r. z... .,

i! A .

‘WL

u

n...

‘3
s"

 

 

x 7' '.
. - '- 1:: t
h i. _

£3.

-

a).

I.
4
35‘
.. 1r
,1‘

.....-..
nah

fii

.m; 2.. a."

an ,mmuwfii

"£552.31. :3
..: :5: 2
an}. 3.
\I y . i 5‘- ’.VI:
11:13.,»35,

.141: a“

4 1 .

t

.a :1“. ,
x:._n!.= hit-Q
.«Rfltseu .0.
.€

4
z . i.
.héowfirz.

iiérsx. ‘
I «(1.3:

 

This is to certify that the

dissertation entitled

The Relationship between Parental Attachment and African-

American, Asian, and Caucasian Student's Reported Feelings
of Social Alienation.

presented by
Delila Lashelle Owens

has been accepted towards fulfillment
of the requirements for

Doctor of Philosophy degree in Counselor Education

Date 5/23/02
/ I

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

 

LIBRARY
Michigan State
University

 

 

 

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

 

DATE DUE DATE DUE DATE DUE

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

6’01 cJCIRC/DateDuosz-pJS

THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN PARENTAL ATTACHMENT AND AFRICAN
AMERICAN, ASIAN, AND CAUCASIAN STUDENT’S REPORTED FEELING OF
SOCIAL ALIENATION.

By

Delila Lashelle Owens

A DISSERTATION

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

DOCTOR OF PHILOSPHY

Department of Counseling, Educational Psychology, and Special Education

2002

ABSTRACT

THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN PARENTAL ATTACHMENT AND AFRICAN
AMERICAN, ASIAN, AND CAUCASIAN STUDENT’S REPORTED FEELING OF
SOCIAL ALIENATION.

By
Delila Lashelle Owens

Many argue that the psychological and physical aspects of social alienation in
college can be damaging to students’ adjustment (Burbach & Thompson, 1971; Tatum,
1999). Still, others argue that parents providing of emotional support may be an
important buffer in helping students adjust to the overall university experience (Cutrona,
Cole, & Assouline & Russell, 1994; Kenny & Donaldson, 1994). This study sought to
examine these issues. This dissertation explores the relationship between parental
attachment and social alienation in African American, Asian, and Caucasian college
students. Alienation is characterized by feelings of meaninglessness, normlessness, and
powerlessness (Dean, 1961; Schram & Lauver, 1998). The data consists of 158 Asian,
African American, and Caucasian university students at a large mid-westem university.
The participants ranged in classification from freshmen through senior. Data was
analyzed using Multiple Regression, Analysis of Variance, and Multiple Analysis of
Variance. The findings suggest that for all three groups, demographics (mother’s level of
education) and parental attachment were not significant predictors of social alienation; no

significant differences between groups on levels of attachment to parents were found, and

no significant differences between groups on levels of social alienation were found.

Implications of for counselors and recommendations for future research are discussed.

DEDICATION

To the Memory of Wanda Michelle Collins
Friend and Colleague.

iv

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
To my Creator, who makes all things possible!

My sincere appreciation is expressed to Dr. Robbie Steward, Dissertation
Chair. Thank you for your prayers, patience, support, and guidance throughout this
process. It is by DEVINE design our paths crossed. You’ve taught me a lot about
professionalism and life.

My appreciation is also expressed to the following members of my
dissertation committee: Dr. Gloria Smith, Dr. Eugene Pemell, and Dr. Lee June.
Thank you for your continued support. You all provided the wings that helped to
sustain me.

This dissertation is also dedicated to those individuals who are always there
when I need them: Mrs. Diane Hawk, mom thanks for instilling in me the desire to
strive for the best. Dakisha Hawk, Sis, I’ll always know that I can depend on you.
Thank you for being my source of inspiration.

Special thanks to Dr. Judy Ferris, Theda Rudd, Geri Hurt, Dr. Joseph Dorsey,
Dr. Alfiee Breland, Dr. Rodney Wilson, Wendi Gibbs, Linda Rawls, and Elonda

Clemons. You are all wonderful sources of inspiration.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

DEDICATION ...................................................................... iv
ACKNOWLEGEMENTS ........................................................... v
Chapter

1. INTRODUCTION

STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM .................................... l.
HYPOTHESIS AND RESEARCH QUESTIONS ..................... 4
DEFINITION OF TERMS ................................................ 5

2. REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE

COLLEGE STUDENT ADJUSTMENT ................................ 7
SOCIAL INTEGRATION ............................................... lO
SOCIAL ALIENATION ................................................ 13
PARENTAL ATTACHMENT .......................................... 16
THE ATTACHMENT THEORY ....................................... 17

PARENTAL ATTACHMENT AND COLLEGE STUDENT ADJUSTMENT

................................................................................ 22
OJECTIVES OF THE STUDY .......................................... 23
3. RESEARCH PROCEDURES
RESEARCH POPULATION .............................................. 25
RESEARCH DESIGN ....................................................... 26
STATISTICAL ANALYSIS ................................................ 27

vi

RESEARCH INSTRUMENTS ............................................. 27
4. DISCUSSION OF RESEARCH
RESULTS .................................................................... 30
5. DISCUSSION
WITHIN GROUP DIFFERNCES FOR ALL PARTICIPANTS..54
BETWEEN GROUP DIFFERENCES FOR ALIENATION.. .55

BETWEEN GROUP DIFFERENCES FOR PARENTAL TTACHMENT
............................................................................ 58

RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FURTHER RESEARCH. . . . . 59

IMPLICATIONS FOR COUNSELORS ............................ 61

LIMITATIONS OFTHE STUDY.............. ...................... 63

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS ................................ 66

APPENDICES

A. CONSENT FORM ......................................................... 78
B. DEMOGRAPHIC QUESTIONNAIRE .................................. 79
C. UNIVERSITY ALIENATION SCALE ................................. 80
D. PARENTAL ATTACHMENT QUESTIONNAIRE ................... 83
E. GENDER INFORMATION ................................................ 85
F. CLASSIFICATION AND ALIENATION ............................... 86

vii

LIST OF TABLES

Table
1. Frequency distribution and percentages of selected individual
variables ..................................................................... 33
2. Means and standard deviations for all variables ........................ 35
3. Complete correlation matrix for African Americans ................... 37
4. Summary of regression analysis of university alienation/parental attachment
for African Americans ..................................................... 39
5. Model summary for Afi'ican Americans ................................. 4O
6. Complete correlation matrix for Asians ................................. 41
7. Summary of regression analysis of UAS/PA for Asians ............... 42
8. Model summary for Asians ................................................ 43
9. Complete correlation matrix for Caucasians ............................. 43
10. Summary of regression analysis of UAS/PA for Caucasians .......... 46
11. Model summary for Caucasian ............................................. 47
12. Between subject effects for parental attachment ....................... 49

13. Summary of descriptive statistics for parental attachment among Afi'ican

American, Asian, and Caucasian participants ........................... 50

14. Between subject effects for university alienation ........................ 51

15. Descriptive statistics for university alienation among African American,

Asian, and Caucasian participants ......................................... 52

viii

CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION

Statement of the Problem

Existing research that assesses the relationship between parental attachment and
college student adjustment has focused almost exclusively on white middle class
students. Relatively little or no literature exists on attachment and other ethnic/racial
groups. However, attachment theorists contend that attachment models apply across
cultures (Bowlby, 1988).

Other studies that examined the impact of attachment to parents on students
reported that feelings of social alienation are nonexistent. According to Tinto’s model of
social integration, integration into the college environment is a key element that
contributes to the student’s success at an institution. This type of research supports
examining factors that influence feelings of social alienation. For this reason, a study of
this nature is important.

Social alienation involves perception of being disassociated with university life.
Research has shown social alienation to be prognostic of negative academic outcomes.
Daugherty, Vaughn, and Lane (1997) found that loneliness was a function of gender. In
their study, men reported higher levels of loneliness than women. However, the

relationship between alienation and gender has not been sufficiently studied.

Tinto’s (1975) model of social integration attempts to explain social integration in
university students’ academic success. His model of college student adjustment is
composed of the following basic elements: pre-college characteristics (including family
background, individual attributes, and past educational experiences); goal attainment;
academic integration; social integration; and persistence/ withdrawal decisions. Desler
(1985) studied these elements to address gaps in the literature regarding social alienation
and ethnic minority students.

Tinto’s (1975) model conceptualizes social integration by the following: peer
group involvement, interactions with faculty, and integration into social organizations.
He states that “other things being equal, the higher the degree of integration into the
college systems, the greater will be the student’s commitment to the specific institution
and the goal of the college completion” (Desler, 1985; Tinto 1975). The student
adjustment model illustrates how adjustment into the college environment takes place.

The model proposes that the experience of the student at his/her institution is
reflected in two domains. The first domain is the social realm, which encompasses
experiences in the student’s social environment. The academic domain is the second
stage, which reflects experiences with faculty, academic unit, and other students.

The model suggests that students will progress through both intellectual and
academic development while on campus, they will be more involved in social
organizations, feel supported and committed to obtaining a college degree, and they
develop a sense of belonging to their institutions (Tinto, 1987). However, Tierney (1992)
who is an opponent of Tinto’s model argue that “a model of integration that never

questions who is to be integrated and how it is to be done assumes an individualistic

stance of human nature and rejects differences based on categories such as class, race,
and gender” (p. 285).

While literature on attachment and other family issues has explored gender and
developmental differences, researchers have done little regarding cultural differences in
attachment, particularly in college students and how these patterns influence college
adjustment. In this study I focus on relationships with parents (parental attachment) and
their relationships to student’s reported feelings of alienation among African Americans,
Asian, and Caucasians students.

Minority students have been under-represented in the past attachment literature.
They also have a history of higher attrition rates, especially at predominately white
institutions. Past research suggests that the parent-child relationships are important in the
college adjustment of students of color (Kenny, 1996). However, questions still remain
regarding the applicability of the attachment theory to various racial groups. Controversy
exists regarding the cross-cultural validity of the attachment theory and thus far, few
studies of adult attachment have examined racial/ethnic differences in their samples
(Harwood, Miller, & lrizarry, 1995).

As a theoretical perspective this study was partially guided by Tinto’s social
integration theory and Bowlby’s attachment theory. It attempts to answer the following

questions:

1. If and to what degree do demographics (mother’s education level) and attachment
to parents significantly predict African American, Asian, and Caucasian
American students reported feelings of alienation on a predominately white
campus?

2. Do significant differences exist in African American, Asian, and Caucasian
American university students reported levels of attachment to parents?

3. Do significant differences exist in African American, Asian, and Caucasian
American university students’ reported feelings of social alienation?

I tested three hypotheses (1). There will be a positive relationship between
alienation and attachment to parents for all three groups, (2). Students of color will
report stronger levels of attachment to parents than Caucasian American students, (3)
students of color will report stronger level of alienation than Caucasian American
students.

Demographic Variables

Mother ’s Educational Level

A large body of research suggests that parent's, and especially mother's level of
education is one of the most important predictors of school participation and success.
(Sticht & McDonald, 1990; Birdsall & Cochrane,l982; Sticht, 1994). Mother’s
education is strongly related to children's tendency to stay in school and to achieve at
higher levels. Research suggests that mothers' education level is extremely important for

students in the later school years, when difficult assignments may make more demands

on the mother's knowledge for assistance with homework, and when the mother's
knowledge of and involvement in school on behalf of her children may make the
difference between the child’s academic success or failure (Birdsall, & Cochrane, 1982).
Gender
Gender was initially selected as a demographic variable. Men are socialized to
focus on autonomy or independence, while women are socialized to focus more on
connections and relationships. For men, close relationships are harder to build with
the exception of a social network with buddies. Studies examining the relationship
between gender, social alienation, and parental attachment are nonexistent. However,
for this study, gender was not correlated with the criterion variable social alienation.
For that reason, it was excluded from the demographic information (See Appendix F).
DEFINITION OF TERMS
A fiican American
In this study, the term “African American” describes Americans whose self-
identity includes being of African descent. Therefore, “African American” describes an
ethnic or cultural group (Baruth & Manning, 1991).
Asians
The term Asian refers to people of many geographic origins, including Chinese,
Japanese, Korean, and Philippine Americans, as well as Samoans, Guamanians,
Hawaiians, and other Pacific Islanders. It includes people whose roots are in Vietnam,

Thailand, Cambodia, Laos, Indonesia, India, Pakistan, and Ceylon. Though one can argue

that each national group has its own unique culture, history, and reasons for migrating to
the United States (Takaki, 1990).
Caucasians

Caucasian is defined as “relating to a racial group having light to brown skin
pigmentation and straight or wavy hair” (Webster’s dictionary, p. 45). Caucasian refers to
a racial group consisting primarily of light-skinned people of Europe, North Africa,
western Asia, and India.
Attachment

According to Ainsworth (1987), an attachment is a close enduring bond between
two people. The fimction of attachment is that of protection with the attachment figure
providing security. A person’s desire to maintain closeness with the attachment figure
becomes particularly significant during painful events (Ainsworth, 1987). Through
primary interactions with caregivers, three types of attachment patterns emerge: secure,
anxious, and ambivalent.
Social Alienation

“Social alienation is a broad term that describes a state of being composed of
three components: normlessness, which is the loss of socialized values that give meaning
and purpose to life (Burbach & Thompson, 1971); social isolation which consists of
feelings of loneliness or separation from group norms or standards (Dean, 1961); and
powerlessness, which is an interpersonal interpretation of a situation in which one feels a
loss of control over situations and the outcome of those particular situations” (Schram &

Lauver, 1988).

CHAPTER 2
REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE

Chapter II is divided into six major sections containing a review of the literature
related to this study. The topic areas included in this review are studies on
(a) college-student adjustment, (b) social integration as one aspect of college student
adjustment, (c) social alienation as the other side of social integration, (d) parental
attachment/attachment theory (e) relationship between parental attachment and college
student adjustment, and (f) objectives of the current study.

Studies on College Student Adjustment

Soucy & Larose (2000) conducted a study titled Attachment and Control in
Family and Mentoring Contexts as Determinants of Adolescent Adjustment to College.
The purpose of their study was to examine whether adolescents’ perceptions of
attachment security and behavioral and psychological control as experienced in family
and mentoring contexts were predictive of their adjustment to college. Participants were
French-speaking, academically at-risk students from three different colleges, one located
inaruralareaand theothertwoinurbanareasoftheprovince onuebec. The studywas
conducted using 158 subjects.

Results of the study indicate that a percentage of variation (10%) is explained by
characteristics of the parental relationship, in particular, the behavioral and psychological
control exercised by fathers predicted college-student adjustment. Psychological control
is negatively related to adjustment while behavioral control is positively related to

adjustment. Results also indicate that secure attachment to a mentor is predictive of all

aspects of college adjustment but only among students who perceived high or moderate
levels of security in their relationships with their mothers. The findings of this study
further indicate that perceived security and control in adolescent-mentor relationships are
not predictive of adolescent academic success. Finally, in viewing gender differences, the
study illustrates that male participants perceived mentors as being more controlling than
their parents, whereas the reverse is true for female participants.

Vivona (2000) conducted a study titled “Parental Attachment Styles of Late
Adolescents Qualities of Attachment Relationships and Consequences for Adjustment”.
Participants included 173 undergraduates at a small Northeast college, ranging in age
from 18 to 49. Results of the study indicate that insecurely attached late adolescents
report greater feelings of anxiety, depression, and worry than those adolescents who are
securely attached to their parents. Insecure attachment for women is also associated with
diminished college adjustment and lower intimacy levels; however, this is not found to be
true for men. Still other studies continue to document the importance of attachment
relationships.

Kenny and Donaldson (1991) conducted a study that examined the relationships
of parental attachment and family structure to the social and psychological adjustment of
first-year college students. The study was conducted on 256 first year students (173
woman and 53 men). The researchers used the Parental Attachment Questionnaire to test
for attachment to parents, the F arnily Structure survey to assess the structural components
of family functioning, the Texas Behavior Inventory to assess social competence, and the

Hopkins Symptom Checklist to assess psychological functioning.

The results of the study indicate that college women report significantly higher
levels of attachment to their parents than men. The women describe the affective quality
of the attachment as more positive than do the men. Women also report slightly more
psychological symptoms during the transition to college than their male counterparts.
Finally, positive attachment to parents in the absence of both family anxieties over
separation and parental marital conflict are associated with lower levels of psychological
symptoms and social competence.

Still, most of the research on college-student attachment has been concerned with
freshmen and their management of the transition from high school to college (Cutrona,
Cole, Colangelo, Assouline, & Russell, 1994; Kenny, 1987; Kenny & Donaldson, 1991;
&, Rice, 1990). All dimensions of these studies have concluded that attachment, assessed
in a variety of ways, appears to play a role in the adjustment of first- year college
students.

In analyzing adjustment, the importance of viewing a student as an outsider was
briefly inferred; in this context, it then becomes important for the student to learn the
norm of behavior for his/her institution. In other words, upon being exposed to a new
environment, the new student must either adjust or withdraw. Assuming they make
behavioral adjustments, the students must then cognitively replace new norms with
former ways of thinking.

Knowledge of the students’ institutional commitments enables researchers to
make further distinction among those who leave, especially those who transfer to other

institutions.

Social Integr_ation

Persistence in college requires individuals to adjust both socially and intellectually
however, sometimes even the most mature students have difficulties adjusting. For this
reason, social integration will be explored.

Tinto’s model of social integration explains the importance of social integration in
university students’ academic success. His college-student integration model is composed
of the following basic elements: pre-college characteristics (including family background,
individual attributes, and past educational experiences); goal attainment (measured both
before and after matriculation); institutional commitment (measured both before and after
matriculation); academic integration; social integration; and persistence/withdrawal
decisions.

Tinto (1987) believes that integration into the academic and social systems of the
college directly relates to persistence at the university. Too, the individual’s commitment
to the institution and the goal of completing college is what determines his/her stay. An
indivdual’s commitment to the institution takes place through formal and informal
interactions with peer and faculty members. Tinto also alleges that if individuals are
socially integrated into their community, their chances of departure are less likely. To the
degree that a student is integrated into the college community, the more likely he/she is to
view him/herself as deviating from the norm of that institution. However, sometimes

mismatches occur.

10

A mismatch between the individual and the institution may arise in both social
and academic endeavors. It may arise from a mismatch between the skills, abilities, and
interests of the student and the demands placed upon that person by the academic system
of the institution. Such demands may be viewed as either too hard or too easy (Tinto,
1992).

The student adjustment model proposes that the experiences of the student at
his/her institution will be reflected in two domains: the first is the social domain, which
encompasses experiences in the student’s social environment. The second stage
encompasses the academic domain, which reflects experiences with faculty, the academic
unit, and other students. The model proposes that as students undergo both intellectual
and academic development. They become involved in student organizations, feel
committed to degree completion, and have a sense of belonging to the university (Tinto,
1987).

Tinto states that “other things being equal, the higher the degree of integration
into the college systems, the greater will be the student’s commitment to the specific
institution and the goal of college completion” (Desler, 1985; Tinto 1975). For this
reason, social alienation among students was an important concept of study.

Upon arriving at predominantly white universities, African American students are
immediately confronted with white culture. “Being black on a predominantly white
campus, students reported feelings of isolation, powerlessness, and isolation from the
norm “ (Burbach & Thompson, 1971). Because the majority of activities on these campus

activities are geared toward the interest of white students, students of color often face

11

shock and are not prepared for the racism and discrimination they will face. (Feagin &
Sikes,1995).

Psychologist Beverly Tatum discusses the issue of alienation in her book, Why
are all of the black kids sitting together in the cafeteria? (1999)

White students and faculty frequently underestimate the power and presence of
overt and covert manifestations of racism on campus, and students of color often
come to predominately white campuses expecting more civility than they find.
Whether it is the loneliness of being routinely overlooked as a lab partner in
sciences courses, the irritation of being continually asked by curious classmates
about black hairstyles, the discomfort of being singled out by a professor to give
the “black perspective” in class discussion, the pain of racist graffiti scrawled on
dormitory room doors, the insult of racist jokes circulated through campus email,
or the injury inflicted by racial epithets (and sometimes beer bottles) hurled from
a passing car, Black students on predominately white campuses must learn to
cope with ongoing affronts to their racial identity. The desire to retreat to a safe
place is understandable. Sometimes this may mean leaving the campus altogether
(p. 77-78).
On the other hand, Tinto (1975) believes that a student who is highly involved or
well integrated into his or her academic environment can be characterized as an
individual who devotes time to extracurricular activities and interacts with faculty and
peers. However, Tinto neglects racial differences. According to Fleming (1984) exposure
to a climate of discrimination and prejudice on campus is a factor that account for the
withdrawal behavior of minority students.
Opponents of the Tinto model argue that the model dictates that a student of color
must desert his or her culture in order to assimilate into the dominant culture of the
college. (Tierney, 1999). According to Tierney, the extent to which the students

assimilate into their college environments correlates with their achievement (Tierney,

1999). In other words, the model suggests that students’ cultures and

12

backgrounds are not significant to their college experiences. It is recommended in the
model that those backgrounds must be discarded in favor of the dominant cultures of their
institutions.

Other studies that examine the impact of attachment to parents on reported
feelings of alienation on college students’ appear to be nonexistent. According to Tinto’s
model of social integration, integration into the college environment is a key element to
the student’s success at an institution. This type of research supports examining factors
that influence social alienation.

Social Alienation

Social alienation is also prognostic of negative academic outcomes. Daugherty,
Vaughn, and Lane (1997) found that loneliness might be a function of gender. Men
tended to report higher levels of loneliness than women. However, researchers have not
sufficiently studied the relationship between alienation and gender. Other studies have
been conducted, which have examined social alienation on other aspects of college
adjustment.

Using 93 undergraduates, Steward, Germain, & Jackson, (1992) conducted a
study titled Alienation and Interactional Style: A Study of Successful Anglo, Asian, and
Hispanic university Students. Findings of the study indicate that Asian, Hispanic, and
Anglo students who are successful on campus have very similar interactional styles and
report similar degrees of alienation in their campus environments. Interactional styles
appear to be stable for both Hispanic and Asian students. None of the interactional

components in the study contributed to feelings of alienation on campus.

13

Another study indicated the opposite of what was found above. Steward, Jackson,
& Jackson, (1990) conducted a study titled “Alienation and interactional styles in a
predominately white environment: A study of successful Black students”. The
participants of this study were 46 African American seniors at a midwestem state
university. The students’ ages ranged from 21 to 25 years.

The results of this study indicate that the most successful African-American
students are, to some degree, those students who were not integrated into the campus
environment. These students indicated further that not being socially integrated into the
campus environment is, in part, a reason for their success. They shared stories of peers
who integrated too completely and were no longer at the university. The results of this
study clearly suggest a need for a cross-cultural comparison on feelings of social
alienation.

Pettigrew and Martin (1987) propose that African Americans can be subjected to
“triple jeopardy” (i.e. stress due to minority status, solo behavior, and tokenism” while
working in predominantly white environments. Moritsugu & Sue (1983), refer to
minority status as the condition of being the only one (e. g. the only black student) in a
work or group setting. Solo behavior refers to those resulting feelings of isolation and
diminished social interactions that can interfere with work performance. Tokenism on the
other hand refers to the idea that black individual were there due to affirmative action
(Fleming, 1984).

Fernandez (1981, as cited in Suen, 1983) argued that many African-Americans
experience an added stress in their work environments: that of “threatened, perceived,

and actual racism” (p.27). Racism is a stressor that many ethnic minorities may

14

experience on a day-by-day basis. Researchers and writers have argued that racism in the
United States has increased, and that it has evolved from overt (blatant) to more covert
(subtle) forms of prejudiced and discrimination against ethnic minority groups (Kinder,
1986; Pettigrew & Martin, 1987).

Cabrera & Nora (1994), conducted a cross—cultural Study that examined the
perceptions of prejudice and discrimination against reported feelings of alienation. The
study was conducted at a predominantly white Midwestern university. The population
was drawn from the fall 1990 entering class. The results of the study indicate that
discriminatory experiences were found to exert a significant effect on feelings of
alienation. Too, it was likely that the racial/ethnic climate and perceptions of prejudice
attitudes of faculty subtly influenced students reported feelings of alienation.

Not only do student’s reported feelings of social alienation play a part in college
adjustment, but literature also documents that attachment to parents affects students’
transition to college.

Parental Attachment

Most people are well aware that early childhood relationships with caregivers are
a crucial foundation for a healthy psychological adjustment into adulthood. Favorable
parent-child relationships tend to have a calming effect on the influence of negative life
events. Two elements are particularly important to the most advantageous parental-child
relationship during development: parental warmth and encouragement of the child’s
autonomy. An important argument in the literature is that strong familial relationships

foster a secure base from which individuals can explore and then return for emotional

15

support (Armsden 1994; Bowlby, 1982). Children with secure attachment relationships
are more likely to control negative effects and adjust to stressful events (Bowlby, 1982).

A close family relationship allows individuals various options. First, it allows for
the opportunity to learn more about self, thus providing one of the major channels for
identity formation (Armsden, 1994). Attachment theory proposes that a close connection
between parent and child allows the child to experience a sense of security. This allows
the child to safely explore his/her environment (Bowlby, 1988). These ties may provide
the individual the support he/she needs to safely explore his/her own choices (Bowlby,
1988). Attachment researchers also argue that children internalize early attachment
relationships with their parents. These relationships then become a part of the child’s
internal working model (Engels, Finkenauer, & Meeus, 2001).
Attachment Theog

The attachment theory is based on the construct that the attachment relationship is
the primary survival instinct for both the adult and the child. The attachment dynamic is
believed to influence the ability of the individual to form healthy relationships throughout
life (Bowlby, 1988).

Bowlby (1982) reports three types of attachment: secure, anxious, and avoidant.
These attachment relationships serve as core concepts of the attachment theory. The first
is secure attachment. Bowlby describes a child who is securely attached as one who is
certain that parental figures will be available and helpful in an adverse situation. With
this security and assurance, the child is confident enough to explore the world. This

pattern of self-confidence in a child is a direct result of a parent who is available,

16

sensitive to the child’s needs, and responsive. Such a child usually grows up to become
an adult who has a strong sense of self.

The second type of attachment is an insecure attachment classified as anxious.
The anxious attachment occurs when a child is in a relationship has unstable patterns of
caregiving. The anxious attachment is characterized by the individual’s uncertainty as to
whether or not his/her parent will be available. Because of this uncertainty, the child is
anxious about exploring the world. A parent who is unstable and is available at some
times, but not others causes anxious attachment (Bowlby, 1982). Later in adulthood,
Bowlby says, these individuals are extremely fearful that they will somehow lose their
attachment figure.

The final type of attachment is avoidance attachment. The child with avoidant
attachment has no assurance that when he or she seeks care there will be a helpful
response. This attachment pattern results from a child consistently being rejected by
caregivers when he/she approaches for comfort or protection (Bowlby, 1982).

According to the attachment theory, the quality of attachment is an important
variable, simply because attachment relationships established between individuals serve
as a survival function in times of distress. As such, research suggests that these ties meet
basic survival needs for both adults and children.

Within the attachment theory, the concept of the internal working model is
mentioned. The internal working model is the way in which individuals relate with their
environment according to the control of their unconscious. The internal working model
comprises the cognitive structure that permit an individual to understand the availability

of others (Thompson & Wiffen, 1993). This model is a gOOd determinate of whether or

17

not a child grows up to be psychologically healthy and able to function effectively in
future relationship (Thompson & Thompson, 1993).

Researchers have conducted numerous studies to assess the importance of
attachment, among them, Kenny (1996), conducted a study titled Attachment and
Psychological Well-Being Among Racially and Ethnically Diverse F irst-Year College
Students. Kenny designed the study to extend previous research by assessing attachment
characteristics and their relationship to psychological well-being. A total of 172 students
with a mean age of 18.5 participated. Of those participants, 70 were African American,
42 were Asian American, and 60 were Latinos. The results of the study imply that
students who indicate positive perceptions of a family attachment figure and whose
parents encourage their interdependence report lower levels of psychological symptoms
than their counterparts.

Data in this research explains that student’ attachment qualities seem to be
similar, whether the attachment figures are identified as parents or other family members.

Almost no literature focuses on the attachment theory related to racial/ethnic
groups. However, literature does suggest that family characteristics are salient among
Afiican Americans and Asian Americans families.

African American Families.

According to the literature there are five characteristics that describe African-
American families (Boyd-Franklin, 1989; McAdoo, 1993). These characteristics include,
but are not limited to (1) religious affiliations (2) role flexibility (3) strong work and

education ethics (4) strong kinship bonds, and (5) strong coping skills.

18

Religious affiliation seems to offer opportunities for both personal growth and
community support. When families are in need of comfort in the face of oppression or
distress and in need of social and economic SUpport, their religious foundations serve as a
shield in their time of need (Barnes, 1985).

Prevalent throughout the literature is the commitment that African American
families have to education and to work ethics. Parents expect children to assume
responsibility for their own feelings at an early age, to use their time wisely, and to share
in the decision making process (Barnes, 1985).

In a society in which racism and discrimination are common, parents oftentimes
deliberately teach their children coping skills. Specifically, African American children
may be taught at a young age that racism exists and they can not trust everyone. Again,
coping strategies for African-American families are prevalent in their religious faith,
kinship ties, and extended family structures (Barnes, 1985).

The ability for African-Americans to maintain strong kinship bonds is displayed
by the groups’ ability to sustain ties with extended family (Wilson, 1984), to establish
fictive kin relationships, and to carry out fictitious adoptions (Boyd-Franklin, 1989).
Asian Americans Families

The term Asian refers to people of many geographic origins, including Chinese,
Japanese, Korean, and Philipme Americans, as well as Samoans, Guamanians,
Hawaiians, and other Pacific Islanders. Asian also includes people whose roots are in
Vietnam, Thailand, Cambodia, Laos, Indonesia, India, Pakistan, and Ceylon. Even
though each national group has its own unique culture, history, and reasons for migrating

to the United States (Takaki, 1990). Researchers have attempted to identify

19

characteristics that are common among Asian American families (Sue & Sue, 1990; Ho,
1987)

Within the Asian-American culture, the group is given higher priority over the
individual. Family honor and reputation have high priority and value. Individual needs
and desires are often suppressed to take into account what is in the best interest of the
family. Children are encouraged to remain dependent on the family; complete obedience
to parents and honor to the elderly are presumed (Ho, 1987).

Asian-American families also show commonalities in the high value that is placed
on education, success, and wisdom. Individuals achieve positions of status through
education and employment (Ho, 1987). Communication within these families is
characterized by respect rather than assertiveness, control and restraint rather than
emotional expressiveness. Problem solving is done collectively rather than individually
(Ho, 1987).

Certain characteristics make these ethnic groups unique. F arnilial relationships are
given high priority within the family. Too, strong kinship ties have been one of the key
elements that provide stability in many Asian and African American communities.
(DeGenova, 1 997).

Parental Attachment and College Student Adjustment

Other studies contend that ethnic minority and majority students have very
different home experiences. (Ogbu, 1992) Different parental styles influence these
experiences. Steinberg, Dombusch, & Brown, (1992) found that African American
parents take on a more authoritative parenting style, while Asian parents do not. For the

purpose of this study, I explored attachment to parents and college adjustment.

20

A number of researchers have studied the need for both positive attachment and
separation from parents (Kenny & Donaldson, 1992; Schultheiss, Palladino, & Blustein,
1994; Rice, 1992; Rice, Cole& Lapsley, 1990). Their theoretical perspectives reflected in
the research on parent-adolescent relationships vary. Although the theories are quite
different from one another, each stresses the importance of the adolescent need to achieve
some level of psychological separation from his/her parents while still maintaining a
positive connection with them. Attachment theory, like most contemporary models,
acknowledges that connections to parents and support for autonomy from them are
necessary for psychological growth and healthy functioning (Kenny & Rice, 1995).

Close familial ties allow individuals various options. Because they afford for the
opportunity to learn more about oneself, thus providing one of the major channels for
identity formation. Attachment theory proposes that the “close affectional ties between
parent and child allow the child to experience a sense of security. This allows the
individual to securely explore his/her environment” (Bowlby, 1988). These ties may
provide the individual with the support he/she needs to safely explore his or her own
choices as well as to discover new experiences that help form identity. (Bowlby,l988).
For instance, recent research with college students (Kenny & Rice, 1995) has linked low
attachment security with adjustment difficulties. Schultheiss, Palladina, and Blustein
(1994) hypothesized that individuals who had securely attached relationships would be
more apt to engage in the exploration process and be more likely to create and preserve

healthy relationships.

21

Objectives of Cfiurrent Stujdy

The goal of the current research is to provide information about the relationship
between parental attachment and social alienation in students who self-identify
themselves as African American, Asian, and Caucasian. Students of color, have been
under-represented in the past attachment literature. Too, most of the alienation literature
that has had African American representation has been conducted with African
Americans students attending predominantly white universities. Past literature suggests
that the parent-child relationships may be particularly important in the college adjustment
of students of color (Kenny, 1996).

I sought to determine the degree to which mother’s education level and parental
attachment influenced social alienation of African American, Asian, and Caucasian
students. Such a study has significance not only for discovering ways of improving
campus life and educational experiences, but also for a better understanding of the factors
that influence students reported feelings of alienation and, potentially, their probability of
academic success. Too, a study of this nature has strong implications for the development
of retention programs to assist underrepresented students on predominantly white
campuses.

While the literature on attachment and other family issues has explored gender
and developmental differences (Kenny, 1996; Kenny & Donaldson, 1991; & Upmanyum,
Upmanyum, & Dhingra, 1992) there has been little investigate regarding ethnic and
cultural differences in attachment and separation patterns in college students. Too, and

into how these patterns contribute to feelings of social alienation.

22

CHAPTER 3

DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY

The design and methodology of this study includes the following: (a) purpose of
the study (b) population and sample, (c) statistical test used (d) a description of the
instruments.

Participants

The participants included 158 undergraduate students at a public Midwestern
university. A sample of 151 was required for an alpha level of .01 , and moderate effect
Size (Cohen, 1992). African American students of the university comprise approximately
8.2% (3,630); Asian/Pacific Island students 4.5% (2,030); Chicano/Other Hispanic
students 2.7% (1,175); White and other students 77. % (34,110); Native American
students .62% (275), and international students 6.7% (2,980). The university has a total

population of 47,200 students.

23

Procedure

Contacting executive board members of Afiican-American, Asian, and Caucasian
student groups on campus identified participants. I also gathered participants by visiting
various dormitories and cafeterias on campus and soliciting participants from several
courses in Counseling, Educational Psychology, and Special Education (240) courses
during the 2002 spring semester.

Participants were asked to participate in the study, given an overview of the study,
and an opportunity to have any questions or concerns answered. To give participants an
incentive for participating, they had the opportunity to enter their names into a raffle with
a prize being fifty dollars.

Upon receiving data from all of the participants, the data was analyzed using
Analysis of variance (ANOVA), multiple analysis of variance (MAN OVA), and multiple
regression. The researcher made her email address available to all participants and
interested participants had the opportunity to review the findings.

NOTE: This study is part of a larger research project titled: The Relationships
Between Parental Attachment, Social Alienation, and Career Indecision in Asian, African
American, Hispanic, Native American, and Caucasian college students.

268121.!

The study was designed to be an exploratory study, examining the relationships
among parental attachment and social alienation. It utilized statistical analysis of multiple
regression, multiple analysis of variance, and analysis of variance. Each statistical test is

described below. Too, a rationale for why I selected the statistical test is included.

24

AN OVA

All participants’ responses were analyzed for significant gender or racial
differences. Analysis of variance (ANOVA) was used to uncover the main and
interaction effects of categorical independent variables. A “main effect” is the direct
effect of an independent variable on the dependent one. An “interaction effect” is the
combination effect of two or more independent variables on the two dependent variables.
There is also an alternative for the interval-level control variables (analysis of covariance,
AN COVA) and for the multiple dependents, multiple analysis of variance (MANOVA),
and a combination of MANOVA and ANCOVA called MANOVA.

The key statistic in ANOVA is the F -test of difference of group means, testing if
the means of the groups produced by values of the independent variables (or combination
of values for multiple independent variables) are unusual enough not to have occurred by
chance. Ifthe group means do not differ significantly then one concludes that the
independent variables did not have an effect on the dependent variables. If the F test
shows that overall the independent variable(s) is (are) related to the dependent variable,.

Unlike regression, ANOVA does not assume line relationships. Some of its key
assumptions are that the groups formed by the independent variables(s) be relatively
equal in size and similar variances on the dependent variable (homogeneity of variances).
Like regression, AN OVA is a paradoxical process which assumes multivariate normality
(the dependent has a ordinary distribution for each value category of the independent (3).

(Cone & Foster, 1993)

25

MANOVA
The multiple analysis of variance (MANOVA) test is designed to simultaneously

compare differences and means associated with different groups. The MAN OVA was
used because the data met the assumptions of this test at the .05 critical level to test for
significance. Use of the MANOVA tests decrease the likelihood of obtaining significance
by luck, thus limiting Type 1 error. The MANOVA was selected as the method of data
analysis because the study was concerned with determining whether statistically
significant differences existed between three groups based upon the group members’
scores on the set of dependent variables.
MULTIPLE REGRESSION

sj'wo reasons for conducting multiple regression are prediction and measurements!
Prediction is the most common reason for using regressionéiven a set of independent
variables and you know the relationships between these variables and the dependent
variable, you can then find out what the predicted value will be for the dependent
vanahTe7 Measurement is used when the investigator needs to know the particulars of the
relationship between variables and the value associated with that relationship has a
particular meaning. This is the case when dummy variables are used and in analysis of
variance modelsfihe relationships(s) between the dependent and independent variable is

measured by regression coefficients in a linear equation. The independent variables are

usually continuous, but under special circumstances may be categorical or discrete (Cone

& Foster, 1995)/

26

INSTRUMENTS

Each survey packet contained the following: the letter of introduction and
explanation, consent for research and participation form, the Parental Attachment
Questionnaire (Kenny, 1987), the University Alienation Scale (Burbach & Thompson,
1972), and a short demographic questionnaire.

The study utilized two independent measures frequently found in studies on
parental attachment and social alienation. The selection of these instruments was based
upon reliability and validity of each instrument. Researcher also identified instruments
that were the commonly used in other studies.

Parental Attachment Questionnaire

The parental-attachment questionnaire (PAQ) was designed to assess perceived
parental availability, understanding, acceptance, respect for autonomy, facilitation of
autonomy, interests in interaction with parents and affect toward parents during visits,
students help seeking behavior in situations of stress, and satisfaction with help obtained
from parents (see Appendix D). The PAQ contains three scales, Affective Quality of
Attachment, Parental Fostering of Autonomy, and Parental Role in Providing Emotional
Support, which were derived from factor analysis. Subjects were asked to respond to each
of the 55-items by choosing a number on a 5-point Likert Scale 1) not at all, 2) somewhat
3) a moderate amount, 4) quite a bit, 5) very much, that best describes their parents, their
relationships with their parents, and their feelings or experiences. Higher scores on the
scale indicate greater levels of attachment to parents, while lower scores indicate lower

levels of attachment. An overall family environment is more important in determining

27

late adolescents’ feelings of social competence than is the specific relationship with either
parent (Bell et a1. 1995). If parents were divorced, separated, widowed, or reman'ied,
students were instructed to “respond with reference to the living parent toward whom
they felt closer.”

The reliability of the attachment measure was assessed by Kenny (1987) through
test-retest and internal consistency methods. Test-retest reliability over a 2-week interval
was .92 fro the measure as a whole and ranged from .82 to .91 for the three scales derived
from the factor analysis. The three factor scales are theoretically consistent with
Ainsworth et al.’s (1978) conceptualization of attachment as an enduring affective bond,
that serves as a secure base in providing emotional support and in fostering autonomy and
mastery of the environment. The scale does not mention validity measures at this point.
University Alienation Scale

The University Alienation scale was developed by rewriting selected items from
earlier context-free alienation scales so as to include the university as the referent, and by
formulating original items based on the theoretical delineation of the components of
interest. Seeman’s (1959) definitions provided the conceptual basis for the formulation of
the meaninglessness and powerlessness items (both rewrites and originals), while
development of the social estrangement items were based on the conceptualization of
Dean (1961) and Middleton (1963). In all, nine powerlessness, and eight
meaninglessness, and seven social estrangement items were formulated and randomly
assigned a position in the scale. The response set consisted of five choice agree-disagree

Likert type continuum, on which subjects are asked to indicate the degree of agreement

28

or disagreement with each statement. Higher scores on the scale indicate greater feelings
of social alienation, while lower scores indicate lower feelings of alienation
(See Appendix C).

Analysis of these single trial scale data is aimed at providing statistical assessment
of the extent to which the scale consistently measures the hypothesized property. The
split-half technique is used to provide a measure of reliability, and several statistical
procedures were employed to provide an assessment of validity. The validation
procedures are employed to show that the internal structure of the scale represents a
point-by-point mapping of the theoretical structure that produced it and that it correlates
positively with an external criterion measure. The first type of validity (often called
construct validity) is examined through the use of item-to-total analysis and factor
analysis; the second type (often called criterion-related validity) by correlating the
University Alienation Scale was the Dean (1956) scale.

Demographic Questionnaire

A 12- item demographics sheet, partially composed by the researcher was used.
The demographic questionnaire was designed to obtain information such as the
participant’s gender, age, the educational level of parents, the participant’s classification,

major, cumulative GPA, and the participant’s city and state of origin.

29

CHAPTER 4
RESULTS

In this chapter, the results from the analysis of the data are presented in three
sections. The first section of the chapter describes the demographic characteristics of the
sample including gender, grade point average, classification, mother’s education level,
father’s education level, membership in student organization, parent’s income, and
household composition. This section also identifies the means and standard deviations for
variables in the study and complete correlatiOn matrixes for each ethnic group
represented in the study. The second section identifies the quantitative data, which
explains within group differences. Finally, the last section identifies differences between
groups for university alienation and parental attachment.

The variables examined in this study’s research questions include the following:
parental attachment, which was measured using the Parental Attachment Questionnaire’s
three scales (affective quality of attachment, parent fostering of autonomy, and providing

of emotional support) and social alienation using the University Alienation Scale.

30

Description of Sample

This section describes the demographic data in the study summarized in Table 1.
The158 participants consisted of the following: Asian 25.8% (n = 40), African American
40.6% (n = 66), and Caucasian 33.5% (n = 52) .The students’ class level ranged from
freshmen through senior. However, data on three students were excluded from the
analysis because participants did not complete one or a combination of the instruments.
Therefore, data on a total of 155 students was analyzed to test the hypotheses.

Individual Characteristics

The sample consisted of 43 men and 110 women. Initenns of classification,
42.6% (n = 66) were freshmen, 21.3% (n = 33) sophomores, 14.8% (n = 23) were junior,
and 17.4% (n = 31) were seniors. Students were also asked to give their citizenship;
94.2% (n = 146) indicated that they were American born, 2.6%
(n = 4) were naturalized citizens, and 3.2% (n = 3) international students.
Famin Characteristics

Participants identified their mother’s completion of education level with 1.9%

(n = 3) identifying primary education, another 25% (n = 25.5) a high school graduate,
42.8% (n = 62) a college graduate, and 22% (n = 35) as attending graduate school. When
asked to identify father’s level of education, 1.3 % (n = 2) identified their father as
completing primary education, 21.9% (n = 34) identified their father as completing high
school, 35.5% (n = 55) identified their father as completing college, and finally, 27.1%

(n = 42) identified their mothers as completing graduate school.

31

In terms of socio-economic status 2.6% (n=4) identified parents as earning less
than 14,999, another 6.5% (n =10) identified parents as earning 15,000-24,000 annually,
16.8% (n=26) identified parents as earning 25,000-40,999, 13.5% (n=21) identified
parents as earning 41,000-56,999, 11% (n=17) 57,000-72,999, 9.7 (n=15) indicated that
their parent’s household income was 73,000-88,999, 3.2% (n=5) 89,000-99,999, and
finally, 20.6% (n=32) indicated household income levels as being over 100,000.

In terms of household composition, 12.3% (n = 19) indicated that they lived in a
single parent home, .06% (n = 1) with a foster parent, 1.3% ( n = 2) with biological
mother and stepfather, 1.9% (n=3) with biological father/stepmother, 50.3% (n=78) both
biological parents, and finally, .06% (n=1) with grandparent. Seventy three percent
(n=112) of the students indicated that they were members of student organizations, 27.1%
(n = 42) of students indicated that they were not. In terms of areas in which participants
were reared, 14.2% (n=22) indicated in an urban area, 43 3% (n=68) resided in a

suburban area, and finally 33.2% (n=52) resided in a rurai urea.

32

Table 1. Frequency distribution and percentage for all variables

 

 

Variable Frequency - Percentage
SEX
Males 43 27.7
Females 1 10 71.0
No response 2 1.3
CLASSIFICATION
Freshmen 66 42.6
Sophomore 33 2 1 .3
Junior 23 14.8
Senior 27 17.4
No response 6 3.9
MOMED
Primary 3 1.9
Junior High 6 3.9
Senior High 39 25.2
Bachelors degree 62 42.8
Masters degree 26 17.9
Doctorate 5 3.4
Other 4 2.8
No response 10 6.5
DADED
Primary 2 1.3
Junior High 3 1.9
Senior High 34 21.9
Bachelors degree 55 35.5
Masters degree 33 21.3
Doctorate 9 5.8
No response 19 12.3

 

33

Table 1. Frequency distribution and percentage for all variables (Continued)

 

 

Variable Frequency Percentage’
SELF REPORT SES
Less than 14.999 4 2.6
15,000-24,000 10 6.5
25,000-40,999 26 16.8
41,000-56,999 21 13.5
57,000-72,999 l7 1 1.0
73,000-88,999 15 9.7
89,000-99,999 5 3.2
Over 100,000 32 20.6
No response 25 16.1
HOUSE COMPOSITION
Single parent 19 12.3
Foster parents 1 .6
Biological mom/stepdad 2 1.3
Biological dad/ stepmom 3 1.9
Both biological parents 78 50.3
Other 1 .6
No response 51 32.9
CITIZENSHIP
American born 146 94.2
Naturalized citizen 4 2.6
International student 5 3 .2
STUDENT ORGAN
Yes 112 72.3
No 42 27.1
No response 1 .6
RACE
African American 63 40.6
Caucasian 52 33.5
Asian 40 . 25.8

 

34

Table 2 presents means and standard deviations for all variables in the study. The

average score on the UAS was (M = 50.2). The reported mean scores for the Parental

Attachment Questionnaire are PAQl-affective quality of attachment was (M = 50.3),

PAQ scale 2-Fostering of Autonomy was (M = 44.9), and PAQ 3- emotional support was

(M = 176.9).

Table 2. Means and Standard Deviations for all variables (total sample population)

 

 

N Mean SD
Class 149 2.07 1.15
GPA 136 2.97 .498
Income 130 5.01 2.16
Household 104 4.99 l .96
Fathered 136 4.03 .991
Mothered 145 3.91 1.08
UAS 152 59.2 13.34
PAQ 1 151 50.3 10.7
PAQ 2 151 44.9 10.9
PAQ3 151 176.9 31.5

 

Household= reported household composition, fathered = father’s education level, mothered =mother’s
education level, UAS = university alienation scale, PAQ l= affective quality of attachment,
PAQ 2 = parent’s fostering of autonomy, PAQ 3 = parent’s providing of emotional support.

35

Correlation Matrix for African Americans

Pearson Product correlations were computed for criterion (university alienation)
and predictor variables to determine any patterns of association. The closer the absolute
value to 1.0 the stronger the relationships and the nearer the absolute value to 0.0 the
weaker the relationships. Correlations were computed for each ethnic group.

Table 3 presents correlations for all variables specifically for African American
participants. This was produced using Statistical Package for the Social Sciences, (SPSS).
The following are correlations that were found to be significant at the p< .05 level. First
of all, a significant correlation was found between grade point average and income;
household composition and income were significantly correlated at (r =.68). This
suggests that reported household composition was consistent with reported income levels.
Finally, father’s education was significantly correlated with students’ reported grade
point average (r =.38).

Correlations that were significant at the p <.01 level were as follows: father’s
education was consistent with mother’s education (r =.40); father’s education level was
also significantly correlated with reported income levels (r =.67). This indicates that the
education level of the mother and father matched. Mother’s education level was also
significantly correlated with income (r =.45).

The parental attachment subscales were also significantly correlated. Parental
attachment subscale three (parents providing of emotional support) was positively
correlated with both subscale one, affective quality of attachment (r =.70) and subscale

two, parents providing of autonomy (r =.37). Finally, parental attachment questionnaire

36

subscale two, parent fostering of autonomy, was positively correlated with subscale one

(r =3 7), affective quality of attachment.

Table 3. Complete Correlation Matrix for African Americans

 

 

income Gpa class Mom Dad UAS PAQl PAQ2 PAQ3 hous
Income
Gpa .239
Class .037 -.056
Mom .454M .094 .098
Dad .637" 383* -130 .406"
UAS .003 -.042 .095 -.259 -.055
PAQ] .025 .153 .081 -.022. .130 .168
PAQ2 .077 .098 -157 .246 -.002 .065 .378"
PAQ3 -.O93 .211 -111 .001 .213 .012 .705" .458W
Hous .682* .405 .074 -.096 .271 .345 -.310 -.132 -.254

 

Class = classification, Mom = mother’s education level, Dad = father’s education level,
UAS = university alienation scale, PAQ 1= affective quality of attachment,

PAQ 2 = parent’s fostering of autonomy, PAQ 3 = parent’s providing of emotional
support, Hous = household composition.

"Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2—tailed)
’Correlation is significant at the .05 level (2 tailed)

37

nga Analysis of Research Question 1— If and to what degree do demographics (mother’s
education levcmfiandJarental a_ttachment L3 scaleflinfluence Africar_r AmerLcrgr
students’ rgported feelings of social alienation on a university campus?

I was interested in exploring withig group differences. Each ethnic group (African
American, Asian, and Caucasian) was examined individually to determine the degree to
which parental attachment influenced social alienation for that particular group.

An examination of within group differences for African Americans in this study
was performed using a. multiple regression analysis. I was interested in learning about the
systematic relationships between the dependent variable (alienation) and the independent
variables mother’s education level and parental attachment specifically for African
American participants.

Table 4 summarizes the beta, standard errors, t-test statistic, and significance
levels for the African American participants’. The regression analysis yielded no
significant results for mother’s education (t = .772; p = .446). All three scales on the
Parental Attachment Questionnaire were not significance: affectivequality of attachment
(t = -.734; p =.469), parent’s fostering of autonomy (t = -1.40; p =. l 69), and parents

providing of emotional support (t =.470; p =.641).

38

Table 4. Multiple regression of the relationship between ME, PA, and UAS

 

Model B SEB T Sig.
MOMED -l.36 -.128 -.772 .446

Affective quality of attachment -.106 -.145 -.734 .469
Fostering of autonomy -.447 -.286 -1.40 .169

Providing emotional support -. 127 .095 .470 .641

 

Table 5 presents the model summary for African American participants.
R-squared indicates that the percentage of variance in the dependent variable explained
by the independent variables is 13%. The model indicates that the variance for mother’s
education and parental attachment were very low for predicting students reported feelings
of alienation.

Table 5. Model Summary
Model R R Square Adjusted R Square St. Error of the Estimate

 

.363a .132 .023 13.0

 

Predictors: (constant), parental attachment and mother’s education level.

a. Dependent Variable: university alienation
b. RACE = African American

39

Correlations for Asian participants

Table 6 presents correlations of all variables specifically for Asian participants.
This was produced using Statistical Package for the Social Sciences, (SPSS). The
following are correlations that were found to be significant at the p< .01 level. First,
mother’s education level and father’s education level was significantly correlated
(r =.56). This indicates that participants’ reported that their parent’s attained Similar
levels of education.

The following correlations were significant at the p < .01 level. The parental
attachment subscales were also significantly correlated. Parental attachment subscale
three (parents providing of emotional support) was positively correlated with both
subscale one, affective quality of attachment (r =.48) and subscale two, parents providing
of autonomy (r =.50). Finally, parental attachment questionnaire subscale two, parent
fostering of autonomy, was positively correlated with subscale three (r =.50), affective

quality of attachment.

4O

Table 6. Complete Correlation Matrix for Asians

 

inco Gpa class Mom Dad UAS PAQ l PAQ2 PAQ3 Hous
Income

Gpa .332

Class .198 -.061

Mom .336 .084 .134

Dad .270 .331* .032 .565“

UAS -.346 .102 .202 -.1 16 -.274

PAQl .269 .146 .106 -.009 .038 -.234

PAQ 2 -.061 -.259 -.l 19 -.010 -.152 -.316 .451"
FAQ 3 .038 .049 -.234 -.O41 -.155 -.l 19 .481 " .509"
Hons .226 .214 .064 .093 -19c .335“ -.O99 -.006 -.254

 

Class = classification, Mom = mother’s education level, Dad = father’s education level, UAS = university
alienation scale, PAQ 1 = affective quality of attachment,

PAQ 2 = parent’s fostering of autonomy, PAQ 3 = parent’s providing of emotional support, Hous =
household composition.

“ Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed)
” Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed)

41

Data Analysis of Research Question 1- If and to whatdegree do demographics (mother’s
education level) angarental attachment (3 scales) influence Asian students’ reported
feelings of social alienation on armiversity cmus?

A multiple regression analysis was used to examine the relationship between
university alienation, mother’s education level, and parental attachment for Asian
participants. This analysis was selected because the researcher was interested in
describing relationships between the dependent variable (university alienation) and the
independent variables (parental attachment and mother’s education level).

The regression analysis yielded no significant results for Asian participants;
mother’s education (t = -l .79; p = .079). All three scales on the Parental Attachment
Questionnaire also reported non significance; affective quality of attachment
(t = 1.77; p =.083), parent’s fostering of autonomy (t = -1.77; p =.967), and finally, with

regard to parents providing of emotional support (t = -1.44; p =.155).

Table 7. Multiple Regression of the relationship between ME, PA, and UAS for Asians

 

 

Model B SEB T Sig.
MOMED -3.46 1.92 -l .79 .079
Affective quality of attachment .287 .162 1.77 .083
Fostering of autonomy -1.006E .244 1.77 .967
Providing emotional support -.356 -.297 -.1.44 .155

 

42

Table 8. presents the model summary for Asian participants. R-squared indicates
the percentage of variance in the dependent variable explained by the independent
variables is 12%. The model shows that the variance for mother’s education and parental
attachment were very low for predicting students feelings of alienation.

Table 8. Model Summary
Model R R Square Adjusted R Square St. Error of the Estimate

 

.354 .125 .054 14.4

 

a. Dependent variable: University alienation
b. Race = Asian

43

Correlations for Caucasian participants

Table 9 presents correlations for all variables specifically for Caucasian
participants. This was produced using Statistical Package for the Social Sciences, (SPSS).
The following are correlations that were found to be significant at the p< .05 level. First,
father’s education was significantly correlated with grade point average (r =.32), father’s
education level was also significantly correlated with parental attachment questionnaire
scale three, parents providing of emotional support (r =.28). Mother’s education level was
significantly correlated with classification (r = -.32). Household composition was
significantly correlated with grade point average (r = .34). Finally, university alienation
was significantly correlated with PAQ 3, parents providing of emotional support (r =.29).

Correlations were significant at the p <.01 level are as follows: father’s education
significantly correlated to both income (r =.44) and mother’s education
(r =.36). Household composition and income also significantly correlated (r =.4l ). Finally
parents fostering of autonomy (PAQ 2) Significantly correlated to both scale one,
affective quality of attachment (r =.40) and scale three, parent’s providing of emotional
support (r =.46). PAQ 3 also significantly correlated (r =.47) with affective quality of

attachment scale one.

Table 9. Complete Correlation Matrix for Caucasians

 

income gpa class Mom Dad UAS PAQ] PAQ2 PAQ3 Hous

 

Income

Gpa .077

Class -.294 -.268

Mom .177 .287 -326"‘

Dad .444" .320* -.262 .368"

UAS -.171 .022 .123 .165 -.174

PAQl .103 .121 -.010 -.193 .098 -.115

PAQ2 .134 .077 .204 .098 .155 -.004 .403"

PAQ3 .270 .165 .008 .054 283* .295" .470" .467“

Hous .418" .340“ -.182 .102 .250 -.l99 .210 .079 .003

 

Class = classification, Mom= mother’s education level, Dad = father’s education level,
UAS = university alienation scale, PAQ 1= affective quality of attachment, PAQ 2 =
parent’s fostering of autonomy, PAQ 3 = parent’s providing of emotional support,
Hous = household composition.

* Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed)
** Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed)

45

Data Analysis of Research Question 1- If and to what degree do demographics (mother’s
edrfltion level) and parentzLaIIachment (3 scafles) influence Caucasiaa students’
reported feelings of socfi alienation org university campus?
Caucasian Participants

The relationship between university alienation and parental attachment was
examined using a multiple regression analysis. This form of analysis can be useful
because it describes the associations between the dependent variable (university
alienation) and the independent variables (parental attachment and mother’s education
level). However, no significant relationship was found for this group of participants;
mother’s education level (t =1.03; p =.304). All three scales on the parental attachment
questionnaire were also non significant, although scale three closely approached
significance levels. The results are as follows: affective quality of attachment (t = -.373; p
= .711), parents fostering of autonomy (t = 1.07; p = 289), and finally, parents providing

of emotional support (t = -1.97; p = .054).

Table 10. Multiple Regression of the relationship between ME, PA, and UAS

 

B SEB T Sig.

 

MOMED 1.83 1.76 1.03 .304
Affective quality of attachment -6.060E-02 .163 -.373 .71 l
Fostering of autonomy .229 .213 1.07 .289

Providing emotional support -.503 .254 -1.97 .054

 

a. Dependent variable: University alienation
b. Race = Caucasian

46

Table 11. presents the model summary for Caucasian participants.
R-Squared indicates that the percent of variance in the dependent variable explained by
the independent variables is 13%. The model Specifies that the variance for mother’s
education and parental attachment were very low for predicting students’ feelings of
alienation.

Table 11. Model Summary
Model R R Square Adjusted R Square St. Error of the Estimate

 

.3703 .137 .058 11.2

 

Predictors (Constant), parental attachment, MOMED for Caucasian participants

The researcher was also interested in exploring differences between groups for
both university alienation and parental attachment, which is addressed in the sections to

follow.

47

Walysis of Research Question 2-Do signifigam differences exist in African
American, Asiangd Caucaaian students reported levels of attachment to parents?

The researcher was interested in exploring m group differences for the three
ethnic groups included in the study. For this purpose, multiple analyses of variance was
used. MANOVA allows for exploration of the main and interaction effects of categorical
variables on multiple dependent interval variables. MANOVA test the differences in the
vector of means of the multiple interval dependents, for various categories of the
independent(s).

The construct of parental attachment consists of three separate scales (affective
quality, autonomy, and emotional support). In order to detect differences across race in
participants reported level of attachment to their parents, a multivariate analysis of
variance (MANOVA) procedure was used because of the multiple dependent variables of
the PAQ scale and multiple ethnic groups. No significant differences were found
(p =.197), however, when viewing the scales individually, there were significant effects
on all three scales. For the PAQ scale 1 (fostering of autonomy) a significant level of
( p = .002) was found. A significant difference on the PAQ scale 2 (affective quality)
was found (p = .012) and PAQ scale 3 at ( p =.OOO). Overall, scale three (providing of
emotional support was rated the highest). Means, standard deviations, and numbers are
presented in Table 9. As shown in table 12, Caucasians scored the highest mean of
affective quality of attachment (M = 84.7) followed by African Americans (M =81 .1) and
finally, the Asian students scored the lowest mean on PAQ 1, (M =78.3). Therefore, it is

suggested that Caucasian students in this study rated the affective quality of their

48

relationships with parents as being of highest importance. In terms of parents fostering of
autonomy, African American students reported the highest mean (M=53.4), followed by
Caucasians students (M=49.9), and finally Asian students with a mean of (M= 45.7). The
results of this scale indicate that African American students reported parents fostering of
autonomy as of greater importance than the other two ethnic groups. Finally, when
examining parents providing of emotional support (PAQ 3), African American students
reported the highest mean (M=47.1), followed by Caucasian students with a mean of

(M = 45.5) and finally Asian students with a mean of (M=40.6).

In summary, African American, Asian, and Caucasian students’ reported different
levels of attachment to parents, each group scored various means on the three scales. This
indicates that the students rated various types of support as being more important than
others.

Table 12. Test of Between Subject Effects (MANOVA)

 

 

Source of Dependent Type 111 sum of Df Mean Square F Sig.
Variable squares

Correct PA model 913.553 2 456.776 1.641 .197
Affective Quality 1402.655 2 701.328 6.542 .002
Autonomy 1043.139 2 521.570 4.540 .012
Emotional support 961478.49 1 3454.00 3454.004 .000

 

49

Table 13. Provides descriptive statistics (parental attachment) for all three ethnic
groups. Caucasian students had the highest mean (M = 84.7, SD = 81.6) on the affective
quality of attachments scale, African Americans (M = 81.1, SD =18.5) and Asian
participants (M = 78.3, SD =17.9). On the parents fostering of autonomy scale, African
Americans participants scored the highest mean (M = 53.4, SD = 12.2) than Caucasians
(M = 49.9, SD =50.3) and Asians (M = 45.7, SD =8.6). Finally, on the parents fostering
of autonomy scale, African Americans participants scored a higher mean (M 47.1, SD
13.0) than Caucasian (M = 45.5. SD = 44.9) and Asians. ‘
(M =40.6, SD = 9.8).

Table 13. Descriptive statistics for Parental attachment

 

 

Race Affective Qua Autonomy Support

African Americans Mean 81.1 53.4 47.1

N 62 62 62

SD 18.5 12.2 13.0
Asians Mean 78.3 45.7 40.6

N 38 38 38

SD 17.9 8.6 9.8
Caucasians Mean 84.7 49.9 45.5

N 51 51 51

SD 81.6 50.3 44.9

 

50

Data analysis of Research Question 3-Do significant differences exist in African
AmericanLAsia_n,_a,nd Cflasian students reported feelings of social alienation?

Data on across group differences for alienation was analyzed with Analysis of
variance (ANOVA). ANOVA was used to test significant differences in participants’
reported levels of social alienation. An analysis of variance was selected because it seeks
to determine whether differences in the values of the variables can be explained by
categorization of the observations (Mirer, 1995). As a result, no significant relationship
was found (p = .179) for parental attachment across groups.

(Table 14).

Table 14. Between group effects for alienation (ANOVA)

 

 

Sum of Squares df Mean Square f Sig.
Between Groups 613.961 2 306.981 1.740 .179
Within Groups 26292.539 149 176.460
Total 26906.5 1 51

 

51

Data in table 15 show the ANOVA test produced statistically insignificant means
and standard deviations. Asians had the highest mean on the University Alienation Scale
(M = 62.6, SD = 13.2), followed by Afiican Americans (M = 58.1, SD = 14.2) and finally
Caucasians with a mean of (M = 57.9, SD = 11.7). The subscale findings support the
initial hypothesis of this research that students of color would report higher levels of

alienation than Caucasian students.

Table 15. Descriptive Statistics (Between Subjects) University Alienation

 

Race M SD N

 

African American 58.1 14.4 62

Asian 62.6 13.2 39
Caucasian 57.9 11.7 51
Total 59.7 13.3 152

 

52

CHAPTER 5

DISCUSSION

The overall purpose of this study was to examine the relationship between
parental attachment and social alienation in African American, Asian, and Caucasian
college students. For this study, three hypotheses were tested. They are as follows:

(1) There will be a positive relationship between parental attachment and alienation for
all three groups, (2) African American and Asian students will report higher levels of
alienation than Caucasian students, and (3) Afiican American and Asian students will
report stronger levels of attachment to parents than Caucasian students.

Though Cabrera & Nora (1994) found that racial/ethnic climate and perception of
prejudicial attitudes of faculty/staff indirectly influenced students’ reported feelings of
alienation, literature has not demonstrated how or to what degree other variables
influence students’ reported feelings of social alienation on a university campus. The
results of the present study did not confirm a significant relationship among the variables
proposed. Chapter 5 includes the findings of this study as they relate to the hypotheses
developed in the first chapter. The implications and theoretical assertions will also be
examined. Finally, the limitations of the study and recommendations for future research

will be discussed.

53

Original Hypotheses regarding results
If and to what de do demo hics mother’s educational level and relationshi s
with grants influence African American, Asian_, and Caucasian students remrted

feelings of social alienation on a universig campus?

- Hypothesis 1: There will be a positive relationship between attachment to parents and
university alienation scores for Asian, African American, and Caucasian students.

The author hypothesized that for all three ethnic groups there would be a positive
relationship between mother’s education level, parental attachment, and social alienation.
Statistical analysis did not support this hypothesis.

Reasons for the absence of statistical relationships in scores between criterion and
independent variables could be that parental attachment and social alienation are simply
independent of each other, or that students’ relationships with parents have no influence
on how they feel on a university campus. The author examined scores for each racial
group and found no significant relationship for the items. Non significant relationships
I existed across all three groups, it would be difficult to argue that relationships with
parents influence students’ feelings of social alienation on a university campus.

Previous research on attachment lends some support to the continuation of the
study of patterns of attachment (i.e. attachment style) across the life span. Bowlby (1979,
p. 129) maintain “attachment behavior characterizes human beings from cradle to
gave.” An individual’s attachment style remains relatively stable over time (e.g.
Grossman & Grossman, 1991 and Sroufe, 1992), thus possibly resulting in attachment

styles not influencing feelings of alienation for Asian, African American, and Caucasian

54

students. This continuity of attachment could be another reason why the results were not
sigrificant in this study. Regardless of the continuity or discontinuity, perhaps
relationships with parents simply have no influence on the way students feel and interact
on campuses. Other variables not examined in the study must be identified for a clearer
understanding of university alienation. The researcher was also interested in exploring

differences between goups on levels of social alienation.

Do sigg'ficant differences exist in Afiican Ameriga, Asian, and Caucasian students

remrted feelings of alienation?

4» Hypothesis 2. African American and Asian students will report higher levels of
alienation than Caucasian students.

To address this question, Analysis of variance (ANOVA) was used. Analysis of
variance was used to uncover the main and interaction effects of categorical independent
variables. All participants’ responses were analyzed for sigrificant differences.

AN OVA allowed the researcher to determine the mean on the social alienation scale
for each individual goup. Higher scores on the University Alienation Scale indicate
higher levels of alienation. Although the analysis showed no sigrificant differences,
Asian students reported the highest mean on the university alienation scale
(M = 62.6), followed by African Americans (M = 58.1), and finally, Caucasian students
(M = 57.9). The lack of statistical sigrificance is not consistent with research findings
that students of color attending predonrinately white universities report higher feelings of
alienation than their counterparts (Feagin & Sykes, 1995; Tatum, 1999).

This hypothesis was derived from past research asserting that students of color on

predominately white campuses face geater racism and discrimination than their

55

Caucasian counterparts (Moritsugu & Sue, 1983; Cabrera & Nora, 1987; F eagin & Sykes.
1995; Tatum, 1999). These researchers found that students of color had a host of issues to
overcome when attending predominately white universities. This hypothesis was not
supported. This finding is of geat interest: why was no relationship observed in this
study, when it was commonly observed elsewhere? Several explanations may be offered
as to why the findings were not Siglificant. First, women were disproportionately
represented in the study.

The first proposed reason for lack of statistical difference in alienation scores study
was a skewed male versus female ratio. This study population was 71% (n=110) women
while men comprised of only 27.7% (n = 43). In past research gender and feelings of
loneliness were correlated (Daugherty, Vaughn, & Lane, 1997). The authors found that
men tended to report higher levels of loneliness than women. Women are predisposed to
focus on connections and relationships. Men are inclined to be more autonomous or
independent (Daugherty et. al, 1997). Perhaps the limited number of male participants
affected the nonsigrificant relationship between alienation in this study. If the gender of
participants had been of equal ratio, conceivably the results may have been different.
Membership in student organizations could have also played a factor in the study’s
nonsignificant results.

Second, the majority of the participants in this sample were members of student
organizations. The second reason that the researcher proposed for differences between
this study’s results and those of past research is participants’ membership in student
organizations. In Tinto (1975) model of college student adjustment he asserts that

involvement, informal interactions with faculty, and integation into social organizations

56

produce geater feelings of commitment to one’s institution. His student adj ustrnent
model proposes that those students who are involved in student organizations are more
likely to be committed to their goals and are less likely to withdraw from the university.
He defines an integated student as one who devotes substantial time to extracurricular
activities and interacts frequently with faculty and students. In this study, 72% (n =112)
of the participants indicated that they were members of student organizations, while 27%
(n=42) indicated that they were not members of student organizations. If Tinto’s student
adjustment model is accurate, it follows that participants in this study, with high levels of
integation would not also report higher feelings of alienation. Had fewer students
reported membership in student organizations, the researcher predicts that the reported
levels of social alienation would be much higher for the participants.

Alternatively, a possible reason for the differences in alienation scores

is that students have become complacent with the prejudices in our society. Perhaps, the
students of color in this study have internalized the oppression from the larger society.
They have accepted the stereotypes, images, and myths promoted by the larger society
about persons of color.

Finally, another possible explanation for the difference in alienation scores can be
found in a study that was conducted by Steward, Jackson, & Jackson, (1990) titled
“Alienation and interactional styles in a predominately white environment”. The results
of this study indicate that the most successful African-American students were, to some
degee, those students who were not integated into the campus environment. These
students finther specify that not being socially integated into the campus environment is,

in part, a reason for their success. Perhaps students are intentionally not integating into

57

campus life. These students may feel comfortable with the adjustment as a means of
protecting themselves from racism and discrimination. Thus, they are less likely to report
feelings of alienation. Taken together, no sigrificant relationship was found between
goups for alienation. The researcher was also interested in exploring differences between

goups on levels of parental attachment.

Do sigm'ficant differences exist in African Amerigg, Asiga and Caucasian students’

 

levels of attachment to parents?

Hypothesis 3. African American and Asian students will report stronger levels of
attachment to their parents than Caucasian students.

Kenny’s (1987) Parental Attachment Questionnaire (PAQ) treats parental
attachment as a unitary construct. Participants in the current study were asked to
complete the questionnaire. In order to detect differences based on race, a multiple
analysis of variance (MAN OVA) was performed to determine the amount of variance in
students reported levels of attachment to their parents.

Research suggests that Asian and African American families place geater
emphasis on extended family, collectivism rather than individualism, with numerous
family members involved in the rearing of children (Blivvise, 1999).

In part, this hypothesis was not statistically supported. However, Studies have
generally found that students who report higher levels of attachment to parents are better
able to adjust to the college environment (Arrnsden 1994; Bowlby, 1988; Schultheiss &
Blustein 1994). An important argument in the literature is that healthy familial

relationships foster a secure base for individuals to return for emotional support and

58

nurturing (Arrnsden 1994; Bowlby;1982). Children who have secure attachment
relationships with parents are thought to moderate stressful events (Hojat, 1998).

Lopez (1995a) suggests that the quality of the affective bond with one’s parents
can either promote or hinder the development of autonomy, particularly as the child
enters adolescence. Attachment theory also contends that attachment patterns are
relatively stable across time. Individuals who develop a certain type of attachment to
parent(s) will carry that pattern of attachment with them throughout their lives (Bowlby,
1998). If this is true, then it validates the nonsigrificance findings.

Recommendations for Further Research

Recommendations for firture research can be made on the basis of the strengths
and limitations of the study. Future research should use a more diverse sample of
participants. For example, the number of males and females studied should be balanced
and a more diverse socioeconomic status measured. As mentioned earlier, the sample
consisted of individuals who reported that they were in the higher income brackets.
Therefore, it is possible that the lack of diversity in the sample contributed to the
nonsigrificant results. In order to increase the generalizability and external validity of the
study, future research should use more random and diverse sampling procedures.

Another recommendation concerns the possible use of an instrument with a
different format that measures paternal attachment (i.e., a scale that does not view
parental attachment as a unitary construct). The use of other parental attachment
instruments would allow the researcher to compare and contrast the levels of attachment

to the mother versus that of the father.

59

Finally, only a total of nine international and naturalized Asian students
participated in this study. Because of the small number of participants, the researcher was
unable to draw any valid or generalizable conclusions from the group. Further research is
warranted in this area.

Additional finding

The following finding was not part of the initial hypotheses developed for
validation purposes but is worthy of attention.

Classification was significantly correlated with the criterion variable (university
alienation). As classification levels increased, so did the scores on the university
alienation scale. Seniors reported significantly higher levels of alienation than did
freshmen participants. Studies supporting these findings are non-existent. However, there
are several possible explanations for this finding.

First, as students become upperclassmen, they are more focused on their academic
programs and less integrated into the campus environment. Another possible reason for
this statistically significant finding might be that juniors and senior are more focused on
the job search aspects of their future careers and meeting graduation requirements versus
membership in student organizations and campus involvement therefore, less concerned
with integration. Also, as first and second year students come into the college
environment, they are almost required to integrate. First and second year students are in
most cases, mandated to live in dormitories. Upperclassrnen have the option of moving
off campus and are less involved in campus activities (Appendix G). Finally, implications

for counselors and make recommendations for future research will be discussed.

6O

Implications of Findgg' s to Counseling

Although not statistically significant, students of color in this study reported the
higher degrees of alienation than Caucasian students when viewing subscales. As Asian
and African American students seek counseling to help reduce their levels of stress and
improve overall well-being, it is crucial that counselors possess the cultural competencies
necessary to effectively assist their clients. Although cultural groups may share common
characteristics, within group differences must be considered. Counselors should be both
aware and sensitive to these differences. Additionally, counselors must be willing to
embrace the complexity of understanding of the nature of oppression that students of
color face on predominately white campuses.

Although the findings were not significant, counselors need to understand the
world-view of Asian, Caucasian, and African American clients. Counselors must have an
awareness of their client’s historical and cultural background (Baird, 1996). Injustices
against individuals who are culturally different have long been prevalent in American
society. When counselors have not undergone these experiences themselves they may not
fully understand the effect. Sue and Sue (1990) state that frequently counselors lack the
sensitivity and understanding to deal with diversity and at times function in ways that are
oppressive and discriminatory to minority clients and majority clients that have attitudes,
values, etc. that may lead to heightened levels of alienation as well. Counselors must take
into account the influence of race, culture, and gender and how all three operate in social

situations.

61

One very important issue to consider when working with immigrant and Asian
American clients is the issue of acculturation. Clearly, Asians may face problems as a
result of acculturation. The American culture is much different from that of their
homeland. Oftentimes Asians who have moved to America may experience stress and
frustration as a result of a separation from their extended families (Chandras, 1997).
Counselors must have an awareness of these acculturation issues and be sensitive to
them. Sue and Sue (1990) purported that:

“As mental health professionals, we have a personal and professional responsibility to (a)
confront, become aware of, and take actions in dealing with our biases, stereotypes,
values, and assumptions about human behavior, (b) become aware of the culturally
different client’s world view, values, biases, and assumptions about human behavior, and
(c) develop appropriate help-giving practices, intervention strategies, and structures that
take into account the historical, cultural, and environmental experiences/influences of the
culturally different client (Sue and Sue, 1990, p. 6).”

Sue and Sue (1990) further explain that part of the reason minority populations
generally tend to avoid counseling is the counselor’s lack of cultural sensitivity and
mistrust of the practice. Counseling practices have historically been geared toward the
white middle-class. There is no question that cross-cultural counseling need to be taught
to prospective counselors.

In this study, Asian participants reported lower levels of attachment to parents
(subscale scores). Counselors must have sensitivity to the struggle between individualism
and collectivism for Asians. For Asian families, an exclusive focus on self may induce
feelings of guilt, anxiety, and shame, thus possibly interrupting social and family

relationships. A key goal in the counseling relationship should be to assist Asians clients

in becoming comfortable compromising so that internal conflict is reduced.

62

(Sue and Sue, 1990). Counselors must be attentive to cultural differences and differences
in experiences for Asian clients.

Past research suggests that Asians in comparison to Caucasians tend to display
lower levels of verbal and emotional assertiveness; they hold high regard for authority,
and experience more ofien feelings of loneliness. Asians have also been found to exhibit
restraint of feelings and to adhere to culturally social norms (Sue and Sue, 1990; Kohatsu,
1990).

Limitations

This study supports further exploration of the relationship between parental
attachment and students reported feelings of social alienation especially because of its
contradictions the literature. However, several cautions need to be observed regarding the
findings.

First, because the majority of the participants described their household
compositions as including both biological parents, most were members of student
organizations, and American born generalizability is questionable. Due to the
homogeneity of the sample with respect to the above mention characteristics, the results
obtained may not be generalizable to other populations. This raises concerns about the
external validity of the study. As mentioned, the sample of this study was extremely
homogeneous. Therefore, it raises the question of whether findings can be generalized to
a more diverse population.

Another limitation of this study relates to the issue of internal validity. As with
most social science research, this study was based on self-report questionnaires. The

sampling procedure employed in this study was convenient. Therefore, with all

63

nonexperimental correlation studies, the results of this study can’t make any arguments
about the causal relationships among proposed variables.

Third, these findings may be limited because of the limitations of the memories of
early childhood experiences and feelings of alienation. A limitation of retrospective
reports is that they can be embellished. Relationships with parents and feelings of social
alienation on campus may also suggest that the current emotional state of the participants
systematically influenced the results.

A fourth limitation is the failure of the study to consider influence of demographic
variables (e.g., family, socio-economic status) largely due to a lack of accurate statistical
measures. Part of the reason for failure to consider demographic variables were due to
researchers inability to construct a workable question a more accurate and objective
assessment of the demographic variables are needed to better understand their influence
on the dependent variable.

Fifth, one of the most notable limitations in this study is the practical and
theoretical concern of Vincent Tinto’s (1975) model of college student adjustment. The
student adjustment model asserts that students’ success is dependent upon the degree to
which they are able to integrate into both the social and academic life of the institution.
The model implies that students must both physically and socially dissociate themselves
from their past communities in order to become fully integrated into the campus
community (Tinto,l975). Further, the model asserts that if students focus on the social
and intellectual integration into the campus environment, then success is likely.

To a large extent the background of Asian and African American students differ

significantly from the Caucasian cultural framework. Yet, according to Tinto’s model,

these youth must experience a “rites of passage” framed within the majority culture
(Tierney, 1999). In other words, the student adjustment model implies that students of
color must neglect their cultural backgrounds in order to succeed in college. (Tierney,
1999). The students in this study seemed to maintain a similar sense of comfort with
campus life inspite of differences in relationships with parents. Results of the study
challenges Tinto’s justification that healthy integration into campus life for minority
students is directly related to disassociation fi'om one’s community.

Tierney asserts that:

“Implicit in Tinto’s model is the assumption that success in college is partly dependent
upon Durkeimian notions. That is, students must divorce themselves from their previous
relationships-in effect, commit a form of suicide or figuratively “kill off” their former
selves- and forge new selves and relationships in order to successfully integrate
themselves into collegiate life. The model implies that college-bound students not only
need to leave their youth behind them but also their cultures” (p.11).

Deyle (1995) conducted a study that demonstrated the importance of cultural
identity to academic success. Her study noted that the most successful Native American
students had a strong sense of cultural integrity and refused to assimilate or reject their
culture. Rather than view the university environment as a place into which students’ need
to assimilate, educational and academic institutions must accommodate and honor
students’ cultural backgrounds and differences (Tierney, 1999).

Finally, the Attachment Theory also has limitations worth mentioning. What is
problematic about attachment theory and research is its limited focus on attachment

bonds as being innate, self-evident, and largely directed toward the mother. There is a

push to examine this theory from broader perspective (Bliwise, 1999).

65

Attachment is generally viewed as a theory of mothering. However, Howes and
Smith (1999) conducted a study on attachment and young children and found that young
children formed secure attachments with their caregivers. If we begin to view the
attachment theory from a broader perspective, thus as a theory of care-giving and not
mothering, the model would be more applicable to those individuals who provide regular
care-giving and not simply the biological mother. The main difficulty with the attachment
theory is that care-giving behavior has often been studied as an fixed characteristic of the
mother; with attachment characteristics being assigned primarily to children and not
systems. (Bliwise,] 999).

The development of a more cultural specific view of attachment is needed. Hill-
Collins (1991) identified four characteristics that distinguish African American views on
motherhood from Caucasian views: (1) A focus on woman-centered child care networks,
(2) financial support as a part of mothering, (3) community and extended family
involvement, and (4) motherhood as a symbol of power. In African American
communities, family structures include fictive mothers who share in the responsibilities
of rearing children. Lower levels of attachment security observed in other studies may
simply reflect the variations in cultural values and care-giving structures. Increasing
attention to extended families is indicating that multiple significant attachment
relationships and not simply the mother characterize attachment.

Summm and Conclusions

Overall, findings of this study demonstrated that there was no significant

relationship between participant’s level of attachment to parents and participants reported

feelings of social alienation. Despite the non-significant findings of this study, it does

66

provide useful information in several areas. First, the results of the study suggest that
there is considerable need for parents to provide emotional support for their college
student. Second, the study provides support for the necessity of distinguishing between
types of attachment and the need to identify the degree to which attachment styles are
displayed in various racial and ethnic groups. Third, the fact that parents provide
emotional support was highly rated among the participants, suggests that research
attention should be focused on perceptions of parental emotional support and its
influences to college adjustment.

There were no significant differences across groups in relation to Asian, African
American, and Caucasian students reported feelings of alienation. Although there were
no statically significant differences, students of color did report higher levels of
alienation than did Caucasian students on subscales. This tendency is consistent with past
research that suggests that students of color attending predominately white universities

report higher feelings of alienation.

67

References

Ainsworth, MD. (1989). Attachment beyond infancy. American Psychologig,
44, 709-716.
Ainsworth, MD. (1987). Patterns of attachment. NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Ainsworth, MD. (1978). Patttems of attachment. NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Armsden, G.C., & Greenberg, M.T. (1987). The inventory of parent and peer
attachment. Individual differences and their relationship to psychological
well being. Journal of Youth and Adolescence 16, 427-464.

 

Baker, R.W. & Siryk, B. (1989). Student adaptation to collpge questionnaire. Los
Angeles Western. Psychological Services.

Baird, B.N. (1996). The internship, practicum, and field placement handbook: A
guide for helping professions. New Jersey: Prentice Hall.

Barnes, AS. (1985). The black middle class family. Bristol, IN: Wyndham Hall

Baruth, L. G. and Manning, M. L.(l991). Multicultural Counseling and
Pachotherapv: A Lifespan Perspective. MacMillan, New York.

Berg, I.K. & Jaya, A. (1993). Different and same: Family therapy with Asian
American Families. Journal of Marital and Famin Therapy,19, 31-38.

Birdsall, N. & Cochrane, S. (1982). Education and mum] decision making: A
two-generation approach. In: L. Anderson & D. Windham (Eds) Education and
Development. Lexington, MA: D. C. Heath.

Bliwise, N.G. (1999). Securing attachment theory’s potential. Feminism and
Pachology, 9, 43-45.

68

Bliwise, N.G. (1992). Attachment style and interpersonal relationships in
adulthood’, paper presented to the 45‘” Annual Meeting of the Gerontological Society of
America, Washington, DC (November).

Bowlby, J. (1979). The making and breaking of atfectional bonds. London:
Tavistock.

Bowlby, J. (1982). Attachment and loss: Vol. 1 Attachment (2ml ed). London:
Penguin Books.

Bowlby, J. (1988). A secure base. New York: Basic Books.
Boyd-Franklin, N. (1989). Black families in therapy. New York: Guilford

Burbach, H.J., & Thompson, M.A. (1971). Alienation among college freshmen: A
comparison of Puerto Rican, Black, and White Students. Journal of College
Student Personnel 12, 248-252.

 

Cabrera, A., Nora, A. (1994). College students perceptions of prejudice and
discrimination and their feelings of alienation: A construct validation

Approach. Review of Education/ Pflmgy/ Cultural Studies. Vol. 16,
No. 3-4. 387-409

 

Cabrera, A., Nora, A., & Castaneda, M. (1993). College Persistence: Structural
Equations Modeling Test of an Integrated Model of Student Retention. Joumal of Him
Educatipp, 64, 2, 123-129.

Chandras, K.V. (1997). Asian Americans: Ethnoviolence and discrimination in
higher education. CSERV Bullep'p, 3(1), 36-43.

Chilman, GS. (1993). Him’c families in the United States: Research
Persmtives. In H. P. McAdoo (Ed.), Family ethnicity: Strength in diversity (pp. 141-

163). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

Cohen, J. (1992). Quantitative methods in psychology. Pachological Bullg'p, 1,
1 55-1 59.

69

Cone, J .D. & Foster, S.L. (1993). Dissertations and theses from start to finish:
Washington, Dc. American Psychological Association.

Cornell, D.G. & Grossberg, I.W. (1987). Family environment and personality
adjustment in gified program children. Gifted Children Quarterly. 31, 59-64.

Cutrona, C.E., Cole, V., Colangelo, N., Assouline, S.G., & Russell, D.W. (1994).
Perceived parental support and academic achievement. An attachment
theory perspective. Personality gn_d Social Psychology, 66, 369-378.

Daugherty, T.K., Vaughn, S.R., & Lane, E.J. (1997). A longitudinal study of first-
year stress and alienation as predictors of attrition among college men. Paper presented at
the Annual Convention of Midwest Psychological Association, Chicago, IL.

Dean, D.G. (1961). Alienation: Its meaning and measurement. American
Sociological Review, 26, 753-758.

DeGenova M.K. (1997) Families in cultural context. Mountain View, CA.
Mayfield Publishing Company.

 

 

 

Desler, M.K. (1985). A test of Tinto’s theoretical model of college student
persistence among transfer commuter students at an urban university. (Doctoral Thesis,
Michigan State University 1985). Thesis Abstracts, 107 204 THS

Dobson, J .E., Campbell, N.J., & Dobson, R. (1987). Relationships among
loneliness, perceptions of school, and grade point averages of high school juniors. School
Counselor, 35, 143-148.

 

Engels, R.C., F inkenauer, C., & Meeus, W. (2001). Parental attachment and
adolescents’ emotional adjustment: The associations with social skills and relational
competence. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 48, 428-439.

F eagin, R., & Sykes, MP. (1995). How Blacks cope with racism on white
campuses. Journal of Black Studies 26, 117-133.

 

70

Fleming, J. (1984). Blacks in college: A commtiristudv of s_t_udents’ success
in Black and White institutions. San Francisco: Jossey- Bass.

Grossman, K.E., Grossman, K. (1991). Attachment quality as organizer of
emotional and behavioral responses in a longitudinal perspective. In C.M. Parkes, J.
Stevenson-Hinde, & P. Marris (Eds). Attachment across the life cycle (pp. 93-114),
London: Tavistock/Routledge.

Grossman, K.E., Grossman, K., & Zimmerman, P. (1999). A wider view of
attachment and exploration: Stability and change during the years of immaturity. In J.
Cassidy & P.R. Shaver (Eds), Handbook of attachment: Theory, research, and clinical
applications (pp. 760-786). New York: Guilford Press.

Hamadache, A. (1990). Litemy, Human Rights, and Peace. Geneva: UNESCO
International Bureau of Education.

Harwood, Miller, & Irizarry (1995). Culture and attachment: Perception of the
children in context. New York: Guildford

Hilda, & Rodriguez (1998). Children and Divorce: A Smshot

Hill Collins P. (1991). The meaning of motherhood in black culture and black
mother-daughter relationships’. Pp42-60 in P. Bell-Scott, B. Guy-Shefiall, J .J . Royster, J.

Sims-Wood, M.Decosta-Willis and L. Fultz (eds) Double-stitch: Black women write
about mothers and daughters. Boston, MA: Beacon Press.

Ho, M.K. (1987). Family therapy with ethnic minorities, Newbury Park, CA:
Sage.

Hojat, M. (1996). Satisfaction with early relationships with parents and
psychosocial attributes in adulthood: which parent contributes more? J oumal of Genetic
Psychology. v. 159(2), 203-220.

Howes, C. and Smith, E.W. (1995). Children and their child caregivers: profiles
of relationships’. Social Development, 4, 44-61.

71

Hurtado, S., (1992). The campus racial climate: Contexts or conflict. Research

In Higher Educatioh, 35, 21-41.

Hurtado S., (1994). The institutional climate for talented Latino students.
Research in Higher Educatioh, 35, 21-41.

Isgark, T., & Isgark, S. (1989). Racism in higher education. Report of the US.
National Student Education Association. Washington, DC: US. National Student
Association.

Kan V., & Eddy, J. (1999). Counseling Asian Americans: Implications for
Training. Source,120 no 2, 239-246.

Keith, P.B, & Lichtrnan, M. (1992). Testing the influences of parental
involvement on Mexican American eight grade students’ academic achievement: A
structural equations analysis. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American
Educational Research Association, San Francisco, CA (ERIC Document Reproduction
Service No. ED 351 170).

Kenny M.E., (1996). Attachment and psychological well being among racially
and ethnically diverse first-year college students. Journal of College Student
Development, 37, 527-535.

Kenny M.E., & Rice, K.G. (1995). Attachment to parents and adjustment in late
adolescence: Current status, applications, and future considerations. The Counseling
Psychologist, 23, 433-456.

Kenny M.E. & Donaldson G. (1991). Contributions of parental attachment and
family structure to the social and psychological functioning of first year college
Students. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 41(2), 248-255.

Kenny ME. (1987). Family ties and leaving home for college: Recent findings
and implications. Journal of College Personnel, 28, (5), 43 8-442.

Kinder DR. (1996). The continuing American dilemma. White Resistance to
racial change 40 years after myrdal. Journal of Social Issues 42(2), 151-171.

 

72

Kohatsu,E.L. (1990). The impact of philosophical orientation and race on the
conceived mental health problems among Asian American and White college students.
Unpublished manuscript, University of Maryland, College Park.

Lopez, F. (1995a). Contemporary attachment theory: An introduction with
implications for counseling psychology. The CouAnseling Psychologist, 23, 395-415.

Lopez, F.G. (1989). Current family dynamics, trait anxiety, and academic
adjustment: test of a family-based model of vocational identity.
Journ_al of Vocational Behavior 35, 76-87.

 

Marin, G., & Marin, B.V. (1991). Research with Him’c mpulations Newbury
Park, CA:

McAdoo, J. L. (1993). Decision making and marital satisfaction in African

American Families. In HR McAdoo (Ed.), Family ethnicity: Strengm in diversity (pp.
109-119). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

McCarthy, C. J; Moller, N. P; & Fouladi Rachael T. (2001). Continued
attachment to parents: its relationship to affect regulation and perceived stress among

college students. Measurement and evaluation in counseling and development,
33(4) 198-213.

Mirer, T.W. (1995).Economics and Statistics and Econometrics Englewood
Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Moritsugu, J. & Sue, S. (1983). Minority status as a stressor. In R. Felder (Ed.),
Preventive Psychology: theory, research, and practice.

Ogbu,J.U. (1992). Understanding cultural diversity and learning. Educational
Researcher 21(8), 5-14.

 

Pettigrew, T.F.; Martin,J. (1987). Shaping the organizational context for Black
American inclusion, Journal of Social Issues 43, 41-78.

 

73

Rice, K.G. (1992). Separation-Individuation and Adjustment to College: A
Longitudinal Study. Journpl of Counseling Psvchology,_39, n2, 203-213.

Rice, K.G. (1990). Separation-Individuation, Family Cohesion, and Adjustment to
College: Measurement Validation and Test of a Theoretical Model. Journal of Couhseling
Pychology, 37 n2, 195-202

Rice, K.G., Cole, D.A., & Lapsley, D.K. (1990). Separation-individuation, family
cohesion, and adjustment to college: Measurement validation and test of a theoretical
model. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 37, 195-202.

Ronch, J .L, Van Omum, W., & Stilwel, W. (1994). The counseling sourcebook:
A practical refere_npe on contemmgy issues. The Crossroad Publishing Company, NY.

Schram, J .L. & Lauver, P.J. (1988). Alienation in international students. Journal
of Collsge Student Development. 29, 146-150.

Schreiner, L. & Pattengale J. (Eds). (2000). Visible solutions for invisible
students: (Monograph No. 31) Columbia, SC: University of South Carolina, Natural
Resource Center for The First-Year Experience and Students in Transition.

Schultheiss, D.P., Palladino, DE, and Bluestein, D.L (1994). The role of
adolescent —parental relationships in college student development adjustment. Journal of

Counseling Psychology, 34, pp. 248-54.

Seeman, M. (1991). Measures of mrsonality and social psychological attitudes.
Academic Press Inc.

Seeman, M. (1959). “On the meaning of alienation”, American Sociological
Review 24, 783-791.

 

Sroufe, LA. (1992). Child Development: Its Nature and Course. 2"d ed. New
York: McGraw-Hill.

74

Sroufe, L.A. & Fleeson, J. (1986). Attachment and the construction of
relationships. In W. Hartup and Z. Rubin (Eds). Relationships and development (pp. 51-
71). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Steinberg, L., Dombusch, S.M., & Brown, BB. (1992). Ethnic differences in
adolescent achievement: An ecological perspective. American Psychologist, 47, 723-729.

Steward, R.J., Germain, S., & Jackson, J .D. (1992). Alienation and interactional
Style. A student of successful Anglo, Asian, and Hispanic university students. Journal of
CollegtLStudent Development. 33, 149-156.

Steward, R.J., Jackson, M.R., & Jackson J .D., (November 1990). Alienation and
Interactional styles in predominately white environment, a study of
successful Black students. Journal of Collegg Student Developmeng,
3 1 , 509-5 1 5.

Sticht, T. (1994). Family Literacy: A World Movement. Orange, CA: Gateway
Educational Products, Ltd.

Sticht, T. & McDonald, B. (1990). Teach the Mother and Reach the Child:
Literacy Across Generations. Geneva: UNESCO International Bureau of Education

Strange, A. (2000). Predictors of college adjustment and success: similarities and
differences among Southeast-Asian-American, Hispanic, and white students. Source, 120
n04, 731-740.

Soucy, N., & Larose, S. (2000). Attachment and control in family contexts as
deterrninates of adolescent adjustment. Journal of Family Psychology, 14, 125-143.

Sue, D.W., & Sue. D. (1990). Counseling the culturally different: Theogy and
practice (2Ml ed.). New York: John Wiley & Sons.

Suen, H.K. (1983). Alienation and attrition of Black college students on a
predominately white campus. Journal of College Stud_e_nt Personnel, (March): 117-121.

75

Takaki, R. (1990). Strangers from a Different Shore: A History of Asian
American. Viking Penguin, 1990.

Tatum, BE. (1999). Why are all of the black kids sitting together in the cafeteria?
New York, NY: Basic Books.

Tierney, W.G. (1999). Models of minority college going and retention: Cultural
integrity versus cultural suicide. The Journal of Negro Bducatiop, 68, 80-91.

Tierney, W.G. (1992). An anthropological analysis of student participation in
college. Journal of Higm Educatioh, 63, 603-618.

Tinto, V.(1997). Classrooms as communities: Exploring the educational character
of student persistence. Journal of Higher Educatiop, 68,. 599-623.

Tinto, V.(1993). Leaving College: Rethinking the causes and cures of attrition.
Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Tinto, V.(1992).An anthropological analysis of student participation in college.
Journal of Higher Educatioa, 63, 603-618.

Tinto, V. (1987). Leaving College. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Tinto, V. (1975). Dropout from higher education. A theoretical synthesis of recent
research. Review of Educational Research, 45 (1) 89-125.

Upmanynu, V.U., Upmanyum S., & Dhingra, M. (1992). Gender differences in
loneliness. Joarpal of Personality ahd Clinical Studies 8, 161-166.

Vivona, J ., (2000) Parental attachment styles of late adolescents: Qualities of
attachment relationships and consequences for adjustment. Journal of Counseling
Psychology, 47 (3),_316-329.

76

Wilson, MN. (1984). Mothers and grandmothers’ perceptions of parental
behavior in three-generational black families. Child Development, 55, 1333-1339

77

APPENDIX A
Consent for Participation in Research Form

The Michigan State University College of Education supports the practice of protection
of human subjects participating in research. The following information is provided so that
you can decide whether you wish to participate in the study. You should be aware that if
you participate, you may withdraw at anytime and you have the right not to answer any
questions.

The study is concerned with factors associated with career indecision in African
American, Native American, Hispanic American, Asian American, and Caucasian
students. After data has been collected and analyzed, participants will have the
opportunity to review the results. The subjects will be given an email address to contact
the researcher if they desire to view the findings. Results will then be mailed to

participants upon request.

Your participation is voluntary. Do not hesitate to ask questions about the study. Be
assured that your privacy will be protected to the maximum extent allowable by law.
Your name will not be associated with the study in any way. Confidentiality is assured.
Thank you in advance for your participation.

 

Signature of participant date

 

Print name here date

Principal Investigator
Delila Owens
Doctoral Candidate
Counselor Education
436 Erickson Hall

3 55-603 1

Additional Investigator
Dr. Robbie Steward
Associate Professor
Michigan State University
436 Erickson Hall

43 2-1 524

Dr. Ashir Kumar, M.D., Chair

University Committee on Research Involving Human Subjects
202 Olds Hall

Michigan State University

(5 1 7) 43 2-4503

78

APPENDIX B
Demographic Questionnaire
Please circle the appropriate answers to the following questions.
1. Gender: Male Female
2. Age: _
3. Classification: Freshman Sophomore Junior Senior

4. My ethnicity is: 1. Asian American, 2. African American, 3. Hispanic 4. Caucasian
5. Native American 6, Other

5. Major Cumulative GPA

 

 

6. City and State of Origin

 

Rural/urban/ suburban

7. Highest level of education completed by father
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Primary Jr. High Sr. High College Masters PH.D Other

8. Highest Level of education completed by mother
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Primary Jr. High Sr. High College Masters PH.D Other

9. Annual Family Income
a. less than $14, 999 b. 15,000-24,000 c. 25,000-40, 999 d. 41,000-56,999
e. 57,000-72,999 f. 73,000-88,999 g. 89,000-99,999 h. over 100,000

10. Do you belong to a student organization? Ifso, which one?

 

11. Composition of household. One parent mother_, One parent father ,
One foster parent_, 1 Grandparent(s)_, Two parent, mother and stepfather_,
two parent, biological father and stepmother_, Two parent, biological mother and
Father_ Other

12. Are you a 1.American born citizen

_, 2. Naturalized Citizen or
3. International student

79

Appendix C
UNIVERSITY ALIENATION SCALE

Below are some statements regarding university issues with which you may agree to
disagree. Please register your feelings regarding these statements, i.e., whether you agree
or disagree with the statements as they stand. Please complete evegy item.

Please check in the appropriate blank as follows:

SA (STRONGLY AGREE)
A (AGREE)

U (UNCERTAIN)

p (DISAGREE)

SD (STRONGLY DISAGREE)

 

 

 

 

 

(m)* 1. The size and complexity of this university make it very difficulty for a student
to know where to turn.

_SA (5)”
_A (4)
_U (3)
__D (2)
_SD (1)

(p) 2. It is only wishful thinking to believe that a student can really influence what
happens at this university.

__SA (5)
_A (4)
_U (3)
_D (2)
_SD (1)

(p) 3. Classes at this university are so regirnented that there is little room for personal
needs and interests of the student.

_SA (5)
_A (4)
_U (3)
_D (2)
_SD (1)

80

(p) 4.

(m) 5.

(s) 6.

(m) 7.

(s) 8.

The faculty has too much control over the lives of the students at this university.

_SA(5)
_.A (4)
_U (3)
_D (2)
_SD(1)

The bureaucracy of this university has me confused and bewildered.

_SA (5)
_A (4)
_U (3)
_D (2)
_SD (1)

I feel that I am an integral part of this university community

_SA (5)
_A (4)
_U (3)
_D (2)
_SD (1)

Things have become so complicated at this university that I really don’t
understand just what is going on.

_SA (5)
_A (4)
_U (3)
_D (2)
_SD (1)

I seldom feel lost or alone at this university

_SA (5)
_A (4)
_U (3)
_D (2)
_SD (1)

81

(p) 9. There are just so many cogs in the machinery at this university

_SA(5)
_A (4)
_U (3)
_D (2)
_SD(1)

(s) 10. I don’t have as many friends as I would like at this university.

_SA (5)
_A (4)
_U (3)
_D (2)
_SD (1)

(p) 11. Most of the time I feel I have an effective voice in the decisions regarding
my life at this university.

_SA (5)
_A (4)
_U (3)
_D (2)
_SD (1)

(m)12 Life within the social system of this university is so chaotic that the student
really doesn’t know where to turn.

_SA (5)
_A (4)
_U (3)
_D (2)
_SD (1)

(S) 13 Many students at this university are lonely and unrelated to their fellow human
beings.

_SA(5)
_A (4)
_U (3)
_D (2)
_SD(1)

82

 

APPENDIX D
PARENTAL ATTACHMENT QUESTIONNAIRE

The following pages contain statements that describe family relationships and the kinds
of feelings and experiences fiequently reported by college students. Please respond to
each item by circling the number on a scale of 1 to 5 that best describes your parents,
your relationship with your parents, and your experiences and feelings. Please provide a
single rating to describe your parents and your relationship with them. If only one parent
is living, or your parents are divorced, respond with reference to your living parent or the
parent toward who you feel closer. Please put number next to item.

1 2 3 4 5

Not at all Somewhat A Moderate Amount Quite a bite Very Much
(0-10%) (1 1-35%) (36-65%) (66-90%) (91-100%)

In general, my parents”...

. Are persons I can count on to provide emotional support—

Support my goals and interests—

live in a different world—

understand my problems and concerns—

respect my privacy—

restrict my freedom or independence_

Are available to give me advice or guidance when I want it_

take my opinions seriously_

Encourage me to make my own decisions—

10. Are critical ofwhat I do_

11. impose their ideas and values on me_

12. have given me as much attention as I wanted—

13. are persons to whom I can express differences of opinion on important matters
14. have no idea what I am feeling or thinking_

15. have provided me with the freedom to experiment and learn things on my own_
16. are too busy or otherwise involved to help me_

17. have trust and confidence in me_

18. try to control my life—

19. protect me fi'orn danger or difficulty_

20. ignore what I have to say__

21. are sensitive to my feelings and needs__

22. are disappointed in me_

23. give me advice whether I want it or not_

24. respect my judgment and decisions ever if different from what they would want_
25. do things for me, which I could do for myself___

owseweww—

83

l 2 3 4 5

Not at all Somewhat A Moderate Amount Quite a bite Very Much
(0-10%) (1 1-35%) 06-65%) (66-90%) (91-100%)

26. are persons whose expectations I feel obligated to meet_
27. treat me like a younger child—

During recent visits or time spent together, my parents were persons...
28. I looked forward to seeing_
29. with whom I argued—
30. with whom I felt relaxed and comfortable—
31. who made me angry_
32. I wanted to be with all the time_
33. to whom it felt cool and distant_
34. who got on my nerves_
35. who aroused feelings of guilt and anxiety__
36. to whom I enjoyed telling about the things I have done and leamed_
37. for whom I felt feelings of love_
38. I tried to ignore—
39. to whom I confided my most personal thoughts and feelings_
40. whose company I enj oyed_
41. I avoided telling about my experiences_

Following time spent together, I leave my parents ........
42. with warm and positive feelings
43. feeling let down and disappointed by my family

When I have a serious problem or an important decision to make...
44. I look to my family for support, encouragement, and guidance__
45. I seek help from a professional, such as a therapist, college counselor,
or clergy._
46. I think about how my family might respond or what they might say_
47. I work it out on my own without help or discussion from them—
48. I discuss the matter with a friend_
49. I know that my family will know what to do_
50. I contact my family if I am not able to resolve the situation after talking
it over with friends_
When I go to my parents for help...
51. I feel more confident in my ability to handle the problems on my own_
52.1 continue to feel unsure of myself__
53. I feel that I would have obtained more understanding and comfort from a fiiend_
54. I feel confident that things will work out as long as I follow my parent’s advice_
55. I am disappointed with their response—

84

APPENDIX E

GENDER INFORMATION

Independent Sample Test
t df Sig (2-tailed)

University alienation -.854 149 .394

Levene’s Test for
For equality of Variances
F Sig.

Equal variances assumed 2.541 .113

University alienation

Criterion variable: University alienation and gender.

85

APPENDIX F

ALIENATION AND CLASSIFICATION

 

Model R Square Adjusted R Square SE estimate

 

.172 .030 13.2

 

a predictors: (Constant), classification

 

Model B Std. Error T Sig.

 

2.01 .958 2.10 .037

 

a Dependent variable: university alienation

86

G

1|11311tllfljlfijfllllll'ulifllflil1|