SINGLE MOTHERS’ PERCEPTIONS OF THEIR YOUNG . CHILDREN'S BEHAVIOR ' Dissertation for the Degrée of Ph. D. MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY ROBERT HOWARD Fox 1975 IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII This is to Certify that the thesis entitled SINGLE MOTERS! PERCEPTI ONS OF THEIR YOUNG CHILDREN '3 BEHAVIOR 1/ presented by - / Robert Howard Fox has been accepted towards fulfillment I of the requirements for Ph.D; degree in Educational Psychology \Aajor professor / rte ”/5/L5, / /' 0-7639 W7 Isa W1”! ABSTRACT SINGLE MOTHERS' PERCEPTIONS OF THEIR YOUNG CHILDREN'S BEHAVIOR BY Robert Howard Fox The purpose of this study was to compare single mothers' perceptions of their young children's behavior to married mothers' perceptions of their children, in an effort to dis- cover a possible contributing factor to the effects of father- absence. The comparison was achieved by matching the mothers' perceptions to the perceptions of day care personnel. Per- ceptions were examined for a broad range of behavior and for five specific areas of behavior: sex role development, peer relationships, self-concept, autonomy-dependence, and emotion- al adjustment. A checklist of children's behavior was re- vised and utilized to obtain perceptions of the children in the day care center. Separate analyses were conducted for mother-day care teacher data and mother-day care aide data. This was necessi- tated by moderately low interrater reliability between teachers and aides. A two-way analysis of variance was used to test the mother-teacher data while a nonparametric technique was required to analyze the mother-aide data. Robert Howard Fox It was hypothesized that married mothers' perceptions of their young children's behavior would be in greater agree- rment with the perceptions of day care personnel than would be the perceptions of single mothers Discussion of Findings............... ..... Mother-Day Care Personnel Agreement... Single Mothers’ Perceptions of Their Sons and Daughters....... ..... Teacher-Aide Agreement................ Emotional Adjustment Scale-—Single Mother-Teacher Discrepancies........ Emotional Adjustment Scale--Single Mother-Married Mother Discrepancies. Recommendations for Future Research....... Children's Behavior Checklist.... ......... Revised Children's Behavior Checklist..... Sex Role Development.Scale........... ..... Peer Relationships Scale ......... . ....... . Self-Concept Scale ....... . ................ iv 49 49 50 50 50 54 55 55 57 57 57 57 60 60 62 62 65 65 66 68 69 71 73 83 91 92 93 Appendix F - Appendix G - Appendix H - Appendix I - Appendix J - Bibliography Autonomy—Dependence Scale...... ..... .... Emotional Adjustment Scale.............. Cover Sheet............................. Information Sheet.. ..... ................ Table of Observed and Transformed Cell Standard Deviations for Mother- Aide Data............................. Page 94 95 96 97 98 99 LIST OF TABLES Page Table 3.1 Demographic Information .................. 35 Table 3.2 Demographic Summary. ..................... 36 Table 3.3 Checklist and Scale Reliability .......... 42 Table 4.1. Mother-Teacher Agreement ................. 51 Table 4.2 Mother-Aide Agreement ........... . ........ 56 Table 4.3 Single Mother-Teacher Agreement for Boys vs. Girls.......... ..... ............ 58 Table 4.4 Single Mother-Aide Agreement for Boys vs. Girls ..... ............ ..... ..... 59 vi CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION The Problem The rate of divorce and separation in American society has risen steadily over the last fifteen years. According to the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare (1974), the rate of divorce was 2.2 peOple per one thousand in 1960. By 1970, the rate had risen to 3.5 per thousand and by 1973, they estimated the rate of divorce has risen to 4.4 per thousand. A similar increase in number of separations also had occurred. Perhaps more important is the number of children involved. In 1960, approximately 463,000 children were involved in divorces or annulments. The number had almost doubled (870,000) by 1970. Now, in 1975, well over one million children are living with one parent who, in the vast majority of cases, is the mother. For example a recent television news program (Jackson, Sixtnginutes, August 24, 1975) reported that approxi- mately three million children were involved in divorces and living with their mothers. In view of this evidence, two questions arise: "What are the effects on the child of being raised in a father-absent family?" and "How are these effects brought about?" A con- siderable body of research has been generated by the former l question but the literature on the latter is sparse and incon- clusive. This study was undertaken in an effort to examine one aspect of the latter question: "How do single mothers perceive their young children?" The Literature Researchers have consistently found that father-absence is associated with behavioral, developmental, and psychological difficulties in children. These effects have been found to vary as a function of: the child's sex, the age of the child at the onset of separation, the cause of separation, the presence or absence of sex of siblings, the child's peers, sociocultural factors, the availability of adult male surro- gates, and several maternal variables. Father-absence has been found to have its most severe effects on males. Two rather consistent findings have been that boys who were separated from their fathers prior to age five experienced disruptions in their sex role develOpment while those who became father-absent between the ages of six and nine years old have been cited as being overaggressive (Biller, 1968, 1969, 1970; Biller and Borstelmann, 1967; Hetherington, 1966; Lynn and Sawrey, 1959; McCord, McCord and Thurber, 1962; Santrock, 1970). In the case of father-absent girls, differences between them and father-present girls do not emerge till adolescence. At that point, father-absent girls experience greater diffi- culties in their heterosexual relationships (Hetherington, 1972L Father-absent children have also been found to have poor self-concepts (Leichty, 1960; Rouman, 1956), to be over- dependent (Barclay and Cusumano, 1967; WOhlford and Liberman, 1970), and to have greater difficulty in their peer relation- ships than father-present children (Biller, 1970, 1971; Lynn and Sawrey, 1959). Others report father-absent children to be immature and unable to delay immediate gratification (Mischel, 1961; Santrock and Wohlford, 1970). Children from father- absent homes also seem to have greater difficulty achieving emotional adjustment (Koch, 1961; McCord, McCord and Thurber, 1962; McDermott, 1970; Tucker and Regan, 1966). Just as father-absence effects the child, so too does his absence effect the mother. A mother who has undergone separation or divorce from her husband usually has experienced the entire spectrum of emotion in more extreme form (Dispert, 1953; Kapit, 1973; Spock, 1962). In addition, her life situa- tion has probably undergone drastic changes. These two factors usually combine to alter the mother's relationship with her children (Biller, 1970, 1971; McDermott, 1970; Neubauer, 1960; Stendler, 1954; Tommin, 1974; Wylie and Delgado, 1959). Research (Hetherington and Deur, 1972; McCord, McCord and Thurber, 1962; Pedersen, 1966) has indicated that a strong, emotionally stable single mother can overcome her own problems and raise her children adequately. However, a weaker mother, without a husband, frequently turns to her children for her own need satisfaction rather than responding to the children on a basis of their needs. According to the theories of Combs and Snygg (1959), Rogers (1951), Sullivan (1953), and others such a mother-child relationship is likely to create difficulties for the child. Need for Study It has been demonstrated in the literature that father- absence can have detrimental effects upon children, particular- ly young children. Further, the tendency for a single mother to distort her relationship with her children has been dis- cussed by several researchers. However, researchers have not investigated the possibility that many of the effects of father-absence may be due to the single mother's perceptions of her young child, which may be distorted in accordance with her needs and emotions. It is her perceptions of the child which dictate the mother's actions toward him and significantly contribute to the child's psychological development. There is some evidence (Cotler and Shoemaker, 1969; Cowen et al., 1970; Glidewell, Domke, and Kantor, 1963; Ireton and Thwing, 1972; Medinnus, 1961; Wolfensberger and Kurtz, 1971) that married mothers perceive their children with a fair degree of accuracy. This is not known to be so for single mothers. There is a need, therefore, to examine and evaluate the single mother's perceptions of her children. One means of accomplishing this is to compare single and married mothers' perceptions to the perceptions of teachers, who have been found to be relatively accurate observers (Lederman and Blair, 1972). The day care center provides a common setting in which the young children of both single and married mothers can be observed. Further, it is becoming an increasingly significant factor in society as many mothers are now working and need the services of day care centers. The staff of these centers, therefore, provide a common basis against which single and married mothers' perceptions can be compared. Purpose of the Study The purpose of this study was to examine the perceptions single and married mothers have of their young children and compare them to the perceptions of day care personnel familiar with these same children. Hypotheses Hypothesis 1: Married mothers' perceptions of their young children's behavior will be in greater agreement with the perceptions of day care personnel than will be the perceptions of single mothers. Sub-hypothesis 1: Married mothers' perceptions of their young children's behavior will be in greater agreement with the perceptions of day care personnel than will be the per- ceptions of single mothers for each of the following scales: (a) Sex Role Development. (b) Peer Relationships. (c) ‘Self—Concept. (d) Autonomy-Dependence. (e) Emotional Adjustment. Hypothesis 2: Single mothers' perceptions of their daughters will be in greater agreement with the perceptions Of day care personnel than will be single mothers' perceptions of their sons. Sub-hypothesis 2: Single mothers' perceptions of their daughters will be in greater agreement with the perceptions of day care personnel than will be single mothers' perceptions of their sons for each of the following scales: (a) Sex Role Development. (b) Peer Relationships. (c) Self-Concept. (d) Autonomy-Dependence. (e) Emotional Adjustment. Sample Thirty-five mothers of children who attended a day care center located in an urban setting in Michigan participated in this study. Twenty mothers were married and fifteen were single. All of the mothers but one were employed or were students. Two day care teachers and four day care aides also participated. The children who were to be rated by the participants were of preschool age; none had entered the first grade. Methodology Perceptions of each child, as measured by a revised form of the Children's Behavior Checklist, were obtained from the child's mother, teacher, and aide. The mothers' perceptions were then compared to the perceptions of the day care teachers and again, separately, to the perceptions of the aides. Comparisons were in the form of "agreement scores", derived by taking the absolute difference between the mother's item score and the day care teacher's (or aide's) item score and summing over all items. A 2 X 2 design was used to compare single mothers to married mothers and mothers of boys to mothers of girls. The Instrument A revised form of the Children's Behavior Checklist was used to obtain the perceptions of mothers and day care person- nel. Revisions included: deletion of fifty-nine items, changing the response format to a three point Likert-type rating scale, rewarding certain items, and adding five new items relating to sex role develOpment. Once the revision was completed, the checklist items were placed into one of five scales: Sex Role Development, Peer Relationships, Self- Concept, Autonomy-Dependence, and Emotional Adjustment. A pilot study was conducted, utilizing nursery school and kindergarten teachers and the mothers of children in these settings. The resulting checklist and scale reliabilities were found to be satisfactory for use in the present research. Definition of Terms Day care aide: A person working with small groups within the day care center and under the supervision of the day care teacher. Day care teacher: A person meeting the state of Michigaan minimum requirements for a teacher of day care. She is responsible for all children in her group and supervision of the aides assigned to her group. Married mother: A mother who is married or remarried and living with her husband. A mother living continuously with the same man for at least one year. Single mother: A mother who has lost her husband by divorce or separation, or a mother who has never been married. A single mother is not living with a male partner. Young child: A child up to the age of six, who has not entered the first grade. Assumptions It is assumed that by the age of four, the child has developed relatively consistent behavior patterns which emerge in continuous relationships with significant others. It is assumed that the revised form of the Children's Behavior Checklist samples a broad and comprehensive range of children's behavior. Limitations Certain limitations should be noted in evaluating this research. First, the findings of this study cannot be general- ized beyond pOpulations similar to the one studied. No attempt is made to evaluate the perceptions of single mothers with children in nursery schools or other settings nor of single mothers whose children are older. Within this study, no attempt is made to equate the two groups on race or socioeconomic status. Another limiting factor is that the behavior of the children being rated will not be directly observed. Con- sequently, judgments about accuracy of perceptions can only be tentative. This study is limited to examining mothers' perceptions of the socio-emotional development of their children. No attempt is made to study mothers' perceptions of their children's cognitive or physical development, nor is the effect of maternal employment upon mothers' perceptions being studied. CHAPTER TWO REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE Three areas of research are pertinent to this study: the effects of father-absence, mother-child relationships within father-absent families, and parental perceptions. These are thoroughly discussed in the following pages. Effects of Father-Absence The effects of father-absence are extremely complex and depend upon many variables such as: age of the child at separation, length of separation, cause of separation, the sex of the children, the presence or absence and sex of siblings, the availability of male surrogates, socio-cultural factors, and several maternal factors. Almost all authors surveyed agree that father-absence causes some disturbance in male sex-role development. Very few have dealt with its effects on feminine sex role develOp- ment. For boys, age at separation appears to be an important mediating factor. In two early studies with doll play (Bach, 1946; Sears, 1951), preschool aged father-absent boys dis- played less aggression in their play than did father-present boys. In addition, their play seemed more characteristic of preschool girls. Santrock (1970) combined doll play with 10 11 maternal interviews and found similar results. Preschool father-absent boys were less aggressive, more feminine, and more dependent than their father-present counterparts. Santrock did not find significant differences between father-absent and father-present preschool girls. Hetherington (1966) studied lower-class Black and White boys 9-12 years old in a recreational setting. The boys were divided into three groups: those who were separated from their fathers by age four, those separated from their fathers by age six or over, and those whose fathers were present throughout their lives. Although there were no differences in the amount of dependence on adults, both groups of father- absent boys showed greater dependence on their peers than did the father-present boys. However, the early separated boys were significantly less aggressive, less masculine in their sex-role preference, and played physical-contact games less frequently than either those boys who were separated at age six or over or the father-present boys. The literature appears to be inconsistent when discussing the effects of father-absence on older boys. In contrast to the nonaggressive,feminine picture of the preschool male, studies of older children frequently cite aggressive and anti- social behavior as being common. Lynn and Sawrey (1959) found father-absent eight and nine year old boys showed greater immaturity, poor peer adjustment, intense strivings toward father identification, and "compensatory masculinity", which 12 is characterized by inconsistent extremes of sex—typed be- havior. At times they act extremely masculine and at other times they are excessively dependent and feminine. Studying father-absent boys six to twelve years old, McCord, McCord, and Thurber (1962) found basically the same results. Miller (1958) hypothesized that much adolescent gang behavior can be attributed to attempts to compensate for the overwhelming feminine influence prevalent in the lower-class due to the increased proportion of fatherless homes. Biller and Borstelmann (1967) described three general aspects of sex role development: sex-role orientation, sex- role preference and sex-role adoption, which offer an ex- planation of this difference between the preschool and older father-absent boys. "Sex-role orientation" refers to the individual's conscious or unconscious assessment of his own maleness and/or femaleness. "Sex-role preference" refers to the individual's preference for objects and activities which are culturally sex-typed. "Sex-role adoption" refers to how masculine and/or feminine the individual is in social inter- actions. Boys who experience father-absence after the age of five have enough peer interactions to override the feminizing effects of their home. Accordingly they identify with their peers to a great extent. This seems to support Hetherington's (1966) findings that the boys separated from their fathers after age six were over-dependent on their peers. For boys who are separated from their fathers in the preschool years, 13 great difficulties arise and have lasting effects. When these boys reach middle childhood and preadolescence, a sex-role conflict frequently arises due to their awareness of and greater identification with their masculine peer culture. This conflict is usually resolved by adolescence with the boy having masculine sex-role preference and sex-role adoption. However, sex-role orientation remains somewhat feminine (Biller and Borstelmann, 1967; Biller, 1968, 1969, 1970). Barclay and Cusumano (1967) tested father-absent adolescent males and found no significant differences on sex- role preference when compared to father-present adolescents. However, males who were father-absent before age five showed greater field-dependence on the Witkin Rod and Frame Test. The authors interpreted this as evidence of a more passive, feminine approach to the environment and a measure of the individual's underlying sex-role orientation. Wohlford and Liberman (1970) found that both father-absent boys and girls were more field-dependent than their father-present peers. Just as peer interactions help the father-absent boys develop their masculinity, the presence of older male siblings or a father substitute facilitates greater masculinity (Biller and Borstelmann, 1967; Santrock, 1970). As noted earlier, there is a paucity of literature on the effects of father-absence on girls. Among the few existing studies, differences were generally not found between father- absent and father-present girls. For example, Santrock (1970) 14 found no differences between preschool Black father-absent and father-present girls with respect to dependency, aggression, and femininity. Lynn and Sawrey (1959) found father-absent eight and nine year old girls to be more dependent on their mothers. Note, however, that greater dependency is not contra- dictory to the feminine role. Hetherington (1972), hypothesized that since little or no sex role disturbances were found for preschool or elementary school girls, the effects of father-absence may appear only at puberty when interactions with males become more frequent. Therefore she studied the sex role development and behavior of three groups of adolescent girls: those who experienced father-absence due to divorce, those whose fathers died, and those who were from father-present homes. Both father-absent groups showed greater dependency on female adults than the girls from intact families. The greatest area of disruption was in heterosexual relations. Daughters of divorcees tended to be ”promiscuous" and "inapprOpriately assertive" with male peers and adults. The daughters of widows tended to be shy, experienced discomfort around males, and had severe sexual anxiety. Those girls who were very young when their parents were divorced displayed significantly more prosocial aggression and seemed to be associated with greater degrees of hetero- sexual difficulties. Interestingly, there were no differences on variables such as feminine interests, attitudes toward the feminine role, or similarity to mother and father; thus 15 indicating no problems in sexual identification. Other findings of interest were that both groups of father-absent girls showed greater anxiety than father-present girls. Also daughters of divorcees tended to have negative attitudes toward their fathers. Daughters of widows and daughters from intact homes had higher self-esteem than girls from divorced families. Hetherington concluded that "for both groups of father-absent girls the lack of opportunity for constructive interaction with a loving, attentive father has resulted in apprehension and inadequate skills in relating to males.” Further, she stated that the father-absent girls' difficulties with males arose from their anxiety and lack of skills, with the differences in behavior attributed to differ- ences in mothers. More will be said of this later. Father-absence has other effects as well. Rouman (1956) found that among school guidance cases, those children who were without a father had their greatest difficulties in their "sense of personal worth." They could not believe they were well liked or had others' confidence in them. Leichty (1960) studied college freshmen whose fathers were away continuously, due to World War II, when the subjects were three to five years old and at the height of their Oedipal conflicts. The results indicated that father-absent males identified significantly less with their fathers who had re- turned from the war compared to the degree of father identifica- tion of boys whose fathers remained home during the same period. 16 In addition, the father-absent boys had a more "diffuse" identification. They identified in varying degrees with available models. This can be interpreted as an indication of less well-developed self-concepts among father-absent boys. Father-absence also affects the child's level of autonomy and emotional stability. Mischel (1961) found that father- absent eight and nine year old boys are more impulsive, less mature and autonomous, and less able to delay immediate gratification than father-present boys. Santrock and Wohlford (1970) found essentially the same results for boys when the onset of father-absence occurred when the child was between the ages of three and five years old. The effects were less severe if the onset of father-absence occurred when the child was between the ages of birth to two years old or six to nine years old. . In a study by Rouman (1956), father-absent school children seemed to lack knowledge of what is regarded as socially right and wrong. Another study (Hoffman, 1970) found that seventh grade father-absent boys had less well-internalized standards of moral judgment. They were rated by teachers as more aggressive and less willing to conform to rules or show consideration for others. Following trans- gressions, father-absent boys showed little guilt and were unwilling to accept blame for their own behavior. Instead of accepting the situation, these children responded in an immature fashion, denying they performed the act, crying, making excuses, or blaming others. (Hetherington and Deur, 1972, p. 308) l7 Differences between father-present and father absent girls were not detected. Studies by Seigman (1966) and Suedfeld (1967) tend to support these findings. Tuckman and Regan (1966) divided children referred to a child guidance clinic into those from intact homes, divorced homes, separated homes, and widowed homes. Several of their findings are interesting. First, children under six years old were underrepresented in the clinic as compared to the general population, while those between six and twelve years old were overrepresented. This might be due, in part, to the ”compensatory masculinity" previously discussed. Secondly, children from "broken homes" were overrepresented among the clinic cases. When "broken home" was divided into those from divorced and separated families and those from widowed families, two distinct patterns emerged. Children from divorced and separated homes had a greater percent of refer- rals for school problems, aggression, and antisocial behavior. Those children of widows and those with intact families had a greater percent of problems relating to anxiety and neurotic symptoms. Father-absence appears to affect the child's emotional adjustment, as well. McCord, McCord and Thurber (1962), Koch (1961) and Stolz et a1. (1954; cited in Biller, 1970) found father-absence to be associated with greater anxiety. McDermott (1970) reported that among father-absent children seen in a child guidance clinic approximately 34 percent showed 18 overt depression and it "was found hidden or in mild degree in virtually all individual records when examined further." Socioeconomic status is also a factor in the degree of emotion- al adjustment because, "middle-class families, particularly with respect to the mother-child relationship, may have more psychological as well as economic resources with which to cope with father absence" (Cobliner, 1963; as cited in Biller, 1970). Peer relationships for the father-absent male also appear likely to suffer some disturbance. Lynn and Sawrey (1959) found that father-absent boys had poor peer adjustments. Biller (1970, 1971) in an extensive review of the literature concluded that, "father-absent boys may be less popular with their peers than father-present boys because they more often lack a secure masculine sex-role orientation" (1970). Those boys who are strongly motivated to adopt masculine behavior, will do so. "Yet at home their mothers may react negatively to such behavior, thus creating conflict" (Biller, 1971). Herzog and Sudia (1968) concluded their review of the literature on father-absence stressing the need to study the mothers in father-absent homes. The mother in the fatherless home also needs to be studied. How does she c0pe with her dual role as mother and father-substitute? How does she cope with her children? What picture of the absent father does she project to them? What kind of supervision and dis- cipline is she able to exercise? What ex- pectations does she impart to them about life and about people? What support does she have 19 from family, friends, or community? We assume that the effect on children of the mother's behavior and attitudes is profound in any family. Unquestionably, in the absence of a father, the mother's role is especially difficult and demanding. (page 181-182) Mother-Child Relationship in Father-Absent Families In order to understand the mother-child relationship in father-absent families it is first necessary to examine the effects upon the mother of separation from her husband. Tiller (1958; as cited in Lynn and Sawrey, 1959) found that mothers whose husbands were not at home tended to lead less active social lives and regarded their lives as less happy and fulfilling. Other studies (Hetherington, 1972; Hethering- ton and Duer, 1972) report that separation or divorce can lead to a lowering in self-esteem, feelings of unattractiveness and inadequacy as a woman, apprehension about the reliability of others, and resentment or ambivalence toward being forced into the role of a single woman burdened by children. (Hetherington and Deur, 1972) In addition, single mothers felt more externally controlled than mothers from intact families (Hetherington, 1972). Kogelschatz, Adams and Tucker (1972) found a distinction between those mothers separated over two years and those less than two years. Women separated for more than two years were discontent with but "resigned" to their life situation and "in despair, focused their attention more exclusively upon daily survival." Their counterparts separated for less than two years had "feelings of independence," obtained jobs 20 or returned to school and generally attempted to gain control of their life situation. Obviously, single parenthood is a great burden in our society. There seems to be almost unanimous agreement among investigators as to the effects of separation from one's husband on the mother's feelings about her maternal role. Guilt, resentment and feelings of inadequacy are almost always present. Spock (1962) noted, from letters, from interviews in the office, from social conversations, I've been impres- sed with the degree of apprehension that women express when they talk about rearing children without a father. (p. 227) Similarly, Despert (1953) in discussing divorced parents who have brought their children to a clinic for counseling, stated, guilt is the first strong reaction expressed.... It shows itself in a variety of ways which nevertheless have a common denominator. "We must have failed somewhere " or "I guess I was not a good mother "..... This self accusation crops up in almost identical words in countless records. (p. 27) The relationship between guilt and resentment is ably stated by Kapit (1973): Guilt may in addition arise as a sequel of resentful thoughts toward the child, again very understandable. A child, besides bringing joy and comfort, is also a burden for a single parent. The thought that life could be easier without a child occurs at some time or another. But you are supposed to love your child - always - and resentful thoughts or wishes make for guilt and anxiety. It is hard to accept the fact that angry thoughts (not deeds) are a natural part of being human and alive. or 21 In father-absent families the guilt and resentment of the mother frequently creates problems in her child management techniques. Several authors have reported the prevalence of maternal overprotection and extremes in disciplinary measures. Tiller (1958; as cited in Hetherington and Deur, 1972) found that mothers of fatherless families place more emphasis on obedience, politeness, and conformity as contrasted to happi- ness and self-realization. They tended to be overprotective as well. Despert (1953) states that some parents fail to recognize their resentment toward their children and express it as excessive concern and overprotectiveness which is accompanied by anxiety which "beclouds issues and makes rational decisions for the child's welfare difficult to achieve.” Toomin (1974) explains the dynamics of this situation for divorced mothers. The mother is frequently preoccupied with her own adjustment, making her less available and less sensitive to her child. This creates a situation which pro- vokes anger in the child and allows him greater opportunity to break the family rules. When the mOther realizes the child has taken advantage of the situation, she may overreact and punishment may be unduly severe. However, after reflection, the mother feels guilty about punishing the child for her own problems and may frequently alleviate her guilt by being overconcerned about her child. Overpermis- siveness, the other extreme of discipline, frequently occurs 22 when the divorced mother attempts to compensate for the child's loss of his father. Overdependency (frequently the result of overprotection) seems to be particularly likely for boys who were separated from their fathers in their preschool years. Stendler (1954) found a significant number of father-absent overdependent children had been separated from their fathers in their first three years of life. This was explained by the lack of the counter-influence exerted by a father over the mother's overprotective tendencies and his active encouragement of independent activity. Apparently, overdependency is avoided by school age father-absent children because of the previously mentioned peer counterpressure offsetting the mother's influence. The conflict between peer culture and maternal influence has been noted by Biller elsewhere. There are additional data suggesting that mothers in father-absent homes, as compared to those in father-present homes, are less likely to treat their sons and daughters differently, and are less likely to encourage their sons to behave in a masculine manner or enter into masculine peer group activities. (Biller, 1970) Biller (1971) notes that some of the literature suggests a sociocultural distinction in maternal overprotection. Lower-class mothers, particularly Black mothers, appear to be too busy with survival and are subject to less of a stigma for being single than are middle-class mothers. 23 The middle-class mother may be more predisposed to feel guilty because her child particularly her son, is being deprived of a father. She may be more likely to try to make this up to the boy and overprotect and overindulge him. (Biller, 1971) rdzithers of father-absent families studied by Spock (1962) eaacpressed similar emotions in regard to their sons. The mother's attitude toward the feelings about her ritlsband, toward males in general, and her personality (:riaracteristics appear crucial to her children's sex role and emotional development. After reviewing several studies, Biller (1971) concluded: It seems reasonable to suppose that a mother could facilitate her father-absent boy's sex- role develOpment by having a positive attitude toward the absent father and males in general, and by consistently encouraging masculine be- havior in her son. Ffiirther he emphasized that, the mother can, by reinforcing specific responses and expecting masculine behavior, increase the boy's perception of the in- centive value of the masculine role. This, in turn, would seem to promote a positive view of males as salient and powerful, thus motivating the boy to imitate their behavior. Hetherington (1967) reached similar conclusions when looking at parental permissiveness. Permissiveness tends to be related to the masculine characteristics of activity, aggression, assertiveness, achievement, and independence. Restrictiveness leads to feminine characteristics of submissive- ness, dependency, compliance, politeness, conformity, and minimal aggression. This distinction between the effects of parental permissive- ness and restrictiveness is significant for father-absent d 24 <3hi1dren. The single mothers studied by Tiller (1958; as (zited in Hetherington and Deur, 1972) tended to emphasize obedience, politeness and conformity in their child rearing techniques . As noted earlier, the sex role development of father- 21k>sent females seems to be less disturbed than that of father- ext>sent males. However, this too is dependent upon the mother. Spock (19 62) stated , When it comes to the relationship between a husbandless mother and her daughter it will be similar to her relationship to her son in some respects, different in others. The mother is less apt to feel apprehensive about her ability to raise a daughter because she has learned about all there is to know about rearing a girl by having been one. (p. 235) Tfliis may account for the consistent findings of "no effects" for preschool and elementary school father-absent girls. Phowever, as Hetherington (1972) noted, differences do appear i1: adolescence between fatherless and father-present girls. llpon examination of divorcees, widows and mothers of intact fandlies in this study she found, All groups of mothers were equally feminine, reinforced daughters for sex-appropriate behaviors and surprisingly, had equally positive attitudes toward men. Since these mothers were offering their daughters appropriately feminine models and rewarding them for their assumption of the feminine role, the finding that there were no disruptions in traditional measures of sex typing for the father-absent girls is compatible with expectations of social learning theorists....It seems mainly in attitudes toward herself, her marriage, and her life that the divorcee differed from the widow. 25 She is anxious and unhappy. Her attitude toward her spouse is hostile; her memories of her marriage and life are negative. These attitudes are reflected in the critical attitude of her daughter toward the divorced father. Although she loves her daughter she feels she has had little support from other peOple during her divorce and times of stress and with her difficulties in rearing a child alone. This is in marked contrast to the positive attitudes of the widows toward marriage, their lost husbands, the emotional support of friends and family at the loss of a husband, and the gratification of having children. These attitudes are reflected in the happy memories their daughters have of their fathers. (Hetherington, 1972) As has already been noted, the mother's attitude toward unenles, if positive, can facilitate her son's masculine <3eevelopment (Biller, 1971). However, almost every article reeferring to the effects of father-absence on boys (Biller, 11371; Despert, 1953; McDermott, 1970; Neubauer, 1960; Wylie Euad Delgado, 1959) mentioned the extremely likely possibility (Df the mother unconsciously turning to her son as a substitute :for her husband and treating him in accordance with her attitudes toward the husband. When this happens the results «are usually devastating for her son. One pattern resulting from such a home situation can be called a "sexualized relationship" (Wylie and Delgado, 1959) between the father-absent boy and his mother. Kogelschatz, Adams and Tucker (1972) found some single mothers became extremely dependent on their sons. In addition, they proved to be the most affectionate, most seductive, and least abusive toward their children. Nearly one third of the father- less children, mostly boys, slept with 26 their mothers. In some ways, the oldest male child became a replacement for the absent father's companionship. In Wylie and Delgado's (1959) sample, nearly one half of the 13(33rs slept with their mothers. If an intense relationship eexrc>1ves, these boys may experience extreme difficulties in 'tlieair'sex role development, be unable to c0pe with his sexual ftaeelings toward his mother and develop a "defensive feminine ixieentification" (Neubauer, 1960). The entire pattern of distortion in the mother-son realbationship has been excellently presented by McDermott (1970): Anna Freud has observed that the reason why a broken family is destructive for a child's development is less in the absence of a parental figure of identification than in the fact that the remaining parent will tend to cast the child into the absent parent's place. In many cases it was quite openly evident that the mother forced the child to follow in his father's footsteps as she saw those footsteps. But usually there was an unconscious conspiracy of both mother and child, sometimes one more than the other, to recreate the lost father through the child's identification with his traits, leading, of course, to the mother- child struggles which brought them to the clinic. This often seemed to provide a mechanism through which she could continue to suffer and punish the father through the child. In many cases the mothers indicated how much they realized at the time of the divorce (or just afterward) that their child closely resembled his father.... In many cases...the child identified with [the] alternate antisocial image in the mother's thought, one in which acting out in order to recreate old situations was prominant. In these cases, the mother projected a super- imposed image of the father on the child as his pseudo-identity, setting out to prove the child delinquent, lazy, stupid, bad, immoral, sometimes driving the child to flights of 27 escape and, most commonly, fantasies that the father would rescue him. Thus he experienced secondary rejection for "part" of himself identified with the absent parent. There appeared to be a whole series of legendary exaggerations and projections built up layer after layer on these children, more easily accomplished because the father was unavailable, still living but "imaginary," gone but not really gone, unable to be continu- ously identified as real except on artificial visits. A similar pattern has been noted by several authors (I)eespert, 1953; Kogelschatz, Adams, and Tucker, 1972; Leader, 1960; Toomin, 1974; Wylie and Delgado, 1959). Crumley and Blumenthal (1973) found that the mother may even project her own traits onto the child. Sometimes the mother unconsciously encouraged aggressive acting out as an expression of her own anger toward her absent husband. III fact, these authors state they frequently had to help the Cfliild differentiate his reactions to the separation from his fixather's. Similarly, Trunnell (1968) found mothers who had theen separated from their husbands would frequently project ‘thedr childhood conflicts onto their sons if they had had an Ixnsatisfying relationship with their own father. If we can assume that such a case implies poor emotional adjustment, then Pedersen's (1966) finding that generally, the more diSturbed the mother, the greater the disturbance in her father-absent boy, appears to be a valid finding. Another way a mother can deter her child's development is described by a social worker: "Out of rage and vindictiveness, the mother may even deny, distort, or attempt to destroy the 28 relationship between father and children, although she is lgikely to be unaware of doing this" (Leader, 1973). In addition to the effects these patterns of inter- amcrtion have upon the child, many children have a sense of feeling used. Landis (1960) studied a large number of college students whose parents were divorced and found that 444 percent felt "used" by one or both parents. In conclusion, it seems that the results of father— absence for children, although affected by many variables such as sex and age at separation, are mediated through the remaining parent who is almost always the mother. Parental Perceptions The literature on parental perceptions is relatively Sparce. However, the majority of studies reviewed indicate tflaat perceptions of parents from intact families are rela- tzively accurate in regard to their children. Cotler and Shoemaker (1969) found that, "mothers...were able to describe iaccurately their son's performance relative to the other Imembers of the children's own cultural group" although there was a tendency to "normalize" their ratings of their children. Cowen et a1. (1970) compared parents' judgments of their child's adjustment with teacher judgments and various other indexes of adjustment. They found that overall the parents' juflgment correlated "in logical and systematic ways", with both the indexes and teachers' judgments. However, agreement was significantly and substantially greater for girls than 29 for boys. They conclude that, "for boys, what is entirely acceptable behavior at home may not be acceptable in the schools and vice versa." A study by Andre and Brown (1969) found that mothers' perceptions of their five and six year old boys' interests differed significantly from the interests expressed by the boys themselves on measures of active and quiet play. This was not the case for girls. Stedman, Clifford, and Spitznagel (1969) found that mothers and teachers of preschool children were able to agree in their ratings of academic readiness for girls but not for boys. This apparent discrepancy in per- ceptions of boys and girls seems to be in agreement with the literature on father-absence. For example, Santrock (1970), comparing father-absent and father-present children, found that "the maternal interview proved to be a more discrimin- ative device than the doll-play interview in revealing sex- typed behaviors." From this, we can only conclude that the mothers' perceptions were discriminating. There is no evi- dence that discrepancies existed between children. If the mother's perception is inaccurate, she may encourage in- appropriate behavior. A study by Osborn (1973) offers an explanation of how this might function. His study was on the adjustment of pupils whose parents were raised in cultures different from the one in which the child lives. If we assume that a mother in a father-absent family was raised as a female, and that she is culturally different from her son 30 by virtue of her femaleness. then we can consider the son a "transcultural" child. Osborn (1973) stated, the key to adjustive adequacy may lie in the parents' perception of the child, particularly the transcultural child, since the vital factor in transmitting the values by which adjustive adequacy is defined seems to be in how accurately the transmitter perceives the intended recipient in the recipient's pertinent sociocultural con- text - that is, the one in which he is learning to live and work. Accurate perception can then be followed by helping the trans- cultural child adopt adjustive modes congruent with his pertinent socioculture even if different from the parent's. Other studies have shown parents from intact families to be relatively accurate in their perceptions of their children. (Glidewell, Lomke, and Kantor, 1963; Ireton and Thwing, 1972; Medinnus, 1961; Wolfensberger and Kurtz, 1971). A few studies contradict these findings but only rela- tively. Serot and Teevan (1961) found no relationship be- tween parental perception and their offspring's adjustment. When a Q-sort was administered to various professionals and parents of disturbed children and normal siblings there was significantly less agreement among judges for the disturbed child than for the normal one. This is not contradictory to the previously cited findings if one assumes disturbed children's behavior tends to be erratic (Miller, 1964). A study by Medinnus and Johnson (1970) found this same dis- parity. Using a semantic differential scale, these authors found the discrepancy between parents of poorly-adjusted 31 children (as judged by their teachers) and their kindergarten teachers, in describing the child on a wide range of adjectives, was significantly greater than the discrepancy between parents and teachers of well-adjusted children. The authors explained, "Parents and the teacher of poorly-adjusted children hold differing expectations for him which in turn produce incon— sistencies in his behavior." Lederman and Blain (1972) found that teachers of young children provided more valid information in regard to the children's developmental status than did the children's mothers. However, these authors note that the measures used were somewhat ambiguous and confusing to the parents. Thus, we have evidence, though not overwhelming, that parents from intact families perceive their children with a fair degree of accuracy. There appears to be no literature on the effects of loss of spouse on the remaining parent's perception of his/her children. Summary An extensive review of the literature on father-absence was presented in this chapter. Included in the discussion was the effect that separation from one's husband has upon mothers and how this, in turn, effects the mother-child relationship. Mothers' perceptions of their children were of particular interest and were discussed in terms of the literature on this topic specifically. The procedures and hypotheses of this study are presented in the next chapter. CHAPTER THREE METHODOLOGY This chapter will present a detailed account of the research setting, the sample studied, and the general pro- cedures utilized in data collection and analysis, including a discussion of the instrument used. In addition, the study's hypotheses are specifically stated. The Research Setting This study was conducted in a day care center located in the heart of a middle-sized city in Michigan with a pOp- ulation of approximately 200,000. The day care center ser- vices between thirty-five and fifty children who range in age between two and one-half years old and eight years old. The majority are five years old or younger and attending for a full day. The older children attend for a half day and spend half a day in kindergarten. Some children are at the center after a full day of school. The families utilizing the day care center represent a heterogeneous group. The majority of families could be characterized as lower middle class economically, with almost all having at least one full-time working member. In families where the mother is not working full-time, she either works part-time and/or is a student. There are no professionals 32 33 among the parents sending their children to the center. The population of the center is approximately 80 percent white, 20 percent Black, and a few Spanish-speaking families. The day care staff is composed of a director, two teachers and eight aides, all of whom are female. Two aides are Black; the other members of the staff are white. One teacher to- gether with four aides is responsible for the younger group of children. The second teacher with four aides works with the older group. A teacher and two aides from each group participated in this study. The teachers are responsible for the supervision and organization of the center. They are, in addition, respon- sible for the planning and evaluation of the long range activ- ities for all the children. The aides are responsible for working with a teacher in carrying out the plans. The aides work primarily with small groups. One of the teachers had been with this center for four years and the other was beginning her second year there. In contrast, three of the four aides had been employed at this center for five months or less. The only aide who had com- pleted a year's work in the center was a teenager, consider- ably younger than the rest of the staff. The Sample Of a possible thirty-eight subjects, the final sample centained thirty-five subjects. Twenty mothers were married and fifteen were single. The three potential subjects who 34 did not respond were, according to the Director, married mothers who did not differ significantly from those mothers who did respond. Table 3.1 gives a demographic description of these two groups and the information is summarized in Table 3.2. The sample contained a total of eighteen boys and seventeen girls. Nine boys and six girls composed the single mother group and nine boys and eleven girls composed the married mother group. The children ranged in age from 34 months to 77 months. The mean age for children in the single mother group was 55.6 months. 58.0 months was the mean age for children of married mothers. The mean age for boys in both groups was 55.22 months compared to a mean age of 58.55 months for girls. Similar results were obtained for within group comparisons. The racial mixture of both groups was essentially similar. Both groups were predominantly white and each contained two Black children. In addition, one Hispanic child was in the married mother group. The largest difference between the two groups was in total family income. Nine married mothers but only one single mother reported figures in the category "$18,000 and over." In contrast, seven single mothers reported incomes of less than $6,000 a year while all the married mothers were above this income level. Almost all of the mothers were employed. Nineteen of the twenty married mothers had jobs, fifteen of whom, worked full-time. Similarly, ten of the fifteen single mothers 235 TABLE 3.1 DEMOGRAPHIC INFORMATION Single Mothe I'S (n-15) Child Sex Age Racea Siblings Total Familv Mother's # (mos.) M F Annual Income Occupational (in 1,000'5) Statusb 1 M 47 W 0 1 6-9 F 2 M 50 B l 1 3-6 F 3 M 53 W 1 0 9-12 P, S 4 M 53 W 0 0 6-9 F 5 M 56 W O 0 6-9 F 6 M 56 B O 0 6-9 F 7 M 58 W 0 0 0-3 P, S 8 M 61 W 2 1 6-9 F 9 M 62 W 0 0 3-6 P 10 F 40 W 0 0 3-6 F 11 F 51 W 0 0 0-3 F 12 F 52 W 0 0 0-3 S 13 F 56 W 0 0 3-6 F 14 F 66 W 0 0 12-15 F 15 F 73 W 0 1 18+ 3 Married Mothers (n-ZO) Child Sex Age Racea Siblings Total Family Mother's # (mos.) M F Annual Income Occupational (in 1,000'3) Statusb l M 34 W 1 1 18+ P 2 M 43 W 0 0 9-12 F 3 M 52 B 0 0 6-9 F 4 M 53 W 0 0 6—9 P. S 5 M 57 W 0 0 6-9 F 6 M 63 W l 0 18+ F 7 M 64 W l 3 9-12 F 8 M 64 W 0 1 18+ F 9 M 68 W 0 0 9-12 P 10 F 43 W 0 0 18+ F 11 F 48 W 0 0 18+ F 12 F 58 W 0 0 18+ F 13 F 59 W 1 0 18+ P 14 F 59 W 0 1 18+ F 15 F 60 W 0 1 18+ F 16 F 62 H 0 0 9-12 F 17 F 65 W 1 2 12-15 U 18 F 65 W 1 1 9—12 F 19 F 66 B 0 2 18+ F 20 F 77 W 0 0 18+ F aW=White, B=Black, H-Hispanic bstull-time, P=part-time, S=student, U=unemployed 36 TABLE 3.2 DEMOGRAPHIC SUMMARY Descriptor Single Married Total Sex boys 9 9 18 girls 6 ll 17 Total 15 20 35 Age in months (mean) . ' . boys 55.11 55.33 55.22 girls 56.33 60.18 58.82 Total 55.60 58.00 56.97 Race . White 13 17 30 Black 2 2 4 Hispanic 0 1 l Siblings (mean) .53 .95 .74 Total Family Income (mean) $5,400. $13,650. $10,114. Mother's Occupational Status Employed full-time 10 15 25 Employed part-time l 3 4 Employed part-time and student 2 l 3 Student 2 0 2 Unemployed 0 1 1 37 held full-time jobs. Two of the single mothers were students and two more were both students and part-time employees. One married umther fit the latter category. This is of signifi- cance for this study. Since all but three mothers in the total sample are employed and two of the three are students, it is suggested that the mother's Opportunity to observe her child, and thus form her perceptions of him, was roughly equivalent for the two groups. Other related sample information is the number of siblings and others in the household. Single households ranged from 0 to 3 siblings of the child being studied while the married households ranged from 0 to 4 siblings. On the average, the children of married mothers had almost twice as many siblings as did the single mother group. Two boys in the single mother group had one older male sibling and one boy had two older male siblings. Married households were composed of the nuclear family members exclusively. One single household in- cluded the child's grandparents, one had a married couple living in, and one single household had two younger male cousins. The single mother group contained ten divorced women, four separated women, and one woman who had never been married. The average length of separation from the mother's husband, excluding the "never married" woman, was 19.14 months with a range of six months to sixty-three months. 38 The Instrument The instrument used was a revised form of the "Children's Behavior Checklist." The original checklist was developed by Dr. Lucy Ferguson of the Department of Psychology of Michigan State University (see Appendix A). In its original form, the checklist contained 154 behavioral items and required the person completing it to first check all items which pertained to the child in question. Then, the person was instructed to go through the items a second time, checking in a separate column, those items which are characteristic of the child. The checklist was constructed for use in the Michigan State Psychological Clinic. Revisions With the corroboration of two experts in child develOp- ment, the author deleted 59 items from the original check- list. The criteria for deletion were as follows: items per- taining to physical development, redundant items, items which dealt with severe emotional and behavioral problems, and items dealing with areas of development which seemed over- represented in the checklist. A second revision was to change the response format from the original to a three point Likert-type rating scale, in the form of: 39 where: "1" means the child does not behave this way or does not apply; "2" means the child occasionally behaves this way; and "3" means the child frequently behaves this way. Certain items had to be rewritten so as to fit the response format. For example, "Never goes out of the way to help others, even when asked" was changed to "Doesn't go out of the way to help others, even when asked." Five items were added to the checklist to more directly probe sex-role development. They are listed below. Item # Item 9 Behavior is appropriate for his (her) sex. 24 Will dress up in adult clothes of the same sex. 42 Prefers quiet activities. 54 Enjoys play roles requiring taking care of others. 71 Prefers playing with cars and trucks to dolls. The final revised checklist contained 100 items (see Appendix B). Scale Construction Items were placed in one of the following categories: sex role development, peer relationships, self-concept, autonomy-dependence, and emotional adjustment. In addition, there were eight items which were included in the checklist but did not meet the criteria for any of the scales. Criteria for the Sex Role Development Scale--A1though the concept of sex-typed or sex-appropriate behaviors is 40 currently undergoing critical scrutiny by researchers and teachers of child development, as well as by many women's groups, most parents raise their children according to society's stereotypes for sex-appropriate behavior (Fagot, 1974). Therefore, the criteria for item selection for the Sex Role Deve10pment Scale were those items which reflected the stereotypes held for boys and girls in American society, namely: males in our society are expected to be independent, dominant, assertive, and competent in dealing with problems in the environment. In contrast, females are viewed as more submissive, nurturant and sensitive in the social situations. (Hetherington and Deur, 1972) In several cases, items which met these stereotypical descriptions also qualified for placement in other scales. In such cases the author tried to place the item in the scale which best represented the essence of the item. The final Sex Role Development Scale contained eight items (see Appendix C). Criteria for the Peer Relationships Scale--Items were placed in this scale if they dealt specifically with inter- actional behaviors such as the presence or absence of approach behaviors, e.g., "Doesn't go out of his (her) way to make friends." Items dealing with the quality of inter- action were also placed in this scale. An example is, "Very critical of others--telling others what is wrong with them." The final Peer Relationship Scale contained twenty-five items (see Appendix D). 41 Criteria for Self-Concept Scale--Those items which specifically referred to the child's feelings about himself or strongly implied such were included in this scale. An example of the latter is, "Becomes embarrassed when praised for doing something well." The final Self-Concept Scale con- tained nine items (see Appendix E). Criteria for Autonomy-Dependence Scale--Autonomy and dependence were broadly defined for this scale. Autonomy refers to behaviors which are primarily assertive and indepen- dent of adult supervision. Examples of items concerning autonomy are, "Able to stand up for himself" and "Seems com- fortable in new situations." Conversely, dependent behavior is characterized by the need and desire for adult intervention and supervision. "Asks for help on tasks that he (she) can Very well do on his (her) own" is an example. The final Autonomy-Dependence Scale contained twenty-two items (see APpendix F) . Criteria for Emotional Adjustment Scale--This scale represented a broad range of behaviors. The scale contained items pertaining to: impulse control, use of physical aggres- sion, use of prosocial aggression (e.g. tattling) , presence or absence of various affect states, moodiness, appropriate emotional responses, intensity and degree of flexibility in activities, etc. Some examples of items, are: "Can't wait, mist have things immediately," "Laughs or smiles," and "Seems unable to change way of doing things." The final Emotional Adj ustment Scale contained twenty-eight items (see Appendix G). 42 Checklist Reliability A pilot study was conducted to ascertain the checklist's reliability. The checklist was completed by a sample of twenty-five subjects who were Kindergarten teachers, nursery school teachers and parents of nursery school age children. Hoyt's reliability estimates (a measure of internal consistency) were computed for the total checklist and for each scale. The results are presented in Table 3.3. Table 3.3 Checklist and Scale Reliability H of Reliability Standard Error items Total Checklist 100 .94 6.23 Sex Role Development 8 .56 1.63 Peer Relationships 25 . 8 3 3 . 07 Se lf-Concept 9 . 59 1 . 48 Autonomy-Dependence 22 . 70 2 . 90 Emotional Adjustment 28 . 92 3 . 10 \ Note that the reliability estimates for the Sex Role Development Scale and the Self-Concept Scale were somewhat depressed due to the presence of certain items upon which 6111 or almost all respondents agreed, thus reducing group variance (as indicated by the low standard errors) and de- flating the reliability figure. These items were retained in their respective scales because discrepancies between parents and day care personnel on such items would be instructive for the purposes of‘this study. 43 Analysis of Data The independent variables of the study are mother's nnéixiital status (single vs. married) and sex of the child. Crimea dependent variable is the "agreement score" on the revised (Zrljgldren's Behavior Checklist. This is to be derived by taking the absolute difference between the mother's item Socre and the day care teacher's item score and then summing Over all items. The same holds true for comparison between mOther's and aide's item scores. Hypotheses to be Tested Hypothesis 1: Married mothers' perceptions of their young Cflxildren's behavior, as measured by the revised Children's Behavior Checklist, will be in greater agreement with the Perceptions of day care personnel than will be the percep- tions of single mothers. Sub-hypothesis 1: Married mothers' perceptions of their Ytnang children's behavior, as measured by the revised Child- remi's Behavior Checklist, will be in greater agreement with the perceptions of day care personnel than will be the per- Ce*Ptions of single mothers for each of the following scales: (a) Sex Role Development (b) Peer Relationships (c) Self-Concept (d) Automony-Dependence (e) Emotional Adjustment 44 Hypothesis 2: Single mothers' perceptions of their daughters, as measured by the revised Children's Behavior (Illeeciklist, will be in greater agreement with the perceptions C>f5 ciay care personnel than will be single mothers' percep- tions of their sons. Sub-hypothesis 2: Single mothers'-perceptions of their daughters, as measured by the revised Children's Behavior Cflheecklist, will be in greater agreement with the perceptions C>f7 day care personnel than will be single mothers' perceptions C>f? their sons for each of the following scales: (a) Sex Role Development (b) Peer Relationships (c) Self-Concept (d) Autonomy-Dependence (e) Emotional Adjustment Data Collection Perceptions of mothers and day care personnel were obtained b)’ their completion of the revised Children's Behavior Check- liest. For every child observed, a checklist was completed b3’ the child's mother, day care teacher, and day care aide. The checklist was distributed in individual envelopes and given to all the mothers whose children were in attendance at time center at the time of the study (38). The envelopes con- tliiined a cover sheet (see Appendix H), an information sheet (See Appendix I) and the checklist. In an effort to insure 45 confidentiality, each child was arbitrarily assigned a number between one and forty. These numbers were placed in the areas requesting the child's name. The mothers were instructed nOt to write the child's name on either the checklist or the in formation sheet. In addition, mothers were instructed to seal the envelope before returning it. . Scoring The "agreement score" discussed above was obtained in the following manner. Items marked "Does not behave this way Or does not apply" (point 1 on the rating scale) received a Score of "1". Items marked "Occasionally behaves this way" (point 2 on the rating scale) received a score of "2". Items marked "Frequently behaves this way" (point 3 on the rating SCale) received a score of "3". This was done for each of the three checklists per child. The agreement score was tfiller; obtained by taking the absolute value of the difference between the mother's score on each item and the teacher's Score for that same item. The resulting item figures were then summed to yield a total agreement score per child. The Saune procedure was followed for mother and aide scores. Thus tOtal agreement between mother and teacher (or aide) yielded a score of "0"; total disagreement yielded a maximum score of "200". It had originally been anticipated that the teacher's and aide' 3 ratings could be combined . To Check the feasability 46 of such an operation, interrater reliabilities were obtained for the scores of the teachers and aides. The overall inter- rater reliability was computed as were the teacher-aide inter- rater reliabilities for single and married mothers and for boys and girls. The overall interrater reliability was .63, the interrater reliability for the teachers and aides of the single mother group was .65 and for the married mother group, .58. The interrater reliabilities were .62 and .54 for boys and girls, respectively. The writer judged these figures to be too low to combine scores and therefore, performed separate analyses for mother- teacher data and mother-aide data. Data Analysis Procedures The statistical analysis of the data utilized a 2 (marital status) x 2 (sex of child) design. A two way analysis of variance with unequal cell sizes was utilized to test for differences for Hypothesis 1 and Sub-hypothesis 1. For Hypothesis 2 and Sub-hypothesis 2, a simple effects model of the two way analysis of variance was used, where sex was nested in status. Utilization of unequal cell sizes required that the assumption of equality of variance be statistically confirmed. Accordingly, "F max" tests (Kirk, 1968) were performed. The mother-teacher data met the assumption of equality of variances but the mother-aide data did not. Therefore, square 47 root and log transformations (Kirk, 1968) were performed on the mother-aide data in an effort to meet the equality of variance assumption. This effort was unsuccessful.. Therefore, the Wilcoxon-Mann-Whitney test for two independent samples (Cbnover, 1971) was used for all mother-aide data analyses. Summary In this chapter the research setting was discussed and sample descriptors were described in detail. The study's hypotheses were stated and the development of the research instrument was specifically discussed. Also covered was the ciistribution and collection of the data. The statistical ferocedures necessary for analysis of the data were reviewed :Ln this chapter. The results of these procedures are pre- sented in the next chapter. CHAPTER FOUR RESULTS The findings for the hypotheses of this study are pre- sented in this chapter. As discussed in Chapter Three, it was hoped that the Pernzeptions of the day care teacher and aide might be com- biJIed.so that the mother's perception would be compared to a~mo .um some .>mo .um some whomowz om": man: mnmnuoz omwuuoz mumruoz mamcwm H.v mamea Bzmzmmmwd mmmvdelmmmBOZ 52 On the Emotional Adjustment Scale, discrepancy scores for single mothers were significantly greater than for married mothers, as predicted (mean discrepancy scores 14.00 and 10.30, respectively; p <.0431). Close examination of the Emotional Adjustment Scale revealed the following results. Fifteen of the Scale's twenty-eight items had substantial discrepancies between the single and married group. Three themes seem to emerge from these items. Two of the themes are logically interrelated. One theme might be described as a willingness to show and extend one's emotions to others. Two items exemplify this theme. On the item, "Is concerned about feelings of others", 47 percent of the single mothers disagreed with the teachers while only 15 percent of the married mothers disagreed with the teachers. Sixty percent of the single mothers compared to 35 percent of the married mothers disagreed with the teachers' rating on the item, "Doesn't like to let others know how he (she) feels." Single mothers perceived their children as less willing to expose or share their feelings than did the teachers. The children of married mothers were perceived by both their mothers and teachers as more fre- quently expressing emotion and concern about others. Depending on how the child actually behaves in regard to the above theme, the people around him would find it more or less difficult to know his feelings. 53 The second theme over which there was consistent dis- crepancy between single and married mothers' agreement with the day care teacher was the child's affect state. For example, 33 percent of the single mothers disagreed with the teacher compared to 5 percent of the married mothers on item 48, "Very moody-sad one minute and happy the next." A similar response was obtained for the item, "Seems sad and unhappy." The single mother-teacher discrepancy was not in one direction. Some single mothers perceived their children as more happy than did the teachers, while others perceived their children as less happy or moody. Married mothers, in agreement with teachers, perceived their children as infrequently sad or moody. Single mothers perceived their children as slightly more frightened than married mothers perceived their children. The teachers saw both groups of children as less frequently frightened than the mothers saw them. i The third theme, also somewhat related to the other two, involves degree of emotional control. On one hand, to the item, "Doesn't fight back when other people attack him (her)", 80 percent of the single mothers disagreed with the teachers to only 40 percent disagreement among married mothers. On the other hand, 67 percent of single mothers but only 50 percent of the married mothers disagreed with the teacher on item 15, "Rebels when routine is upset." The teachers generally perceived the children as less passive and meek than both groups of mothers but did not perceive them as 54 overly impulsive. This difference in perception was more acute for single mothers than for married mothers. Item 5, "Gets irritated or angry easily", presents an interesting contrast. Forty percent of the single mothers but 80 percent of the married mothers disagreed with the teacher on this item. Mothers perceived their children as getting irritated or angry far more frequently than did teachers. Nine items of the Emotional Adjustment Scale represented relatively little discrepancy between the two groups. These items seem rather obvious and represent more extreme types of behavior. For example, most children without severe emotional problems laugh, smile, and are enthusiastic (items 18 and 86). Similarly most children don't have uncontrollable outbursts of anger (item 65). Mother (Married and Single)-Teacher Comparison When parents, regardless of status, were compared to teachers, five items emerged as high discrepancy items and four as low discrepancy items. Four of the five high dis- crepancy items are items which discriminated between single and married mothers as well. The items are: "Rebels when routine is upset", "Doesn't fight back when other people attack him (her)", "Gets carried away by his (her) feelings, acts on them right away", "Easily scared", and "Easily disappointed." 55 The four items upon which there was high agreement be- tween all were: "Laughs or smiles", "Doesn't get excited about anything, even when you would expect him (her) to be pleased with something", "Seems angry for no particular reason, expresses it in many different ways", and "Shows pleasure and involvement in most things he (she) does--enthusiastic." Although a significant difference was found only on the Emotional Adjustment Scale, there was a tendency toward greater agreement (smaller means) between married mothers and teachers when compared to the agreement between single mothers and teachers on fifteen of eighteen comparisons (see Table 4.1). Mother-Aide Agreement The results for the mother-aide analysis are summarized in Table 4.2. No significant differences were found when the agreement between single mothers and aides was compared to the agree- ment between married mothers and aides on scales measuring the following areas of behavior: sex role development, peer relationships, self-concept, autonomy-dependence, and emotional adjustment. Hypothesis 2: Single mothers' perceptions of their daughters, as measured by the revised Children's Behavior Checklist, will be in greater agreement with the perceptions of day care personnel than will be single mothers' perceptions of their sons. 56 TABLE 4.2 MOTHER-AIDE AGREEMENT Measure Mean Agreement Score T' Single Married _ n=15 n=20 W15,2o"101 Checklist . boys (mean=46.17) 46.22 46.11 girls (mean=48.88) 49.67 48.45 Total 47.60 47.40 159 Sex Role boys (mean=8.16) 4.44 11.88 girls (mean=4.00) 3.83 4.09 Total 4.20 7.60 137 Peer Relationships boys (mean=12.95) 9.00 16.89 girls (mean=12.76) 15.33 11.36 Total 11.53 13.85 135.5 Self-Concept boys (mean=5.28) 3.56 7.00 girls (mean=3.47) 2.83 3.82 Total 3.27 5.25 111 Autonomy-Dependence boys (mean=12.00) 12.00 12.00 girls (mean=ll.65) 9.83 12.64 Total 11.13 12.35 124.5 Emotional Adjustment boys (mean=13.06) 12.56 13.56 girls (mean=12.29) 13.33 11.73 Total 12.87 12.55 181.5 T' must be LESS THAN W=101 to be significant at the .05 level. 57 Mother-Teacher-Agreement The mean agreement score for daughters of single mothers was 54.17 and 55.00 was the mean agreement score for sons of single mothers. The difference was not significant (p less than .9030). Mother-Aide Agreement As with the single-mother-teacher analysis, the mean agreement score for sons of single mothers did not differ significantly from the mean agreement score for daughters of single mothers. The mean agreement scores were 46.22 and 49.67 for sons and daughters of single mothers, respectively. Sub-hypothesis 2: Single mothers' perceptions of their daughters, as measured by the revised Children's Behavior Checklist, will be in greater agreement with the perceptions of day care personnel than will be single mothers' per- ceptions of their sons for each of the following scales: (a) Sex Role Development (b) Peer Relationships (c) Self-Concept (d) Autonomy-Dependence (e) Emotional Adjustment Mother-Teacher Agreement No significant differences were observed for any of the scales, nor could any pattern be discerned. One scale, however, is of interest. The mean agreement score for sons ’ 58 TABLE 4.3 SINGLE MOTHER-TEACHER AGREEMENT FOR BOYS VS. GIRLS Measure F less than Checklist .0151 .9030 Sex Role Development .2833 .0661 Peer Relationships 3.6307 .2042 Self-Concept 1.0172 .3210 Autonomy-Dependence 1.6830 .3155 Emotional Adjustment 1.0411 .5984 59 TABLE 4.4 SINGLE MOTHER-AIDE AGREEMENT FOR BOYS vs. GIRLS Measure Boys Girls T' W6'9=13 Checklist 46.22 49.67 29.5 Sex Role DevelOpment 4.44 3.83 30.5 Peer Relationships 9.00 15.33 49.5 Self-Concept 3.56 2.83 26.5 Autonomy-Dependence 12.00 9.83 21.0 Emotional Adjustment 12.56 13.33 32.0 T' must be LESS THAN W =13 to be significant at the .05 level 6,9 60 Of single mothers on the Sex Role Development Scale was 4.78 while the daughters' mean agreement score on this scale was 3.50. The probability of this difference being significant was less than .0661. The mother-teacher findings for Hypothesis 2 and Sub- hypothesis 2 are summarized in Table 4.3. Mother-Aide Agreement The difference between groups was not found to be signi- ficant for any Of the scales as indicated in Table 4.4. The mean agreement scores were within one point of each other on three Of the scales: Sex Role Development, Self-Concept, and Emotional Adjustment. On the Peer Relationships scale, single mothers' per- ceptions Of their sons were in considerably greater agreement with day care aides than were their perceptions of their daughters, though not significantly so. The mean agreement score for sons of single mothers on this scale was 9.00 compared to 15.33 for daughters of single mothers. The reverse can be Observed on the Autonomy-Dependence Scale. Sons Of single mothers had a mean score Of 12.00 and daughters of single mothers had a mean score Of 9.83. Summary In this chapter, the results for the two hypotheses and two sub-hypotheses Of this study were presented. Hypothesis 1, Hypothesis 2 and Sub-hypothesis 2 could not be statistically 61 supported. Four Of the five scales in Sub-hypothesis 1 yielded no significant differences when the agreement between single mothers and teachers was compared to the agreement between married mothers and teachers. Only on the Emotional Adjustment Scale was a significant difference found. CHAPTER FIVE DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS Discussion of Findings When the agreement between single mothers and teachers was compared to the agreement between married mothers and teachers, on a checklist sampling a broad range Of children's behavior, no differences between groups were detected. An analysis of scales measuring perceptions of sex role develop- ment, peer relationships, self-concept, and autonomy-depen- dence revealed no differences in agreement between single mother-teacher perceptions and married mother-teacher per- ceptions. However, as predicted, married mothers agreed with teachers significantly more Often than single mothers in their perceptions Of their children's emotional adjustment. In a parallel series Of comparisons, predictions were made regarding the agreement between mothers and day care aides. NO significant differences emerged as a result of these comparisons. Mother-Day_Care Personnel Agreement When the agreement between single mothers and day care personnel was compared to the agreement between married mothers and day care personnel, significant differences were 62 63 not found between groups on the total checklist nor on measures Of sex role development, peer relationships, self-concept or autonomy-dependence. One conclusion one might draw from such a finding is that mothers, regardless Of their marital status, perceive their children with equal accuracy in the areas of behavior measured. In light of these findings, the question arises, "Have the many societal supports for single parents, which have proliferated during the past few years, reduced the burden associated with single parenthood?" Several factors, however, which may have influenced the results should be analyzed. The first and possible strongest influence appears to stem from two interrelated factors. This study utilized an extremely small sample. In addition, two Of the scales, Sex Role Development and Self-Concept, had very few items (eight and nine, respectively) which severely limited the group variance. This tended to limit the possibility of detecting differences between groups. Evidence Of this can be seen when one looks at the number Of items in each scale and the probability of differences between groups on that Scale. The probability of detecting differences between groups on the Emotional Adjustment Scale, the largest scale, was less than .04 compared to the probability Of detecting differences on the Sex Role Development Scale (p less than .83). While differences may not exist on the Sex Role Development Scale, one cannot say this with a strong degree 64 Of confidence due to the limited variability caused by so few items. A strong indication that the difference detected on the Emotional Adjustment Scale is meaningfully as well as statistically significant, is demonstrated by the finding that a significant difference was not detected for the total checklist, which was Obviously the largest measure Of all. If statistical differences were solely a function Of the number of items, the differences between groups would be greatest for the total checklist. Another possible explanation for no differences between groups might be found in the day care center itself. Perhaps communication between parents and teachers had minimized the differences in their perceptions Of the children's be- havior. Indeed, if single mothers are as overconcerned about their children as the literature indicates, one might hypothesize that they have taken extra steps to inquire about their children's progress in the center. One final explanation for a lack of difference between single mothers and married mothers may be the children themselves. There is evidence that the child's action will help shape his parents' behavior toward him (Osofsky and O'Connell, 1972). A logical extension Of this finding is that the child's behavior affects his parents' perceptions as well. If this is true, the lack of distinction between groups may be due to the father-absent children's exposure to the socializing influence Of the day care center, and 65 particularly so for boys. Several researchers (Hetherington and Deur, 1972; Biller and Borstelmann, 1967) suggest that the presence of male peers may help counteract the effects of father-absence. After a year at the day care center, the father-absent boys have had continuous exposure to male peers and may have altered their mothers' perceptions of them. Single Mothers' Perceptions of their Sons and Daughters It was predicted that single mothers' perceptions of their daughters would agree to a greater extent with the per- ceptions of teachers than would single mothers' perceptions of their sons. The findings of this study could not support this prediction. On some measures, the agreement was greater over the sons' behavior and on other measures the agreement was greater for daughters. However, despite the small number of items, there is an indication that differences may exist on the Sex Role Development Scale. Teacher-Aide Agreement Teachers and aides agreed moderately in their perceptions of the children's behavior. One possible explanation for this lack of strong agreement may be found in examining the differ- ences in the length of time the teachers have worked in this setting as compared to the aides. Three of the four aides have spent five months or less at this center. In contrast, one teacher has been with the center for four years and the other for a period of more than one year. 66 Emotional Adjustment Scale--Single-Mother-Teacher Discrepancies Ifi' The agreement between the perceptions of single mothers and day care personnel did not differ from the agreement be- tween married mothers and day care personnel on four of five scales of children's behavior. However, there were discrep- ancies between the single mother's perception of her child's emotional adjustment and the teacher's perception of the child's adjustment. A close examination of the nature of these discrepancies follows. The area of greatest single mother-teacher discrepancy was emotional control. The single mothers saw their children as more impulsive and as more likely to act out than did the teachers. This finding offers a possible explanation to the findings of Mischel (1961), Santrock and Wohlford (1970), and Crumley and Blumenthal (1973). Mischel and Santrock and Wohlford found father-absent elementary-aged boys were more impulsive and less able to delay immediate gratification than father-present boys. Crumley and Blumenthal found that single mothers sometimes encouraged acting out in their children. A substantial number of single mothers viewed their children as not fighting back when attacked, easily scared, easily disappointed, and prone to having their feelings hurt. The teachers did not perceive the children as displaying these behaviors as frequently as did the mothers. This may explain 67 the finding of several researchers (Biller, 1970, 1971; Despert, 1953; Hetherington and Deur, 1972; Stendler, 1954) that mothers in father-absent homes tend to be overprotective, of their children. The single mothers in this study, perceived their children as less open emotionally and more selfish than did the teachers. Wylie and Delgado (1959), McDermott (1970) and several other researchers have noted an intensification of the mother-son relationship when father-absence is due to divorce or separation. In light of these studies, the mothers' perceptions may be interpreted as an indication that the single mothers would like their children to share their emotions to an even greater extent than they do presently, in an effort to draw them closer. Single mothers also differed from teachers in their perceptions of the children's affect state. There was not a consistent pattern between mothers and teachers. Some mothers perceived their children as more unhappy than did the teachers while some perceived the opposite. The same was true of the child's perceived moodiness. Single mothers did see their children as being more frequently frightened and more sensitive. Thus McDermott's (1970) claim that depression was present in all the children of single mothers he observed, cannot be explained by maternal perceptions. Perhaps the greater anxiety found in father-absent boys studied by McCord, McCord and Thurber (1962), and Koch (1961), may be 68 explained by single mothers' perceptions of their children as being more frightened. As noted by Sullivan (1953) the child becomes anxious through his relationship with his mother. A substantial number of the single mothers perceived their children as "hating to lose" more frequently than observed by the teachers. This may be an indication that single mothers perceived their children as having poorer self- concepts since children who hate to lose frequently have an intense need to win in order to maintain a tenuous self-image; losing is interpreted as a blow to the entire personality. This seems to be in accord with Rouman's (1956) finding that children in one parent families tend to have a "poor sense of personal worth." Emotional Adjustment Scale-- Single Mother-Married Mother Discrepancies When single mothers were compared to married mothers, many of the same trends emerged as when single mothers were compared to teachers. Married mothers perceived their children as showing greater concern for others' feelings. They also tended to see their children as less selfish, although the vast majority of mothers, both married and single, perceived their children as occasionally selfish. Single mothers tended to perceive their children as slightly more rigid than married mothers perceived their children. Twice as many single mothers perceived their 69 children as occasionally "unable to change their way of doing things" and a similar proportion of single to married mothers viewed their children as frequently "hating to lose." An indication of a tendency toward overprotection among single mothers can be seen in their response to the item "Easily scared." Sixty-five percent of the married mothers indicated that their children were not easily scared compared to forty-seven percent of the single mothers. Moreover, twenty-eight percent of the single mothers saw their children as frequently scared compared to only ten percent of the married mothers. These perceptions, although they relate to only one aspect of the child's behavior, may begin to hinder the child's adjustment and influence the child in the direction of the mother's perceptions (Osborn, 1973; Gecas, Calonico and Thomas, 1974). Recommendations for Future Research There is some indication in this study, that the economic level does not affect maternal perceptions. Single mothers' total family income was substantially less than the incomes 0f the families of married mothers, yet there were no differ- ences between the two groups on five of the six measures. l3efore such a conclusion can be drawn, however, a study should lbe conducted in which socio-economic level is rigorously con- ‘trolled. Such an investigation should include the educational and occupational level of the participants. 70 One limitation of the study was the small sample size which tended to hinder the detection of differences between groups. A larger sample would provide a more thorough ex- amination of the trends suggested by this study. Future research which includes controlled and systematic : observation of the children themselves, in addition to the / perceptions of mothers and day care personnel, would be extremely enlightening. This would enable the researcher to gain a closer and more critical view into the nature of the perceptions of the significant adults in the child's life. Another study on father-absence might divide the children into those who are "well adjusted" and those who are "poorly adjusted." Medinnus and Johnson (1970) found that the parents and teachers of those children judged as poorly adjusted disagreed in their ratings of these children to a greater extent than parents and teachers of well adjusted children. Dividing the children in such a manner would act as a control and at the same time provide insight into the relative adjustment of children of single mothers compared to children with two parents living at home. An interview with the mothers should be an element in- cluded in any further study on father-absence. Some of the more critical areas which might be investigated are: the quality of the marital relationship, prior to separation in the case of single mothers; present home conditions; the nature and extent of any relationships the single mother may 71 have with adult males; the degree of contact the child presently has with the father. This last point may be particularly important since Landy, Rosenberg, and Sutton- Smith (1969) found that where there was little contact between father and child (a degree of father-absence) in two parent families, the child was adversely affected. Another area worthy of investigation is the mother's personality. Several researchers (Biller, 1971; Hetherington and Deur, 1972; McCord, McCord and Thurber, 1962) suggest that a critical factor in the father-absent child's develop- ment is the strength of the mother's personality and her emotional stability. One final recommendation is for research on the topic of single fatherhood. Little if any literature can be found on the dynamics of single father-child relationships. This entire area becomes more relevant as the courts begin to realize that granting custody to the mother, as Opposed to the father, is not always in the best interest of the child. Summary The findings of this study were discussed in this chapter. Several factors were indicated as contributing to the finding of no differences between groups for the majority of areas under study. Mothers' perceptions of their children's emotional adjustment were discussed in detail and generally correspond to the findings of previous research. The impli- cations for future research were discussed and several J 72 suggestions for improving follow-up studies were made. A different, but related area of inquiry, single fatherhood, was suggested as an interesting and relevant area to study. APPENDICES APPENDIX A M.S.U. Psychological Clinic CHILDREN'S BEHAVIOR CHECKLIST Name of child: Age: Date: Name of person filling out checklist: Relationship to child (mother, father, teacher, clinician, etc.): Situation in which child has been observed (home, school, clinic etc.):___ This is a list of items describing many aspects of children's behavior-- things that children do or ways they have been described by others. Not all of the items will apply to the particular child you are describing, but quite a few of them will. First, go through the list and put a checkmark (v) in the first column by each item which gpplies to this child. If there are some items which you do not check because you do not know whether they apply or not, or have never had theggpportunity to observe them (for in- stance, "He (she) is a finicky eater," if you see this child only in school and don't know anything about his (her) eating habits), put an (9) in the first column. After you have gone through the list, please go back through those items you have checked and put another checkmark (/) in the second column Opposite those that are now most characteristic of this child, that describe how he (she) is most of the time. Does this Is it apply at all? characteristic? 1. Is happy when he (she) has done a "good job." 2. Is tidy and neat, perhaps even a little bit fussy about it. 3. Is concerned about feelings of others. 4. Can't wait - must have things immediately. 5. Gets irritated or angry easily. 73 74 Children's Behav. List 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. Is a finicky eater. Makes strange or distorted faces. Plays with toys in a rough way. Sometimes makes meaningless or strange noises. Doesn't go out of his (her) way to make friends. Hurts self when angry. Often wakes up crying in the middle of the night - complains of nightmares. Wants very much to be approved of. Doesn't pay attention to what grown-up says to him (her). Pouts and becomes sullen when refused help. Looks awkward when he (she) moves around. Sometimes says odd things. Acts in ways that makes others not like him (her). Doesn't pay much attention to others, seems more involved with himself (herself). Feelings are apparent in facial expression. Has trouble falling asleep at night. Acts helpless to get attention. Rebels when routine is upset. L_..l Does this apply at all? Is it characteristic? 75 Children's Behav. List Does this Is it apply at all? characteristic? 24. Becomes embarrassed when praised for doing something well. 25. Handles small objects skillfully. 26. Memory seems poor, forgets what he (she) is trying to say or forgets things that have just happened. 27. Never goes out of the way to help others, even when asked. 28. Seldom laughs or smiles. 29. Is left out of things and ignored by others. 30. Seldom satisfied with what others do for him (her)-unappreciative. 31. Can be depended on to do what he (she) is supposed to do without reminders. 32. Never gets excited about anything. even when you would expect him (her) to be pleased with some- thing. 33. Often giggles or smiles for no apparent reason. 34. Activity is focused on a particu- lar purpose, seems to accomplish what he (she) sets out to do. 35. Asks many silly questions. 36. Likes to play with girls instead of boys. 37. Hates to lose. 38. Doesn't fight back when other people attack him (her). 76 Children's Behav. List Does this Is it apply at all? characteristic? 39. Can accept new ideas without getting upset. 40. Asks for help on tasks that he (she) can very well do on his (herfi own. 41. Seems unable to change ways of doing things. 42. Mbods often change for no apparent reason. 43. Appears stiff in walking or moving about. 44. Doesn't start a conversation, others must begin first. 45. Acts angry when adult shows attention to other children. 46. Shows pride in accomplishment. 47. Breaks down and cries for no apparent reason. 48. Seems comfortable in new situations. 49. Comes to others for protection, even when it is not necessary. 50. Does what other adults ask him (her) to. 51. Blames himself (herself) when he (she) has done nothing wrong. 52. Has trouble finding the right words to say what he (she) means. 53. Moves gracefully - is well coordinated. 54. Seems to do things just to get others angry at him (her). 77 Children's Behav. List Does this Is it apply at all? characteristic? 55. Plays to win. 56. Is a "copycat" - always imitating others. 57. Starts things off when with others. 58. Spends most of time sitting and watching - doesn't play and do things with others. 59. Very critical of others - always telling others what is wrong with them. 60. Gets carried away by his (her) feelings, acts on them right away. 61. Others seem to want to be with him (her). 62. Seems distrustful of others; doesn't think he (she) can rely on others or believe their promises. 63. Feelings are easily hurt. 64. Talks in a funny way (e.g. stutter, lisp). 65. Asks the same question over and over again. 66. Seems quiet when around other children. 67. Has a characteristic mannerism or nervous habit. Specify: 68. Makes friends quickly and easily. 69. Lacks pep and complains of being tired. 70. Quickly loses interest in an activity. 78 Children's Behav. List Does this Is it apply at all? characteristic? 71. Sucks thumb. 72. Very moody - sad one minute and happy the next. 73. Will interrupt someone else in order to state his (her) opinions. 74. Talks or mutters to self as if conversing with self. 75. Self confident. 76. Bullies younger children. 77. Plays mostly with younger or smaller children - even when children of own age are around. 78. Seems sad and unhappy. 79. Uses "baby talk." 80. Tends to go too far unless fre- quently reminded of rules. 81. Often becomes so stuck on one idea that he (she) can't stop thinking or talking about it. 82. Does not wait for others to approach but seeks others out. 83. Talks all the time. 84. Will fight in a rough way where others could really get hurt. 85. Refuses to share things with others. 86. Brags about what he (she) can do. 87. Holds a grudge. 88. Often tries to do more than he (she) can handle on his (her) own. 89. Prefers standing by adults when other children are present. 79 Children's Behav. List. Does this Is it apply at all? characteristic? 90. Often has to be reminded of what he (she) can and cannot do. 91. Is frightened of being alone. 92. Uses mostly gestures or movements to express or communicate feelings. 93. Avoids talking about himself (herself). 94. Threatens to hit or hurt others. 95. Seems out of touch with what is going on around him (her) - off in his (her) own world. 96. Often seems angry for no particu- lar reason, expresses it in many different ways. 97. Has uncontrollable outbursts of temper. 98. Able to stand up for himself (herself). 99. Likes to perform for company. 100. Polite and cooperative with others. 101. Easily embarrassed. 102. Body often looks tense, as if expecting a fight. 103. Careful in explanations - precise. 104. Often breaks the rules in games with others. 105. Avoids physical contact withcmhers. 106. Easily scared. 107. Doesn't like to let others know how he (she) feels. 80 Children's Behav. List. Does this Is it apply at all? characteristic? 108. Frequently disappointed. 109. A new situation seems to bring out the show-off in him (her). 110. When told to do something he (she) doesn't want to do, he (she) becomes very angry. lll. Often acts silly. 112. Play is aimless, doesn't seem to make or accomplish anything. 113. Is curious about things. 114. Prefers competitive games. 115. Likes to play with boys instead' of girls. 116. Shows appreciation when others help or do things for him (her). 117. Seems afraid to try anything new. 118. Doesn't like to ask others for help. 119. Will lie to get out of a tight spot. 120. 'Nothing seems to interest him (her). 121. Energetic. 122. Asks sensible questions in new situation. 123. Aggressive and overpowering with other children. 124. Likes to do things well so others will notice him (her). 81 Children's Behav. List. Does this Is it apply at all? characteristic? 125. Shows pleasure and involvement in most things he (she) does - enthusiastic. 126. Seems selfish, always wants own way. 127. Doesn't seem to care about how he (she) looks - often looks sloppy. 128. Bossy with others. 129. Makes faces and acts "silly." 130. Tires easily in activities. 131. Speech often seems unrelated to what is going on. 132. Blows up very easily when bothered by someone. 133. Stays to self during games. 134. Prefers following others to taking the iniative. 135. Says he (she) is not as good as others - feels bad about himself (herself). 136. Competes with other children. 137. Does what is expected to do, but grumbles about it. 138. When he (she) likes someone, he (she) tells them so. 139. Pitches in when things are to be done. 140. Fidgety and restless. 141. Speaks only in response to direct questioning. 82 Children's Behav. List. Does this Is it apply at all? characteristic? 142. Gets other children stirred up to mischief. 143. Acts as if everyone were against him. 144. Makes rules for others. 145. Quick and clever. 146. Learns quickly from others. 147. Once he (she) makes up his (her) mind about something, it's hard for him (her) to change. 148. Shows delight when hurting others. 149. Affectionate - enjoys being physically close to others. 150. Retains composure even when those around him (her) are acting in a boisterous way. 151. Prefers playing with older or bigger children even when child of own age are around. 152. Often tattles on others. 153. Speaks so rapidly he (she) is difficult to understand. 154. Quickly moves from one activity to the next. After completing this checklist, you may think of some other descrip— tions which you feel characterize this child but are not included in the checklist. Please write any such items or comments in the space below. APPENDIX B Children's Behavior Checklist Child's name Age Sex Relationship to child (mother, teacher, aide, etc.) Instructions This is a list of 100 items describing many aspects of children's be- havior--things that children do or ways they have been described by others. Not all of the items will apply to the child you are describing, but quite a few of them will. Each item has three possible replies in the form: TT—T— where: number 1 means the child DOES NOT behave this way or DOES NOT APPLY. number 2 means the child OCCASIONALLY behaves this way. number 3 means the child FREQUENTLY behaves this way. Place an "X" over the reply number for each item which best describes the child's behavior. For example: Gets irritated or angry easily. l 2 3 An "X" over "1" ( X ) means this child does not get 1 2 3 irritated or angry easily. An "X" over "2" means the child can sometimes or occasionally become angry easily. An "X" over "3" means this child very often or frequently gets irritated and angry easily. Please answer ALL the items. Remember: 1 DOES NOT behave this way or DOES NOT APPLY 2 = OCCASIONALLY behaves this way 3 = FREQUENTLY behaves this way 1. Is happy when he (she) has done a "good job." 1. l 2 3 2. Is tidy and neat. 2. l 2 3 3. Is concerned about feelings of others. 3. I 1 2 3 83 84 1 = DOES NOT behave this way or DOES NOT APPLY 2 = OCCASIONALLY behaves this way 3 = FREQUENTLY behaves this way 4. Can't wait, must have things immediately. 4. 5. Gets irritated or angry easily. 5. 6. Plays with toys in a rough way. 6. 7. Doesn't go out of his (her) way to make friends. 7. 8. Wants very much to be approved of. 8. 9. Behavior is appropriate for his (her) sex. 9. 10. Doesn't pay attention to what grown-up says to him (her). 10. 11. Pouts and becomes sullen when refused help. 11. 12. Acts in ways that makes others not like him (her). 12. 13. Doesn't pay much attention to others, seems more involved with himself (herself). 13. 14. Acts helpless to get attention. 14. 15. Rebels when routine is upset. 15. 16. Becomes embarrassed when praised for doing something well. 16. 17. Doesn't go out of the way to help others, even when asked. 17. 18. Laughs or smiles. 18. 85 H II DOES NOT behave this way or DOES NOT APPLY OCCASIONALLY behaves this way FREQUENTLY behaves this way (AN Illl 19. Can be depended on to do what he (she) is supposed to do without reminders. 20. Doesn't get excited about anything, even when you would expect him (her) to be pleased with something. 21. Activity is focused on a particular purpose, seems to accomplish what he (she) sets out to do. 22. Likes to play with children of the Opposite sex. 23. Hates to lose. 24. Will dress up in adult clothes of the same sex. 25. Doesn't fight back when other people attack him (her). 26. Asks for help on tasks that he (she) can very well do on his (her) own. 27. Seems unable to change way of doing things. 28. Doesn't start a conversation, other children must begin first. 29. Acts angry when adult shows attention to other children. 30. Shows pride in accomplishment. 31. Breaks down and cries for no apparent reason. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 28. 29. 30. 31. 86 1 = DOES NOT behave this way or DOES NOT APPLY 2 = OCCASIONALLY behaves this way 3 = FREQUENTLY behaves this way 32. Seems comfortable in new situations. 32. 33. Comes to others for protection, even when it is not necessary. 33. 34. Does what adults ask him (her) to. 34. 35. Blames himself (herself) when he (she) has done nothing wrong. 35. 36. Plays to win. 36. 37. Is a "copycat" - imitates others. 37. 38. Starts things off when with others. 38. 39. Sits and watches - doesn't play and do things with others. 39. 40. Very critical of others - telling others what is wrong with them. 40. 41. Gets carried away by his (her) feelings, acts on them right away. 41. 42. Prefers quiet activities. 42. 43. Others seem to want to be with him (her). 43. 44. Feelings are easily hurt. 44. 45. Seems quiet when around other children. 45. wNH ll 87 DOES NOT behave this way or DOES NOT APPLY OCCASIONALLY behaves this way = FREQUENTLY behaves this way 46. 47. 48. 49. 50. 51. 52. 53. 54. 55. 56. 57. 58. 59. Makes friends quickly and easily. Quickly loses interest in an activity. Very moody - sad one minute and happy the next. Will interrupt someone else in order to state his (her) Opinions. Self confident. Plays mostly with younger or smaller children - even when children of own age are around. Seems sad and unhappy. Tends to go too far unless frequently reminded of rules. Enjoys play roles requiring taking care of others. Does not wait for others to approach but seeks others out. Talks excessively. Refuses to share things with others. Brags about what he (she) can do. Holds a grudge. 46. 47. 48. 49. SO. 51. 52. 53. 54. 55. 56. 57. 58. 59. 88 l = DOES NOT behave this way or DOES NOT APPLY 2 = OCASSIONALLY behaves this way 3 = FREQUENTLY behaves this way 60. Tries to do more than he (she) can handle on his (her) own. 60. 61. Prefers standing by adults when other children are present. 61. 62. Avoids talking about himself (herself). 62. 63. Threatens to hit or hurt others. 63. 64. Seems angry for no particular reason, expresses it in many different ways. 64. 65. Has uncontrollable outbursts of temper. 65. 66. Able to stand up for himself (herself). 66. 67. Polite and c00perative with others. 67. 68. Easily embarrassed. 68. 69. Body gets tense, as if expecting a fight. 69. 70. Breaks the rules in games with others. 70. 71. Prefers playing with cars and trucks to dolls. 71. 72. Avoids physical contact with others. 72. 73. Easily scared. 73. 89 DOES NOT behave this way or DOES NOT APPLY 1 = 2 = OCCASIONALLY behaves this way 3 = FREQUENTLY behaves this way 74. Doesn't like to let others know how he (she) feels. 74. 75. Easily disappointed. 75. 76. Likes to showboff in front of other children. 76. 77. When told to do something he (she) doesn't want to do, he (she) becomes very angry. 77. 78. Acts silly. 78. 79. Play is aimless, doesn't seem to make or accomplish anything. 79. 80. Prefers competitive games. 80. 81. Shows appreciation when others help or do things for him (her). 81. 82. Seems afraid to try anything new. 82. 83. Doesn't like to ask adults for help. 83. 84. Aggressive and overpowering with other children. 84. 85. Likes to do things well so others will notice him (her). 85. 86. Shows pleasure and involvement in most things he (she) does - enthusiastic. 86. 90 l = DOES NOT behave this way or DOES NOT APPLY 2 = OCCASIONALLY behaves this way 3 = FREQUENTLY behaves this way 87. Seems selfish, wants own way. 87. 88. Doesn't seem to care about how he (she) looks - looks SIOppy. 88. 89. Bossy with others. 89. 90. Blows up very easily when bothered by someone. 90. 91. Stays to self during games. 91. 92. Prefers following others to taking the initiative. 92. 93. Says he (she) is not as good as others - feels bad about himself (herself). 93. 94. Competes with other children. 94. 95. Does what is expected to do, but grumbles about it. 95. 96. When he (she) likes someone, he (she) tells them so. 96. 97. Makes rules for others. 97. 98. Affectionate - enjoys being physically close to others. 98. 99. Retains composure even when those around him (her) are acting in a boisterous way. 99. 100. Tattles on others. 100. Item No. 6 9 22 24 36 42 54 71. APPENDIX C Sex Role Development Scale Item Plays with toys in a rough way. Behavior is appropriate for his (her) sex. Likes to play with children of the opposite sex. Will dress up in adult clothes of the same sex. Plays to win. Prefers quiet activities. Enjoys play roles requiring taking care of others. Prefers playing with cars and trucks to dolls. 91 Item No. 12 l3 17 28 37 38 39 40 43 45 46 51 55 57 70 72 76 81 84 89 91 94 96 97 APPENDIX D Peer Relationships Scale Item Doesn't go out of his (her) way to make friends. Acts in ways that makes others not like him (her). Doesn't pay much attention to others, seems more involved with himself (herself). Doesn't go out of the way to help others, even when asked. Doesn't start a conversation, other children must begin first. Is a "copycat" - imitates others. Starts things off when with others. Sits and watches - doesn't play and do things with others. Very critical of others - telling others what is wrong with them. Others seem to want to be with him (her). Seems quiet when around other children. Makes friends quickly and easily. Plays mostly with younger or smaller children - even when children of own age are around. Does not wait for others to approach but seeks others out. Refuses to share things with others. Breaks the rules in games with others. Avoids physical contact with others. Likes to show-off in front of other children. Shows appreciation when others help or do things for him (her). Aggressive and overpowering with other children. Bossy with others. Stays to self during games. Competes with other children. When he (she) likes someone, he (she) tells them so. Makes rules for others. 92 Item No. 16 30 35 50 58 62 68 93 APPENDIX E Self - Concept Scale Item Is happy when he (she) has done a "good job". Becomes embarrassed when praised for doing something well. Shows pride in accomplishment. Blames himself (herself) when he (she) has done nothing wrong. Self confident. Brags about what he (she) can do. Avoids talking about himself (herself). Easily embarrassed. Says he (she) is not as good as others - feels bad about himself (herself). 93 Item No. 8 10 ll 14 19 21 26 29 32 33 34 49 60 61 66 77 79 82 83 85 92 95 APPENDIX F Autonomy - Dependence Scale Item Wants very much to be approved of. Doesn't pay attention to what grown-up says to him (her). Pouts and becomes sullen when refused help. Acts helpless to get attention. Can be depended on to do what he (she) is supposed to do without reminders. Activity is focused on a particular purpose, seems to accomplish what he (she) sets out to do. Asks for help on tasks that he (she) can very well do on his (her) own. Acts angry when adult shows attention to other children. Seems comfortable in new situations. Comes to others for protection, even when it is not necessary. Does what adults ask him (her) to. Will interrupt someone else in order to state his (her) Opinions. Tries to do more than he (she) can handle on his (her) own. Prefers standing by adults when other children are present. Able to stand up for himself (herself). When told to do something he (she) doesn't want to do, he (she) becomes very angry. Play is aimless, doesn't seem to make or accomplish anything. Seems afraid to try anything new. Doesn't like to ask adults for help. Likes to do things well so others will notice him (her). Prefers following others to taking the initiative. Does what is expected to do, but grumbles about it. 94 Item No. 3 l, 15 18 20 23 25 27 31 41 44 47 48 52 53 59 63 64 65 69 73 74 75 86 87 90 100 APPENDIX C Emotional Adjustment Scale Item Is concerned about feelings of others. Can't wait, must have things immediately. Gets irritated or angry easily. Rebels when routine is upset. Laughs or smiles. Doesn't get excited about anything, even when you would expect him (her) to be pleased with something. Hates to lose. Doesn't fight back when other people attack him (her). Seems unable to change way of doing things. Breaks down and cries for no apparent reason.‘ Gets carried away by his (her) feelings, acts on them right away. Feelings are easily hurt. Quickly loses interest in an activity. Very moody - sad one minute and happy the next. Seems sad and unhappy. ' Tends to go too far unless frequently reminded of rules. Holds a grudge. ' Threatens to hit or hurt others. Seems angry for no particular reason, expresses it in many different ways. Has uncontrollable outbursts of temper. Body gets tense, as if expecting a fight. Easily scared. Doesn't like to let others know how he (she) feels. Easily disappointed. Shows pleasure and involvement in most things he (she) does - enthusiastic. Seems selfish, wants own way.” Blows up very easily when bothered by someone. Tattles on others. 95 APPENDIX H COVER SHEET June, 1975 Dear Parents: I am a graduate student at Michigan State University working on my doctoral dissertation. It is in this connection that I need your help. Much has been written and said about single parenthood. I am interested in comparing how single and married mothers view their children's behavior in comparison to how the child's Day Care teacher and aide see them. Enclosed is a questionnaire about your child's behavior. Please fill it out and return it to the Downtown Day Care Center promptly. They must be returned no later than Wednesday, June 11. The Day Care teachers and aides will also complete questionnaires for“ all children whose parents COOperate. Also enclosed is an information sheet which should be returned with the question- naire. All information received will be kept STRICTLY CONFIDENTIAL. Therefore, your child's name WIEL NOT appear on the questionnaire or the information sheet. Instead, each child has been assigned a number which only I can identify. Also, please seal the return envelope. If there are any questions about the Behavior Checklist please call Janet Emery at 458-8480. Your cooperation in this study is greatly appreciated. Sincerely, Robert Fox Approved: Janet Emery, Director Downtown Day Care Center 96 APPENDIX I Information Sheet Name of child Date of birth Sex The following are living in the same household as the above named child. Please check the appropriate spaces and fill in the requested in- formation. ALL INFORMATION WILL BE KEPT CONFIDENTIAL. Mother Father Other (please specify) 0 [:7 C7 Brothers and sisters: Age Sex Age Sex 1 4. 2 5. 3 6. Child's race: White Black Hispano Other .ZCIJ7 25:27' 25:27’ ACIZJ' Marital status: Never married Married Divorced Separated Widowed Remarried 15:37 15:37 ACIZ7 How long? years months Mother's occupational status: Unemployed Employed Student (5237 Full Part Time Time Total family_annua1 income (If student, report income PRIOR to becoming a student): $o—$3,ooo $3,001-$6,000 $6,001—$9,000 $9,001—312,ooo ACII37 ACIZI7 .ZIII7 $12,001-$15,000 $15,001—$l8,000 $18,001 and over ([227 ACII?’ 4(2237 Please use reverse side.for any additional comments. 97 APPENDIX J Observed and Transformed Cell Standard Deviations for MothervAide Data Measure Cell boys-married boys~single girls-married girls-single. Checklist Observed 16.59 13.45 11.88 4.55 T 1a 1.46 1.00 0.88 0.32 T 2b 0.56 0.30 0.27 0.09 Sex Role Dev. Observed 21.88 1.33 1.92 2.04 T 1 2.16 0.34 0.52 0.56 T 2 1.12 0.36 0.60 0.67 Peer Relationships Observed 9.43 4.06 3.93 1.51 T l 1.02 0.70 0.60 0.19 T 2 0.47 0.52 0.38 0.09 Self-Concept Observed 8.76 2.88 2.23 1.17 T 1 1.24 0.73 0.75 0.32 T 2 0.88 0.85 205.86 0.37 Autonomy- Dependence Observed 3.08 3.39 3.47 4.54 T 1 0.44 0.49 0.50 0.78 T 2 0.26 0.29 0.30 0.55 Emotional Adjustment Observed 6.69 4.22 5.44 1.97 T 1 0.79 0.61 0.80 0.27 T 2 0.39 0.36 0.49 0.15 a Square root transformation b Logarithm transformation 98 BIBLIOGRAPHY BIBLIOGRAPHY Andre, V. and Brown, D. Children's interests and their ' mother's perceptions of these interests. Measure- nent and Evaluation in Guidance, 1969, 2, 168-173. Bach, G. Father-fantasies and father-typing in father- separated children. Child Development, 1946, 11, 63-80. Barclay, A. and Cusumano, D. Father absence, cross-sex identity, and field-dependent behavior in male adolescents. Child Development, 1967, 3g, 243-250. Biller, H.B. A note on father absence and masculine develop- ment in lower-class Negro and White boys. Child Development, 1968, 32, 1003-1006. . Father absence and the personality develOpment of the male child. Developmental Psychology, 1970, g, 181-201. . Father absence, maternal encouragement, and sex role development in kindergarten-age boys. Child Development, 1969, 50, 539-546. . The mother-child relationship and the father- absent boy's personality develOpment. Merrill- Palmer Quarterly, 1971, 11, 227-241. Biller, H.B. and Borstelmann, L. Masculine development: An integrative review. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 1967, 1;, 253-294. Combs, A. and Snygg, D. Individual behavior: A perceptural approach to behavior (revised edition). New York: Harper and Row Publishers, 1959. Conover, W.J. Practical nonparametric statistics. New York: Wiley and Sons, 1971. Cotler, S. and Shoemaker, D. The accuracy of mother's reports. Journal of Genetic PsychOIOgy, 1969, 114, 97-107. Cowen, E. et a1. Parental perceptions of young children and their relation to indexes of adjustment. Journal of Consulting and Clinical PsycholOQY: 1970, 35, 97-103. 99 100 Crumley, F. and Blumenthal, R. Children's reactions to temporary loss of the father. American Journal of Psychiatry, 1973, 130, 778-782. Despert, J.L. Children of divorce. New York: Doubleday and Company, 1953. Fagot, B. Sex differences in toddler's behavior and parental reaction. Developmental Psychology, 1974,'lg, 554-558. Ferguson, L.R. "Children's Behavior Checklist", Michigan State University. Ferleman, L.R. C0ping. Menninger Prospective, 1972, 3, 17-22. Gecas, V., Calonico, J., and Thomas, D. The development of self-concept in the child: Mirror theory versus model theory. Journal of School Psychology, 1974, 92, 67-76. * Glidewell, J., Domke, H., and Kantor, M. Screening in schools for behavior disorders: Use of mother's reports of symptoms. Journal of Educational Research, 1963, 56, 508-515. Goldstein, H.S. and Peck, R. Maternal differentiation, father absence and cognitive differentiation in children. Archives of General Psychiatry, 1973, 29, 370-373. Harris, S. and Nathan, P. Parents locus of control and perception of cause of children's problems. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 1973, 32, 182-184. Herzog, E. and Sudia, C. Fatherless homes: A review of research. Children, 1968, 1;, 177-182. Hetherington, E.M. The effects of familial variables on sex typing, on parent-child similarity and on imitation in children. Minnesota Symposia on Child Psychology, 1967, 1, 82-107. . Effects of father absence on personality develop— ment in adolescent daughters. Developmental Psychology, 1972, 1, 313-326. . Effects of paternal absence on sex-typed behavior in Negro and White preadolescent males. Journal of Personality and Social PSychology, 1966, 3, 87-91. 101 Hetherington, E.M. and Deur, J.L. The effects of father absence on child develOpment. In W. Hartup (Ed.). The young child. Washington, D.C.: National Association for the Education of Young Children, 1972. Hoffman, M. Father absence and conscience development. Developmental Psychology, 1971, 5, 400-406. Ireton, H. and Thwing, E. The Minnesota Child DevelOpment Inventory in the psychiatric-developmental evalua- tion of the preschool-age child. Child Psychiatgy and Human Development, 1972, 3, 102-114. Jackson, J. (Producer). Children of divorce. On Sixty minutes, August 24, 1975. New York: C.B.S. News. Kapit, H. It's the parent who suffers most. Parenting. Washington, D.C.: Association for Childhood Education International, 1973. Kirk, R.E. Experimental design:J Procedures for the behavior- al sciences. Belmont, California: Brooks Cole, 1968. Koch, M. Anxiety in preschool children from broken homes. Merrill-Palmerguarterly, 1961, 1, 225-231. Kogelschatz, J., Adams, P., and Tucker, D. Family styles of fatherless households. American_Aoademy of Child Psychiatgerournal, 1972, 11, 365-383. Landis, J.T. The trauma of children when parents divorce. Marriage and Family Living, 1960, 22, 7-13. Landy, F., Rosenberg, B., and Sutton-Smith, B. The effect of limited father absence on cognitive development. Child Development, 1969, 49, 941-944. Leader, A. Family therapy for divorced fathers and others out of home. Social Casework, 1973, 51, 13-19. Lederman, E. and Blair, J.R. Comparison of the level and predictive validity of preschool attainment record ratings obtained from teachers and mothers. Psychology in the Schools, 1972, 2, 392-395. Leichty, M. The effects of father-absence during early, childhood upon the Oedipal situation as reflected in young adults. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 1970, 6, 212-217. Lynn, D. and Sawrey, W. The effects of father absence on Norwegian boys and girls. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 1959, 59, 258-262. 102 McCord, J., McCord, W. and Thurber, E. Some effects of paternal absence on male children. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 1962, 33, 361-369. McDermott, J. Divorce and its psychiatric sequelae in children. Archives of General Psychiatry, 1970, 33, 421-427. Medinnus, G. Q-Sort descripts of five-year old children by their parents. Child Development, 1961, 33, 473-489. Medinnus, G. and Johnson, T. Parental perceptions of kinder- garten children. Journal of Educational Research, 1970, 33, 379-381. Miller, L.C. Q-Sort agreement among observers of children. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 1964, 33, 71-75. Miller, W. Lower-class culture as a generating milieu of gang delinquency. Journal of Social Issues, 1958, 123' 5.19. Mischel, W. Father-absence and delay of gratification: Cross-cultural comparisons. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 1961, 33, 116-124. Neubauer, P. The one-parent child and his Oedipal develop- ment. Poychoanalytic Studies of the Child, 1960, 33, 286-309. Osborn, W. Parental perceptions of Hispano-born pupil adjustment. California Journal of Educational Research, 1973, 33, 104-113. Osofsky, J. and O'Connell, E. Parent-child interation: Daughters' effects upon mothers' and fathers' behaviors. Developmental Psychology, 1972, 3, 157-168. Pedersen, F.A. Relationship between father-absence and emotional disturbance in male military dependents. Merrill-Palmer_guarterly, 1966, 33, 321-331. Rogers, C. Client-centered therapy: Its currentopractice. implications and theory. Boston: Houghton-Mifflin. 1951. Rouman, J. School children's problems as related to parental factors. Journal of Educational Research, 1956, 33, 105-112. Santrock, J. Paternal absence, sex typing, and identifica- tion. DevelOpmental Psychology, 1970, 3, 264-272. 103 Santrock, J. and Wohlford, P. Effects of father absence: Influence of the reason for and the onset of the absence. Proceedings of the 78th Annual Conyontion of the American Psychological Association, 1970, 3 (Part 1), 265-266. Sears, P.S. Doll play aggression in normal young children: Influence of sex, age, sibling status, father's absence. Psychological Monographs, 1951, 33 (6, Whole No. 323). Serot, N. and Teevan, R. Perception of the parent-child relationship and its relation to child adjustment. Child Development, 1961, 33, 373-378. Siegman, A. Father-absence during childhood and antisocial behavior. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psyohology, 1966, 33, 71-74. Spock, B. Problems ofoparents. Cambridge, Mass.: The Riverside Press, 1962. ‘ Stedman, D., Clifford, M., and Spitznagel, A. A comparison of ratings by mothers and teachers on the Preschool Attainment Record of seventeen five year old children. Exceptional Children, 1969, 33, 488-489. Suedfeld, P. Paternal absence and overseas success of Peace Corps volunteers. Journal of Consulting Psychology, 1967, 33, 424-425. Sullivan, H.S. The interpersonal theoryogpsychiatry. New York: Norton and Company, 1953. Toomin, M.K. The child of divorce. In R. Hardy and J. Cull (Eds.), Therapeutic needs of the family. Springfield, 111.: Thomas, 1974. Trunnell, T. The absent father's children's emotional disturbances. Archives of General Psychiatry) 1968, 33, 180-188. Tuckman, J. and Regan, R. Intactness of the home and behavioral problems in children. Jouroal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 1966, 3, 225-233. Tulkin, D. and Cohler, B. Childrearing attitudes and mother- child interaction in the first year of life. Merrill-Palmerguarterly, 1973, 33, 95-106. Wohlford, P. and Liberman, D. Effect of father absence on personal time, field independence, and anxiety. 104 Proceedings of the 78th Annual ConventiOnog the American Poychological Association, 1970, 3 (Part 1), 263-264." Wolfensberger, W. and Kurtz, P. Measurement of parents' perceptions of their children's development. Genetic Psychology Monographs, 1971, 33, 3-92. Wylie, H.L. and Delgado, R. A pattern of mother-son relationship involving the absence of father. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 1959, 32: 644-649. ' "I7'1111'111'13'11'1111111115