solid ties with kin than

52
the lower class even after urbanization (Pearlin 1971)
because the former have more resources to help their kin.
However, our data indicates that the lower class are more
likely to depend on kin for family problems rather than the
other way around.

In terms of the choices of helpers in three situations,
we found that spouses, friends and church clergy constitute
a large portion of American respondent’s helping network,
but Italians depend on church clergy only minimally even
when faced with family problems. The church clergy in the
U.S. plays an important role in solving family problems:
U.S. respondents turn to church clergy first seven times
more than Italians. Though church clergy is not included in
the hypotheses, the role of church in both countries is
worth discussion.

According to the samples, the number of U.S.
respondents attending church once a week is larger than that
of Italians. Putnam (1995) holds that America continues to
be an extraordinarily "churched" society though church
attendance has decreased. Religious affiliation is the most
common associational membership among Americans (p. 69).
Religion provides Americans a conception of how one should
live (Bellah 1986), and church clergy help them out of
difficulties, such as offering marriage counselling for
those with family problems. In Italy, nine out of ten
Italians call themselves Catholics and nearly 100 percent of

these self-identified Catholics are baptized (The Economist

53
1996). However, many people have bitter feeling against the
Roman Church and are disgusted at church clergy. They
believe that the church derives its wealth and power from
the ignorance and superstition of the poor and that a large
group of clergy are in the church simply as an honorable
profession but have little religion (Mangano 1971). In
Italy, attending church has more of social custom than of
religious significance; the majority of men of all classes
never attend church except for weddings or funerals;
”churchgoing is left to the women and children" (ibid p. 71,
74, 75).

As for other options of helpers for family problems,
psychologists serve better in the function of solving family
problems than in other functions. American respondents turn
to psychologists first twice as often as Italians when
feeling depressed. We are not sure if Americans trust
psychologists better than Italians. However, whether
seeking help from psychologists or not depends on one’s
educational and income status. Since American respondents
have higher socioeconomic status than Italian respondents,
this may explain why the former are more likely to turn to
psychologists. The comparisons as well as the finding that
Italian respondents turn to nobody three to five times more
likely than their American counterparts lead us to speculate
that Italians are reluctant to disclose their family
problems to people other than kin and friends. Generally

speaking, men in both countries are less likely to seek help

54
than women in three situations mentioned above, and more
Italian respondents do not seek help than American
respondents. .

Previous findings indicate that the gender of
respondents impacts their choices of helpers: men primarily
depend on their spouses and women depend on more varied
sources of support. The findings for hypothesis 3 show that
there is also gender preference in terms of the helpers they
seek. '

The findings support part of hypothesis 3 that both
American and Italian women would more likely seek help from
female rather than male kin first in three situations, if
they do not turn to their spouses for help. The difference
between the percentage of female and male helpers whom they
turn to for depression is the largest; the difference is the
second largest when they seek help for family problems and
the smallest for seeking advice. This implies that females
turn to female kin for help with depression more than for
family problems and advice.

However, the findings do not support the rest of
hypothesis 3 that American and Italian men would more likely
turn to female kin rather than male kin first in three
situations, if they do not seek help from their spouses.
Findings show that married men in both countries would most
likely seek help from female kin than from male kin for
depression, followed by family problems. This suggests that

female kin are more expressive and help more with emotional

55
problems. Both American and Italian men turn to male kin
more often than to female kin for advice probably because

they believe that males are more capable of offering the

advice they need than females.

LIMITATIONS

Because this paper deals with emotional and
informational support only, we can not see the effect of
gender on the choices of helpers in other aspects of
support. For example, whom will married men and women turn
to more often when needing household help and financial help
or when feeling ill? In addition, education is the only
predictor used in the logistic regression. The effects of
age, income, employment status, and other variables on the
choices of helpers are not examined, because gender and
cultural difference have already been covered in the study.
Since the paper compares two countries, using many
predictors will make the paper too complicated to read.

The reason race is not used as a predictor is that it does
not exist in the data. As for the questions in the survey,
they have some shortcomings. If respondents had been asked
why they choose a certain helper first, and how they are
helped, it would help researchers explain the findings
better.

56

CONCLUSION

Culture, social class, geographic mobility, and social
mobility impact married persons' kin and friend ties, while
their gender, educational levels, the extent of gender
equality in their marital relationships, and their attitudes
towards or attachment to the church have much impact on
married persons' choices of helpers when they need support
for family problems, depression and advice.

Based on previous findings and discussion, the
following conclusions are reached: (1) Italian respondents
associate with kin more often than American respondents,
while the latter associate with friends more often than the
former. (2) In both countries, kin, spouse and friends are
the most important sources of support for a married person.
Spouse support is especially important when s/he needs help
with depression and advice, no matter s/he is from
individualist or family-oriented culture. Friends help most
when s/he is faced with family problems. (3) Women in both
countries are more likely to turn to female kin than men.
(4) Americans are more likely to seek help from church
clergy and psychologists than Italians. (5) Women rely on a
wider variety of sources of support than their husbands.

Hen rely on their spouses to a large extent and more likely
turn to nobody than women in three situations. In

particular, men are more likely to get help with depression

57

58
from their spouses than women are. The last finding is
consistent with Hobfall's (1986) and other researchers'
findings. This suggests that marriage is more conducive to
the mental heath of men than that of women. Increasing
gender equality in a marital relationship is a prerequisite

of improving the mental health of married women.

APPENDIX

APPENDIX

variables a Survey Questions
V55 -- help in family problem
Suppose you were very upset about a problem with your

husband, wife, or partner, and haven't been able to sort it
out with them.

Who would you turn to first for help?

1. no one 2. husband/wife/partner 3. mother 4. father

5. son- 6. sister 7. brother

8. other relatives, including in-laws

9. closest friend 10. other friend

11. neighbor 12. someone you work
with

13 church, clergy or priest 14. family doctor

15. psychologist, psychiatrist, 16. other

marriage guidance or other
professional counselor
V57 -- help in depression

Suppose you felt just a bit down or depressed, and you
wanted to talk about it.

Who would you turn to first for help?
(The options are exactly the same as those for v55)
V59 --help with advice
Suppose you needed advice about an important change in your
life -- for example about a job, or moving to another part
of the country.

Who would you turn to first for help?

1. no one 2. husband/wife/partner 3. mother 4. father

5. son 6. sister 7. brother 8. other relatives,
including in-laws

9. closest friend 10. other friend

11. neighbor 12. someone you work
with

59

13
15.

16.

60

church, clergy or priest
psychologist, psychiatrist,
marriage guidance or other
professional counselor

solicitor] lawyer

14. family doctor

LIST OF REFERENCES

LIST OF REFERENCES

Allan, G. 1979. A SoCiology of Friendship and Kinship.
London: Allen and Unwin.

Antonucci, Toni C. 1985, Social support: Theoretical
advances, recent findings and pressing issues. Social
Support, Theory, Research, and Applications. The
Neitherlands, Dordrecht: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers.

Barbagli, Marzio & David Kertzer. ”An introduction to the
history of Italian family life" in JOurnal of Human History,
15,4, 369-383. -

Barzin, Luigi. 1964. The Italians. NY: Atheneum.

Bedford, Victoria H. 1989. "Sibling research in historical
perspective:The discovery of a forgotten relationship."
American Behavioral Scientist, 33, 6-18.

Bellah, Robert N., Richard Madsen, William M. Sullivan, Ann
Swinder, & Steven M. Tipton. 1986. Habits of the Heart.
CA: University of Canifornia Press.

Bernard, Jessie. 1971. WOmen and the Public Interest: An
essay on policy and protest. Chicago: Aldine.

Booth, Alan. 1972. Sex, and social participation .
American Sociological Review, 37, 183-187.

Bott, Elizabeth. 1971. Family and Social Network (2nd ed.)
London:Tavistock Publications.

Bowman, Marilyn. L. 1990. "Coping efforts and marital
satisfaction: Measuring marital coping and its correlates"
in Journal of Marriage and the Family 52, 463-74.

Bryant, Andrews. 1971. The Italians: How they Live and
work. NY: Praeger Publishers

Campbell, A. 1980. The Sense of well-being in America.
New York: McGraw Hill.

Cassel, J. 1974. Psychological Processes and "Stress":

Theoretical formulations. International JOurnal of Health
Services (4): 471-482.

61

62

Cumming, Elaine 8 David Schneider. 1961. "Sibling
Solidarity: Property of American Kinship," American
Anthropologist (63): 498-507.

Cutrona, Carolyn E. 8 Julie A. Suhr. 1992.
”Controllability of stressful Events and Satisfaction with
spouse Support Behaviors" Cbmmunication Research, vol 19,
No. 2, Apr. 154-174.

Cutrona, Carolyn E. 8 Julie A. Suhr. 1994. "Social support
communication in the context of marriage: An analysis of
couples’ supportive interaction" in Burleson et al’s
(editors) Cbmmunication of Social Support. CA: Sage
Publications.

Dohrenwend, B. S. 8 Dohrenwend, B.P. 1978. Exemplification
of a method for scaling : The PERI life events scale.
JOurnal of Health and Social Behavior, 19, 205-229.

Donohue, William A. 1990. The New Freedom: Individualism
and Collectivism in the Social Lives of Americans. New
Jersey: Transaction Publishers.

Eagly, A.H. & Crowley, N. 1986. Gender and helping
behavior:A meta-analytic review of the social psychological
literature. Psychological bulletin, 100, 283, 283-
308.Booth, A. 1972. Sex and social participation.
American Sociological Review (27): 183-193.

Eckenrode, John. 1991. The Social Context of Cbping.
NY:Plenum Press.

Economist. 1996. A Flock that strayed. Jan. 6th, p. 42.

Ensel, W. H. 1986. ”Social class and depressive
symptomatology,” in N. Lin et al. (eds.) Social Support,
Life EVents, and Depression. Orlando, FL: Academic Press.

Fischer, C. S. 1982. To Dwell Among Friends: Personal
Networks in wan and City. Chicago: University of Chicago
Press.

Gore, S. 1978. The effect of social support in moderating
the health consequences of unemployment. JOurnal of Health
and Social Behavior, 24 (19): 157-165.

Hobfoll, S. E., Nadler, A., & Leiberman, J. 1986.
Satisfaction withn social support during crisis:Intimacy and
self-esteem as critical determinants. JOurnal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 296-304.

Jacobson, D. E. 1986. Types and timing of social support.
JOurnal of Health and Social Behavior, 27, 250-264.

63

Kelley, H. H. 8 J. W. Thibaut. 1978. Interpersonal
Relations: a Theory of Interdependence. NY: Wiley-
Interscience.

Handel, Denise. 1978. Homophily, selection, and
socialization in adolescent friendship. Journal of
Sociology, 84, 427-436.

Kessler, R.C. 8 McLeod, J. 1984. Sex differences in
vulnerability to undesirable life events. American
Sociological Review 49(5): 620-631.

Levi, Giovanni. 1990. "Family and Kin -- A few thoughts"
in JOurnal of Family History, 15, 4, 567-578.

Lin, Nan 8 Jeanne Westcott. 1991. "Marital management]
disengagement, social networks, and mental health” in John
Eckenrode, The Social Context of Coping. NY: Plenum Press.

Lin, Nan, Alfred Dean 8 Walter M. Ensel. 1986. Social
Support, Life EVents, and Depression. Florida: Academic
Press, Inc.

Lin, N.,R. Simeone, W.M. Ensel 8 W. Kuo. 11979. ” Social
support, stressful life events, and illness:A model and
empirical test" in JOurnal of Health and social Behavior,
20, 108-20.

Loscocco, Karyn A. 8 Glenna Spitze. 1990. Working
conditions, social support, and the well-being of female and
male factory workers. JOurnal of Health and Social
Behavior, 31, 313-327.

Lowenthal, M.F., 8 Haven, G. 1968. Interaction and
adaptation: Intimacy as a critical variable. American
Sociological Review (33):20-30.

Hangano, Antonio. 1971. Sons of Italy. NY: Misssionary
Education Movement of the United states and Canada.

McLanahan, S.S., Wedemeyer, N.V., and Adelberg, T. 1981.
Netwrok structure, social support, and psychological well-
being in the single-parent family. JOurnal of Marriage and
the Family, 24, 3, 601-612.

Moors, Hein G. 1990. Attitudes toward demographic trends
and population policy: Italy and the Netherlands in a
comparative perspective. Kluwer Academic Publishers, 9,
179-194.

64

Oakley, Ann 8 Lynda Rajan. 1991. Social class and social
support: The same or different? Sociology, 25, 1, 32-59.

Parsons, T. 1949. "The social structure of family" in
Anshen, R.N. (ed.) The Family: Its Function and Destiny.
NY: Harper 8 Row, pp. 173-201.

Piselli, Fortunata. 1981. Parentela ed emigrazione.
Mutamenti e continuita in una comunita calabrese. Torino:
Einaudi.

Pinneau, S. Richard. 1975. "Effects of social support on
psychological and physiological stress,” unpublished
doctoral dissertation, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.

Putnam, Robert D. 1995. "Bowling Alone: America's
Declining Social Capital.” JOurnal of Democracy, 6, No.1,
65-78.

Raggio, Osvaldo. 1986. "La politica della parentela,
conflitti, locali e commissari in Liguria orientale (secc.
XVI-XVII)." Quaderni Storici 21:721-758.

Reiss, Ira L. 1971. The Family System in America. NY:
Holt, Reinhart 8 Winston, Inc.

Statistical Handbook on the American Family. 1992. Ariz,
Phonix: Oryx Press.

Rosenfield, S. 1980. Sex differences in depression: Do
women always have higher rates? JOurnal of Health and
Social behavior.

(21):33-43.

Ross, Catherine E., and John Mirowsky. 1989. "Explaining
the Social Patterns of Depression: Control and Problem
Solving -- or Support and Talking?" JOurnal of Health and
Social Behavior 30 (June): 206-209.

Snapp, Mary Beth. 1989. Toward Race, Class and Gender:
Inclusive Research on Stress, Social Support, and
Psychological Distress. Memphis: Center for Research on
women.

Tomasi, Lydio F. 1972. Italian American Family. NY:
Center of Migration Studies of New York, Inc.

Triandis, H. C., Bontempo, R., Villareal, H. J., Asai, M.,
Lucca, N. 1988. Individualism and Collectivism:Cross-
cultural perspectives on self-ingroup relationships.
JOurnal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54, 323-338.

65

Triandis, C. 8 Harry Hui. 1990. "Multimethod probes of
individualism and collectivism” in Journal of Personality
and Social Psychology, 59, 5, 1006-1020.

Turner, R. J. 1994. Social support and social structure: A
descriptive Epidemiology. JOurnal of Health and Social
Behavior, 35, 193-212.

Vanfossen, B.E. 1981. Sex differences in the mental health
effects of spouse support and equity. JOurnal of Health and
Social Behavior, 72 (2), 130-143.

Wiseman, Jacqueline P. 1986. Friendship: Bonds and binds
in a voluntary relationship. Journal of Social and Personal
Relationships, 3, 191-211.

"‘Mimi!IEEIIMWMEWEF