ll!ullluzllllmllltllllwllml

  

LIB RAR Y .
Michigan Stave
University

'6".£rz-\'-->5' 8“

This is to certify that the
thesis entitled
A Test of Gender Role Perceptions and Ideals as
They Relate to Family Role Perceptions and
Ideals in Married College Students

presented by

Angele Marie Parker

has been accepted towards fulfillment
of the requirements for

Ph .D . degree in Family Ecology

 

 

@0451 1.4 ”fig/(1M

Major professor

[hue November 7, 1978

 

0-7 639

A TEST OF GENDER ROLE PERCEPTIONS AND IDEALS
AS THEY RELATE TO FAMILY ROLE PERCEPTIONS
AND IDEALS IN MARRIED COLLEGE STUDENTS

By
Angela Marie Parker

A DISSERTATION

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

DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY

Department of Family Ecology
1978

(fl / C; (S: z/rl/C),

ABSTRACT

A TEST OF GENDER ROLE PERCEPTIONS AND IDEALS
AS THEY RELATE TO FAMILY ROLE PERCEPTIONS
AND IDEALS IN MARRIED COLLEGE STUDENTS
By
Angela Marie Parker

Proposed ideal and perceived gender role personality
traits and family role tasks in the context of early
marriage of college students with children were investigated.

Gender role was defined as a set of personality traits.
The female role included such items as "sympathetic,"

"affectionate," and "gentle." Typical male role items

were "ambitious, aggressive,‘ and independent." Ideal
gender role concept referred to individual personal beliefs
or values, while perceived gender role characteristics
referred to an individual's perception of his/her own
and spousal characteristics.

Family role was defined as a set of household tasks.
The wife family role tasks included: prepares a dinner
when friends are invited; helps the child(ren) find play-
‘mates and have play experiences with them; and dresses,

feeds and entertains the child(ren). The typical husband

Angele Marie Parker

family role tasks were: plans to be the major provider

for the family economically; whose education or job

determines where the family lives; and rough-houses (is

physically playful with the child(ren).

Ideal family role concept referred to individual

personal beliefs or values, while perceived family role

performance referred to an individual's perception of

his/her own and spousal performance of tasks.

The hypotheses were:

1.

There are significant positive relationships

among scores on individual items of the Ideal
Gender Role and Ideal Family Role Concept

Measures.

There are significant positive relationships

among scores on individual items of the Perceived
Gender Role Characteristics Measure and the
Perceived Family Role Performance Measure.

There is no significant difference between women's
and men's scores on the Ideal Gender Role and Ideal
Family Role Concept Measures, but there is a
significant difference between women's and men's
scores on the Perceived Gender Role Characteristics

and the Perceived Family Role Performance Measures.

Due to a lack of findings associated with the role measures,

relationships were not investigated between them and marital

adjustment as had been proposed.

Angele Marie Parker

A questionnaire survey was conducted in the homes of
57 couples. Living in married housing units of Michigan
State UniverSity, they were contacted randomly by door-
to-door. The questionnaire asked students to rate their
beliefs and perceptions on a seven point scale. The scale
ranged from husband or men always to a midpoint of both
and the other end of wife or women always has this trait
or task. The couples were college educated, 23 to 25 years
old, and had one or more children 13 years or younger.

Hypotheses were generally supported for Ideal Gender
Role and Ideal Family Role Concepts, but were rejected
for Perceived Gender Role Characteristics and Perceived
Family Role Performance. Men and women agreed on most
items. The college students held a moderate to very,
traditional ideal family role concept, and a moderate to
nontraditional ideal gender role conceptx/ Ideal gender
role and family role concepts were negatively related.‘/

Results of the data demonstrated that ideal gender
role and family role concepts were measureable. However,
the questions for the perceived gender role characteristics
and perceived family role performance did not indicate
measureable concepts. While intervening variables were
one explanation, significant items may have not been
investigated. The data indicated that the subjects did not
actualize their own ideals into behavior. Limitations to

the study included lack of random sampling, lack of

Angele Marie Parker

measurement reliability and validity, and the use of non-

causal statistical methods.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Chapter

LIST OF TABLES .

LIST OF FIGURES.

I.

II.

III.

IV.

INTRODUCTION AND CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK.

The Purpose of Gender Role Research. .

The Study of Gender Roles and Family Roles
Conceptual Framework . . . . .
Objective.

Assumptions.

Definition of Terms.

Hypotheses

REVIEW OF LITERATURE .

Gender Role.

Family Role.

Role Perceptions and Role Ideals
Nontraditional Role- -Taking .

Sex Differences. .

Role Conflict and Marital Adjustment
Summary. . . . . . . . . . .

METHOD OF THE STUDY.

Method . . . .

Sample Selection Procedure .

Sample Description . .

Data Collection Procedure.

Questionnaire Development.

Gender Role Measure.

Family Role Measure. .

Marital Adjustment Measure . . .
Statistical Methods and Data Reduction .

RESULTS.

Ideal Gender Rule Concept.
Female Subjects. .
Male Subjects. . .
Male and Female Subjects Combined.

ii

Page
iv

vi

Ideal Family Role Concept .
Female Subjects . .
Male Subjects . . .
Male and Female Subjects Combined .
Perceived Gender Role Characteristics .
Female Subjects .
Male Subjects . . .
Male and Female Subjects Combined .
Perceived Family Role Performance .
Female Subjects .
Male Subjects . . .
Male and Female Subjects Combined .
Sex Differences . . . . . .
Ideal Gender Role Concept .
Ideal Family Role Concept . . . .
Perceived Gender Role Characteristics .
Perceived Family Role Performance .
Maritial Adjustment .
Summary . . .

V. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS.

Introduction.

Gender Role .

Family Role .

Conclusions .

Limitations of the Study. .
Implications for Further Study.

BIBLIOGRAPHY.

APPENDIX A .

Letter of Introduction.
APPENDIX B

Questionnaire .
APPENDIX C

Marital Adjustment Measure With Weighted Scores :

APPENDIX D

Questionnaire Data.
APPENDIX E .

Correlation Coefficients of Questionnaire Data.
APPENDIX F . .

Factor Analysis of Questionnaire Data .

iii

Page
97’

100
101
104
106
107
108
112

115
117
120
120
123
126
128

133
141

141
141
146
150
154
154

157

165
166
168
169
187
188
192
193
205
206
242
243

Table

10.

11.

LIST OF TABLES

Number of Significant Intercorrelations of
Items on the Ideal Gender Role Concept
Measure for Female, Male and Total Samples. ..

Varimax Rotated Factor Loadings of Ideal
Gender Role-Related Questionnaire Items
Significantly Associated with Factors 2
and 5 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Number of Significant Intercorrelations of

Items on the Ideal Family Role Concept
Measure for Female, Male and Total Samples

Varimax Rotated Factor Loadings of Ideal
Family Role-Related and Other Questionnaire
Items Significantly Associated with Factor 1-.

Number of Significant Intercorrelations of
Items on the Perceived Gender Role Performance
Measure for Female, Male and Total Samples .

Varimax Rotated Factor Loadings of Perceived
Gender Role Performance-Related Questionnaire
Items Significantly Associated with Factors
3, 4, 13, 19 and 20.

Number of Significant Intercorrelations of
Items on the Perceived Family Role Performance
Measure for Female, Male and Total Samples

Varimax Rotated Factor Loadings of Perceived
Family Role Performance-Related Questionnaire
Items Significantly Associated with Factor 15.

T Values of Men's and Women's Scores on the
Ideal Gender Role-Related Items.

Means and Standard Deviation of Men's and
Women's Scores on the Ideal Gender Role-
Related Items.

T Values of Men's and Women's Scores on the
Ideal Family Role Concept Items.

iv

Page

91

96

98

103

105

111

113

119

121

122

124

Table Page

12. Means and Standard Deviations of Men's and
Women's Scores on the Ideal Family Role—
Related Items. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 125

13. T Values of Men's and Women's Scores on
Perceived Gender Role Characteristics
Measure Items. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 127

14. Means and Standard Deviations of Men's
and Women's Scores on the Perceived Gender
Role Characteristics Related Items . . . . . . 129

15. T Values of Men's and Women's Scores on
Perceived Family Role Performance Measure
Items. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 131

16. Means and Standard Deviations of Men's and
Women's Scores on the Perceived Family Role
Performance—Related Items. . . . . . . . . . . 132

17. A Summary of Items Related to Gender and
Family Roles in Which Men and Women Disagreed. 139

Figure

LIST OF FIGURES

Role Terms and Related Hypotheses.

A Depiction of Role Dimensions .

A Selection of Significant Gender

Role Traits Identified in One or More
Research Studies

A Classification of Twenty Family Task
Items into Ten Family Role Categories
and Family Roles . . . .

A Generation and Test of Research
Questions.

vi

Page
15
50

76

82

85

CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION AND CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK

The Purpose of Gender Role Research

 

The goal of this investigation is to empirically test
proposed ideal and perceived gender role personality
traits and family role tasks in the context of an early
marital relationship of college students with children.

Questions about whether specific gender role and
family role concepts are believed by college students are
important because theory developments in both gender role
and family development make assumptions about what these
roles are and why they are held. Assumptions are made in
research and theory without significant testing. Yet
according to mass media, both gender roles and family
roles are changing. It therefore becomes imperative to
know whether role concepts are held on family role and
gender role, and if so, what they are.

Aspects of behavior associated with gender roles and
sex discrimination are in question in American society as
evidenced by the Equal Rights Amendment pending adoption
and the Women's Liberation Movement. Many people are

attempting to change gender role definitions and sex

discrimination today. Some couples are planning to have
fewer children. More women work and more young women are
planning professional careers. Consequently, the
traditional family roles of man as provider and woman as
nurturer are changing dramatically.

What are the results of these changes? Do traditional
and equalitarian male and female role attitudes effect the
anticipated (or actual) number of children produced in the
family? Are there differences in marital decision-making?
What other definitions of gender roles are held and by
whom? Does the division of labor in the household vary
with the definition of gender roles in the marital relation-
ship? Do professional women have less traditional marriages
in terms of family role? Do younger women have less
traditional marriages? Are gender roles changing, but not
marital roles, decision-making or the division of labor
in the household? Are lower class working women more or
less traditional in gender role ideals and perceptions than
middle class women? Are they more or less traditional in
family role ideals and perceptions?

When adequate definitions are developed, gender roles,
family roles and marital behavior may be related to such
variables as socioeconomic status, number of children,
interpersonal behavior, child socialization, marital

adjustment, consumer behavior, and work and leisure activity.

This study investigates gender role and family role
concepts held by married college students. Based on
previous research findings on theoretical propositions,
role definitions are developed.

The Study of Gender Roles and
Family Roles

 

Two separate literature traditions have developed
around the concept of gender role within the family context.
One literature tradition, sex role socialization, stems
from child development research, and focuses on socializa-
tion of the child into a sex role. Another tradition,
family role development theory, draws upon family role
changes through the development of the family over time.

It comes out of family ecology and family sociology.

One problem with these research traditions is that
both use the term of "gender role” or "sex role." Yet,
both traditions refer to quite different definitions. For
instance, Jerome Kagan and Laurence Kohlberg, child
developmental psychologists, refer to personality traits
such as "aggressive" as masculine and "passive" as feminine
(Maccobby, 1966; 1974). On the other hand, Ivan Nye (1974)
and Joan Aldous (1972) both refer family roles to family
household tasks, such as housekeeping. Yet, major text-
books and theory papers on child development and family
relations both refer to these characteristics as "sex roles"

or "gender roles." Examples are Udry's text (1974), The

Social Context of Marriage, and Smart and Smart's text
(1967), Children: Behavior and Development.

Udry refers to "sex role" in a chapter on socialization
of children into personality characteristics, as well as a
chapter on "sex role specialization in marriage." For
example, in the latter chapter, he discusses division of
labor, such as "breadwinner," power and personality charac-
teristics as sex role. He introduces the chapter by making
the following questionable assumption:

This chapter is interested not in the general

division of sex roles in the society, but in

the division of roles between husband and wife.

Of course, the two are intimately interconnected

...(1974:26l)
Udry's use of a concept of the general division of gender
roles in society is reflected in his widespread use of the
term throughout the text, as if there is an underlying
biological or other basis of differences between men and
women that formulate every role they play into a "sex role."
In at least 16 out of the 19 chapters of the text he refers
to various behaviors or expectations he labels as "sex
role."

Smart and Smart also refer to sex role as personality
traits in their discussions of sex role preference and
identification and sex typing (1967:328-332). They quote

a study listing characteristics as follows from fifth

graders:

 

Masculine Feminine
Never afraid of anything Always does what teacher says
Likes to show off Likes to act grown up
Likes noisy fun Is always polite
Sticks up for own rights Likes to do for others
Is bossy Is easily embarrassed
Likes to tease others Careful not to hurt other's
feelings

Yet they also discuss sex roles as family roles and say:
"Concepts of sex role are derived to a large extent from
concepts of what fathers, mothers, and other family members
do." (1967:332)

The question is not whether both gender role and family
role are gender roles. By defining sex as physical male
or female characteristics, gender role as social charac-
teristics or traits culturally associated with maleness and
femaleness, then family role can be defined as household
tasks culturally associated with "husband-father" and "wife-
mother."

However, the underlying question remains. Are gender
role and family role true conceptions of role theory as in
social psychology and sociology? Research conducted
primarily in the 1950's and 1960's found evidence to support
that gender role ideals and perceptions were held by college
students. College students had similarities in attitudes
around male and female-associated personality traits.
(Sherriffs and McKee, 1957; Rosencrantz, et al., 1968)

There is a strong indication of gender role as a role

involving personality traits. Yet, defined measures of

gender role were not developed. This is quite different
from family role. Instead of exploratory research, family
development theory has evolved a broad-based description
of family roles without empirical testing. Yet, little
argument over the content of roles in the family has
occurred (Nye and Berardo, 1973).

The scope, nature and descriptive ability of the
concepts of gender roles and family roles cannot be deter-
mined without systematic study. Only after items
representing role characteristics are determined, can
analysis of the affects of gender roles and family roles
be made. Gender role definitions of personality charac-
teristics, as in the first area of gender role research,
should be redefined separately from definitions of family
roles.

This initial survey is a first step in that direction.
The major purpose of this study is to propose gender role
and family role constructs composed of test items suggested
by previous research and theoretical literature. Additional
theoretical propositions are stated for exploratory purposes.
By no means do the proposed operational definitions of
gender role and family role encompass all literature using
these terms. They are an attempt to test selected existing

bodies of research and theory.

Conceptual Framework

The proposed theoretical framework was developed by the
author for use in this thesis. The retroductive strategy
of theory development was the employed method. Based on
Hanson, Burr defines it as follows:

This strategy is the process of combining
the deductive and inductive methods to expand
theory. One way of doing it is to identify
several relatively specific propositions and
induce a more general proposition from these
propositions. This builds new theory, but it
is only half of the process of retroduction.
The other half is then deducing new, relatively
specific propositions from the more general
propositions (Burr, 1973:280-281).

The strategy specifically began with inductions from
research on marital adjustment into role theory. The
deductive strategy then generated new family role and
gender role concepts and propositions. These propositions
became the basis for the present study. The theoretical
framework represents the deductive stage of the retroductive
strategy. reviewing definitions of role theory, followed
by deduced gender role and family role definitions.

Role theory is the underlying theoretical framework
for the literature on gender roles and family roles. Ten
definitions of role theory concepts were devised by inter-
defining terms used by role theorists. Shaw and Costanzo's
work represents the broader theory of roles in social
psychology, while the work of Angrist and Aldous represents

applications of role theory to gender roles and the family,

respectively.

Following are the ten major concepts and their

definitions:

1.

Role: "A part of a social position that consists
of a more or less related set of normative" or
nonnormative "expectations distinguishable from
other sets of expectations in the same position,
often associated with a verbal label" (Aldous,
1972:66).

Norm: An overtly or covertly held culturally
prescribed behavioral expectation ”held by
particularized or generalized others for the
appropriate behavior that ought to be exhibited

by the person or persons holding a given role”
(Shaw and Costanzo, 1970:329).

Position: The cluster of ascribed and achieved
roles and their associated norms that an individual
can play located at a point in the social structure
at a given time.

Role Performance: "Consists of the behaviors

 

displayed by a person which are relevant to the
particular role which (s)he is currently playing,
varying in intensity of role performance by degree
of involvement of self in the role and generally
classified by its nature and ends rather than

its means" (Shaw and Costanzo, 1970:330).

Role Concept: The label of a designated role.
Role Conflict: "A specific form of polarized
dissensus results when the expectations associated
with several positions a person might hold are

incompatible with one another (inter-role conflict)

 

or when the expectations and behaviors associated
with a single position a person holds are

incompatible (intra-role conflict)" (Shaw and

 

Costanzo, 1970:339).

Focused Role: "A focused role is one that occurs

 

within a situated activity system" (Angrist, 1972:
50). An example is that the husband role takes
place within the marital system and the father
role, within the parental system.

Unfocused Role: "An unfocused role is one that
introduces modulations in the performance of
focused roles but have no particular jurisdiction:
in one situated activity system or any specific
set of tasks allocated to its performance (Angrist,
1972:50). An example is the female gender role
which crosses all social experiences and has no
specific behavioral tasks.

Achieved Role Position: A position "acquired
through the individual's own efforts" (Aldous,
1972:64). Examples are wife, teacher, babysitter,

lover.

10

10. Ascribed Role Position: A position "assigned by

 

virtue of one's age, gender or other charac-
teristics, including normative prescriptions as
to how an actor must behave" (Aldous, 1972:64).
Brown and Lynn, who have done major work in areas of
sex and gender roles in children, distinguish aspects of
sex-related experience. In summary, they consider sex to
be defined as the following:
Sex; Sex is the identity of a male or female
based on physical characteristics independent
of gender role and sexual object preference
(Brown and Lynn, 1966).
Therefore, sex is a physical condition; gender role is a
societally designated condition though not necessarily by
choice, and sexual object preference is a socially learned
condition.
Based on Angrist, and the role theory definitions, the
following role concepts are deduced:

Gender Role: Gender role refers to the norms

 

culturally associated with the ascribed sex
position of male or female based on unfocused
personality traits or characteristics.

Gender Role Conflict: Intra-role conflict results

 

when normative expectations and behaviors
associated with a gender role position are

incompatible.

11
Based on research, gender role norms, concepts and perfor-
mance are considered in the review of literature to follow.
Their definitions are conceptualized as the following:

Gender Role Norms: Gender role norms are

 

overtly or covertly held culturally prescribed
expectations held by particularized or
generalized others for the appropriate
personality trait that ought to be exhibited
by the persons holding the male or female role.

Gender Role Concepts: The label of gender roles

 

as female or feminine and male or masculine.

Gender Role Performance: The behaviors termed

 

gender role performance are those relevant to

the gender role (s)he is in, varying in degree

of intensity by the individual.
Gender role positions are assumed to be associated with
one's sex identity. However, as Brown and Lynn point out,
some peOple grow up with a gender role identity different
from their sex (Brown and Lynn, 1966). In spite of this,
society will ascribe the gender role position considered
normative for their sex. The definition follows.

Gender Role Position: Gender role position is

 

defined as the cluster of gender roles and their
associated norms that an individual can play which
are normatively ascribed by society to a particular

sex. In other words, the male gender role is

12
normatively assigned by society to males and the
female gender role to females. However, this may
be contrary to actual socialization of individuals.

Drawing from the family development theory employing
role theory, three concepts are introduced. Family is
conceived by Aldous and many others as the following:

1. Family: The family is "any small group of

persons whose members are related to one another
by marriage, birth or adoption," who share a
common household and/or, "where it is possible
for each member to affect every other member
reciprocally and directly" (Aldous, l972:5).
In family development theory, time and change are introduced
with the conceptions of family stages and the life cycle
of the family unit.

2. Family Life Cycle: The family life cycle is

 

"the existence of the family as a unit from its

inception to its dissolution,‘ in which members
experience changes in the contents of roles and
positions over time (Aldous, 1972:11).

3. Family Life Cycle Stages: Stages in the family

 

life cycle are sequenced time divisions within
the family life cycle that are different enough
from one another by changes in roles, positions,
tasks and critical developmental periods to

constitute separate stages (Aldous, 1972:56).

13

Based on these conceptualizations of the family, the follow-

ing six definitions are quoted, inferred and/or redefined

from Aldous' statements of family development theory:

1.

Family Role: Family role refers to the norms

 

associated with the achieved position of husband-
father and achieved position of wife-mother, based
on focused behavioral characteristics along

family activity, division of tasks dimensions.

Family Role Conflict: Intra-role conflict

 

results when the normative expectations and
behaviors associated with a family role position
are incompatible.

Family Role Norms: Family role norms are overtly

 

or covertly held culturally prescribed behavioral
expectations held by particularized or generalized
others for the appropriate behavior that ought to
be exhibited by the persons holding the husband-
father or wife-mother role.

Family Role Concepts: Family role concepts refers

 

to the label of the husband-father and wife-mother.

Family Role Performance: This refers to the

 

behaviors displayed by a person which are relevant
to the family role an individual holds, varying

in degree of intensity held.

Family Role Position: Family role position

 

refers to the cluster of family roles and their

14
associated norms that an individual can play,
which are normatively achieved by the individual
within each gender position.

In summary gender roles are ascribed to individuals by
their sex, they have prescribed norms that are not focused
into any one specific social context more than any other,
but have a pervasive influence over focused role performance.

It is clear that when attempting to distinguish family
roles from gender roles, social norms disallow conceptions
of shared or exchangeable roles. Men are assigned the
husband-father role position and women are assigned the wife-
mother position. Variations of this are often thought
temporary, due to unusual circumstances, and undesirable.

The underlying theme in family development theory is
that family roles are natural and more specialized develop-
ments from gender roles because gender roles are ascribed
and unfocused, and family roles are achieved and focused.
Thus, the pervasiveness of gender roles in the norms or
ideology of society can affect attitudes towards many other
roles. In Figure I the terms described in this chapter and
the hypothesis associated with specific terms are depicted.

Perception of roles, role content, sex differences, and
research on aspects of role performance are discussed in the

literature review chapter following.

15

.H Hmuawso SH

calm .mm co mommnuoazn mo umHH mnu on Home“ muonafia .mmmmnuommn mafia

 

unmoaoo mHom mawamm unmocou maom Hobamu
mommauomumm maom %Hwamm moawEhomumm mHom Hmvcmu
aoHuHmom maom hawamm cowuwmom oaom umbcoo
Ehoz mHoM hawamh Bhoz maom Hmvaow
poaamaoo mace AHaEma soaamaoo maom panama

maom em>maao<
mHom empauoma
maom Ummnoomcs

oaom comDUOh

unmocou maom mH .<H
mocmauomuom maom OH .UH
coauamom > .>H .HHH .HH
Buoz

uoHHmsou oHom H>
mace em>maao<
maom wmnwuom<
maom powwoomfia

maom peanuom

 

 

zaflamm maom Hmpcmu maom
Ammwmum macho owed kafiswmv
Amaosu mafia saasmev
Amflasmmv Axmmv
zuomsh oaom haflamm knomsfi maom Hmpaou mnomny maom wmmmnuommm
*mmmosuoazm wmumamm cam mahoH maom "H.muswwm

16

Objective

 

The purpose of the study is to empirically test ideal
and perceived aspects of gender role and family role in
married college student couples with young children. Gender
role is defined as a set of personality traits while family
role is defined as a set of household tasks. If items
constitute unitary, operational constructs of ideal and
perceived gender roles and family roles, then sex
differences and relationships to marital adjustment can be

explored.

Assumptions

 

The hypotheses are based on the following considera-

tions:

1. Gender role and family role characteristics
held by subjects in previous research are
significant and generalizable to the current
populations under study.

2. Gender role and family role perceptions of self
and spousal behavior as defined can be measured
through a self report questionnaire method. This
presumes some degree of cognitive awareness.

3. Gender role and family role ideal concepts of male
and female traits or tasks as defined can be
measured through a self report questionnaire
method. This presumes some degree of cognitive

awarenes S .

17
4. Gender roles are unfocused roles held by
individuals across contexts, while family roles
are focused roles, held only in specific family
contexts.
5. Self report of marital adjustment is sufficiently
reliable and valid for the purpose of sample

comparisons.

Definition of Terms

 

The following concepts are the major variables under
investigation and are defined conceptually and operationally:

I. Family Life Cycle Stages Two, Three and Four--

 

The family life cycle stages are defined as husband, wife
and children between the ages of O to 13 years old. Stage
two refers to families with children 30 months or under,
stage three with children 5 years or under and stage four
with children 13 years or under (Nye and Berardo, 1973:536).
These families are defined as sharing a common household.

II. Ideal Gender Role Concepte- Ideal gender role

 

concept refers to individual personal beliefs or values
about twenty characteristic personality traits associated
with the ascribed gender position of "male" and "female."
Ten traits hypothesized as associated with the female gender
role concept are: sympathetic, affectionate, gentle,
tactful, sensitive, religious, polite, warm, sentimental,

and neat. Ten traits hypothesized as associated with the

18
male gender role concept are: ambitious, aggressive, self-
confident, independent, adventurous, dominant, logical,
realistic, dynamic and competitive. Gender role traits
are scored using the Ideal Gender Role Concept Measure and
range from highly traditional beliefs (a high score) to
highly anti-traditional or role-reversed beliefs (low
score). A midpoint score represents shared characteristics.

III. Perceived Gender Role Characteristics-- Perceived
gender role characteristics refer to an individual's percep-
tion of his/her own and spousal unfocused role characteristics
socially designated as normative expectations for male and
female gender roles as listed in definition II above. Gender
role characteristics are quantified using the Perceived
Gender Role Characteristics Measure. Perceptions range
from highly traditional (a high score) to highly anti-
traditional or role-reversed. A midpoint score represents
perceived shared characteristics .

IV. Ideal Family Role Concept-- Ideal family role

 

concept refers to the individual's personal beliefs or
values about twenty characteristic tasks associated with

the achieved role position of "husband-father" and "wife-
mother." The author developed a family role concept measure
to score family role tasks which range from highly tradi-
tional beliefs (high score) to highly anti-traditional or
role-reversed beliefs (low score). A midpoint score

represents shared tasks.

19

The ten tasks hypothesized as associated with the wife

family role concept are:

prepares a dinner when friends are invited;

helps the child(ren) find playmates and have

play experiences with them;

dresses, feeds and entertains the child(ren);

tends to give family members affection and reassurance
when problems arise;

makes medical and dental appointments for family
members;

dusts, washes the floors, and cleans the bathroom;
decorates the house with plants, knick-knacks,
curtains, pictures, etc.;

makes the daily family meals;

sends birthday, wedding and bereavement and holiday
cards to relatives;

purchases the child(ren)'s clothing.

The ten tasks hypothesized as associated with the

husband family role concept are:

plans to be the major provider for the family
economically;

whose education or job determines where the family
lives;

rough-houses (is physically playful) with the
child(ren);

takes over in a family crisis such as a death;

20
- participates in sports activities;
— initiates sexual activity on a regular basis;
- takes care of repair and services for the car;
- drives, when the couple is in the car;
- is concerned with locking doors at-night and when
the family is away;
- chooses insurance policies for the family.

V. Perceived Family Role Performance-- Perceived

 

family role performance refers to an individual's percep—
tion of his/her own and spousal focused role performance

of tasks socially designated as normative expectations

for "husband-father" and "wifedmother" family roles. The
author developed a perceived family role performance measure
with scores ranging from highly traditional (high score) to
highly anti-traditional or role-reversed (low score).
Perceptions of family role performance are tabulated. A
mid-point score represents shared performance. The tasks
hypothesized as associated with the roles are those listed
above in definition IV.

VI. Marital Adjustment-- Marital adjustment is defined

 

as marital success and is evaluated by the following factors:
companionship, consensus, affection, satisfaction, and
sexual behavior, as measured on a short-form questionnaire
developed by Locke and Williamson (Udry, 1974:210-214;
Locke and Williamson, 1958). A high score is regarded as

the highest third of all possible scores (97-120), and a

21
low score is the lowest third of all possible scores

(49-72).

Hypotheses

 

The hypotheses are exploratory and stated concep-
tually and operationally. Those related to the role
measurement instruments (I) are tests of whether the items
together constitute a concept. These are the major
hypotheses of the study. Hypotheses related to male-female
differences and similarities (II, III, IV, V and VI) are
minor hypotheses. Marital adjustment (VI) is dependent
on the outcome of the major hypotheses for analysis.

I. Measurement Instruments

 

The following propositions state that each set of
items constitutes a measure of a concept.
A. Ideal Gender Role Concept

1. There is a significant positive relationship
among women's scores on individual items of the ideal
gender role concept measure.

2. There is a significant positive relationship among
men's scores on individual items of the ideal gender role
concept measure.

3. There is a significant positive relationship among
all scores on individual items of the ideal gender role

COHC ept mea 8111' e .

22
B. Ideal Family Role Concept

1. There is a significant positive relationship among
women's scores on individual items of the ideal family role
concept measure.

2. There is a significant positive relationship among
men's scores on individual items of the ideal family role
concept measure.

3. There is a significant positive relationship among
all scores on individual items of the ideal family role
concept measure.

C. Perceived Gender Role Characteristics

1. There is a significant positive relationship among
women's scores on individual items of the perceived gender
role characteristics measure.

2. There is a significant positive relationship among
men's scores on individual items of the perceived gender
role characteristics measure.

3. There is a significant positive relationship among
all scores on individual items of the perceived gender role
characteristics measure.

D. Perceived Family Role Performance

1. There is a significant positive relationship among
women's scores on individual items of the perceived family
role performance measure.

2. There is a significant positive relationship among

men's scores on individual items of the perceived family role

performance measure.

23
3. There is a significant positive relationship among
all scores on individual items of the perceived family role

performance measure.

11. Ideal Gender Concept

 

Male and female married college students agree on
beliefs about their gender role concepts. There is no
significant difference between men and women's scores on
the ideal gender role concept measure.

III. Ideal Family Role Concgpt

 

Male and female married students agree on beliefs
about their ideal family role concept. There is no signifi-
cant difference between men and women's scores on the ideal
family role concept measure.

IV. Perceived Gender Role Characteristics

 

Male and female married college students disagree on
perceptions about their gender role characteristics. There
is a significant difference between men and women's scores
on the perceived gender role characteristics measure.

V. Perceived Family Role Performance

 

Male and female married college students disagree on
perceptions about the couple's family role performance.
There is a significant difference between men and women's
scores on the perceived family role performance measure.

VI. Marital Adjustment

 

A. Women show higher marital adjustment than men.

Women have significantly higher marital adjustment scores

24
than men.

B. Male and female subjects with lOWWmarital adjust-
ment exhibit greater differences between their ideals and
perceived role performances for gender role and family
role concepts than male and female subjects with high
marital adjustment. More specifically,

1. Men with low marital adjustment scores have
significantly greater differences than do men
with high marital adjustment scores between the
following scores:

a. between ideal gender role concept measure
scores and perceived gender role performance
measure scores.

b. between ideal family role concept measure
scores and perceived family role performance
measure scores.

c. between the difference of ideal gender role
concept and perceived gender role performance
measure scores, and the difference of ideal
family role concept and perceived family role
performance measure scores.

2. Women with low marital adjustment scores have
significantly greater differences than do women
with high marital adjustment scores between the

following scores:

25
between ideal gender role concept measure
scores and perceived gender role performance
7 measure scores.
between ideal family role concept measure
scores and perceived family role performance
measure scores.
between the difference of ideal gender role
concept and perceived gender role performance
measure scores, and the difference of ideal
family role concept and perceived family role

performance measure scores.

CHAPTER II

REVIEW OF LITERATURE

The purpose of the review of literature is to develop
conceptual definitions and generate propositions about
gender role and family role. Discussions of role percep-
tions and role ideals as well as traditional and
nontraditional role taking, lead to the development of
separate concepts of perceived and ideal roles, held by
individuals within a range of traditional role taking. In
order to analyze the importance of gender role and family
role concept, sex differences in behavior as well as role

conflict in relation to marital adjustment are reviewed.

Gender Role

 

Gender role concept as a set of personality traits is
selected for investigation in this study. Types of gender
role concepts are analyzed. Following this, three sets of
studies are compared for similarity of research findings.

Is gender role a unitary concept within American
norms and expectations? Gender role has been studied from
various perspectives, as reported by Hochschild (1973).
However, few researchers have attempted to define or
operationalize their definitions through research. Gender

26

27
role has been measured by American social scientists with
varying assumptions.

Two types of contents have typified gender role measure-
ment instruments. One is the personality assessment where
conforming to gender role norms is a necessary requirement
for personality adjustment. Scales such as the Minnesota
Multiphasic Personality Inventory, the Edwards Personal
Preference Inventory, and the California Psychological
Inventory measure what they term, ”masculinity-femininity"
(Sopchak, 1952; Edwards, 1968; Gough, 1957). The assump-
tions are that identification of oneself and one's interests
as male or female depend on absolute and fixed gender role
norms and that these are related to personality adjustment.

According to these personality inventories, "masculinity-
femininity," or "Mf," crosses all personality traits and is
related to biological and socialization foundations. There-
fore, male and female personalities are differentially
evaluated using an Mf score, as well as adjustments on other
scales according to sex differences norms. Sample state-

ments are:

When a parent, teacher, or boss scolds me,
I sometimes feel like crying.

I am inclined to take things hard.

I fre uently find it necessary to stand
up or what I think is right.

I think I would like the work of a garage
‘mechanic (Lunneborg and Lunneborg,
l970b:360).

28

In reviews and reassessments of the personality Mf
approach, critics point out several deficits. One is
that gender role norms change with societal fluctuations
in attitudes about gender and life styles. Therefore,
specific behavioral interests and experiences become out-
moded (Lunneborg, l970a; Lunneborg and Lunneborg, l970b;
Angrist, 1972, Broverman et al., 1972; Henshel, 1971;
Naimark, 1973; McKee and Sherriffs, 1959). For instance,
women may regard more professions open to them today
such as police work, law and medicine, that may not be
identified as exclusively masculine any longer.

A second problem with the Mf scales is that subjects
evaluate masculinity more positively than femininity in
society. There is evidence to indicate that it is Egg
healthy to be highly feminine-identified. Both male and
female college students evaluated male-associated traits
more highly than female-associated traits (McKee and
Sherriffs, 1957). In addition, male—associated traits were
more often rated healthy while female-associated traits
rated unhealthy by college student and mental health
clinician samples (Broverman et al., 1970; Rosenkrantz et a1,
1968; Broverman et al., 1972). Therefore, assumptions about
the relationship between degree of individual identification
with the same sex gender role stereotype and personality

adjustment are not valid. Society, may expect identification

29
with one's ascribed gender role while personality adjustment
goals are in contradiction for women.

Angrist points out that vague, unfocused gender roles
come into play in a cluster of more specific roles. She
states:

The utility of a role constellation approach
to the study of sex roles rests on the fact
that the individual rarely, if ever, behaves
just as a man or a woman. Rather, sex (role)
modifies, sometimes strongly, sometimes weakly,
whatever social interactions or relationships
he is engaged in (Angrist, 1972:53).
Therefore, not only is gender role enacted when a boy wants
to solve the world's economic problems, and a girl wants
to raise children, but other roles as well.

A second type of measurement of gender role has been
a direct approach, assuming sex typing reflects societal
norms. It evaluates the degree of consensus among subjects
about those norms. Typical assessments along these lines
have been made by Sherriffs and McKee, the Broverman
research group, and Johnsen. The method involves presenting
a large list of personality traits chosen and rated as
more typical of one sex than the other (Sherriffs and
MCKee, 1957; Broverman et al., 1972; Johnsen, 1973). Sample
items are, "aggressive, independent, gentle, tactful,
religious, ambitious" (Broverman, 1972).

While the personality Mf approach assumes what is

normative, the sex-typing approach asks what is normative.

30

The second approach, employed by Johnsen, Sherriffs
and McKee, and the Broverman group, makes different assump-
tions and tests different questions. One assumption is
that self report of gender role characteristics is possible
and meaningful because they are cognitive and consciously
held beliefs. The second assumption is that personality
traits define significant aspects of gender role. Both
agree with Angrist that gender roles as unfocused roles
act as mediators or filters when other, more focused roles
are enacted. However, individuals must have an abstract
conceptualization of gender role norms and it must be
conscious enough to generalize across various contextual
behaViors.

The questions addressed by these studies focus on the
degree of consensus by subjects of gender role norms held
in society, variation in gender role norms, and gender
differences in attitudes about gender roles.

Johnsen, Sherriffs and McKee, and the Broverman group
use different pools of traits from which to explore these
questions. Yet a surprising degree of consensus exists
among the three studies. Together they span several decades
of college students from different geographic locations
(Midwest, West, East), and represent the most systematic
studies involving large pools of traits to date. The
Sherriffs and McKee, and Broverman group studies each

comprise a synthesis of several data collection periods.

31
Therefore, these traits are reported as significant across
a variety of samples.

Tressemer, in an extensive review of gender role
literature, examines the validity of the gender role concept.
He suggests that while gender role is thought to be
attitudinally unitary and consistent, it does not cross
subcultural groups, nor is it often significantly related
to behavioral variables (Tressemer, 1975). Tressemer
evaluates the attitudinal-trait models as follows:

The underlying assumption of these models, as

well as the scales devised to measure them,

are that masculinity-femininity is a bipolar,

unidimensional, continuous, normally distri-

buted variable that is highly important and

consistently viewed within the samples popu-

lation (Tressemer, 1975:318).
Suggesting these assumptions are erroneous, Tressemer
recommends that research address issues of developmental
levels of gender role cognitive conceptions. He believes
a stage theory of conceptual development can be constructed
of gender roles akin to Kohlberg's Piagetian-based stage
theory of moral development (Kohlberg, 1969).

As reflected in the attitudinal, and gender behavior
differences studies, as well as in Tressemer's analysis,
there is no definitive construct testing of any gender role
concept. Attitudinal surveys have turned away from traits
and role definitions to a collection of feminist attitudes

or beliefs (Aroji, 1977; Osmond and Martin, 1975; Bayer,
1975; Parelius, 1975; Roper and LaBeff, 1977; Scanzoni, 1975;

32

Singleton and Christiansen, 1977; Smith, Feree and Miller,

1975; Wilson, 1973). Yet, they also still found significant

levels of stereotyping by sex, most often based on college

student surveys.

Typical items from Wilson's questionnaire are:

1. Which sex has more advantages and privileges in

this society?

a.

b.

d.

e.

Men have many more than women.

Men have more than women.

There are advantages and disadvantages for
each sex.

Women have more advantages than men.

Women have many more advantages than men.

2. What is the best way for most women to develop

their potential?

3.

b.

By being good wives and mothers only.

By taking jobs that utilize their uniquely
feminine skills and qualities.

By taking jobs that fulfill them as individuals.
By joining women's groups that will develop

their consciousness as women.

By combining marriage, motherhood and work.

By combining marriage or a love relationship

and work. (1973:73)

Behavioral differences as yet do not attempt to

theoretically connect these differences to theoretical

33
concepts. Tressemer, on the other hand, offers many
questions, but neither theory postulation nor testing.
While this author agrees that theoretical formulations to
date are rudimentary, the task at hand is to construct,
evaluate and reconstruct rather than to "throw out the
baby with the bath water."

The purpose of this study is to propose an operational
definition of gender role based on past research on gender
assignment of traits. Studies on gender role-associated
items by three research groups generated characteristics
that imply definitions of gender role concept. Question-
naire items incorporating these characteristics are used.
The three research groups are the Sherriffs and McKee
(1957, 1957, 1959), the Broverman, Broverman, Clarkson,
Rosenkrantz, and Vogel group (1968, 1970, 1970, 1972) and
Johnsen (1973). These studies span three decades of
college students in the East, West and Midwest of the
United States. Yet, findings are remarkably parallel.
Rather than attempt to describe all aspects of each study
groups' investigations, following is a summation of the
general method and selected analyses of interest.

The Sherriffs and McKee conducted a series of
investigations on sex role stereotype by college students
at the University of California, Berkeley in the late 1950's.
They asked several samples of college students about their

attitudes toward traits as associated more with males,

34
females or neutral, on a scale of 6 or 7 choices. In order
to generate these traits, they used the following sampling
procedure:

We have dealt with the sampling problem in two
ways. First, we have chosen Sarbin's 200
adjective check list as a source of items since
it is widely agreed to include many charac-
teristics which are significant aspects of
personality and it was not specially con-
structed to evaluate maIes and females. Second,
we asked subjects simply to list 10 of the
characteristics of men and 10 of women. Under
such open end conditions each subject may
select from his own personal population of
attributes those which his is able and willing
to transmit to paper. (Sherriffs and McKee,
1957:452)

Based on this, they determined items which were signi-
ficantly found to be associated to men and to women. The
following favorable characteristics are reported by men
and women to be associated to men at a significance level
of p i .05 (75% at p i .01): "easy-going, informal, frank,
humorous, witty, thorough, deliberate, industrious, calm,
steady, realistic, stable, logical, clear thinking, sharp
witted, broad minded, interests wide, ambitious,
individualistic courageous, aggressive, dominant, self-
confident, independent, forceful, dynamic, rugged,
adventurous, daring, masculine (l957:453)." Favorable
characteristics associated with females by both men and
women are: "sophisticated, poised, welldmannered, tactful,
pleasant, sociable, modest, gentle, affectionate, kind,

warm, understanding, sympathetic, soft-hearted, sentimental,

loveable, dreamy, sensitive, artistic, religious and

35
feminine (1957:454)." They also found significant differ-
ences between women and men samples.

The Broverman and Rosenkrantz research group also
conducted a series of sampling surveys, totalling 599 men
and 383 women, in the late 1960's. They generated a pool
of traits in a manner slightly different from the
Sherriffs and McKee. They asked 100 students in Eastern
colleges "to list all the characteristics, attributes,
and behaviors on which they thought men and women differed."
(1972:61)

All items listed twice were included in a questionnaire
in which college students rated the items on a 60 point
scale ranging from adult male to adult female. The criteria
for agreement about whether it was associated with men or
women was 75% agreement at p < .01 level. The significant
difference between male and female associated items on a
t-test was 2 < .001.

Based on a factor analysis, two factors were generally

produced. One was a "competency c1uster,‘ where masculine-
associated characteristics were considered desirable. The
other factor was labelled "the warmth expressiveness

cluster,‘ and female—associated characteristics were
considered desirable.

The favorable masculine-associated characteristics
are: "very aggressive, very independent, not at all

emotional, almost always hides emotions, very objective, not

36
at all easily influenced, very dominant, likes math and
science very much, not at all excitable in a minor crisis,
very active, very competitive, very logical, very worldly,
very skilled in business, very direct, knows the way of
the world, feelings not easily hurt, very adventurous, can
make decisions easily, never cries, almost always acts as
a leader, very self-confident, not at all uncomfortable
about being aggressive, very ambitious, easily able to
seaparate feelings from ideas, not at all dependent, never
conceited about appearance, thinks men are always superior
to women, and talks freely about sex with men (1972:63)."

The favorable feminine-associated characteristics
are: "doesn't use harsh language at all, very talkative,
very tactful, very gentle, very aware of feelings of others,
very religious, very interested in own appearance, very
neat in habits, very quiet, very strong need for security,
enjoys art and literature, and easily expresses tender
feelings (1972:63)."

In 1973 Kathryn Johnsen reported her findings on 190
college students at Purdue University in Indiana. After
asking students to generate a list on their own of 10 male
and 10 female-associated traits, the pool of traits was
compiled by a class of graduate students into a list of
60 items. She then had her sample of college men and women
rate these traits as to whether they were associated more

with men or women. The scale was a 5 point Likert-type

37
scale of (+2) "men much more" to (0) "each sex the same,"
to (-2) "women much more."

Criteria for acceptance was that at least 45% of the
sample agreed that it was associated with a particular sex.
Male-associated traits include: "adventurous, realistic,
rational, independent, protective, ambitious, responsible,
self-confident, dominant and aggressive (1973:14)." Items
associated with females are: "gracious, compassionate,
neat, gentle, sympathetic, affectionate, polite, forgiving,
dependent, sentimental, and domestic (l973:16)." Sex
differences in scoring existed on various traits to some
extent.

The research studies exhibit a high consensus on
the types of traits, but it seems more reasonable to
conclude that these are not constant across all subcultural
groups and time. However, the consensus may be due to a
high degree of awareness of societal norms about gender
roles. Variation must be expected between individual belief
level and beliefs in society.

People may agree about what is typically expected about
gender roles in society, as confirmed by the college student
research. All three studies point out that these norms are
also reflected in how students describe individual self
concepts (that is, what traits describe you and to what
degree). Internalization of gender roles can be evaluated

by asking students to rate themselves.

38
Based on the traits identified in these studies, an,
operational definition of gender role is proposed. But,
according to Angrist, a specific social context is needed
for study and potential enactment of gender roles. The
marital system including family concepts is selected as
this context since work has been done in this area using

role theory (Angrist, 1972).

Family Role

 

Literature is reviewed to develop a definition of
family role and draws upon family development theory,
family role research and marital power research. Selected
researchers and theorists are reviewed.

Angrist suggests the relationship between gender role
and family role is that the former is unfocused and the
latter focused into a specific behavioral context. Family
roles are seen as taking place within the family inter-
active system. According to family development theory
family experiences fall within definitive breaks or stages
occurring in the family life cycle development system.
Therefore, families before having children, are quite
different from families with young children, or those with
older children, and so on (Aldous, 1972; Hill and Rodgers,
1964; Nye and Berardo, 1973).

However, investigations of family role have centered

on the role-taking process rather than role content (Burr,

39
1973). To date, indications of role content are generally
restricted to theoretical propositions and unsystematic,
specialized arenas of family role investigation.

In family development theory, family roles are the
definitive concept in which to explain family member
activity. While the experience of a family role changes
over the family life cycle, basic structural elements or
roles are generally defined. In a recent review of family
roles, Nye reworked the elements of family role into
eight major tasks (Nye and Berardo, 1973; Nye, 1974a,
1974b). The eight areas of family roles are: provider,
socialization, child care, therapeutic, recreation, sexual,
housekeeping, and kinship.

Several conceptual modifications broaden the family
role definition and makes them more all inclusive.
Socialization can be extended to include socialization of
adult family members as well as children. Therapeutic can
be broadened to include crisis situations and authority
patterns. And, housekeeping can be broadened to include
maintenance activities, since it is generally associated
with female, but not male, physical labor in the household.

Nye's conceptualization neglects two very significant
role areas. One is financial management which cannot be
subsumed under provider (Dunn, 1960). In an investigation
of family roles, Nye asks questions specifically related

to this task (Nye, 1974a). The other area is family and

40
household protection. This was originally conceptualized
by Ogburn several decades ago in a list of seven family
functions (Nye and Berardo, 1973z8). This role is conceived
of as a task not wholely subsumed under provider and is a
significant function for families including children,
elderly or handicapped members.

The result is a list of ten family role functions.
Though overlapping, the categories depict central aspects
of the family system. They include: provider, socializa-
tion, child care, therapeutic, recreation, sexual,
housekeeping and maintenance, kinship, protection, and
financial management.

Nye's research on family role has been the only
extensive investigation of the content of husband and wife
roles. To date, analysis was incomplete and reliability
had not been established. Several data collection periods
have been set up on a longitudinal basis. The questionnaire
instruments are long and unwieldy, generating a profuse
amount of data. Covering eight of the major family role
tasks, the following samples of questions are asked in a
variety of formats:

- Who should provide the income? (Provider)

- Who should discipline, teach acceptable behavior

and help school age children with their jobs?

(Socialization)

41

- Who should take care of preschool children?

(Child Care)

- To whom, if anyone, do you talk to about your own
problems? (Therapeutic)

- Who should organize family recreation and help
family members with their recreational activities?
(Recreation)

- How satisfying do you find sex in your marriage?
(Sexual)

- Who should do the housekeeping? (Housekeeping and
Maintenance)

- Who should keep in touch with relatives? (Kinship)

- Which of the following best describes how you feel
about giving financial help to relatives? (Kinship)

(Nye, 1974a)
The serious drawback from Nye's research is not in the
conceptualization of the family roles so much as in the
lack of empirical verification of these concepts. It is
difficult to accept his data results based on these
questionnaire items. In attempting to answer these questions,
it becomes apparent that they are vague, overly broad and
general.

Other than Nye's recent research on family role, no

systematic investigation of tasks constituting family role
could be found. Instead, specific lists of questions have

attempted to address specialized issues. The major area in

42
which specialized research around family roles has taken
place is marital power research.

In the family power literature, Safilios-Rothschild
points out the need for systematic investigations of
decision points for husbands and wives. She further
criticizes the lack of systematic conceptualization and
measurement weighing of individual questionnaire items
(Safilios-Rothschild, 1969).

In evaluating the questionnaire items used by
Safilios-Rothschild, only 6 of the 10 major family tasks
are covered. There is also an emphasis on financial
purchases with 7 out of 14 reported items asking about who
makes specific purchases. The specific purchase questions
ask who makes purchase decisions on furniture and household
items, food, clothing, a car, house or apartment to buy
or rent, life insurance, and use of available money in
general.

The other seven questions cover a variety of tasks
not including child care, therapeutic, sexual, or protection.
"Job husband should take" is the task of provider. Rearing
of children and family size questions relate to the
socialization task. Use of leisure time and choice of
friends are questions referring to recreation. The only
housekeeping and maintenance question was "what doctor to
consult," and a general kinship task of relations with

inlaws was included. While Safilios-Rothschild's criticisms

43
are apparent, the data results contribute to some verifica—
tion of the family role concepts.

Therefore, based on the theoretical conceptions of
Ogburn, Nye and Berardo, and the data reported by Nye and
Safilios-Rothschild, a definition of family role based on
family tasks is proposed. The family role concept is
based on a set of ten family tasks, including: provider,
socialization, child care, therapeutic, recreation, sexual,
housekeeping and maintenance, kinship, protection, and

financial management.

Role Percgptions and Role Ideals

In this section pertinent literature is reviewed,
conceptually distinguishing role ideals from perceptions of
actual role performance that individuals hold. This
conceptual distinction is analyzed in gender role and family
role literatures available.

Role performance has been defined as "the behaviors
displayed by a person which are relevant to the particular
role which (s)he is currently playing, varying in intensity
of role performance by the degree of involvement of self in
the role" (Shaw and Costanzo, 1970:330). Role concept as
opposed to performance can activate both behaviors and
expectations from others and from oneself. Therefore,
performance refers to enactment in behavior and concept

refers to the abstract idea of the role held by the person.

44

Role performance has been investigated empirically as
an individual's perceptions of higher and/or spousal role
performance. Data on role concepts have generally included
ideals held by individuals or their views of societal
ideals.

Perceptions of role performance in gender role research
center on reports of self concept. Data comparisons have
been made between self, ideal and societal ideal
(Rosenkrantz et al., 1968; Lunneborg, 1970b; McKee and
Sherriffs, 1959; Johnsen, 1973). Mixed interpretations of
results, methods of data collection and analysis make the
picture unclear. However, as the Lunneborgs point out,
self concepts, while generally in the direction of gender
role stereotypic choices, are not nearly as exaggerated as
societal stereotypes.

Questionnaire reports of societal ideals are consensual
validations of cultural norms rather than measures of
internalization of these norms. The pictures of personal
ideals that individuals held, when asked to describe their
ideal woman or man, were more discriminatory and personal
than societal ideals. While they seem to reflect gender
role stereotyping, attitude variations appear in data
results.

The variation is analyzed only by sex rather than
according to individual differences (McKee and Sherriffs,

1957, 1959). Therefore, it can be tentatively surmised that

45
ideals reflect values ascribed by individuals about gender
roles, while self concepts reflect individual perceptions
of reality. Because these studies indicate adherence to
gender role norms at all levels, it is further hypothesized
that gender roles are unitary concepts with culturally
established norms.

Work parallel to research on gender role ideals and
self concept has not been accomplished in family role
research. However, similar propositions are stated in a
review by Burr and an analysis of family roles by Nye
(Burr, 1973; Nye and Berardo, 1973). Personal ideals are
an important source of role enactment and transition (Burr,
1973:48, 146; Nye and Berardo, 1973:13).

Self concept in relation to family roles has been
measured as perceptions of congruity of family role enact-
ments of spouse and self. Perceptual congruity was reported
important for marital satisfaction by Luckey and Hawkins
and Johnsen, and in a review of research by Udry (Luckey,
1960; Hawkins and Johnsen, 1969; Udry, 1974). Variations
of role concept ideals and perceptions of enactment have
also been reported as generational or societal change in
recent research (Nye, 1974b; Nye and Berardo, 1973; Bahr,
1974; Naimark, 1973; Udry, 1974).

Since these studies report recognition and internaliza-

tion of family roles as ideals and as perceptions of role

46
enactment of self and spouse, family role is hypothesized as
a unitary concept.

In gender roles and family roles, then, a distinction
has been made between ideal roles as values, and reports of
role enactment as perceptions of individual reality. Values
are viewed as concepts of desirable goals, behaviors or end
results (BangstonznxiLovejoy, 1973). In contrast, percep-
tion of role enactment depends on an individual's view of
his/her own and spousal behavior, attitudes, and/or
personality relative to a specific role concept. Larson
specifies perception in an interpersonal context as the
family as:

Those aspects of cognitive activity directly
related to sensory information received or
available at the time a response occurs....
(It is) the perception of the moods,
attitudes, perceptions, and behaviors of

another individual or group (Larons, 1974:
1-2).

Perception of role enactment and ideal role concepts
differ for gender roles as well as for family roles.
Perceptions and ideals cannot be expected to be the same
for individuals, given variations in cultural context,
marital satisfactions and undisclosed ideals for other,
possibly more important and conflicting goals (Nye and
Berardo, 1973; Bangston and Lovejoy, 1973). However,
differences between ideals and perceptions of actual
behavior may be significant for relationship adjustment,

satisfaction and success (Luckey, 1960; Hawkins and

47

Johnsen, 1969; Udry, 1974). Also, gaps can exist between
ideals and perceptions of one's own behavior, and conflict-
ing ideals, such as feminism and the "Total Woman."

Therefore, based on the literature reviewed, gender
role and family role concepts must be distinguished from
ideal concepts to perceived role characteristics and
performance. Evidence also indicates that gender roles
and family roles are changing in ideals and role enactment
(Naimarck, 1973; Nye, 1974b; Bahr, 1974; Bernard, 1972).
An integral aspect of role-related behavior and social

change is the degree to which people take on a role.

Nontraditional Role-Taking

 

The question of the range or degree of role-taking is
reviewed in this section. A comparison is made between
two dimensions used frequently in the literature: degree
of traditional role—taking and the degree of segregation
of roles between the sexes in role-taking. Both dimensions
are proposed to be conceptually integrated.

Various family researchers have described concepts of
traditional family roles in terms of contrasts with non-
traditional roles. For example, traditional family roles
have been defined as instrumental for males and expressive
for females (Parsons and Bales, 1955). But this theory
fails to withstand empirical tests (Rollins, 1963). Evidence
indicates the instrumental-expressive dimension better

describes a group of personality characteristics that

48
cluster in a female gender role factor of warmth and
expressiveness and a male gender role factor of competency
(Broverman et al., 1972).

The initial paradigm by Parson and Bales demonstrates
the confusion between gender roles and family roles. If
the concept of female gender role is in the warmth-
expressiveness cluster, it does not necessarily follow with
her family role of wife/mother who keeps house, prepares
meals, etc.

Gender role, marital role and sex are independent
phenomena that can vary mutually, but cannot be assumed to
be mutually causal, or aspects of the same variable. Leik
compared women's interpersonal responses to experimental
situations with their husbands and strangers (Leik, 1963).
He interpreted women's behavior along expressive lines and
found them more expressive with strangers than husbands.
Switching the focused role from husband to stranger, and
assuming that because she is a female, she is expressive,
leads to confusion of gender role, marital role and sex.

Sex refers to the biological gender assigned an
individual based on physical characteristics. Leik's
assumptions lead to misidentification of all behavior as
gender role-related, and therefore, all female behavior
evaluated against the expressive versus instrumental
dimensions. Instead, sex, gender role and marital role

must be separated out and described.

49

Another framework for contrasting role behavior is
the traditional or role segregation dimension versus the
equalitarian or role shared dimension. For example, the
traditional dimension refers to one spouse normally
assigned a specific task or trait, while the shared
dimension does not. A typical question is who makes what
decision (husband or wife) and to what extent (always,
often, sometimes, etc.).

This dimension has been given central attention in
literature reviews on gender roles as family roles (Udry,
1974); family decision-making (Safilios-Rothschild, 1970;
Burr, 1973); and family life cycle (Burr, 1973).

The concept of role reversal in family interaction
research was further evaluated. In an extensive review of
this literature, Riskin and Faunce point out the charac-
teristics of the debate. They summarize it as follows:

Role reversal theory has come out of the
clinical tradition of working with families
with a schizophrenic member. This theory
postulates that the mother usurps the
father's role as the authority figure in the
household and this reversal of traditional
role models is present in schizophrenic
families. It has been the basis of much
research with Cheek and Farina and Dunham,
obtaining results to support this theory,
and findings of Caputo and Haley refuting

this theory (Riskin and Faunce, 1972:432).

Therefore, role segregation dimension can be extended

theoretically from simple role segregation to role segre-

gation plus direction. The dimension is depicted in Figure

2.

50

Figure 2: A Depiction of Role Dimensions

 

Traditional Role Equalitarian Anti-traditional
Segregation Role (Reversed)
by Gender/Age Integration Role Segregation
Characteristics (Shared) ' by Gender/Age
Characteristics

The major issue with this framework is the assumption
that abnormal families are causally linked to role reversal.
This resembles the now recognized misconception about
homosexuality. Because clinical psychologists only saw
maladjusted homosexuals, homosexuality was determined the
cause of maladjustment. Parallel to this, clinical
psychologists, having only seen abnormal families with
role reversal assume role reversal is abnormal.

An alternate explanation of schizophrenia is that it
originates in a double bind situation. The schizophrenic's
family exclusively recognizes and legitimates traditional
roles, while anti-traditional roles are actually played out.
This creates an immense contradiction for the schizophrenic.
Therefore, female authority may be the source of problems
because of a lack of recognition and legitimation of role
reversal rather than the phenomenon of role reversal (Laing,
1969; Parker, 1972). Further research of healthy role
reversal (anti-traditional) families is needed to under-

stand the parameters and cOnsequences of such a life style.

51

In several futuristic analyses, critics of family role
and gender role research indicate role segregation in
traditional and anti-traditional or reversed norms is
different and out-of-mode with current and future life
style choices. Instead, role integration or "androgyny"
is predicted to become the ideal situation for an increasing
number of young couples (Bernard, 1972; Osofsky and
Osofsky, 1972).

In a concluding statement the Osofsky's state:

Society and the individual within it are changing.
Some people will undoubtedly choose to follow
traditional sex-typed roles. However, others will
not and they will have both the ability and
encouragement to develop new patterns. It may be
expected that the changes which are occurring will
lead to fuller deve10pment of the potential of a
greater number of individuals in the society.
Hopefully, people, in varied roles can contribute
to a healthful orientation and progressive growth
(Osofsky and Osofsky, 1972:50).

In this investigation, the dimension ranging from
traditional role segregation to shared or equalitarian and
anti-traditional role segregation, is applied to gender
role and family role concepts to distinguish assignment of
personality traits and family tasks. The rationale for the
hypotheses, based on literature reviewed, is that
individuals retain conception of both gender roles and
family roles that are basically traditional, equalitarian,
or anti-traditional. More people will likely fall at the

former end of the range than the latter, based on cultural

conformity propositions (Burr, 1973).

52

Sex Differences

 

Research and theory on differences between the sexes
on ideal and perceived gender role and family role concepts
are reviewed in this section. In the family context
theoretical propositions about sex differences are developed
by Bernard, Scanzoni, and family decision making researchers.
On the gender role concept, the Sherriffs, Broverman
research groups and Johnsen are reviewed.

Differences between male and female behavior are
theoretically due both to biology and socialization
(Hochschild, 1973; Maccobby, 1966, 1974; Sherman, 1971;
Bardwick, 1971). Bernard, speaking of the marital context,
explains that sex differences exist in experience and goals
(Bernard, 1972). Rooted in traditional sexual division of
labor, she writes of isolated housewives and husbands.

She suggests there is a subjective reality and an objective

reality and distinguishes them as follows:
For there is, in fact, an objective reality in
marriage. It is a reality that resides in the
cultural-legal, moral, and conventional prescrip-
tions and proscriptions and, hence, expectations
that constitute marriage. It is the reality that
is reflected in the minds of spouses themselves.
The differences between the marriages of husbands
and of wives are structural realities, and it is
these structural differences that constitute the
basis for psychological realities (Bernard, 1972:
10).

Bernard builds her case through a series of comparisons of

marital experience between husbands and wives. However,

53
more research is needed to support Bernard's argument.

She concludes and summarizes her critique as follows:
Traditionally, men consider marriage a trap for
themselves and a prize for their wives. Statis-
tically, marriage is good for men--physically,
socially, and psychologically. Traditionally all
women want to marry, and most want t0'become
mothers. Statistically, childless marriages are
happier; and marriage, literally makes thousands
of women sick (Bernard, l972:l).

Differences in experience of the sexes are also evident
in marital role research. Although Scanzoni feels differ-
ences in perceptions of behavior are nonsignificant between
husbands and wives, other analysts demonstrate significant
sex differences in perceptions of marital decision-making
(Scanzoni, 1965; Granbois and Willet, 1970; Olson, 1969;
Safilios-Rothschild, 1969). Culturally determined family
role ideals, however, appear to provide the foundation for
a successful marital relationship if agreed upon (Burr,
1973; Udry, 1974).

Evidence in gender role research indicates college
students frequently agree on ideal gender role (Sherriffs
and McKee, 1957, 1959; Johnsen, 1973). However, there is
no data to support or deny the suggestion that husband
and wife mutually agree on their ideal concepts of gender
roles and perceived gender role performance. When signifi-
cant differences in personal ideals exist, couples may

have little in common except awareness of societal role

expectations.

54

In sum, Bernard believes men and women experience
marriage differently except in the objective reality of
cultural ideals or norms. Some evidence for this is
indicated in gender role and family role research. It is
proposed that objective reality is agreement on personal
ideals of roles. Subjective reality refers to an
individual's perception of behavior. It is hypothesized
that while husbands and wives often agree on role ideas
(objective reality), male and female perceptions of role
performance differ (subjective reality). This hypothesis
is stated for exploratory purposes, since there is a lack

of research to strongly support the proposition.

Role Conflict and Marital Adjustment

A review of the literature on role conflict and role
conflict assessment is discussed. Conclusions are reached
about the use of marital adjustment and perceived role
discrepancy as indicators of role conflict. Sex differences
in marital adjustment are also discussed.

If husbands and wives differ in their perception of
roles and behaviors, role conflict may result. Rather
than infer role conflict from differences, it may be
possible to observe it. Two steps are necessary for a
more direct assessment of role conflict. One step is to
infer role conflict if the individual reports a self aware-

ness of role discrepancy between their ideal role concept

55
and perceived role behavior. Thus role conflict may arise
within the individual perceptual-cognitive system. Other-
wise, all role discrepancies are labeled conflictual, and
do not allow for human inconsistency and lack of self-
awareness.

Angrist prefers to explain role discrepancies as
follows:

The idea that people manage to juggle, avoid,
manipulate, interpret, the scope of their roles

seems closer to empirical reality than that

individuals act in terms of a single blue-

print at any given time or place...it represents
a maneuverability as some students of role
conflict suggest, the very multiplicity of
choices can foster flexibility for the actor

(Angrist, 1972:52,54).

A second step is to assess role conflict by an outside
variable. The variable employed in this study is marital
adjustment. Following Udry's synthesis of this area of
research, marital adjustment has been viewed as several
different constructs (Udry, 1974). One approach defines
marital satisfaction as the degree of happiness experienced
by the couple (Rollins and Feldman, 1970). Another approach
conceptualizes marital tensions in the relationship (Orden
and Bradburn, 1968). This second approach subtracts marital
tensions from marital adjustment.

Locke and Williamson view marital success as their
specific indicator, and conducted a factor analytic study

of a set of questionnaire items (Locke and Williamson,

1958; Burgess, Locke and Thomas, 1963). Criteria indicating

56
maritaladjustment are: companionship, consensus or
agreement, affectional intimacy, satisfaction with marriage
and the mate, and sexual behavior. These conceptualizations
show that marital adjustment is a construct with a variety
of independent factors attempting to predict marital
success and well-being.

In two extensive research reviews, role conflict is
reported to be related to low marital adjustment, and role
consensus with high marital adjustment (Burr, 1973; Udry,
1974). Individuals often interchange concepts of role
discrepancies and role conflict. The degree of role
discrepancy perceived by the individuals will reflect role
conflict or dissensus. This accounts for a possible
curvilinear relationship found in some research but not
in others. Thus, marital role conflict depends on
individual perceptions of role discrepancies. If role
discrepancies are not perceived, role conflict will not
result.

Wives are reported to have higher marital adjustment
than husbands (Imig, 1971; Udry, 1974). Udry suggests wives
may overvalue and husbands undervalue their adjustment to
marriage. Based on Bernard's description of the marital
experience, women may feel more of a need to mentally
compensate for a less positive marriage experience than men.
Since, according to Bernard, men benefit more from marriage,

their need to justify the experience will not be as great

(Bernard, 1972).

57
Based on the literature reviewed, it is hypothesized
that role conflict is related negatively to marital adjust-
ment. It is also hypothesized the women report higher
marital adjustment than men. These exploratory hypotheses
are proposed for the purpose of investigating the role

definitions.

Summary

Based on literatures reviewed, hypotheses are developed
for this study. Therefore, based on the research of the
Sherriffs and McKee, the Broverman group, and Johnsen,
a gender role concept of personality traits is proposed for
this study. Based on the works of Nye, Safilios-Rothschild
and others, a family role concept of family tasks is
also proposed. It has been found that role ideal and
perceived role performance must be conceptually distinguished.
And, literatures reviewed indicate degree of role-taking by
a traditional, role-segregated dimension. Sex differences
are proposed to exist on perceived role performances but
not ideal role concepts, following Bernard's distinction
of subjective and objective realities in marriage. It is
further hypothesized that perceived role discrepancy as
role conflict is negatively related to marital adjustment.
There is also some indication of sex differences on marital

adjustment.

CHAPTER III
METHOD OF THE STUDY

Method

Theory testing of the proposed concepts of gender role
and family role is based on the strength of the operational
definitions of these concepts. As Kerlinger points out:

Scientific investigators must sooner or later
face the necessity of measuring the variables
of the relations they are studying...Though
indispensable, Operational definitions yield
only limited meanings of constructs. No

operational definition can ever express all
of a variable (1964:35).

There are two phases to the theory testing employed in
this study. They include selection of items for the
constructs and construct testing for relationship between
items and constructs.

The design chosen for this study is the field study.
A major weakness of the field study method is that it is
difficult for the experimenter to separate the variables.
According to Kerlinger:

In field study situations, there is usually so

much noise in the communication channel that

even though the effects may be strong and the

variance great, it is not easy for the experi-

menter to separate the variables (Kerlinger,
1964:389).

58

59
Therefore, the questionnaire survey method is used to
separate variables. Because gender roles and family roles
are believed to be cognitive and conscious, a questionnaire
is both feasible and appropriate. If objective instruments
can be developed from previous research, future studies of
more significant proportions can be carried out. This
study is a step toward that goal. The closed question
and answer method with significant mathematical distinctions
allows for future investigations with more complex theory
testing and multiple variable analysis.

Because the proposed gender role and family role
concepts are operationalized in a questionnaire format, they
become operationalizations based on self report of behavior
and attitudes. They imply perceptions by the individual
subject, rather than an outside observer.

The value of self report is a seriously contested
issue as contrasted with other methods. Research on marital
power, for example, compared the validity of various measures
of family power. Olson and Rabunsky found that while
married couples were able to accurately report what decisions
were made, they were not able to report who made them (Olson
and Rabunsky, 1972).

Alternatives to the self report questionnaire method
include Olson's base measure of researcher's observation.
However, there are several impediments to observational

research. As Borg and Gall point out:

60

1. It is difficult to obtain 'data related to

complex behavior that is objectively
observable and yet related to problem,‘

2. It is difficult to 'determine the degree

to which the presence of the observer
changes the situation being observed,‘

3. And, it is difficult to 'observe the

context because of access problems
including time and place.‘ (Borg and
Call, 1976:225)

There are three major reasons for selecting the self-
report questionnaire methods for operationalizing the
proposed constructs of gender role and family role. They
include making the method selection consistent with the
theoretical basis from which the conceptions are derived,
with the research findings employed for operational defini-
tions, and with the cultural beliefs of the subjects
themselves.

It is important to make selection of the research
method on grounds consistent with the theoretical framework
employed. The chosen theoretical framework for this study
is role theory in social psychology. Social psychology
frequently derives role conceptions through the survey
method.

Other role theory conceptions have differing traditions.
Cultural anthropologists derive proposed concepts from
participant observation (Mead, 1972). Sociolinguists such
as those presented by Thorne and Henley (1975), primarily

use direct observation and content analysis procedures of

language and verbalization.

61

Shaw and Costanzo (1970), present a tradition of role
theory in social psychology, Aldous (1972), a family
development role theory in sociology; and Angrist (1972),
a gender role theory in sociology. These traditions, as
interdefined in Chapter I, reflect an attitudinal-perceptual
level of role-taking. This study's proposed definition of
roles as norms or expectations held by individuals in
society is similar.

Another basis for selection of the questionnaire
method is the previous research and theory testing metho-
dology employed. The proposed gender role concept is
based on previous research which utilized the self report
method via questionnaire.

The last major basis for choosing the questionnaire
method is to utilize culturally determined conceptions of
the proposed role concepts in order to test the subjects
against the culturally designated conceptions. As pointed
out by Motz (1955), this is an important step in creating
a role conception inventory. If the researcher imposes
their own, individually determined definitions, their
validity is less likely to be proven.

In order to determine the viability of the operation-
alized proposed concepts, the second phase of construct
testing is required. Here the issues of item relatedness

and construct relationships come into focus.

62
Sample Selection Procedure

The purposive sample is based on three family
development stages of early marriage with children under
13 years. Fifty-seven married couples were interviewed in
the married housing units at Michigan State University.
All marital dyads included in the study were available
for interviews in the 6-day data collection period. Both
spouses agreed to participate in the study, and were United
States citizens. The couple had at least one child and
no children over 13 years.

This purposive sample is selected for three reasons:
(1) to have a basis for comparison with gender role
attitudes research conducted by the Sheriffs, Broverman
and Johnsen research groups on college students, (2) to
have a known population with sufficient homogeneity from
which to be able to draw conclusions, and (3) to have a
sample with children in order to make family household
tasks a relevant and experienced concern.

Six interviewers were given maps of Spartan Village,
University Village and Cherry Lane Apartment Complexes,
the three married housing units at Michigan State University,
with separate designated buildings to contact. Only two-
bedroom apartment buildings were used in the study, since
families with children are limited to these areas. One

section of Spartan Village was not included in the study

63
because two bedroom apartments in this area were not
occupied by families with children.

According to an interview with an assistant manager
of Michigan State University Married Housing, the following
assumptions are warranted, given the exempted area: (1)
assignment to the three villages is random and not by
choice of family; (2) assignment to apartments is made
on a "first come, first serve" basis, with two bedrooms
reserved for families with children; and (3) the married
housing population is limited to families with one or more
full time students at Michigan State University three
terms out of four each year.

The differences or similarities between married
housing families and off-campus student families are
unknown. Since married housing is both less expensive
and less spacious, it is possible that student families not
in married housing are of a higher socioeconomic status.

Also, several factors in the sampling procedure
disallow generalization. Summer residents may differ from
school year residents. Approximately 50 percent of those
contacted and eligible chose not to participate in the
study. Reasons given ranged from lack of time and
availability (70%), to one spouse not willing to participate
(20%), or no reason given to the interviewer (10%).

Each of the six interviewers went door-to-door to

find volunteer contacts and set up an interview date.

64
Interviewers reported a vacant apartment/not home rate
ranging from 25 to 95 percent per building, and, therefore,
had to return to contact more subjects. Out of 1,184
two-bedroom apartments in the three complexes, 118 subjects
(10%) were contacted and 57 (5%) were interviewed.

Interviewers received the following instructions for

the initial contact:

1. to introduce themselves and outline the purpose
of the study.

2. to find out if the individuals were U.S. citizens
and had at least one child with no children older
than 13 years.

3. to ask for 1% hours of the subjects' time with
both spouses present.

4. to assure full confidentiality of the couples'
responses in the study.

5. to set up a meeting time or call back to confirm
a date and time for the interview.

6. to leave a letter of introduction with the
subjects.

The letter of introduction reviewed the content of the study
and the specific statement the interviewer was to give at
the contact point. The letter of introduction is included

in Appendix A.

65

Sample Description

 

The subjects interviewed included 57 married couples.
Information about the selected sample was based on two
sources: questionnaire items 1 through 19, titled

"Biographic Information,’ and a subject answer sheet
coding system carried out by the six interviewers. The
"Biographic Information" section of the questionnaire
included nineteen items about socioeconomic status and
previous and current socialization sources. These variables
were related to marital adjustment or satisfaction in
previous research (Udry, 1974). Items were constructed to
range from low to high marital adjustment. Because this
study is part of a larger investigation, hypotheses about
the relationship between these and other variables was
beyond its scope.

A number and letter were assigned to each subject
at the top right hand corner of the answer sheets. Each
of the six interviewers contacted and interviewed up to ten
couples. Therefore, each interviewer was assigned a
sequential set of twenty numbers for assignment to subjects.
Husbands were designated odd numbers, wives even numbers,
and the number assigned to each husband was designated to
precede his spouse's number.

For example, in couple one, the husband is number
one and his wife, number two. In couple two, husband was

number three with his wife, number four. Each subject

66
number was followed by a letter, that is, subjects with
oldest children birth to 30 months were designated (a),
those with children 31 months to 5 years were designated
(b), and couples with children 6 to 13 years were designated
(c).

The distribution of couples over the three family life
cycle stages is 21 couples in stage two (oldest children
30 months or under), 19 couples in stage three (oldest
children 31 months to 5 years), and 17 couples in stage
four (oldest children 6 to 13 years of age).

The sample chosen for study is purposive, nonprobable
and conforms to the following established criteria. All
families were in the second, third or fourth stage of the
family life cycle. All had at least one spouse as a
college student. All were living in married student housing
at Michigan State University during the summer of 1975 and
were accessible for a randomized sample selection procedure.

The sample consists of fifty-seven couples. No single
parent families were used, nor couples not fitting into the
three chosen stages of the family life cycle. All subjects
were United States citizens at the time of data collection.

All subjects finished high school and 55 percent have
college undergraduate or graduate degrees. The men have
achieved a higher level of education overall than the women;

20 men and 3 women have doctoral degrees in progress.

67
For the total sample, the mean age is between 23 and 25
years. Women are slightly younger than men. The sample
is weighted toward the 23- to 30-year-olds, accounting for
64 percent of the total sample.

Subjects reported their age at the marriage of their
present spouse. Men married slightly older than women,
predictable considering the slightly older age of the
husbands than the wives. Most subjects (77 percent) married
between 17 and 23 years of age. Only 10 percent of the
total sample have been divorced. This frequency may be
due to the young age of the subjects. Fewer women than
men have been divorced with three divorced women and eight
divorced men reported.

The breakdown of couples into stages is based on the
age of the oldest child. These stages are described in
Chapter III. The number of couples in each of the stages
is reasonably even, with 21 couples in Stage 2, 19 couples
in Stage 3 and 17 couples in Stage 4. The stages range from
couples with children of ages up to 13 years. Most subjects
(81.5 percent) reported having one or two children. There-
fore, family size, probably due to the short marital
careers, is small. A female respondent answered that she
had no children, reporting to the interviewer that the
child is not hers biologically.

Family planning contrasts with actual family size.

Subjects overall are considering growth in family size.

68
Mest subjects (63.2 percent) plan to have two or three
children and a few more (13.2 percent) plan to have four.
Three husbands and three wives (5.3 percent) are planning
a family of six or more children.

The income reported was based on their present total,
combined, gross annual income. The modal income bracket
reported (33.3 percent) is $5,100 to $8,000 with the next
upper and lower brackets fairly even at 18. 4 percent
reporting $3,100 to $5,000, and 21.1 percent reporting
8,100 to $12,000. Only one couple reported an income of
$20,000 or more.

Husbands and wives do not report the same religious
persuasion. Confusion seems to exist about each other's
religious orientation. The most obvious confusions occur
in reporting whether both are members of religious
persuasions other than Jewish, Protestant or Catholic,
and whether the couple is a mixture of persuasions. While
no Jewish couples were reported in the total sample, 32.5
percent were Catholic.

In summary, the sample of 114 subjects of 57 couples
is highly educated (55 percent finished at least four years
of college), youthful (mean age between 23 and 25), married
recently (77 percent married between 21 and 26), and in
their first marriage (only 10 percent have been divorced).

The couples are fairly evenly distributed in their stage

69
of the family life cycle, that is, with an oldest child
age 13 years or younger.

Most couples (81.5 percent) have one or two children,
and are considering growth to two, three or four (76.4
percent). The average combined gross income for most
(72.8 percent) subjects ranged between $3,100 and $12,000,
and the religious orientation is Catholic or Protestant

for both members of the marriage (51.8 percent).

Data Collection Procedure

 

Six interviewers were hired to contact couples and
conduct ten interviews each. All six were female college
students in family studies or related social science
fields with professional interests in the family. In
previous studies, the researcher's gender did not
significantly effect the outcome of the study (Parker,
1973). Four were graduate students and two were upper
class undergraduate students. All had experience in social
services and were skilled in interviewing.

The interviewers were trained in data collection and
sample selection procedures. They pretested the question-
naire and discussed individual items. As a result of this
pretest, no changes in items were suggested or warranted.

Questionnaire items include Biographic Information
(questions 1 through 19), the Perceived Gender Role
Performance Measure (questions 20 through 39), the Perceived

Family Role Performance Measure (questions 40 through 59),

70
the Ideal Gender Role Concept Measure (questions 60 through
79), the Ideal Family Role Concept Measure (questions 80
through 99), and the Marital Adjustment Measure (questions
100 through 121), respectively (see Appendix B).

Three tests preceded and two tests followed the
measures for this study. They involved measures of
decision-making in economic and interactional situations.
Data collected for the present study are part of a larger
investigation that included another dissertation and further
research of interest to the primary investigators. The
questionnaire instrument used in this study includes a set
of directions for subjects and is included in Appendix B.

Five interviewers contacted and interviewed ten
couples each and one interviewed seven, for a total of
57 couples. Interviewers were instructed to reiterate
the purpose of the study as stated in the introductory
letter (Appendix A). Upon entry to the household, the
interviewer seated the husband and wife at a table or desk
apart from one another. Subjects were instructed not to
discuss the questions until both had completed the
questionnaire. Interviewers were to clarify objective
questions, but to tell subjects to define their own terms
when subjective questions were asked. Interviewers reported
three instances where subjective questions were asked.

Each subject was given two answer sheets with instruc-

tions to stop after question 100 and to start on the

71
second answer sheet with question 101. Both answer sheets
were given a subject number and letter code as described
previously. Interviewers were directed to observe for
errors in filling out answer sheets. In all instances,
these were corrected during the interview. Couples wishing
results of the study signed up on a mailing list for a
summary to be sent to them. Interviews generally took

from one to one and one-half hours.

Questionnaire Develgpment

 

Borg and Call point out in the following quote the
approach necessary to develop questionnaire items measuring
attitude:

The use ofaaone-item test is quite satisfactory
when one is seeking out a specific fact, such
as teacher salary, number of baseball bats
owned by the physical education department, or
number of students failing algebra. When
questions get into the area of attitude and
opinion, however, the one-item test approach is
extremely unreliable. A questionnaire dealing
with attitudes must generally be constructed

as an attitude scale and must use a number of
items (usually at least ten) in order to obtain
a reasonable picture of the attitude concurred
(Borg and Gall, 1976:202-203).

Based on these guidelines, gender role and family role
questionnaire items were generated to test operational
definitions of four concepts: ideal gender role concept,
perceived gender role performance, ideal family role

concept, and perceived family role performance.

72

Gender Role Measure

 

Two measures of gender roles were constructed using
the Likert scale response format. This scale was chosen
because it has proved to be systematic and reliable
(Edwards and Kinney, 1967), and was employed in previous
gender role research (Broverman, 1972: McKee and Sherriffs,
1957; Johnsen, 1973). The Likert scale ranges from male
to female on the two measures. The seven response points
in the range are:

(0) Male almost always

(1) Male more frequently

(2) Male slightly more

(3) Both

(4) Female slightly more

(5) Female more frequently

(6) Female almost always

The sequence of responses is often reversed for some
items. The most typical or normal response is given first
and the least typical or normal response last. The
rationale for this is that many people today with tradi-
tional views are more apt to feel self-conscious about them
because it is in vogue to believe in shared roles. There-
fore, it is thought to be more supportive and less jarring
for traditional norms to precede. People with nontraditional
views are accustomed to and have built-in defenses against

traditional norms and will not be affected substantially.

73
Research has indicated that "out-of—the-ordinary" item
and question ordering puts subjects on the defense, and
leads toward shared-oriented responses (Parker, 1973).

Gender role measures have two forms. One form asks
subjects to rate traits according to their ideals. For
the Ideal Gender Role Concept Measure the directions state:

Rate the following personality traits according
to your personal values of the ldggl woman and
the ideal man. There is no correct or best
answEE_§ince everyone has their own ideals in

life (Appendix B).

A second form of the gender roles measures asks the
subjects to rate the same characteristics according to
their perception of which spouse has these characteristics
more in their presentmarital relationship. This measure
is titled, "Perceived Gender Role Characteristics Measure."
No assumptions were made about the relationship of subject
perceptions to actual behavior in natural settings.

The two measures were sequenced with every other gender
role measure and family role measure so that subjects would
not compare answers from Perceived to Ideal Measures on
the same questions. Also, "Do Not Turn Back" was typed
at the top of every page of the questionnaire. Perceived
measures preceded Ideal measures with the rationale that
subjects would feel less threatened with the disparity

between responses to the two forms and thus not be as

apt to misrepresent perceived behaviors.

74

The two gender role measures are composed of twenty
questions each. In each.measure, ten personality traits
found to be traditionally female and ten personality traits
found to be traditionally male by men and women in previous
studies were chosen for questions. The same traits are
repeated on both measures of gender roles.

To construct a hypothetical definition of the gender
roles concept, twenty traits found to be significantly
gender-typed, ten female-associated and ten male-associated,
were identified from the Johnsen, Sheriffs and McKee, and
Broverman group studies. These traits were chosen because
they appeared in more than one of the three studies. If
they appeared in another study with a similar verbal label,
they were relabeled. Statistical levels of significance
varied from p i .05 to p i .01.

Nine male-associated and ten female-associated
traits appeared significantly gender-typed by both men
and women, in two or all of the studies. To obtain ten
male-associated traits, "competitive" was chosen from the
more recent Broverman study since it was not included in
pools for the other two, and because the research sample
was the largest. Figure 3 summarizes the sources of items
selected from the three research groups.

All three investigations focused attention to differ-

ential evaluation by males and females of gender role-

75
associated traits. The result was a list of negative and
positive traits for both sexes (Johnsen, 1973; Broverman
et al., 1972; McKee and Sherriffs, 1957).

Following Johnsen's criticisms of this research,
only an equal number of positively valued traits by males
and females were used. This controls for the possibility
of a skewed outcome of differential evaluations of gender
roles, as demonstrated in Johnsen's data analysis. However,
it further limits the focus of the investigation to the
goals (positive traits) and neglects role sanctions
(negative traits).

Therefore, based on data collections using pools of
traits from college students, gender role-associated traits
for males are: ambitious, aggressive, self-confident,
independent, adventurous, dominant, logical, realistic,
dynamic and competitive. Gender role characteristics
associated with females are: sympathetic, affectionate,
gentle, tactful, sensitive, religious, polite, neat, warm,
and sentimental. The selection of gender role traits and
the research sources are classified in Figure 3. These
personality traits are stereotypes held in society about

men and women.

Familleole Measure

 

Two measures of family roles were constructed using
the Likert scale response format. This scale was chosen

because it has proved to be systematic and reliable (Edwards

76

Figure 3: A Selection of Significant Gender Role Traits
Identified in One or More Research Studies.

 

 

Sherriffs and Broverman Johnsen
McKee (1957) et a1. (1972) (1973)

 

Female Traits

Sympathetic
Affectionate *
Gentle
Tactful

Sensitive

x— a x- a >e »
a :9 » x->+ s

Religious
Polite * *

Warm

>(-
3(-

Sentimental * *
Neat * *

Male Traits
Ambitious
Aggressive
Self Confident
Independent
Adventurous
Dominant
Logical

» :9 s :+ x- a >9 a
a >: a :6 a a->+ »

Realistic

>5-

Dynamic

» at a >+ a a->+ a a: a

Competitive

 

77
and Kinney, 1967), and was employed in previous family role
and decision-making research (Nye, 1974a; Sofilios-Rothschild,
1969). The Likert scale ranged from husband to wife on the
two measures. The seven response points in the range are:

(0) Husband almost always
(1) Husband more frequently
(2) Husband slightly more
(3) Both
(4) Wife slightly more
(5) Wife more frequently
(6) Wife almost always
The sequence of responses is often reversed for some
items. The most typical or normal response is given first
and the least typical or normal response last. As dis-
cussed in the previous section, it is thought to be more
supportive and less jarring for traditional norms to precede.
Family role measures have two forms. One form asks
subjects to rate tasks according to their ideals. For the
Ideal Family Role Concept Measure the directions state:
Rate the following family jobs and responsibilities
according to your personal beliefs about the ideal
husband/father and the ideal wife/mother. We all
have ideals we don't live. Therefore, there is
no correct answer since everyone has their own
values in life (Appendix B).
A second form of the family roles measures asks the

subjects to rate the same tasks according to their

perception of which spouse does these tasks more in their

78
present marital relationship. This measure is titled,
"Perceived Family Role Performance Measure." No assumptions
are made about the relationship of subject perceptions to
actual behavior in natural settings.

The two family role measures are composed of twenty
questions each. In each measure, there are ten family tasks
to be traditionally wife/mother role-related and ten tasks
found to be traditionally husband/father role-related
in previous studies. The same tasks are repeated on both
measures of family roles.

Safilios-Rothschild points out the need for systematic
investigations of decision points for husbands and wives.
She further criticizes the lack of systematic conceptua-
1ization and measurement weighing of individual questionnaire
items (Safilios-Rothschild, (1969). Based on her criticism
and the family role measurement questionnaire developed
by Nye, a series of ten husband-father-associated and ten
wife-mother-associated tasks were generated.

Tasks were generated by three criteria: (1) if they
are concrete and specific behaviors thought to be
experienced by most families in stages three, four and five
of the family life cycle; (2) if they are significant,
regular, daily experiences; and (3) if they are normally
identified as belonging to one family role more than the
other. With these criteria, a short, but representative

set of family role-associated tasks were generated, after

79
review and suggestions by several graduate student
colleagues for professional judgment.

These questionnaire items were generated from Nye's
family role instrument, Safilios-Rothschild's decision-
making power research, and from the author of this study.
Items were reformulated in clarity and balanced level for
specificity between items.

Based on Nye's questionnaire instruments items were
rewritten for greater specificity in order to include them
in this study (1974a). They include:

- Who plans to be the major provider for the

family economically?

- Who initiates sexual activity between you on a
regular basis?

- Who helps the children (child) find playmates
and have play experiences with them?

- Who dresses, feeds and entertains the children
(child)?

- Who tends to give family members affection and
reassurance when problems arise?

- Who sends birthday, wedding, bereavement and
holiday cards to relatives? (also from Safilios-
Rothschild, 1969)

- Who prepares a dinner when friends are invited?

- Who dusts, washes the floors, and cleans the

bathroom?

80

- Who decorates the house with plants, knick knacks,

curtains, pictures, etc.?

- Who makes the daily family meals?

Based on Safilios-Rothschild's research on marital
decision making power, items were restated for inclusion
in this study (1969). They include:

- Who makes medical and dental appointments for

family members?

Who purchases the children's (child's) clothing?

Whose education or job determines where you live?
- Who chooses insurance policies for the family?
Six additional items were generated to gain more
breadth on the husband/father role. In keeping with the
10 overall family tasks,they include:
- Who rough-houses (is physically playful) with
the children (child)?
- Who takes over in a family crisis such as after
a death?
- Who participates in sports activities?
-V&m>takes care of repairs and services for the
car?
- When both of you are in the car who drives?
- Who is concerned with locking doors at night and
when the family is away?
In order to account for breadth, based on the ten family

role tasks identified in the review of literature, a

81
classification of the questionnaire items used by family
role and family role task categories is shown in Figure 4.

These characteristics are definitions of the family
role concepts of husband-father and wife-mother and do not
reflect the systematization suggested by Safilios-Rothschild.
Yet, in this exploratory investigation, it is hypothesized
that they will roughly reflect the unitary concept of
family role. In other words these tasks represent a whole
concept or standard of expectations which individuals
believe are related to one another. However, variations
in the internalization and idealization of family roles
are expected.

The questionnaire instrument is in Appendix B.

Marital Adjustment Measure

 

The Marital Adjustment Measure based on Locke is
composed of items 100 to 121 on the questionnaire and is
included in Appendix B (Burgess, Locke and Thomes, 1963:
301-306). Question items are based on five factors:
companionship, consensus or agreement, affectional intimacy,
satisfaction, and sexual behavior. Weights are given for
each possible answer, as designated by two digits to the
right of each response item (see Appendix C). Udry states
directions for computing scores. He refers to the number
circled where the questionnaire has substituted response

numbers of zero (0) through five (5).

82

mmmwum
mamanoum sonz moamusmmm
paw cowuoommm muonaos
mafiamm o>aw ou meson 0&3

axeaasuV
coupawno can mowmuuouCo
pom mpmmm .mmmmoup 033

Namnu nuas
moocoflumaxo hmam m>m£ pom
moumasmaa wane Aeaaeov

nonpawno one mafia: 053

axeaanov
amueaaao map can: Aasmsmaa
maamowmhza mHv mmmooSILwnon 0:3

«snoop m mm £05m mfimwno
haaamm m aw Ho>o woxmu 0:3

wo>wa 50% onSB mocwahouop
QOM no coaumospo omonz

azaamoaaocooo
zafiamm one How Hmpw>oum
H0mma osu on on madam 053

coaumouomm

oauaoamuone

oumu pawnv

cowumuwamfioom

Hopw>oum

.H

 

maom Monuoz\mmwz

oaom HoSumm\pcmnmsm

moauowoumu
oHom haaamm

 

 

maom hawamm 569 oqu

.moaom maaamm paw mowuowoumo
mamuH xmmH haflfimm muao3fi mo coaumowmwmmmHU < "q ouswfim

3
8

 

 

mace umauoz\mmaz

oaom nonumm\pcmnmdm

maom saaama

wwcHSDOAU Am.pHH£ov mkHHEmm o£u How wofioaaom unoaowmcmz
m.cmeHH£o onu mommnousa 0:3 .OH communmcH momoozo 0:3 .OH Hmwocmcwm .oH
mkmzm ma hawamm
oflu 56:3 pom unwwc um whoop
wcwxooa spas poauoocoo ma 0:3 .m aowuoouonm .o
«mo>wumaou ou
mpumo ampflaon pom pamfio>mouon
.waaeeos .smeauuan macaw on: .m annmaae .w
wmamoa
madame Aaame on» mmama 0:3 .w
.ouo .mouduowm
.mcwwuuso .mxomcx xowcx .muamam
£ua3 mason mnu moumuooop 033 .n
waoonnumn can mammao pom
.muoon onu moamm3 .mumnp 0&3 .o
ammoname
xawsmm How muaoaucfloaam amo>wup 053
Hmucop paw Hmowpoa moxma 053 .m Hmo onu CH who no» mo soon :053 .m
spouw>aa mum mpaowuw sumo ago wow moow>uom monocouawmz
c633 Hangar m moummmHm 033 .q paw muwmamu mo ammo moxwu 0:3 .5 wow wcflaooxomoom .m
amammn
“madman m Go 50% coosumn
muw>fiuom Hwoxom moumfluaaa 053 .o Hoaxom .o
mofiuowmumo

 

 

AoodcwucOov a ouswwm

84
The first step in computing the marital adjust-
ment score is to add the digits of the number
circled. For example, assuming a person circled
22 for the first question, his scores for this
question would be 2+2. [\score for each question
is obtained in this way and all are added together.
Then 44 is subtracted from this score. This is
because we added 2 points to the weight of each
answer of the 22 questions in order to secure
more combinations of digits (Udry, 1974:214).
Scores ranged from 49 to 120. Burgess, Locke and
Thomes suggest breaking this into quarters, which they

label, "good," "above average, questionable," and

"poor" (Burgess, Locke and Thomes, 1963:301-306). However,
because too few total scores were expected in the lowest
quarter in this study, scores were broken into thirds.

The lowest third was labeled "low marital adjustment" and
the highest third, "high marital adjustment." Burgess,
Locke and Thomes caution that this test is useful to
approximate marital adjustment in groups, but it can be

an incorrect predictor of marital success for individual

couples.

Statistical Methods and Data Reduction

 

Data analysis procedures are identified on Figure 5.
The major hypotheses are tests of construct and test item
relationships. They test whether specific traits or tasks
are unitary concepts of perceived or ideal gender role or
family role.

To evaluate the data, male and female subjects were

computed together and separately. Separate analyses

85

 

00000mu00o

.0000 H 000800 03B

.0000 H 000800 038

0000000< 000000
00000000000 00000000000
000802 0000000 0000000

.0008000n00 0000008

000 00000 030 00 08000 0000
0003000 00000000000 0000:00000
0003000 000000000000 0 00 0000B

.0008000n00 0000008
0.000n000 000 0000 0000 00 08000
030 000 0000000000000 0000:00000
0003000 000000000000 0 00 00008

.000000 00000 0003000 00000000000
00 000000000w00 000 00 00000
00000008_0000 000 00 0000 00 00803
000 008 0003000 00000000000 000
000000000800 00000000w00 000 00009

.00000000 0000

000 w00000000000 00000008 0000
000 00 0000 000003 0000000000000
8000:00000 00000000w00 000 00009

.0008000n00

0000008 300 0003.0000n
-000 0000 00000 h0080m 000
00000 x00 0003000 h0000000
:000 00300 0>00 0008000n00
0000008 0w00 0003 0000n00m

.0008000n00 0000008 300 0003
0000m000 0000 00000000 0000
00000 000 00008000000 0000
00>000000 0003000 00000000
:000 00300 0300 0008000n00
030000 :02 003 38.280

.00008000000 0000 000800

000 0000 x00 00>000000

00000 00 000w0000 000 00000
-000 0000 000800 000 0000 000
00000 00 000w0 00803 000 002

00002

.00000000 0000000
000 0000000000 0000 0000 00B

00H0z

 

 

00000000m 00000000

00000000000 00000000

00000000 0000000000

 

 

 

 

 

000000000 00000000 00 000B 000 0000000000 0

”m 000w0m

86
counteract possible interactive affects of couples on data
results. Pearson Product Moment Correlations and Factor
Analysis methods were used to analyze data.

The Pearson Product Moment Correlation was chosen for
intercorrelation of test items and computed with computer
assistance. The responses were distributed on a possible
continuum of highly traditional role segregation to a
midpoint of role sharing and the other end of anti-
traditional role segregation or reversal. The response
rating was evaluated as interval, nondichotomous, linear
and normally distributed within the sampled p0pulati0n.
This fulfills the assumptions of the Pearson Correlation
test measurement (Glass and Stanley, 1970).

It is not known whether these or any other attitudinal
measures could be considered linear and normal. Little
is known about attitudes in general and gender role and
family role attitudes in particular. However, these
assumptions are tentatively made for the purposes of data
analysis and exploration that could not be done otherwise.
Given these assumptions, the purpose of this investigation
is to explore attitudes about gender roles and family roles.

A significance probability level of Z .10 was chosen
for data analysis. Analysis of attitudinal data must be
more flexible since their measurement varies more than

many other data types.

87

Individual items on each measure were analyzed for
significant intercorrelations with other items. Those
not intercorrelated significantly with other acceptable
items were rejected. Correlation tables are presented in
Appendix E.

The principal factor method was selected for factor
analysis rotating factors using a varimax rotation method
(Kerlinger, 1964; Nye, et a1, 1975). This method is
recommended for social science data. Kerlinger further
suggests that the commonly used correlational significance
levels of p i .30 or p i .40 satisfy appropriate expectations
with this type of data. (Kerlinger, 1964:654) The author
selected p i 40 to use a more critical method of correlation
analysis. This is arguable given that the principal factor
analytic method tends to maximize relations.

The criteria for hypothesis acceptance is more than
50% of items associated with one another as a single
factor. Twenty-two factors of varying intensity were found
when all items were analyzed together. While the factors
were not clean cut, seven had particular significance to
the constructs.

The factor scores are reported in Appendix F, while
factors significantly associated with the hypotheses are
reported in the text following.

Results are reported for hypotheses as they relate

to Ideal Gender Role Concept, Ideal Family Role Concept,

88

Perceived Gender Role Characteristics and Perceived Family
Role Performance.

The minor hypotheses test whether the proposition
that men and women hold similar ideals, but different
perceptions of their own behavior, is true. The marital
adjustment hypotheses could not be tested since inter-item
relationships were not sufficient for the Perceived Gender
and Family Role Measures.

Appendix B gives a sample of the Questionnaire,
Appendix C, of the Marital Adjustment Scale, and Appendix
D reports basic data on each item of the four Measures.

Simple two-tailed t-tests were computed to test
hypotheses with a significance level determined at probability
of i .05. Male and female samples could be considered
dependent or independent. Therefore, pooled and separate
variance estimates were used and both T values are reported.
However, findings show no significant differences in T values
between pooled and estimated variances. Two-tailed tests
have the added asset of retaining power when violations of
assumptions about the population are made (Glass and Stanley,
1970:295). Therefore, it is not important to prove normalcy
of the populations sampled.

To evaluate whether hypotheses were supported, items
are analyzed on an individual basis.

Means and standard deviations for all items related to

each measure are also reported. Scores are generally

89

analyzed as follows: 0.00 to 0.50 refers to extremely ,
traditional role segregation, 0.60 to 1.50 to very tradi-
tional role segregation; 1.60 to 2.50 to moderate role
segregation; 2.60 to 3.50 to nontraditional role sharing;
and, 3.60 to 4.50 to moderate anti-traditional role—reversed
segregation.

This study is exploratory and descriptive. It does
not test causal relationships, nor does it represent a
complete investigation of the concepts for the total American
population. This is an initial step in the direction of

testing the concepts of gender roles and family roles.

CHAPTER IV

RESULTS

Ideal Gender Role Concept

 

Hypotheses:

1. There is a significant positive relationship
among women's scores on individual items of
the Ideal Gender Role Concept Measure.
2. There is a significant positive relationship
among men's scores on individual items of the
Ideal Gender Role Concept Measure.

3. There is a significant positive relationship
among all scores on individual items of the
Ideal Gender Role Concept Measure.

Pearson Product Moment Correlation Coefficients and
their corresponding significance levels are reported for
the Ideal Gender Role Concept Measure items for female
subjects, male subjects, and for the total combined sample
in Appendix E. Table l is a summary of significant inter-
correlations of items on the Ideal Gender Role Concept

Measure for female, male, and total combined subjects.

Only items with levels of p i .10 were considered significant.

Female Subjects

 

For women an incomplete but significant set of
correlations was found between items on the Ideal Gender
Role Concept Measure. The hypothesis was supported because
there was a grouping of significant correlations.

9O

91

Table 1. Number of Significant Intercorrelations of Items
on the Ideal Gender Role Concept Measure for
Female, Male and Total Samples.

 

 

 

 

Intercorrelations Intercorrelations
with Female Items with Male Items
Questionnaire Item Samples Samples

 

 

Female Male Total Female Male Total

 

Female Role

60. Sentimental 9 8 9 3 9 8
63. Neat 8 9 10 5 5 7
65. Sympathetic 8 9 9 7 7 8
66. Tactful 8 5 8 6 2-1 6
68. Religious 2-1 1 3 l-l 3-1 2
70. Warm 9 9 8 8 8
71. Sensitive 8 9 8-1 7 9
75. Gentle 8-1 8 9-1 8 8 10
77. Affectionate 8 8 8 5—l lO 8
78. Polite 3 9 9 3 7 8
(T=70-2)(T=74)(T=83-l)(T=54-3)(T=66-2)(T=74)

Male Role

6l. Adventurous 9 8 9 9 10 10
62. Dominant 7 4-2 7 7 7 8
64. Realistic 7 9 9 9 9 10
67. Logical 4 9 9 7 9 10
69. Independent 6 8 9 8 10 10
72. Aggressive 4 9 9 10 8 10
73. Competitive 4 3 3 9 7 10
74. Ambitious -l 2 2 5 8 8
76. Dynamic 4-1 7 7 9 9 10
79. Self-Confident 9 7 10 9 7 9

(T=54-2)(T=66-2)(T=83) (T=82) (T=84) (T=95)

 

92

Some trends are evident in the correlation
significance patterns. From Table 1, "Number of Significant
Intercorrelations of Items on the Ideal Gender Role Concept
Measure for Female, Male and Total Samples," significant
correlations for women between female and male gender
role-related items can be compared.

There are more significant correlations among female
gender role-related items (70 positive and 2 negative) than
between female and male gender role-related items (54
positive and 3 negative). There are also more significant
correlations among male gender role-related items (82 posi-
tive) than between male and female gender role-related
items (54 positive and 2 negative).

Based on analysis of the correlations, the "religious"
and "polite,” female role-related items, and "ambitious,"
male role related items were nonsignificant. Each of the
same gender role-related item intercorrelations had only
the following significant correlations: religious, 2
positive and 1 negative; polite, 3 positive; and, ambitious
with no positive and 1 negative.

Based on the female sample significantly inter-
correlated female gender role-related items are: sentimental,
sympathetic, tactful, warm, sensitive, affectionate and
neat or gentle. Significantly intercorrelated male gender
role-related items are: adventurous, realistic, independent,
aggressive, competitive, dynamic and self confident. There-

fore the hypothesis was accepted.

93

Male Subjects

 

For men, an incomplete but significant set of correla-
tions was found between items on the Ideal Gender Role
Concept Measure. This hypothesis was supported because
there was a grouping of significant correlations.

Some trends are evident in the correlation significance
patterns. From Table 1, "Number of Significant Inter-
correlations of Items on the Ideal Gender Role Concept

Measure for Female, Male and Total Samples,‘ significant
correlations for men between female and male gender role-
related items can be compared.

There are more significant correlations among female
gender role-related items (74 positive) than between
female and male gender role-related items (66 positive and
2 negative). There are also more significant correlations
among male gender role-related items (84 positive) than
between male and female gender role-related items (66
positive and 2 negative).

Based on analysis of the correlations, the role-

related items, "tactful" and "religious,"

were nonsignificant
for female role-related items. Each of the same gender role
intercorrelations had only the following significant
correlations: tactful, 5 positive; and, religious 1
positive.

Therefore, based on the male sample, the significantly

intercorrelated female gender role-related items are:

94
sentimental, neat, sympathetic, warm, sensitive, gentle,
affectionate and polite. Significantly intercorrelated
male gender role-related items are: adventurous, logical,
independent, dynamic, realistic or self-confident, and
aggressive or ambitious. The hypothesis was accepted.

Male and Female Subjects
Combined

 

For men and women combined, an incomplete but
significant set of correlations was found between items
on the Ideal Gender Role Concept Measure. This hypothesis
was generally supported because there were consistent
patterns of significant correlations.

Some trends are evident in the correlation signifi-
cance patterns. From Table 1, "Number of Significant
Intercorrelations of Items on the Ideal Gender Role Concept

Measure for Female, Male and Total Samples,‘ significant
correlations between female and male gender role-related
items can be compared.

There are more significant correlations among female
gender role-related items (83 positive and 1 negative)
than between female and male gender role-related items (74
positive). There are also more significant correlations
among male gender role-related items (95 positive) than

between female and male gender role-related items (83

positive).

95

Based on analysis of the correlations only the item
"religious" was nonsignificant; and none of the male gender
role-related items were significant. Considering only
intercorrelations within each gender, the "religious"
item had only three significant correlations.

For the combined sample, significantly intercorrelated
female gender role-related items are: sentimental, neat,
sympathetic, warm, sensitive, gentle, polite, and tactful
or affectionate. Significantly intercorrelated male gender
role—related items are: adventurous, realistic, logical,
independent, aggressive, competitive, dynamic, and self-
confident.

Two factors constituted the Ideal Gender Role Measure
as depicted on Table 2. With a significance level of
p i .40, 14 of the 20 female and male gender role-related
items constituted factor 2. Ranging from scores of .81 to
.43, the significantly associated items are: affectionate,
warm, sensitive, sympathetic, sentimental, gentle,
adventurous, neat, logical, independent, polite, realistic,
self-confident, and dynamic. Factor 5 was composed of two
ideal male gender role-related items, competitive and
ambitious. The factor loadings were .66 and .65 respec-
tively.

Factor 2 with 14 items support the hypothesis of a

unitary ideal gender role concept composed of personality

96

 

 

 

Table 2. Varimax Rotated Factor Loadings of Ideal
Gender role-related Questionnaire Items
Significantly Associated with Factors
2 and 5.
Factor 2 Factor 5
Item Score Item Score
77. Affectionate .81 73. Competitive .66
79. Warm .77 74. Ambitious .65
71. Sensitive .73
65. Sympathetic .68
60. Sentimental .63
75. Gentle .61
61. Adventurous .57
63. Neat .57
67. Logical .53
69. Independent .52
78. Polite .52
64. Realistic .46
79. Self-confident .44
76. Dynamic .43

 

 

97
characteristics. The factor composed of aggressive and

competitive constitute a separate construct.

Ideal Family Role Concept
Hypotheses:
1. There is a significant positive relationship
among women's scores on individual items of
the Ideal Family Role Concept Measure.
2. There is a significant positive relationship
among men's scores on individual items of
the Ideal Family Role Concept Measure.
3. There is a significant positive relationship
among all scores on individual items of the
Ideal Family Role Concept Measure.
Pearson Product Moment Correlation Coefficients
and their corresponding significance levels are reported
for the Ideal Family Role Concept Measure items for female
subjects, male subjects, and for the total combined sample
in Appendix E. Table 3 summarizes significant inter-
correlations of items on the Ideal Family Role Concept
Measure for female, male and combined total subjects.

Only items with significance levels of p i .10 were

considered significant.

Female Subjects

 

For women, an incomplete but significant set of
correlations was found between items on the Ideal Family
Role Concept Measure. This hypothesis was generally
supported because there were consistent patterns of

significant correlations.

98

Table 3. Number of Significant Intercorrelations of Items
on the Ideal Family Role Concept Measure for
Female, Male and Total Samples.

 

 

 

 

Intercorrelations Intercorrelations
with Female Items with Male Items
Questionnaire Items Samples Samples

 

 

Female Male Total Female Male Total

 

Wife Role

81. Clean 9 9 9 9 9 10
82. Children 7 9 9 6 9 9
84. Cards 9 9 9 6 9 10
86. Reassure 1 l l -3 -l -l
87. Medical 8 9 9 9 8 10
88. Playmates 8 8 9 8 7 8
90. Clothing 9 9 9 9 9 10
93. Decorate 8 9 9 8 9 8
96. Meals 9 9 9 10 9 10
98. Dinner 9 8 9 8 8 10

(T=77) (T=80)(T=82) (T=13—3)(T=77-l)(T=85-1)
Husband Role

80. Drive 9 9-1 9-1 9 10 10
83. Location 9 9 9 9 9 10
85. Lock 6-1 7 10 7 7 7
89. Rough-house 7 9 9 5 7 7
91. Sports 4 7 7 3 8 8
92. Insurance 8 9 9 6 8 9
94. Sex 8-1 2 6 8 2 6
95. Provider 9 8 9 10 9 10
97. Car 9 9 9 9 9 10
99. Crises 6 8 9-1 7 8 9

(T=75-2)(T=77-1)(T=86-2) (T=73) (T=77)(T=86)

 

99

Some trends are evident in the correlation signifi-
cance patterns. Frmm Table 3, "Number of Significant
Intercorrelations of Items on the Ideal Family Role
Concept Measure for Female, Male and Total Samples,"
significant correlations for women between wife and
husband family role-related items can be compared.

There are similar numbers of significant correlations
among wife role-related items (77 positive) and between
wife and husband family role-related items (73 positive
and 3 negative). There are also similar numbers of
significant correlations among husband role-related
items (73 positive) and between husband and wife family role-
related items (75 positive and 2 negative).

Based on analysis of the correlations, three items

"reassure, rough-house,‘ and "sports,' were generally
not significantly related to others. Among and between
the family role-related intercorrelations, each item had
only the following significant correlations: reassure,
1 positive wife role-related correlation and 3 negative
husband role-related correlations; rough-house with 5
positive husband role-related correlations and 7 positive
wife role—related correlations; and sports with 3 positive
husband role-related correlations and 4 positive wife
role-related correlations.

Based on the female sample, significantly inter-

correlated wife role-related items are: clean, medical,

100
clothing, meals, and dinner, with children, cards, and
decorate as possible considerations. Significantly
intercorrelated husband role-related items are: drive,

location, sex, provider, and car.

Male Subjects

 

For men, an incomplete but significant set of correla-
tions was found between items on the Ideal Family Role
Concept Measure. This hypothesis was supported because
there was a grouping of significant correlations.

Some general trends are evident in the correlation
significance patterns. From Table 3, "Number of Signifi-
cant Intercorrelations of Items on the Ideal Family
Role Concept Measure for Female, Male and Total Samples,"
significant correlations for women between wife and husband
family role-related items can be compared.

There are similar numbers of significant correla-
tions among wife role-related items (80 positive) and
between wife and husband family role-related items (77
positive and 1 negative). There are also similar numbers
of significant correlations among husband role—related
items (77 positive) and between husband and wife family
role-related items (77 positive).

Based on analysis of the correlations, two items

"reassure" and "sex, were generally nonsignificantly
intercorrelated with others. Among and between the family

role-related intercorrelations each item had only the

101
following significant correlations: reassure, 1 positive
wife role-related correlation and 1 negative husband
role-related correlation; and, sex with 2 positive husband
role-related correlations and 2 positive wife role-related
correlations.

Based on the male sample, significantly intercorrelated
wife role-related items are: clean, children, cards,
clothing, decorate and meals. Significantly intercorrelated
husband role-related items are: drive, location, insurance,
provider, and car.

Male and Female Subjects
Combined

For men and women combined an incomplete but signifi-
cant set of correlations was found between items on the
Ideal Family Role Concept Measure. This hypothesis was
supported because there was a group of significant
correlations.

Some trends are evident in the correlation significance
patterns. From Table 3, "Number of Significant Inter-
correlations of Items on the Ideal Family Role Concept
Measure for Female, Male and Total Samples," we can compare
significant correlations for women between wife and husband
family role-related items.

There are similar numbers of significant correlations
among wife role-related items (82 positive) and between

wife and husband family role-related items (85 positive

102
and 1 negative). There are also similar numbers of
significant correlations among husband role-related items
(85 positive) and between husband and wife family role-
related items (86 positive and 2 negative).

Based on analysis of the correlations, two items,

H

"reassure" and "sex, were nonsignificant. These results
are identical to those in the male sample. Among and
between the family role-related intercorrelations, each
item had only the following significant correlations:
reassure, 1 positive wife role-related correlation and 1
negative husband role-related correlation; and, sex with
6 positive husband role-related correlations and 6 positive
wife role-related correlations.

In the combined sample significantly intercorrelated
wife role-related items are: clean, children, cards,
medical, playmates, clothing, decorate, meals, and dinner.
Husband role-related significant items include: drive,
location, lock, insurance, provider, car, and crises.

One factor constituted the Ideal Family Role Measure
as depicted on Table 4. With a significance level of
p i .40, 14 of the 20 wife family role and husband family
role-related items constituted factor 1. Ranging from
scores of .87 to .41, the significantly associated items
are: ‘meals, provider, location, clean, dinner, car,
clothing, medical, drive, children, insurance, cards,
decorate and sex. This factor was complicated by other

items with significant factor loadings. Also associated

103

 

 

 

Table 4. Varimax Rotated Factor Loadings of Ideal Family
Role-Related and Other Questionnaire Items
Significantly Associated with Factor 1.

Factor 1

Construct Questionnaire Item Score

Ideal Family Role Concept 96. Meals .87

Ideal Family Role Concept 95. Provider .82

Ideal Family Role Concept 83. Live .77

Ideal Family Role Concept 81. Clean .73

Ideal Family Role Concept 98. Dinner .73

Ideal Family Role Concept 97. Car .65

Ideal Family Role Concept 90. Clothing .61

Ideal Gender Role Concept 62. Dominant .60

Ideal Family Role Concept 87. Medical .60

Ideal Family Role Concept 80. Drive .56

Ideal Family Role Concept 82. Children .55

Perceived Family Role

Performance 55. Provider .52

Ideal Gender Role Concept 72. Aggressive .47

Ideal Family Role Concept 92. Insurance .47

Ideal Family Role Concept 84. Cards .46

Perceived Family Role

Performance 43. Location .45

Ideal Family Role Concept 93. Decorate .41

Ideal Family Role Concept 94. Sex .41

 

104
with factor 1 are two ideal gender role items, dominant
and aggressive, and two perceived family role performance
items, provider and live.

Factor 1 with 14 items supports the hypothesis of a
unitary ideal family role concept composed of family tasks.
In a transformation factor matrix, factors 1 and 2 were
negatively related at -.63. This was the only significant

score between factors. The hypothesis was supported.

Perceived Gender Role Characteristics

 

Hypotheses:

1. There is a significant positive relationship
among women's scores on individual items of
the Perceived Gender Role Characteristics
Measure.

2. There is a significant positive relationship
among men's scores on individual items of the
Perceived Gender Role Characteristics Measure.

3. There is a significant positive relationship
among all scores on individual items of the
Perceived Gender Role Characteristics Measure.

Pearson Product Moment Correlation Coefficients and

their corresponding significance levels are reported for
the Perceived Gender Role Characteristics Measure items

for female subjects, male subjects, and for the total
combined sample in Appendix E. Table 5 summarizes signifi—
cant intercorrelations of items on the Perceived Gender

Role Characteristics Measure for female, male and total

combined subjects.

105

Table 5. Number of Significant Intercorrelations of Items

on the Perceived Gender Role Performance Measure
for Female, Male and Total Samples.

 

 

 

 

Intercorrelations Intercorrelations
with Female Items with Male Items
Questionnaire Item Samples Samples

 

 

Female Male Total Female Male Total

 

Female Role

20.
23.
25.
26.
28.
30.
31.
35.
37.
38.

Male
21.
22.
24.
27.
29.
32.
33.
34.
36.
39.

Sentimental 4 7 5 2 3 5
Neat 2 2 3 -l -3 1-3
Sympathetic 7 8 9* 5 3-1 6
Tactful 6 7 7 -1 3 1
Religious 5 l 3 -4 -l -1
Warm 6 8 8* 2 -3 4
Sensitive 6 8 9* 5 3 5
Gentle 6 8 7 3 4 8
Affectionate 5 8 6 1 1-2 3-1
Polite 6 9 7 3 -3 2
(T=53) (T=66) (T=64)(T=21-6)(T=17-l3)(T=35-5)

Role

Adventurous 1-1 2 3 8 9 9*
Dominant 2-1 1-2 5-1 8 4 8*
Realistic 1-1 3 5-1 4 4 4
Logical 3-1 0 7 6 10*
Independent 3 4 6 9 4 8*
Aggressive 3 2-2 3-2 9 7 9*
Competitive l 2 2 6 3 8*
Ambitious 1-1 -4 -2 8 7 8*
Dynamic 1 -5 l-2 8 6 9*
Self-Confident 4-1 3 5 9 6 9*

(T=20-6)(T=17-13)(T=33-8)(T=76)(T=56) (T=82)

 

106

Female Subjects

 

For women, an incomplete set of significant correla-
tions was found between items on the Perceived Gender
Role Characteristics Measure. The hypothesis was not
supported.

Some trends are evident in the correlation signifi-
cance patterns. From Table 5, "Number of Significant
Intercorrelations of Items on the Perceived Gender Role
Characteristics Measure for Female, Male and Total Samples,"
significant correlations for women between female and male
gender role-related items can be compared.

There are more significant correlations among female
gender role-related items (53 positive) than between
female and male gender role-related items (26 positive and
6 negative). There are also more significant correlations
among male gender role—related items (76 positive) than
between male and female role-related items (20 positive
and 6 negative). This suggests female subjects think of
female and male gender role items more independently of one
another than expected.

Based on analysis of the correlations, most female
gender role-related items were found nonsignificant. Four
female and one male gender role-related items were non-
significantly related to other same gender items. They
are: neat, sentimental, religious, affectionate, and

realistic. Each had low numbers of significant correlations

107
among same gender items. The significant correlations are:
neat, 2 positive; sentimental, 4 positive; religious, 5
positive; affectionate, 5 positive; and, realistic, 4
positive.

Based on the female sample, significantly inter—
correlated female gender role-related items are: sympathetic,
tactful, and polite, with sensitive or gentle as possibly
related. Significantly intercorrelated male gender role-
related items are: adventurous, independent, aggressive,
ambitious, dynamic and self-confident. This hypothesis was

rejected.

Male Subjects

 

For men, an incomplete set of significant correlations
was found between items on the Perceived Gender Role
Characteristics Measure. This hypothesis was rejected.

Some trends are evident in the correlation significance
patterns. From Table 5, "Number of Significant Inter-
correlations of Items on the Perceived Gender Role
Characteristics Measure for Female, Male and Total Samples,"
significant correlations for men between female and male
gender role-related items can be compared.

There are more significant correlations among female
gender role-related items (66 positive) than between female
and male gender role-related items (17 positive and 13
negative). There are also more significant correlations

among male gender role-related items (56 positive) than

108
between male and female gender role-related items (17
positive and 13 negative). This suggests male subjects
think of female and male gender role items as more
independent of one another than expected.

Based on analysis of the correlations, many male
gender role-related and several female gender role-related
items were nonsignificant. Four of the ten male gender
role-related items were nonsignificantly intercorrelated;
these include: dominant, 4 negative; realistic, 4 negative,
independent, 4 negative; and, competitive, 3 negative.

Two female gender role-related items, "neat" and "religious,"
were nonsignificant. Intercorrelations among female gender
role-related items were 2 negative for neat, and 1 negative
for religious.

Based on the male sample, significantly intercorrelated
female gender role-related items are: sympathetic, warm,
sensitive, gentle, affectionate, and polite. Significantly
intercorrelated male gender role-related items are:
adventurous, aggressive, ambitious, and self-confident.
Therefore, the hypothesis was rejected.

Male and Female Subjects
Combined

 

For men and women combined, an incomplete set of
significant correlations was found between items on the
Perceived Gender Role Characteristics Measure. The hypothe-

sis was not supported.

109

Some trends are evident in the correlation signifi-
cance patterns. From Table 5, "Number of Significant
Intercorrelations of Items on the Perceived Gender Role
Characteristics Measure for Female, Male and Total Samples,"
significant correlations for between female and male gender
role-related items can be compared.

There are more significant correlations among female
gender role-related items (64 positive) than between female
and male gender role-related items (35 positive and 5
negative). There are also more significant correlations with
male gender role-related items (82 significant correlations)
than between male and female gender role-related items
(33 positive and 8 negative). This suggests the total
combined sample of subjects think of female and male gender
role items more independently of one another than expected.

Based on analysis of the correlations only one male
gender role-related item, "realistic," was nonsignificant.
The male gender role-related intercorrelations had 5
positive and 1 negative significant correlations. The non-
significant female gender role-related items were:
sentimental, neat, religious, and affectionate. Inter—
correlations among female gender role-related items were:
sentimental, 5 negative; neat, 3 negative; religious, 3
negative; and, affectionate, 6 negative.

Based on the combined sample, significantly inter-

correlated male gender role-related items are: adventurous,

110
logical, independent, aggressive, ambitious, dynamic, with
competitive and self-confident as possible items. Signi-
ficantly intercorrelated female gender role-related items
are: sympathetic, tactful, warm, sensitive, gentle, and
polite.

Five separate factors constitute the Perceived Gender
Role Characteristics Measure as depicted on Table 6. With
a significance level of p i .40, 5 of 10 male gender role-
related items constitute factor 3. Ranging from scores
of .67 to .44, the significantly associated items are:
dynamic, adventurous, aggressive, dominant and competitive.
Logical and realistic are associated with factor 19 with
factor loadings of .73 and .47 respectively.

Factors 4 and 13 were composed of female gender role-
related items. Factor 4 was composed of affectionate and
warm, with scores of .81 and .68 respectively. Factor 13
was composed of sympathetic, tactful and politie, with
respective scores of .67, .65 and .54.

Factor 3, the perceived male gender-role character-
istics measure is on the borderline of supporting the
hypothesis, with 5 of 10 male gender-role items significantly
associated with the factor. However, the perceived female
gender-role characteristics measure was split between two
factors with only 5 of 10 items significantly associated

with one of the two factors. Factor 4 might be termed

111

Table 6. Varimax Rotated Factor Loadings of Perceived
Gender Role Performance - Related Questionnaire
Items Significantly Associated with Factors 3,
4, l3, l9 and 20.

 

 

Male Gender Role-Related Items

 

 

Factor 3 Factor 19
(Item) (Score) (Item) (Score)
36. Dynamic .67 27. Logical .73
21. Adventurous .66 24. Realistic .47
31. Aggressive .61
22. Dominant .54

32. Competitive .44

Female Gender Role-Related Items

 

 

Factor 4 Factor 13
(Item) (Score) (Item) (Score)
37. Affectionate .81 25. Sympathetic .67
29. Warm .68 26. Tactful .65
38. Polite .54

Mixed Gender Role-Related Items

 

 

Factor 20
(Item) (Score)
30. Sensitive .71
28. Independent .53

20. Sentimental .49

 

112
"perceived female role characteristics of nurturance."
Factor 13 might be termed "perceived female role charac-
teristics of considerateness."

A mixed gender role factor compose of two female
gender role-related items, sensitive and sentimental, and
one male gender role-related item, independent, are
significantly associated. Scores range from .71 to .49.
The underlying nature of this factor is not clearly
defineable.

Therefore, the hypothesis of a unitary perceived gender

role performance concept is rejected.

Perceived Family Role Performance

 

Hypotheses:

1. There is a significant positive relationship
among women's scores on individual items of the
Perceived Family Role Performance Measure.

2. There is a significant positive relationship
among men's scores on individual items of the
Perceived Family Role Performance Measure.

3. There is a significant positive relationship
among all scores on individual items of the
Perceived Family Role Performance Measure.

Pearson Product Moment Correlation Coefficients and

their corresponding significance levels are reported for
the Perceived Family Role Performance Measure items for
female subjects, male subjects, and for the combined total

sample in Appendix E. Table 7 summarizes significant

intercorrelations of items on the Perceived Family Role

113

Table 7. Number of Significant Intercorrelations of Items
on the Perceived Family Role Performance Measure
for Female, Male and Total Samples.

 

 

 

 

Intercorrelations Intercorrelations
with Female Items with Male Items
Questionnaire Item Samples Samples

 

 

Female Male Total Female Male Total

 

Wife Role
41. Clean 5 4 5 6 l 5
42. Children 4 6 5 4-1 2 3
44. Cards 7 3 5 1 1 1
46. Reassure 4 l 4 -3 1 4-1
47. Medical 7 5-2 6 2 -2 2
48. Playmates 7 4 8 3 3 4
50. Clothing 6 3-1 6 6 2 4
53. Decorate 3 3 3 3 4 4
56. Meals 3 3—2 4 2 2-1 4-2
58. Dinner 6 2-1 2 1-1 2-1 2-1
(T=52)(T=34-6)(T=48) (T=28—5)(T=18-4)(T=33-4)
Husband Role
40. Drive 3 0 2 4 2-1 3-1
43. Live 6 4 5 4 3 5
45. Lock 3 2 3 1-1 3 3
49. Rough-house -2 2 -2 2 1 2
51. Sports 3-1 2-1 3 4-1 1 4-1
52. Insurance 4 1 3 4 2 5
54. Sex 1 -2 3-1 4-1 1-1 4
55. Provider 5 5 8 4 2 5
57. Car 2-1 -1 3-1 7 4 8
59. Crises 2 1 2-1 2-1 2 3

(T=29—4)(T=16-4)(T=32-5)(T=36-4)(T=21-2)(T=42-2)

 

114
Performance Measure for female, male and combined total
subjects. Only items with significance levels of p i .10

were considered significant.

Female Subjects

 

For women, no complete set of significant correlations
was found between items on the Perceived Family Role
Performance Measure. The hypothesis was not supported
because data suggest that few items offer unitary construct.

Some trends are evident in the correlation significance
patterns. From Table 7, "Number of Significant Inter-
correlations of Items on the Perceived Family Role
Performance Measure for Female, Male and Total Samples,"
significant correlations for women between wife and husband
family role-related items can be compared.

There are more significant correlations among wife
role-related items (48 positive) than between wife and
husband family role-related items (33 positive and 4
negative). There are also more significant correlations
among husband role-related items (42 positive and 2
negative) than between husband and wife family role-related
items (32 positive and 5 negative). This suggests female
subjects think of wife and husband family role-related
items independently of one another in family role perfor-
mance perceptions, but not in family role concept ideals.

Based on analysis of the correlations, most wife and

husband role-related items were nonsignificant. For the

115
female subjects, five wife and three husband role-related
items were rejected. Intercorrelations among the wife
role-related items were: clean, 5 positive; children,

4 positive; reassure, 4 positive; decorate, 3 positive;
and, meals, 3 positive. Intercorrelations among the
husband role-related items were: lock, 1 positive and 1
negative correlation; crises, 2 positive and 1 negative
correlation; and, rough-house, 2 positive correlations.
Based on the female samples significantly inter-
correlated wife role-related items are: cards, medical,
playmates, clothing, and dinner. Significantly inter-
correlated husband role-related items are: live, sports,

provider, and car. The hypothesis was rejected.

Male Subjects

 

For men no complete set of significant correlations
was found between items on the Perceived Family Role
Performance Measure. The hypothesis was not supported
because data suggest that few items offer a unitary construct.
Some trends are evident in the correlation significance
patterns. From Table 7, "Number of Significant Inter-
correlations of Items on the Perceived Family Role Performance

Measure for Female, Male and Total Samples,‘ significant
correlations for men between wife and husband family role-
related items can be compared.

There are more significant correlations among wife

role-related items (34 positive and 6 negative) than

116
between wife and husband family role-related items (18
positive and 4 negative). There are also more significant
correlations among husband role-related items (21 positive
and 2 negative) than between husband and wife family
role-related correlations (16 positive and 4 negative).

This suggests that male subjects think of wife and
husband family role-related items independently of one
another.

Based on analysis of the correlations, numerous wife
and husband family role-related items were nonsignificant.
For the male subjects, two wife and seven husband role-
related items were rejected as nonsignificant. Inter-
correlations among the wife role-related items are:
reassure, 1 positive, and, dinner, 2 positive and 1
negative. Intercorrelations among the husband role-related
items are: drive, 2 positive and 1 negative; rough-house,
1 positive; sports, 1 positive and 1 negative; insurance,
2 positive; sex, 1 positive and 1 negative; provider, 2
positive and, crises, 2 positive.

Based on the male sample the only significantly
intercorrelated wife role-related item is "children."

Possible significant items are "clean, medical" and

"playmates.' Significantly intercorrelated husband role-
related items are "location” and "lock." The hypothesis

was rejected.

117

Male and Female Subjects
Combined

 

For women and men combined no complete set of
significant correlations was found between items on the
Perceived Family Role Performance Measure. The hypothesis
was not supported because data suggest that few items
offer a unitary construct.

Some trends are evident in the correlation signifi-
cance patterns. From Table 7, "Number of Significant
Intercorrelations of Items on the Perceived Family Role
Performance Measure for Female, Male and Total Samples,"
significant correlations for the total sample between wife
and husband family role-related items can be compared.

There are more significant correlations among wife
role-related items (48 positive) than between wife and
husband family role—related items (33 positive and 4
negative). There are also more significant correlations
among husband role-related items (42 positive and 2
negative) than between husband and wife family role-related
correlations (32 positive and 5 negative). This suggests
that the male and female subjects combined think of wife
and husband family role-related items independently of
one another.

Based on analysis of the correlations, numerous wife
and husband family role-related items were nonsignificant.

For the male and female subjects combined, four wife

118
and one husband family role-related items were rejected
as nonsignificant. Intercorrelations among wife role-
related items are: cards, 1 positive; medical, 2 positive;
dinner, 2 positive and one negative; and decorate, 3
positive. The only husband role-related item is "rough-

house,‘ with only 2 positive correlations.
Based on the female and male samples combined,
significantly intercorrelated wife role—related items

are "children” and "p1aymates,' with "clean" and "meals"
as possibly significant. Significantly intercorrelated
husband role-related items are: location, sports, provider
and car.

One factor is associated with the Perceived Family
Role Performance Measure items, as depicted on Table 8.
With a significance level of p <_ .40, 2 out of 10
perceived husband family role performance-related items
and no perceived wife role performance related items
constituted factor 15. Items, insurance and drive, with
factor loadings of .66 and .43, were associated with
factor 15. Factor 15 alone did not support the hypothesis
of a perceived family role performance construct. However,

if more questions in this direction were asked, there may

have been more support for this hypothesis.

119

Table 8. Varimax Rotated Factor Loadings of Perceived
Family Role Performance-Related Questionnaire
Items Significantly Associated with Factor 15.

 

 

Item Score

 

52. Insurance .66

40. Drive .43

 

120

Sex Differences

Ideal Gender Role Concept

 

The hypothesis:
Male and female married college students agree on
beliefs about their gender role concepts. There
is no significant difference between men and
women's scores on the Ideal Gender Role Concept
Measure.
In Table 9, "T Values of Men's and WOmen's Scores on
the Ideal Gender Role-Related Items," the results for
each item are shown. On the female gender role-related

items, there were no significant differences between

items on women's and men's scores for "sentimental,"

"neat," "tactful," "religious, warm, sensitive,"

"gentle,' and "polite." There was a significant difference
on scores for sympathetic and affectionate.

On the male gender role-related items no significant
differences between men and women were found. Women and
men agreed on the following items: adventurous, dominant,
realistic, logical, independent, aggressive, competitive,
ambitious, dynamic, and self-confident.

On Table 10 the means and standard deviations for
each ideal gender role-related item are reported. (Note
the differences in means and standard deviations.) All
means of the men's scores, except for tactful and

competitive, are lower than the women's scores, indicating

more traditional role segregation. All mean scores suggest

Table 9. T Values of Men's and WOmen's

Gender Role-Related Items.

121

Scores on the Ideal

 

 

Pooled Variance

 

Separate Variance

 

 

Ideal Gender Role- Estimate Estimate
RelatEd Items T 2-Tail T 2-Tai1
Value Prob. Value Prob.
Female Gender Role
60. Sentimental -l.39 0.167 -1.39 0.166
63. Neat -l.69 0.094 -1.69 0.093
65. Sympathetic -2.06 0.041* -2.07 0.041*
66. Tactful 0.13 0.898 0.13 0.898
68. Religious -O.28 0.782 -0.28 0.782
70. Warm -l.65 0.101 -1.66 0.100
71. Sensitive -l.46 0.146 -1.47 0.145
75. Gentle -0.93 0.354 -0.93 0.354
77. Affectionate —2.48 0.015* -2 48 0.015*
78. Polite -l.62 0.107 -l.63 0.106
Male Gender Role
61. Adventurous -l.78 0.077 —1.79 0.077
62. Dominant -1.08 0.283 -1.08 0.283
64. Realistic —l.44 0.151 -l.45 0.150
67. Logical -l.42 0.158 -l.42 0.157
69. Independent -l.82 0.071 -l.82 0.071
72. Aggressive -0.30 0.767 -0.30 0.767
73. Competitive 0.28 0.781 0.28 0.781
74. Ambitious -0.90 0.370 -0.90 0.370
76. Dynamic -0.74 0.459 -0.75 0.458
79. Self-Confident -0.56 0.579 -9.56 0.579

 

*An asterisk marks

those probabilities at < .05,

showing a significant difference between male and female

samples.

dif
in

122

Table 10. Means and Standard Deviations of Men's and
Women's Scores on the Ideal Gender Role-Related
Items. .

 

 

 

 

 

Gender Role- Men's Scores WOmen's Scores
Female Role
60. Sentimental 2.02 1.08 2.29 0.97
63. Neat 2.35 1.14 2.66 0.77
65. Sympathetic* 2.47 0.87 2.79 0.73
66. Tactful 2.91 0.91 2.89 0.68
68. Religious 2.83 0.63 2.86 0.62
70. Warm 2.42 0.98 2.68 0.64
71. Sensitive 2.46 0.91 2.68 0.69
75. Gentle 2.49 0.87 2.64 0.86
77. Affectionate* 2.42 0.91 2.80 0.72
78. Polite 2.77 0.78 2.96 0.43
Male Role
6l. Adventurous 2.11 1.03 2.43 0.89
62. Dominant 1.90 0.99 2.09 0.92
64. Realistic 2.56 0.87 2.77 0.63
67. Logical 2.56 0.80 2.77 0.74
69. Independent 2.26 1.01 2.59 0.89
72. Aggressive 2.04 1.00 2.09 0.94
73. Competitive 2.19 0.93 2.14 0.98
74. Ambitious 2.42 0.94 2.57 0.83
76. Dynamic 2.47 0.91 2.59 0.73
79. Self-

Confident 2.79 0.62 2.86 0.67

 

*An asterisk indicates items where significant
differences were found between men and women, as reported
in Table 9.

123

moderate traditional or role sharing ideals. Standard
deviations are small (generally less than one point)
indicating little variation.

Therefore, the hypothesis was supported by all
items except "sympathetic" and "affectionate." Ideal
gender role-related items indcated moderately traditional
and non-traditional role sharing ideals. There were non-

significantly more traditional scores for men than women.

Ideal Fami1y_Role Concept

 

The hypothesis:

Male and female married students agree on beliefs
about their ideal family role concepts. There

is no significant difference between men and
women's scores on the Ideal Family Role Concept
Measure.

On Table 11, "T Values of Men's and Women's Scores
on the Ideal Family Role Performance Items," the results
of each item are shown. On the wife role-related items,
there were no significant differences between women's and
men's scores. On the husband role-related items there
were no significant differences between women's and men's
scores for: drive, live, lock, rough-house, sports,
insurance, provider, and car. There was a significant
difference between scores for "sex" and "crises."

On Table 12 the means and standard deviations for

each ideal family role-related item are reported. (Note

the differences in means and standard deviation.) Women's

Table 11.

Ideal Family Role Concept Items.

T Values of Men's and WOmen's Scores on the

124

 

 

Pooled Variance

 

Separate Variance

 

 

Ideal Family Role- Estimate Estimate
Rented Items T 2-Tail T 2-Tail
Value Prob. Value Prob.
Wife Role
81. Clean 0.47 0.638 0.47 0.638
82. Children -0.44 0.658 -0.44 0.658
84. Cards -0.16 0.876 -0.16 0.876
86. Reassure 0.35 0.726 0.35 0.725
87. Medical -0.07 0.945 -0.07 0.945
88. Playmates —0.48 0.635 -0.48 0.635
90. Clothing 0.44 0.662 0.44 0.662
93. Decorate -0.87 0.386 -0.87 0.386
96. Meals 1.37 0.175 1.37 0.174
98. Dinner 0.87 0.387 0.87 0.387
Husband Role
80. Drive -0.74 0.460 -0.74 0.459
83. Location 1.45 0.149 1.45 0.149
85. Lock -0.71 0.479 -0.71 0.480
89. Rough-house -0.95 0.345 -0.95 0.345
91. Sports -0.08 0.936 -0.08 0.936
92. Insurance -0.18 0.854 -0.18 0.854
94. Sex 2.37 0.019* 2.37 0.020*
95. Provider 0.31 0.758 0.31 0.758
97. Car -1.22 0.223 -1.22 0.224
99. Crises —2.49 0.014* -2.49 0.014*

 

*An asterisk marks those probabilities at < .05,

showing a significant difference between male afid female
samples.

dii
in

125

Table 12. Means and Standard Deviations of Men's and
WOmen's Scores on the Ideal Family Role-Related
Items.

 

 

 

 

 

Men's Scores Women's Scores
Family Role-
Wife Role
81. Clean 1.61 1.25 1.50 1.32
82. Children 2.00 1.05 2.09 1.08
84. Cards 1.98 1.14 2.02 1.26
86. Reassure 3.11 0.62 3.07 0.38
87. Medical 1.86 1.09 1.88 1.25
88. Playmates 2.40 0.90 2.48 0.85
90. Clothing 1.56 1.15 1.46 1.21
93. Decorate 1.68 1.17 1.88 1.16
96. Meals 1.44 1.18 1.14 1.12
98. Dinner 1.65 1.32 1.45 1.16
Husband Role
80. Drive 1.18 1.21 1.34 1.13
83. Location 1.47 1.30 1.13 1.25
85. Lock 2.49 1.10 2.64 1.17
89. Rough-house 1.90 1.13 2.09 1.05
91. Sports 2.61 0.75 2.63 0.70
92. Insurance 2.21 1.11 2.25 1.16
94. Sex* 2.91 0.69 2.59 0.76
95. Provider 1.14 1.27 1.07 1.09
97. Car 1.02 1.11 1.29 1.22
99. Crises* 2.00 1.12 2.48 0.93

 

*An asterisk indicates items where significant
differences were found between men and women, as reported
in Table 11.

Si
86

be

126
and men's scores varied nonsignificantly for all items
except "sex" and "crises." Men were more traditional in
scores on "crises," but women were more traditional on

"sex."

Mean scores ranged from very to moderately tradi-
tional, with a few exceptions of nontraditional role
sharing ("sex" and "reassure"). Standard deviations,
ranged from below to just above one point, indicating
small variation.

Therefore, the hypothesis was supported by all items

except "sex" and crises." Ideal family role-related items,
except for "sex" and "reassure" suggested very to moderately

traditional ideals.

Perceived Gender Role Characteristics

The hypothesis:

Male and female married college students disagree

on perceptions about their gender role charac-

teristics. There is a significant difference
between men and women's scores on the Perceived

Gender Role Performance Measure.

On Table 13, "T Values of Men's and Women's Scores
on the Perceived Gender Role Characteristics Items,"
the results for each item are reported. On the female
gender role-related items, there were no significant
differences between men's and women's scores on seven items:
sentimental, neat, sympathetic, tactful, religious,

sensitive and polite. Significant differences were found

between scores for "warm," "gentle" and "affectionate."

Table 13.

Gender Role Characteristics Measure Items.

127

T Values of Men's and Women's Scores on Perceived

 

 

Pooled Variance

 

Separate Variance

 

 

Perceived Gender Estimate Estimate
Role—Related Items T 2-Tail 2-Tai1
Value Prob. Value Prob.
Female Gender Role
20. Sentimental -0.11 0.911 -0.11 0.911
23. Neat -0.20 0.843 -0.20 0.843
25. Sympathetic -0.46 0.646 -0.46 0.646
26. Tactful 0.59 0.555 0.59 0.554
28. Religious -0.31 0.757 9.31 0.757
30. Warm. -2.46 0.015* -2.47 0.015*
31. Sensitive 0.34 0.736 0.34 0.736
35. Gentle -2.41 0.018* -2.41 0.018*
37. Affectionate -2.93 0.004* -2.94 0.004*
38. Polite 0.74 0.464 0.74 0.463
Male Gender Role
21. Adventurous -0.87 0.389 -0.87 0.389
22. Dominant -1.49 0.139 -1.49 0.139
24. Realistic -0.89 0.377 -0.89 0.376
27. Logical -1.67 0.098 -1.67 0.098
29. Independent -0.45 0.653 -0.45 0.653
32. Aggressive -1.33 0.186 -l.33 0.186
33. Competitive -2.11 0.037* -2.11 0.038*
34. Ambitious -0.81 0.421 -0.81 0.421
36. Dynamic -0.08 0.932 -0.08 0.933
39. Self-Confident -0.31 0.757 -0.31 0.757

 

*An asterisk marks those probabilities at <

.05,

showing a significant difference between male and female
samples.

a1

th
Me
I1101

De}

128

On the male gender role-related items, there were
no significant differences between men's and women's
scores for: adventurous, dominant, realistic, logical,
independent, aggressive, ambitious, dynamic, and self-
confident. Significant differences occurred between
men and women's scores for one item, "competitive."

On Table 14 the means and standard deviations for
each perceived gender role-related item are shown. (Note
the differences in means and standard deviations.) A11

means of the men's scores, except for "tactful,"

U I

"sensitive,' and "polite,' are lower than the women's
scores, indicating more traditional role segregation. All
mean scores indicate moderately traditional role segrega- a“
tion to nontraditional role sharing, with men's scores

on the edge of very traditional for the "adventurous,"

”aggressive,' and competitive" items. Standard deviations
are moderate (around 1.5 points), indicating some variation.
Therefore, the hypothesis was rejected except for
the items: warm, gentle, affectionate, and competitive.
Means of perceived gender role-related items suggested
moderately traditional and nontraditional role-sharing
perceptions of their behavior. Men were slightly more

traditional than women, though at a nonsignificant level.

Perceived Family Role Performance

 

The hypothesis:

Male and female married college students disagree

.--..43333

129

Table 14. Means and Standard Deviations of Men's and
Women's Scores on the Perceived Gender Role
Characteristics Related Items.

 

 

 

 

 

Men's Scores Women's Scores
Gender Role-
Female Role
20. Sentimental 1.75 1.47 1.79 1.51
23. Neat 2.42 1.72 2.48 1.55
25. Sympathetic 2.35 1.56 2.48 1.47
26. Tactful 3.04 1.69 2.86 1.50
28. Religious 2.46 1.38 2.54 1.35
30. Warm* 2.58 1.35 3.14 1.07
31. Sensitive 2.07 1.43 1.98 1.34
35. Gent1e* 2.30 1.09 2.75 0.90
37. Affectionate* 2.58 1.41 3.27 1.05
38. Polite 2.60 1.29 2.43 1.13
Male Role
21. Adventurous 1.37 1.25 1.61 1.66
22. Dominant 1.67 1.38 2.04 1.25
24. Realistic 2.25 1.44 2.48 1.39
27. Logical 1.79 1.19 2.20 1.39
29. Independent 2.19 1.26 2.30 1.35
32. Aggressive 1.53 1.40 1.89 1.52
33. Competitive* 1.46 1.24 2.04 1.65
34. Ambitious 1.98 1.38 2.20 1.43
36. Dynamic 2.16 1.25 2.18 1.34
39. Self-

Confident 1.93 1.50 2.02 1.52

 

*An asterisk indicates items where significant
differences were found between men and women, as reported
in Table 13.

TIC
9X

Of

130
on perceptions about the couple's family role
performance. There is a significant difference
between men's and women's scores on the Perceived
Family Role Performance Measure.

On Table 15, "T Values of Men's and Women's Scores
on the Perceived Family Role Performance Items," the
results for each item are reported. On the wife role-
related items, there were no significant differences
between women's and men's scores.

On the husband role-related items, no significant
differences were apparent between men and women for
drive, live, lock, sports, insurance, sex, provider, and
car. Significant differences were found for the ”crises"
and "rough-house" items.

On Table 16 the means and standard deviations.
According to Table 16, women's and men's scores showed
varied nonsignificant differences are reported. All mean
scores were generally very traditional with some items
moderately traditional. Exceptions were nontraditional
role shared ratings for the items "reassure" by men and
women, and "lock" by women only. Standard deviations vary
from below one to two points, indicating variation on some
items and none on others.

Therefore, the hypothesis was rejected. There were
no significant differences between men's and women's scores

except for two items: "rough-house" and "crises." Means

of perceived family role-related items suggested generally

Table 15.

T Values of Men's and Women's Scores on

131

Perceived Family Role Performance Measure Items.

 

 

Perceived Family Role

Pooled Variance

Estimate

 

Separate Variance
Estimate

 

 

Related Items 2-Tai1 2-Tai1
Value Prob. Value Prob.

Wife Role
41. Clean 0.71 0.481 0.71 0.480
42. Children -1.16 0.248 -1.16 0.249
44. Cards -0.27 0.784 -0.27 0.784
46. Reassure 0.84 0.402 0.84 0.402
47. Medical 0.52 0.605 0.52 0.606
48. Playmates -0.97 0.334 -0.97 0.334
50. Clothing -0.06 0.953 -0.06 0.953
53. Decorate -0.08 0.934 -0.08 0.934
56. Meals 0.28 0.784 0.28 0.781
58. Dinner -0.26 0.797 -0.26 0.797
Husband Role
40. Drive -1.05 0.295 -1.05 0.297
43. Location 0.15 0.877 0.16 0.877
45. Lock -0.58 0.564 -0.58 0.564
49. Rough-house -3.21 0.002* -3.20 0.002*
51. Sports -0.98 0.330 -0.98 0.332
52. Insurance -1.31 0.193 -1.31 0.194
54. Sex 1.22 0.225 1.22 0.224
55. Provider 0.02 0.986 0.02 0.986
57. Car -1.86 0.066 -1.85 0.069
59. Crises -3.06 0.003* -3.06 0.003*

 

*An Asterisk marks those probabilities at < .05,

showing a significant difference between male and female
samples.

132

Table 16. Means and Standard Deviations of Men's and
Women's Scores on the Perceived Family Role
Performance-Related Items.

 

 

 

 

 

Men's Scores Women's Scores
£32331?st Mean 3:333:13“; Mean 1335:3333
Wife Role
41. Clean 0.86 1.29 0.70 1.16
42. Children 1.32 1.15 1.59 1.35
44. Cards 0.75 1.20 0.82 1.39
46. Reassure 2.77 1.07 2.59 1.23
47. Medical 1.19 1.19 1.07 1.31
48. Playmates 1.46 1.27 1.70 1.36
50. Clothing 0.60 0.82 0.61 1.07
53. Decorate 1.12 1.28 1.14 1.27
56. Meals 0.77 1.04 0.71 1.16
58. Dinner 0.74 1.34 0.80 1.41
Husband Role
40. Drive 0.21 0.62 0.38 1.00
43. Location 0.44 1.00 0.42 0.91
45. Lock 2.51 1.81 2.71 1.96
49. Rough-house* 0.84 1.16 1.66 1.53
51. Sports 1.35 1.13 1.59 1.46
52. Insurance 1.14 1.43 1.50 1.49
54. Sex 1.65 1.26 1.38 1.12
55. Provider 0.77 1.27 0.77 1.13
57. Car 0.14 0.35 0.38 0.89
59. Crises* 1.40 1.28 2.20 1.47

 

*An asterisk indicates items in which significant
differences were found between men and women, as reported
in Table 15.

133

very traditional perceptions of their behavior, with
moderately traditional and occasional nontraditional,

role-shared perceptions.

Marital Adjustment

Hypotheses:

1. Women show higher marital adjustment than

men. Women have significantly higher
marital adjustment scores than men.

2. Male and female subjects with low marital

adjustment have greater differences
between their ideals and perceived role
performances for gender role and family
role concepts than male and female subjects
with high marital adjustment.

In a test of the first hypothesis, the T value for a
pooled variance estimate was -0.71 with a probability
value on a two-tailed test of 0.479. For a separate
variance estimate, T value was computed at -0.71, with
a probability value on a two-tailed test of 0.480. There-
fore, no differences were found between male and female
marital adjustment scores. The hypothesis is rejected.

The second hypothesis cannot be tested due to lack

of inter-item relationship on the measures of Perceived

Gender and Family Role Concepts.

Summary

Hypotheses that were tested for positive relationships
among items on the Ideal Gender Role Concept Measure and

the Ideal Family Role Concept Measure were supported.

134
Hypotheses that were tested for positive relationships
among items on the Perceived Gender Role Performance
Measure and the Perceived Family Role Performance Measure
were rejected.

Items relating to the Ideal Gender Role Concept
Measure are intercorrelated for female, male and combined
samples. For women, the items, religious, polite and
ambitious, had a low number of significant intercorrela-
tions. For men, the items, tactful and religious had a
low number of significant intercorrelations. Yet, in the
combined sample, only the item religious maintained a low
number of significant intercorrelations. Overall more
significant correlations exist among female and male
gender role-related items each than between female and
male gender role-related items.

Two factors hold high factor loadings related to
Ideal Gender Role Concept Measure items. Fourteen of
the twenty gender role-related items are significantly
associated with factor 2. They include: affectionate,
warm, sensitive, sympathetic, sentimental, gentle,
adventurous, neat, logical, independent, polite, realistic,
self-confident, and dynamic. Two male gender role-related
items, competitive and ambitious are significantly
associated with factor 5.

Items relating to the Ideal Family Role Concept

Measure are intercorrelated for female, male and combined

135
samples. For women, the items, reassure, rough-house, and
sports, have a low number of significant intercorrelations.
For men, as well as the combined sample, the items,
reassure and sex have a low number of significant inter-
correlations. Overall about the same number of significant
correlations exist among wife and husband role-related
items each as between wife and husband role-related items.

Fourteen of the twenty family role-related items
are significantly associated with factor 1. They include:
meals, provider, live, clean, dinner, car, clothing,
medical, drive, children, insurance, cards, decorate, and
sex. Items related to other concepts were also associated
with this factor. They include the ideal male gender
role-related items, dominant and aggressive, and the
perceived husband family role-related items, provider and
live. Factor 1 items associated with the Ideal Family
Role Concept, and factor 2 items associated with the Ideal
Gender Role Concepts are negatively associated at .63, a
significant correlation.

Items relating to the Perceived Gender Role Charac-
teristics Concept Measure are not intercorrelated for
female, male and combined samples. For women, the items,
neat, sentimental, religious, affectionate and realistic
have low numbers of significant intercorrelations. For
men, the items, dominant, realistic, independent,

competitive, neat and realistic have low numbers of

136

significant intercorrelations. For the combined sample
one male gender role-related item and four female
gender role-related items have low numbers of significant
intercorrelations. The items include realistic (male
gender role-related) and sentimental, neat, religious,
and affectionate (female gender role-related). Overall
more significant correlations exist among female and male
gender role-related items each, than between female and
male gender role-related items.

Five separate factors hold significant factor loadings
related to perceived gender role-related items. Factor
3 has five male gender role-related items, dynamic,
adventurous, aggressive, dominant, and competitive.
Factor 19 includes the male gender role—related items,
logical and realistic.

Factors 4 and 13 have female gender role-related items.
The items, affectionate and warm are associated with
factor four, termed "nurturance." The items, sympathetic,
tactful and polite are associated with factor 13, termed
"considerateness." A mixed factor that includes the items,
sensitive, independent, and sentimental is not clearly
defineable.

Items relating to the Perceived Family Role Performance
Concept Measure are not intercorrelated for female, male

and combined samples. For women, the following items have

137
low numbers of significant correlations: clean, children,
reassure, decorate, meals, lock, crises, and rough-house.
For men, the following items have low numbers of significant
correlations: reassure, dinner, drive, rough—house, sports,
insurance, sex, provider, and crises. However, for
combined male and female subjects, four wife role-related
items and only one husband role-related item has low
levels of significant correlations. They are rough-house,
medical, dinner, decorate, and cards. Overall, more
significant correlations exist among wife role-related items
and husband role-related items each, than between wife
and husband role-related items.

In factor analysis only one factor is associated with
the Perceived Family Role Performance Measure items.
Factor 15, relating the two husband role-related items,
insurance and drive, do not sufficiently describe the
relationship with the perceived family role performance
concept.

Minor hypotheses were related to men's differences in
and women's scores of Ideal and Perceived Gender and
Family Role Measures as well as marital adjustment. No
significant differences were found between men and women
in a comparison of marital adjustment scores. Therefore,
the hypothesis of difference in scores was rejected. The
marital adjustment hypotheses, comparing Ideal and

Perceived Gender and Family Role Measures, could not be

138
evaluated due to the lack of inter-item relationships for
the Perceived Gender and Family Role Measures.

Few differences were found by comparing men's and
women's scores on gender role and family role-related
items. In comparing men and women on individual items,
there are significantly different scores on nine out of
forty items. Men and women disagreed on two ideal gender
role-related items, "sympathetic" and "affectionate,"
and two ideal family role-related items, "sex" and

"crises.' Therefore, on eight ideal gender role-related
items and eight ideal family role-related items, men and
women agreed, thus supporting the hypothesis.

There was disagreement among three perceived gender

role-related items--"affectionate, warm,‘ and "gentle";
for perceived family role-related items there were two
items of disagreement, "crises" and "rough-house." The
hypothesis of significant differences between scores of
men and women was rejected for seven of ten perceived gender
role-related items and nine perceived family role-related
items. Table 17, "A Summary of Items Related to Gender and
Family Roles in Which Men and women Disagreed," describes
the results.

Mean scores of ideal and perceived gender role-related
items for men and women indicated moderately traditional

to nontraditional ideals and perceptions. While non-

significant, there was a trend on both gender role-related

139

Table 17. A Summary of Items Related to Gender and
Family Roles in Which Men and WOmen Disagreed.

 

 

 

 

 

Gender Role-Related Items Family Role-Related Items
Ideal Perceived Ideal Perceived
Sympathetic Sex
Affectionate Affectionate Crises Crises
Warm. Rough-house

Gentle

 

140
measures for men to score slightly more traditionally than
women. However, ideal and perceived family role-related
scores, suggested very traditional with some moderately
traditional ideals and perceptions. There were occasional
exceptions of nontraditional ratings.

In conclusion, evidence supports the hypotheses of
constructs of Ideal Gender Role Concept and Ideal Family
Role Concept as measured by 14 of 20 items on each measure.
Factor correlation between the two constructs indicate a
moderate negative relationship between Ideal Gender Role
Concept and Ideal Family Role Concept. However, the
hypotheses of unitary constructs for Perceived Gender Role
Characteristics and Perceived Family Role Performance were
rejected. Factor analysis indicated a variety of factors
existed in the Perceived Gender Role Characteristics items,
and only one factor association for items related to
Perceived Family Role performance.

Sex differences were not found on most items of any
of the four measures nor on marital adjustment scores.
Moderately traditional means resulted on scores for the
gender role measures while very traditional means resulted

on scores for the family role measure.

CHAPTER V

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS

Introduction

 

Hypotheses are supported for unitary constructs of
ideal gender role and ideal family role. However, hy-
potheses are rejected for unitary constructs of perceived
gender role characteristics and perceived family role per-
formance.

Men and women agreed overall on most items, and there
were no differences in marital adjustment scores.
Differences between ideal and perceived gender role scores
and ideal and perceived family role scores in relation to
marital adjustment were not investigated. This is due to
the low level of inter-item correlations on the perceived
gender role and perceived family role-related items.

Discussion about the gender role and family role con-
cepts follow, with a review of the agreement between men
and women on these items as well as marital adjustment.

Conclusions are reached with implications for further study.

Gender Role

 

The hypotheses are that:

1. There are significant positive relationships

141

142

among women's, men's, and all scores combined
on individual items of the Ideal Gender Role
Concept Measure.
2. There are significant positive relationships
among women's, men's, and all scores combined
on individual items of the Perceived Gender
Role Characteristics Measure.
3. There is no significant difference between
women's and men's scores on the Ideal Gender
Role Concept Measure, but there is a signifi-
cant difference between women's and men's
scores on the Perceived Gender Role Character-
istics Measure.
The hypotheses are supported for the Ideal Gender
Role Concept Measure for men, women and the combined
sample with high inter-item correlations for most items.
Fourteen of the twenty items were associated with factor
2, and the male gender role-related items, competitive and
ambitious, were associated with a separate factor (5).
Factor two included the following traits; affection-
ate, warm, sensitive, sympathetic, sentimental, gentle,
adventurous, neat, logical, independent, polite, realistic,
self confident and dynamic. These traits appear to be very
positive and attractive human characteristics as well as
gender role ideals. A measureable concept of ideal gender
role held by married college students is indicated by this
data. With further testing, an ideal gender role concept
measure could become reliable.
However, the hypothesis is rejected for the Perceived

Gender Role Characteristics Measure due to the low level

of inter-item correlations. An unclear picture exists of

143
two female gender role-related factors, two male gender
role-related factors, and a mixed, undefined factor com-
posed of sensitive, independent and sentimental. The
factor of most interest is composed of the perceived male
gender role-related items, dynamic, adventurous,
aggressive, dominant, and competitive. The picture of
perceived gender role characteristics appears to be a
fragment of separate factors, including a male-dominant
role, a logical-realistic male factor, and two female-
associated factors of warm-affectionate and sympathetic-
polite-tactful.

No significant differences between men and women
were found on the Ideal Gender Role Concept items except
"affectionate" and "sympathetic." This supports the
hypothesis of agreement between men and women. However,

significant differences were also not found on perceived

gender role-related items except "affectionate, warm
and "gentle." Thus the hypothesis of disagreement is
rejected.

Subjective observations of the data give additional
clues about the proposed gender role concepts. Though not
significant, certain trends are apparent. A greater
number of significant correlations are associated with
items within the ideal female role and male role concepts

each than between the ideal female and male role concepts.

This was also true for the perceived female role and male

144
role concepts. While not significantly independent, a
tendency to think of male and female role concepts
separately is indicated.

Another statistically nonsignificant trend is the
tendency for men toward more traditional role segregation
than women, although both ranged from moderately tradi—
tional to nontraditional perceptions and ideals.

Therefore, in a purposive sample of young, married
college students with children, an ideal concept of male
and female gender role exists, but a concept of perceived
male and female gender role characteristics does not exist,
based on the operational definitions employed in this
study. However, a perceived male gender role characteristics
was implied in a factor of items, including dynamic, ad-
venturous, aggressive, dominant, and competitive. Other
separate factors were also indicated.

The data indicates general agreement by men and women
on a moderately traditional to nontraditional ideal as well
as perception of gender role concept. Exceptions to agree-
ment include "sympathetic" on the ideal gender role concept,
"warm" and "gentle" on the perceived gender role performance,
and "affectionate" on both the ideal and perceived gender
role.

As would be predicted from the research literature,
the college student couples believe in an ideal gender role

based on selected personality characteristics. The

145

moderateness of their beliefs may indicate the relaxa-
tion of traditional norms in the 1970's, as contrasted
with earlier decades. As indicated by Bernard and others,
there is a high agreement between men and women about an
ideal gender role. (Bernard, 1972).

Burr and others indicate the importance of ideal con-
ceptions in relation to behavior (1973). The Lunneborgs
point out that role enactment, however, is never as exag-
gerated as ideal conceptions (1970). Yet the lack of
findings to support the perceived gender role concept
indicates intervening variables. Nonetheless, five factors
were associated with perceived gender role characteristics.
They lend some support to the existence of some sort of
gender role characteristics perception concept. The five
items associated with one male factor are dynamic, ad-
venturous, aggressive, dominant and competitive. This
may be explained in part by the slight tendency for men
to be more traditional. As stated in the literature review,
role enactment is influenced by the degree of investment
of one's self concept in the role ideal.

The items of disagreement between men and women

("affection, sympathetic, warm,‘ and "gentle") indicate
a controversy over the expectations of men. ‘Men are more
traditional in their ideals and perceptions on these items.
Thus women may want and perceive men to be more affec—

tionate and loving than men want and perceive themselves

146
to be. These data support the further testing of a
measure composed of items investigated for an ideal gender
role concept measure. However, perceived gender role
characteristics were fragmented into a number of few item
factors, particularly for the male role. Further testing
with additional items would be necessary to build a
meaningful measure for either male or female perceived

characteristics.

Family Role

 

The hypotheses are that:

1. There are significant positive relationships
among women's,men's, and all scores combined
on individual items of the Ideal Family Role
Concept Measure.

2. There are significant positive relationships
among women's, men's, and all scores combined
on individual items of the Perceived Family
Role Performance Measure.

3. There is no significant difference between
women's and men's scores on the Ideal Family
Role Concept Measure, but there is a signifi-
cant difference between women's and men 3
scores on the Perceived Family Role Perform-
ance Measure.

The hypothesis is supported for the Ideal Family Role
Concept Measure for men, women and the combined sample with
high inter-item correlations for most items. Fourteen of
the twenty items were associated with factor 1, defined as
ideal family role concept. However, the hypothesis is
rejected for the Perceived Family Role Performance Measure

due to the low level of inter-item correlations. One

147
association of two husband role-related items, "insurance,"

and "drive,' resulted from factor analysis. This may in-
dicate that different questions need to be investigated.
Questions such as estate planning, financial investments,
budgeting and mechanics and household repairs were not
investigated. A moderate, negative relationship is
indicated between the "Ideal Gender Role Concept" factor
(2) and the "Ideal Family Role Concept" factor (1).

No significant differences between men and women
were found on the Ideal Family Role Concept items except
"sex" and "crises." This supports the hypothesis of
agreement between men and women. However, significant
differences were also not found on perceived family role-
related items except "crises" and "rough-house." Thus,
the hypothesis of disagreement is rejected.

Subjective observations of the data give additional
clues about the proposed family role concepts. Though
not significant, certain trends are apparent. A greater
number of significant correlations were associated with
items within the perceived wife role performance concept
and perceived husband role performance concept than between
them. Yet, no differences were found for the ideal family
role concepts of wife and husband. A complete inter-
dependency of husband and wife role-related tasks is
inferred by the underlying single factor relationships for

the ideal family role concept. The differences on the

148

perceived family role-related items support the lack of
correlations and factor clustering. Perceived family role
performance tasks appear to be independent variables.

Another trend is the tendency for both men and
women to hold very traditional to moderately traditional
ideal family role concepts as well as perceived family
role performance concepts.

Therefore, in a purposive sample of young, married
college students with children, an ideal concept of wife
and husband family role exists, but a concept of perceived
wife and husband role performance does not exist, based
on the operational definition employed in this study.
Factor analysis indicates a series of independent variables
for the perceived family role performance items except for
an association of ”insurance" and "drive." This points in
a direction for further research. Questions could be de-
signed to see if a role exists more in the areas of finan-
cial management, estate planning, driving, car care and
mechanically inclined household responsibilities.

It is noteworthy that the ideal family role concept
fared so well given the lack of previous research. The
earlier theory development by Aldous, Nye and others indi-
cates a strong basic foundation for conceptualizing family
role without empirical investigation. Yet the same lack
of support for a perceived family role concept is indicated

by our data. As discussed earlier on gender role, there

149
appear to be more significant intervening variables in
perceived family role performance than ideal family role
concept. For perceived family role performance there
are no indications of factors and the items appear to be
more independent, singular variables. The question raised
is what role do ideals play in behavior.

The men and women generally agree on a very tradi-
tional to moderately traditional ideal as well as
perception of family role concept. Exceptions to agree-
ment included "sex" and "crises" on the ideal family role
concept, and "crises" and "rough-house" on the perceived
family role performance concept. The more these married
college students hold traditional family role concepts, the
less traditional are their gender role concepts.

It is important to note the degree of traditional
role segregation on the family role concept in contrast
to gender role. There is a negative relationship between
factor 1, Ideal Family Role Concept, and factor 2, Ideal
Gender Role Concept. The sample of college students tend
toward a very traditional ideal concept of family role-
related tasks and a moderate or nontraditional ideal -
concept of gender role-related traits. Rather than gender
role characteristics and family role behavior being aspects
of the same role, as suggested in some of the child
development and family literature reviewed in chapter one,

this data indicates a negative relationship between two

150

independent factors.

If a married student believes in very traditional
husband and wife role (s)he is likely to believe in more
shared and equal personality traits. The converse is also
true. A married student who believes in shared family
roles will believe in more traditional male and female-
gender-associated personality traits. In some ways this
demonstrates logic. The gender role-related traits, such
as independence, warmth, etc., may be necessary if husbandanui
wife have separate roles in the family to achieve. But if
roles are shared, the best personality characteristics of
either person can be pooled in order to fulfill the family

role-related tasks.

Conclusions

 

The college student couples with children hold a
moderate to very traditional ideal family role concept, but
a moderate to nontraditional ideal gender role concept.
Ideal gender role and family role concepts are negatively
related.

One possible explanation can be found in the nature
of the items composing gender role and family role. The
items significantly associated with the factor, ideal
gender role, are: affectionate, warm, sensitive, sympa-
thetic, sentimental, gentle, adventurous, neat, logical,
independent, polite, realistic, self confident, and

dynamic. The items significantly associated with the

151

factor, ideal family role, follow:

Who should make the family daily meals.

Who should plan to be the major provider for

the family economically.

Whose education or job should determine where
you live geographically.

Who should do the dusting, wash the floors and
clean the bathroom.

Who should prepare dinner when friends are in-
vited over to eat.

Who should take care of repairs and services for
the car(s).

Who should purchase the children's (child's)
clothing.

Who should make medical and dental appointments
for family members.

When both of you are in the car who should
drive.

Who should dress, feed and entertain the child(ren).
Who should choose insurance policies for the
family.

Who should send birthday, wedding, birth, bereave-
ment and holiday cards or notes to relatives.

Who should decorate the house with plants, knick-

knacks, curtains, pictures.

152

- Who should initiate sexual activity between

you on a regular basis.

The family role-related items are instrumental house-
hold tasks that require active involvement, but the gender
role-related items are personality attributes that are
unintentionally acquired through childhood. It may be
that traditional role segregation requires that the husband
and wife accomplish these family role tasks independent of
one another. To do so, however, requires having many of
the personality characteristics traditionally associated
with both male and female gender roles. Thus, a tradition-
ally family role segregated ideal requires a nontraditional,
gender role shared ideal.

Conversely, if the couple hold traditionally female
and male gender role segregated ideals they may need to
operate as a team to accomplish the family role-related
tasks. In other words, an affectionate, warm, sensitive,
sympathetic, sentimental, gentle, polite, ideal female
role may be incompatible with independently accomplishing
such tasks as preparing the daily meals, purchasing the
children's clothing, making medical appointments, and dress-
ing, feeding and entertaining the children. This possible
explanation of the findings, points out the need for further
theoretical differentiation of the concepts of gender role

and family role.

153

The lack of support for the perceived role performance
concepts in contrast to the ideal role concepts has been
noted. Several conclusions are possible. One is that the
couples internalize societal ideology of gender role and
family role into their personal ideology. However, per-
ceptions of one's own and spouses behavior may be more
greatly affected by variables other than personal ideals.
Intervening variables could be sought in a variety of
theoretical areas. Possibilities include the family situa-
tion and day-to-day interactions, family development of
unique family relationships and expectations, and other
variables such as job demands, religion, neighbors and
friends, etc.

The data indicates that people do not have that much
control over their own behavior. They are not able to
actualize their own ideals into behavior. Nor does society
have a simple set of role scripts for people to play. In-
stead a complexity of intervening situational and
ecological variables, both personal and societal, complicate
the situation and influence behavior.

Results of the data demonstrate that ideal gender role
and family role concepts are measureable. However, the
questions for the perceived gender role characteristics and
perceived family role performance do not as yet indicate
measureable concepts. While intervening variables are one

explanation, it is also possible that the most significant

154

questions were not asked.

Limitations of the Study

 

There are several limitations of this study. No
assumptions are made about known parameters of the in-
vestigated population and population generalizability since
a random sampling procedure was not used. The basis for the
proposed definitions are developed in the literature review,
but by no means encompass all role theory, family or gender
role theory. The instruments were developed from previous
instruments or research findings where possible, but
neither reliability nor validity were established for the
measures. The statistical analyses are non-causal tests of
relationships among variables.

This study has the above-mentioned limitations because
of the early exploratory nature of the concepts and data
collection instruments used. Until further characteristics
of the concepts can be identified, rigorous use of scienti~

ficprocedures must be applied in a qualified manner.

Implications for Further Study
The overall implication of this study is that ideal
gender role concepts, as a set of personality characteris-
tics, and ideal family role concepts, as a set of family
tasks, exist in college student couples. However, the
relationship between ideal and perceived gender role and

family role behavior are yet to be understood.

155

A set of steps for conducting attitudinal research
has been implied in the work conducted by the Sherriffs
and McKee, the Broverman research group, Johnsen, and this
study. (Sherriffs and McKee, 1957; McKee and Sherriffs,
1957; 1959; Broverman, et a1, 1970; 1972; Clarkson,
Broverman, et a1, 1970; Rosenkrantz, Broverman, et a1, 1968;
Johnsen, 1973). The steps include the following:

- To generate the items by open ended question.

- To develop a list of all possible items and ask

subjects to select ones related to the concept.

- To develop an attitudinal scale with commonly

selected items.

- To use the attitudinal scale to investigate the

relationship between attitudes, and attitudes
and behavior.

Based on the above set of research steps, further study
could help to enlighten the role of ideal family role and
gender role concepts. One could also investigate the de-
gree to which ideal gender role/family role concepts can
explain differing behaviors. An example is the Broverman
research group who investigated the relationship between
family planning and gender role attitudes (1972).

Other purposive samples with varying socioeconomic
status characteristics are useful for investigating inter-
vening variables. However, in order to investigate other

samples, the above-mentioned research steps would need to

156
be taken.
The new trends toward perceptual research in child

development, as indicated in current issues of Child Develop-

 

ment, have also been adopted in family research, as in
.Larson's work (Larson, 1974). Research has centered
attention on the psychophysiological aspects of perception
and the relationship between perception and behavior. The
relationships between these variables and social attitudes
need to be explored as well. The more we can delineate
these relationships, the more we can determine the effects

of such concepts as gender role and family role.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Albrecht, Stan; Bahr, Howard; and Chadwick, Bruce, 1977.
"Public Stereotypes of Sex Roles, Personality
Characteristics, and Occupations." Sociology and
Social Research §l(2), 223.

 

 

Aldous, Joan. 1972. The Developmental Approach to Family
Analysis: The Conceptual Framework. ‘Minneapolis:
University of Minnesota, unpublished paper, l.

 

 

Angrist, Shirley. 1972. "The STudy of Sex Roles." In
An Introduction to the Interactionist Perspective,

 

45-64.
Araji, Sharon K. 1977. "Husbands' and Wive's Attitude-
Behavior Congruence." Journal of Marriage and the

 

Bahr, Rosemary S. 1974. "Family Roles, Motivation Theory
and Women's Liberation." An unpublished paper
presented at the annual meeting of the National
Council on Family Relations, St. Louis.

Bardwick, Judith M. 1971. Psychology of Women. New
York: Harper and Row, PubliShers.

 

Bayer, Alan E. 1975. "Sexist Students in American
Colleges: A Descriptive Note." Journal of Marriage
and the Family 31 (May). 391.

 

Bengston, Vern L., and Lovejoy, Mary C. 1973. "Values,
Personality, and Social Structure: An Inter-
generational Analysis." American Behavioral
Scientist l6, 880.

 

Bensen, Elizabeth. 1973. "Bases of Family Power."
Michigan State University: Department of Sociology,
an unpublished paper.

Bernard, Jessie. 1972. The Future of Marriage. New
York: Bantam Books, Inc.

Blood, Robert O. 1972. The Family. New York: The Free
Press.

 

157

158

Blood, Robert Jr., and Wolfe, Donald M. 1960. Hgsbands
and Wives: The Dynamics of Married Living. New
York: Macmillan Publishing Company, Inc.

 

Borg, Walter R. and Gall, Meredith D. 1976. Educational
Research - An Introduction. New York: David
McKay Publishing Company.

 

 

Bowlby,.J. 1954. "Psychopathological Processes Set in Train-
ing by Early Mother-Child Separation." In
Infancy and Childhood, edited by M. J. Senn.
New York: Josiah Macy Foundation, p. 3.

 

Broverman, Inge K.; Broverman, Donald M.; Clarkson, Frank
E.; Rosenkrantz, Paul; and Vogel, Susan R. 1970.
"Sex-Role Stereotypes and Clinical Judgements of
Mintal Health." Journal of Consulting Psychology
3 , 1-7.

 

Broverman, Inge K.; Vogel, Susan R.; Broverman, Donald M.;
Clarkson, Frank E.; and Rosenkrantz, Paul S. 1972.
"Sex Role Stereotypes: A Current Appraisal."
Journal of Social Issues 28, 59-78.

 

Brown, D. G., and Lynn, D. B. 1966. "Human Sexual
Development: An Outline of Components and Concepts.‘
Journal of Marriage and the Family 28, 155-162.

 

Burgess, Ernest W.; Locke, Harvey J.; and Thomes, Mary M.
1963. The Family. New York: American Book
Company.

 

Burr, Wesley. 1973. Theory Construction and the Sociology
of the Family. New York: Wiley-Interscience, Ific.

 

 

Clarkson, Frank E.; Vogel, Susan R.; Broverman, Inge K.;
Broverman, Donald M.; and Rosenkrantz, Paul S.
1970. "Family Size and Sex-Role Stereotypes."
Science 167, 390-392.

 

 

Dunn, Marie S. 1960. "Marriage Role Expectations of
Adolescents." Marriage and Family Living 22,
99-111.

Duvall, Evelyn M. 1957. Family Development. Philadelphia:
J. B. Lippincott Company.

 

Edwards, A. L. 1968. Manual for the Edwards Personality
Inventory. Chicago: Science Research Associates.

 

 

159

Edwards, A. L. 1969. ”Correlations Between Scores on
Personality Scales When Items are State in the
First and Third Person Form." Educational and

 

Psychological Measurement 29, 56I-563.

Glass, Gene, and Stanley, Julian. 1970. Statistical
Methods in Education and Psychology. Englewood
Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc.

 

 

Goode, William J. 1963. World Revolution and Family
Patterns. New York: The Free Press.

 

Gough, H. G. 1952. "Identifying Psychological Femininity."
Educational and Psychological Measurement l2, 427-
439.

 

Gough, H. G. 1957. California Psychological Inventory
Manual. Palo Alto: Consulting Psychologists
Press.

 

Granbois, Donald H., and Willett, Ronald P. 1970.
"Equivalence of Family Role Measures Based on
Husband and Wife Data." Journal of Marriage and
the Family, February, 68-72.

 

 

 

Hacker, Helen. 1951. "Women as a Minority Group."
Social Forces 39 (October), 60-69.

Hawkins, James L., and Johnsen, Kathryn. 1969. "Perception
of Behavioral Conformity, Imputation of Consensus,
and Marital Satisfaction." Journal of Marriage

 

and the Familyll, 507-511.

 

Henshel, Anne-Marie. 1971. "Anti-Feminist Bias in
Traditional Measurements of Masculinity-Femininity."
An unpublished paper presented at the annual meet-
ing of the National Council on Family Relations,
Estes Park, Colorado.

Hill, Reuben L., and Rodgers, Roy H. 1964. "The Develop-
mental Approach." In Handbook of Marriage and the
Famil , edited by HaroldiT. Christiansen. Chicago:
Rand McNally and Company, 171-211.

 

Hochschild, Arlie Russell. 1973. "A Review of Sex Role
Research." American Journal of Sociology 18,
1011-1029.

 

Imig, David R. 1971. Masculinity-Femininity as Related
to Family-Marital Adjustment. Unpublisheddoctoral
dissertation, East Lansing: Michigan State
University.

 

 

160

Johnsen, Kathryn. 1973. "Methodological Problems in
Addressing Masculinity and Femininity." An upub-
lished paper presented at the annual meeting of
the National Council on Family Relations, Toronto.

Kerlinger, Fred. 1964. Foundations of Behavioral Research.
New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, Inc.

 

Kolb, Trudy M., and Strauss, Murray. 1971. "Marital Power
and Marital Happiness." An unpublished paper,
University of New Hampshire, Department of

 

Sociology.

Laing, R. D. 1969. The PolitiCS of the Family. Toronto:
CBC.

Larson, Lyle E. 1974. "Toward a Conceptual Framework of

Multi-Level Interpersonal Perception in Families."
An unpublished paper presented at the annual meeting
of the National Council on Family Relations,

St. Louis.
Leik, Robert K. 1964. "Instrumentality and Emotionality
in Family Interaction." Sociometry 26, 131-145.

 

Locke, Harvey J. 1951. Predicting Adjustment in Marriage:
A Comparison of a Divorced and a Happily Married
Group. New York: Holt and Company.

Locke, Harvey J., and Williamson, Robert C. 1958.
"Marital Adjustment: A Factor Analysis Study."
American Sociological Review 23, 562-569.

Luckey, Eleanore B. 1960. "Marital Satisfaction and

 

Congruent Self-Spouse Concepts." Social Forces
32, 153-157.

Lunneborg, Patricia W. l970a. "Stereotypic Aspects in
Masculinity-Femininity Measurement." Journal of

 

Consulting and Clinical Psychology 34, 113-118

Lunneborg, Patricia W., and Lunneborg, Clifford E. 1970b.
"Factor Structure of Mf Scales and Items."
Journal of Clinical Psychology, 360-367.

 

Maccobby, Eleanor E. (ed.). 1966. The Development of Sex
Differences. Stanford, California: Stanford
University Press.

 

Maccobby, Eleanor E. 1974. The Psychology of Sex Differ-
ences. Stanford, California: Stanford University
Press.

 

161

MCKee, John P., and Sherriffs, Alex C. 1957. "The
Differential Evaluation of Males and Females."
Journal of Personality l5, 356-371.

McKee, John P., and Sherriffs, Alex C. 1959. "Men's
and Women's Beliefs, Ideals, and Self Concepts.”
American Journal of Sociologygfi, 356-363.

Mead, Margaret. 1972. Male and Female. New York:
Dell Publishing Company.

 

Meeker, B. F., and Weitzel-O'Neill, P. A. 1977. "Sex
Roles and Interpersonal Behavior in Task-Oriented
Groups." American Sociological Review 42(1), 91.

Millet, Kate. 1970. Sexual Politics. New York: Double-
day and Company.

 

Motz, Annabelle Bender. 1955. "The Role Conception
Inventory: A Tool for Research in Social Psycho-
logy," American Sociological Review, 465-471.

 

Naimark, Edward S. 1973. "WOmen's Liberation, Wife's
‘ Work Status and Masculinity-Femininity in Married
Couples: A Factorial Design.” An unpublished
paper presented at the annual meeting of the
National Council on Family Relations, Toronto.

Nye, F. Ivan. 1974a. "A Study of the Major Family Roles."
Family Role Questionnaire Instruments: Wife's
Form and Husband's Form. Unpublished report and
questionnaires received by personal correspondence,
Washington State University.

Nye, F. Ivan. 1974b. "Emerging and Declining Family
Roles." Unpublished report of research, Washington
State University.

Nye, F. Ivan, and Berardo, Felix M. 1973. The Family--
Its Structure and Interaction. New York: Mac-
millan Publishing Company, Inc.

 

 

Olson, David H. 1969. "The Measurement of Family Power
by Self-Report and Behavioral Methods." Journal
of Marriage and the Family, 545-550.

 

Olson, David H., and Rabunsky, Carolyn. 1972. "Validity
of Four Measures of Family Power." Journal of
Marriage and the Family, May, 224-233.

 

 

Orden, Susan R., and Bradburn, Norman M. 1968. "Dimen-
sions of Marriage Happiness." American Journal of
Sociology 1;, 715-731.

 

 

162

Osmond, Marie Withers, and Martin, Patricia Yancey. 1975.
"Sex and Sexism: A Comparison of Male and Female
Sex Role Attitudes." Journal of Marriage and the
Family, November, 31, 744.

 

Osofsky, Joy D., and Osofsky, Howard J. 1972. "Androgyny
as a Life Style." The Family Life Coordinator,
October.

 

Parelius, Ann. 1975. "Emerging Sex-Role Attitudes,
Expectations and Strains Among College Women.”

Journal of Marriage and the Family, February,
37, 146.

Parker, Angele. 1973. Sex Differences in Participation
in Classroom Intellectual Arguments. An unpub-
lished master's thesis, Division of Individual
and Family Studies, Pennsylvania State University.

Parker, Stanley. 1972. "A Legitimization of Family
Rules." An unpublished paper, Michigan State
University, Department of Family Ecology.

Parsons, Talcot, and Bales, Robert F. 1955. Famil
Socialization and Interaction Process. GIencoe,
Illinois: _Free Press of Glencoe, Inc.

Raj, Des. 1972. The Design of Sample Surveys. New York:
McGraw-HillPBook Company.

Riskin, Jules, and Faunce, Elaine. 1972. "An Evaluative
Review of Family Interaction Research." Family
Process, December, ll(4), 365.

Rollins, Boyd C., and Feldman, Harold. 1970. "Marital
Satisfaction Over the Life Cycle." Journal of
Marriage and the Family ll, 20-28.

 

 

Rollins, James M. 1963. "The Empirical Tests of a
Parsonian Theory of Family Authority Patterns."
The Family Life Coordinator ll, 3-78.

 

Roper, Brent, and LaBeff, Emily. 1977. "Sex Roles and
Feminism Revisited: An Intergenerational Attitude
Comparison." Journal of Marriage and the Family,
February, l9.

 

Rosenkrantz, Paul S.; Vogel, Susan R.; Bee, Helen;
Broverman, Inge K.; and Broverman, Donald M.
1968. "Sex-Role Stereotypes and Self Concepts
in College Students.” Journal of Consulting and
Clinical Psychology 32, 287-295.

163

Safilios-Rothschild, Constantina. 1969. "Family Sociology
or Wive's Family Sociology? A Cross Cultural
Examination of Decision-Making." Journal of
Marriage and the Family 2l, 290-301.

 

 

Safilios-Rothschild, Constantina. 1970. "The Study of
Family Power Structure: A Review 1960-1969."
Journal of Marriage and the Family 22, 539-549.

 

Scanzoni, John. 1965. "A Note on the Sufficiency of
Wife Responses in Family Research." Pacific
Sociological Review, Fall, 109-115.

 

Scanzoni, John. 1975. "Sex Roles, Economic Factors and
Marital Solidarity in Black and White Marriages."
Journal of Marriage and the Family, February,

37, 130.

 

Shaw, Marvin, and Costanzo, Philip. 1970. Theories of
Social Psychology. New York: McGraw-Hill
Publisher, Inc., 326-344.

 

 

Sherman, Julia. 1971. On the Psychology of Women: A
Survey of Empirical Studies. Springfield,
Illinois: Charles C. Thomas.

 

 

Sherriffs, Alex C., and McKee, John P. 1957. "Qualitative
Aspects of Beliefs About Men and WOmen." Journal
of Personality 25, 451-464.

 

Singleton, Royce, and Christiansen, John. 1977. "The
Construct Validation of a Short Form Attitudes
Toward Feminism Scale." Sociology and Social
Research, April, 6l(3), 295.

 

Skolnick, Arlene. 1974. The Intimate Environment.
Boston: Little, Brown andCompany.

 

Smart, R. C., and Smart, M. S. 1967. Children: Behavior
and Development. New York: Macmillan Publishing
Company. -

 

Smith, Eliot R.; Feree, Myra Marx; and Miller, Frederick.
1975. ”A Short Scale of Attitudes Toward Feminism."
Representative Research in Social Psychology,
January, 6, 51.

 

Sopchak, A. L. 1952. "College Student Norms for the
Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory."
Journal of Consulting Psychology l6, 445-448.

 

164

Stafford, Rebecca; Backman, Elaine; and Pameladi-Bona.
1977. "The Division of Labor Among Cohabitating
and Married Couples." Journal of Marriage and
the Family, February, 22.

 

 

Terman, L. M., and Miles, C. C. 1936. Sex and Personality.
New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company.

 

Thorne, Barrie and Henley, Nancy. 1975. Language and
Sex Difference and Dominance. Rowley, Massachu-
setts: Newbury House Publishers, Inc.

 

 

Toffler, Alvin. 1970. Future Shock. New York: Bantam

 

Books.
Tressemer, David. 1975. "Assumptions Made About Gender
Roles.” In Another Volume: Feminist Perspgctives

 

on Social Life and Social Science, editedby
Marcia Millman and Rosabeth Moss Kanter. New
York: Anchor Books, 1975, 308.

 

Turk, James L. 1973. "Uses and Abuses of Power in the
Study of the Family." An unpublished paper
presented at the annual meeting of the National
Council on Family Relations, Toronto.

Turk, James L., and Bell, Norman W. 1972. "Measuring
Power in Families." Journal of Marriage and the
Family, 215-222.

Udry, J. Richard. 1974. The Social Context of Marriage.
Philadelphia: J. B. Lippincott Company, thifd
edition.

Wilson, Gretchen. 1973. "What are Your Family Attitudes?"
Forum. New York: J. C. Penney, Spring/Summer.

APPENDIX A

LETTER OF INTRODUCTION

166

APPENDIX A
LETTER OF INTRODUCTION

June 19, 1975

VOLUNTEERS:
We are asking for your time and help in this study.
We are Lee and Gigi Parker, both doctoral candidates in
the Department of Family Ecology at M.S.U. and we are
doing dissertations on married life. the general purpose
of our investigation is REE to predict problems with
marriage or mental health, but to describe values and
family activity that is generally typical of married
couples today. We are asking you to fill out a question-
naire to describe yourselves and your values about family
roles, sex roles, economic concerns, decision making,
satisfaction and behavior. This will generally take 1
to 1 1/2 hours and requires that both husband and wife
complete it. We are hoping to find that people today
have many different values and not just the "right” ones
from anyone's perspective. Therefore, our study will not
attempt to make judgments about your value choices and
behavior to show that one is right or wrong. We assure
full confidentiality and will not identify your responses
by name, address, or student number. We shall ask you to

sign a mailing list only if you want us to send you a

167
summary of our results in August. The person contacting
you is a graduate student who is working with us. He (she)
will administer the questionnaire. Please feel free to

contact us at apy time if you have questions or are just

 

interested in what we are doing. We hope you enjoy
answering the questions. Thanks for participating in this
study!
Lee and Gigi Parker
1646C Spartan Village
Phppg: 353-7940

APPENDIX B

QUESTIONNAIRE

169

APPENDIX B

QUESTIONNAIRE

Questionnaire on Marriage and
Family Life Experiences

Stanley Parker Angele Parker

DIRECTIONS:

 

These questions are about you and your spouse (marriage
partner). Respond to questions as quickly as possible, and
do not worry about the accuracy of one question in relation
to another. Once you have finished one section, do not
refer to it again, but go on to the following parts.

Change answers only when on the same page of the question-
naire and when absolutely necessary to be accurate. Use

a No. 2 pencil. The answer sheet scores from left to right
horizontally (+).

Many of the questions are based on a seven point comparison
between husband and wife, etc. Make sure that you read
each question carefully as the comparisons reverse direc-
tion frequently.

Remember that your answers do not have to be logical or
what society thinks, just true for you personally and your
family. If you have any questions, the interviewer will be
happy to answer them. Husband and wife are to do all
questions separately and without communication until the
interview is completed.

Thank you for your willingness to share in this project.

Be assured that information is confidential and that your
answers will not be recorded with any identifying name or
address. The purpose of this project is not to look at any
one individual, but to look at the underlying values most
people have today about themselves and the family. If you
would like a summary of our dissertations, be sure to sign
the mailing list the interviewer has with him (her). If
you have any questions you would like to ask us, either

170

before, during, or after the interveiw, feel free to call
or write: 353-7940, 1646G Spartan Village, East Lansing,
Michigan.

Thanks so much again, and have a good summer!

Lee and Gigi Parker

(Stanley and Angele)

Ph.D. Candidates

Department of Family Ecology

171

Biographic Information

 

(The following questions are about you.)

1.

Your gender
(0) Male; (1) Female.

Your age in years
(0) under 17; (1) 18-20; (2) 21-22; (3) 23-25;
(4) 26-30; (5) 31-35; (6) 36 or older.

Education completed

(0) Elementary or less; (1) Junior high school;

(2) High school or equivalent; (3) Technical training;
(4) Two years college; (5) Four years college degree;
(6) Masters degree; (7) Doctorate in process or
achieved.

Are you in school? If so, answer the first part.
Otherwise, answer the second part.

In school and working on:

(0) Undergraduate degree; (1) Masters degree;

(2) Doctoral degree.

 

9;

Not in school and:

(0) At home; (1) Work part time (30 hours or less a
week); (2) Work more than 30 hours a week.

 

How old were you when you married your present spouse?
(0) 16 or under; (1) 17-20; (2) 21-23; (4) 27-30;
(5) 31-35; (6) 36 or older.

Have you been divorced?
(0) Yes; (1) No.

(The following questions are about your family.)

7.

How many children do you have? .
(0) 6 or more; (1) 5; (2) 4; (3) 3; (4) 2; (5) l;
(6) None.

How many children do you plan on having (including
adoption and present children)?

(0) 6 or more; (1) 5; (2) 4; (3) 3; (4) 2; (5) 1;
(6) None.

What religion are you and your spouse?

(0) Mixture of two religions p£_one spouse is not
religious; (1) Both Protestant; (2) Other;

(3) Catholic; (4) Jewish.

172

DO NOT TURN BACK

 

10.

11.

12.

13.

14.

15.

16.

17.

18.

How old is your spouse?
(0) Under 17; (1) 18-20; (2) 21-22; (3) 23-25;
(4) 26-30; (5) 31-35; (6) 36 or older.

What education has your spouse completed?

(1) Elementary or less; (1) Junior high school;

(2) High school or equivalent; (3) Technical training;
(4) Two years college; (5) Four years college degree;
(6) Masters degree; (7) Doctorate in process or
achieved.

Is your spouse in school? If so, answer the first
part. Otherwise, answer the second part.

In school and workipg on:

(0) Undergraduate degree; (1) Masters degree;

(2) Doctoral degree.

 

or

Not in school and:
(0) Atihome; (1) Work part time (30 hours or less a
week); (2) work more than 30 hours a week.

 

How old was your spouse when you married?
(0) 16 or under; (1) 17-20; (2) 21-23; (3) 24-26;
(4) 27-30; (5) 31-35; (6) 36 or older.

Has your spouse been divorced?
(0) Yes; (1) No.

Are you an interracial marriage?
(0) No; (1) Yes.

What combined (total) income are you and your spouse
earning this tax year before taxes are taken out?
(0) $3,000 or less; (1) $3,100-$5,000; (2) $5,100-
$8,000; (3) $8,100-$12,000; (4) $12,100-$16,000;

(5) $16,000-$20,000; (6) $20,000 or above.

Have you or your spouse's parents separated or
divorced?

(0) Yes, both; (1) Yes, one set of parents only;
(2) No.

How does the husband (you or your spouse) view his
parent's marriage?

(0) Extremely unhappy; (l) Moderately happy;

(2) Extremely happy.

173
DO NOT TURN BACK

 

19. How does the wife (you or your spouse) view her
parent's marriage?
(0) Moderately happy; (1) Very unhappy 93 very happy
[both answers are (b)]. .

Rate the following personality characteristics according to
who has these traits most strongly--you or your spouse.
This is pep a personality test. The goal is to evaluate
who has each trait more than the other spouse; not which
characteristics define your personalitiés.

20. Sentimental
(0) Wife almost always; (1) Wife more frequently;
(2) Wife slightly more; (3) Both; (4) Husband slightly
more; (5) Husband more frequently; (6) Jusband almost
always.

21. Adventurous
(0) Husband almost always; (1) Husband more frequently;
(2) Husband slightly more; (3) Both; (4) Wife slightly
more; (5) Wife more frequently; (6) Wife almost
always.

22. Dominant
(0) Husband almost always; (1) Husband more frequently;
(2) Husband slightly more; (3) Both; (4) Wife slightly
more; (5) Wife more frequently; (6) Wife almost
always.

23. Neat
(0) Wife almost always; (1) Wife more frequently;
(2) Wife slightly more; (3) Both; (4) Husband slightly
more; (5) Husband more frequently; (6) Husband almost
always.

24. Realistic
(0) Husband almost always; (1) Husband more frequently;
(2) Husband slightly more; (3) Both; (4) Wife slightly
more; (5) Wife more frequently; (6) Wife ahmost
always.

25. Sympathetic
(0) Wife almost always; (1) Wife more frequently
(2) Wife slightly more; (3) Both; (4) Husband slightly
more; (5) Husband more frequently; (6) Husband almost
always.

174

DO NOT TURN BACK

 

26.

27.

28.

29.

30.

31.

32.

33.

Tactful

(0) Wife almost always; (1) Wife more frequently;

(2) Wife slightly more; (3) Both; (4) Husband slightly
more; (5) Husband more frequently; (6) Husband almost
always.

Logical

(0) Husband almost always; (1) Husband more frequently;
(2) Husband slightly more; (3) Both; (4) Wife slightly
more; (5) Wife more frequently; (6) Wife almost

always.

Religious

(0) Wife almost always; (1) Wife more frequently;

(2) Wife slightly more; (3) Both; (4) Husband slightly
more; (5) Husband more frequently; (6) Husband almost
always.

Independent

(0) Husband almost always; (1) Husband more frequently;
(2) Husband slightly more; (3) Both; (4) Wife slightly
more; (5) Wife more frequently; (6) Wife almost

always.

Warm

(0) Wife almost always; (1) Wife more frequently;

(2) Wife slightly more; (3) Both; (4) Husband slightly
more; (5) Husband more frequently; (6) Husband almost
always.

Sensitive

(0) Wife almost always; (1) Wife more frequently;

(2) Wife slightly more; (3) Both; (4) Husband slightly
more; (5) Husband more frequently; (6) Husband almost
always.

Aggressive

(0) Husband almost always; (1) Husband more frequently;
(2) Husband slightly more; (3) Both; (4) Wife slightly
more; (5) Wife more frequently; (6) Wife almost

always.

Competititve

(0) Husband almost always; (1) Husband more frequently;
(2) Husband slightly more; (3) Both; (4) Wife slightly
more; (5) Wife more frequently; (6) Wife almost

always.

175

DO NOT TURN BACK

34.

35.

36.

37.

38.

39.

Ambitious
(0) Husband almost always; (1) Husband more frequently;
(2) Husband slightly more; (3) Both; (4) Wife slightly

more; (5) Wife more frequently; (6) Wife almost
always.

Gentle

(0) Wife almost always; (1) Wife more frequently;

(2) Wife slightly more; (3) Both; (4) Husband slightly
more; (5) Husband more frequently; (6) Husband almost
always.

Dynamic

(0) Husband almost always; (1) Husband more frequently;
(2) Husband slightly more; (3) Both; (4) Wife slightly
more; (5) Wife more frequently; (6) Wife almost

always.

Affectionate

(0) Wife almost always; (1) Wife more frequently;

(2) Wife slightly more; (3) Both; (4) Husband slightly
more; (5) Husband more frequently; (6) Husband almost
always.

Polite

(0) Wife almost always; (1) Wife more frequently;

(2) Wife slightly more; (3) Both; (4) Husband slightly
more; (5) Husband more frequently; (6) Husband almost
always.

Self-Confident

(0) Husband almost always; (1) Husband more frequently;
(2) Husband slightly more; (3) Both; (4) Wife slightly
more; (5) Wife more frequently; (6) Wife almost

always.

Rate the following tasks and responsibilities according to
which spouse does them most frequently than the other spouse
in your family. Be as realistic as possible as there is no
correct or best answer to these questions.

Who does the following jobs in your family on a regular
basis?

40.

When both of you are in the car who drives?

(0) Husband almost always; (1) Husband more frequently;
(2) Husband slightly more; (3) Both; (4) Wife slightly
more; (5) Wife more frequently; (6) Wife almost

‘always.

176

DO NOT TURN BACK

 

41.

42.

43.

44.

45.

46.

47.

48.

Who dusts, washes the floors and cleans the bathroom?
(0) Wife almost always; (1) Wife more frequently;

(2) Wife slightly more; (3) Both; (4) Husband slightly
more; (5) Husband more frequently; (6) Husband almost
always.

Who dresses, feeds and entertains the children (child)?
(0) Wife almost always; (1) Wife more frequently;

(2) Wife slightly more; (3) Both; (4) Husband slightly
more; (5) Husband more frequently; (6) Husband almost
always.

Whose education or job determines where you live geo-
graphically?

(0) Husband almost always; (1) Husband more frequently;
(2) Husband slightly more; (3) Both; (4) Wife slightly
more; (5) Wife more frequently; (6) Wife almost always.

Who sends birthday, wedding, birth, bereavement and
Holiday cards or notes to relatives?

(0) Wife almost always; (1) Wife more frequently;

(7) Wife slightly more; (3) Both; (4) Husband slightly
more; (5) Husband more frequently; (6) Husband almost
always.

Who is concerned with locking doors at night and when
the family goes away on a trip?

(0) Husband almost always; (1) Husband more frequently;
(2) Husband slightly more; (3) Both; (4) Wife slightly
more; (5) Wife more frequently; (6) Wife almost always.

Who tends to give family members affection and reassur-
ance when problems arise?

(0) Wife almost always; (1) Wife more frequently;

(2) Wife slightly more; (3) Both; (4) Husband slightly
more; (5) Husband more frequently; (6) Husband almost
always.

Who makes medical and dental appointments for family
members?

(0) Wife almost always; (1) Wife more frequently;

(2) Wife slightly more; (3) Both; (4) Husband slightly
more; (5) Husband more frequently; (6) Husband almost
always.

Who helps the children (child) find playmates?

(0) Wife almost always; (1) Wife more frequently;

(2) Wife slightly more; (3) Both; (4) Husband slightly
more; (5) Husband more frequently; (6) Husband almost
always.

177

DONT TURN BACK

 

49.

50.

51.

52.

53.

54.

55.

56.

Who rough-houses (is physically playful) with the
children (child)?

(0) Husband almost always; (1) Husband more frequently;
(2) Husband slightly more; (3) Both; (4) Wife slightly
more; (5) Wife more frequently; (6) Wife almost always.

Who purchases the children's (child's) clothing?

(0) Wife almost always; (1) Wife more frequently;

(2) Wife slightly more; (3) Both; (4) Husband slightly
more; (5) Husband more frequently; (6) Husband almost
always.

Who participates in sports activities?

(0) Husband almost always; (1) Husband more frequently;
(2) Husband slightly more; (3) Both; (4) Wife slightly
more; (5) Wife more frequently; (6) Wife almost always.

Who chooses insurance policies for the family?

(0) Husband almost always; (1) Husband more frequently;
(2) Husband slightly more; (3) Both; (4) Wife slightly
more; (5) Wife more frequently; (6) Wife almost always.

Who decorates the house with plants, knick-knacks,
curtains, pictures, etc.?

(0) Wife almost always; (1) Wife more frequently;

(2) Wife slightly more; (3) Both; (4) Husband slightly
more; (5) Husband more frequently; (6) Husband almost
always.

Who initiates sexual activity between you on a regular
basis?

(0) Husband almost always; (1) Husband more frequently;
(2) Husband slightly more; (3) Both; (4) Wife slightly
more; (5) Wife more frequently; (6) Wife almost always.

Who plans to be the major provider for the family
economically?

(0) Husband almost always; (1) Husband more frequently;
(2) Husband slightly more; (3) Both; (4) Wife slightly
more; (5) Wife more frequently; (6) Wife almost always.

Who makes the daily family meals?

(0) Wife almost always; (1) Wife more frequently;

(2) Wife slightly more; (3) Both; (4) Husband slightly
more; (5) Husband more frequently; (6) Husband almost
always.

178
DO NOT TURN BACK

57. Who takes care of repairs and services for the car(s)?
(0) Husband almost always: (1) Husband more frequently;
(2) Husband slightly more; (3) Both; (4) Wife slightly
more; (5) Wife more frequently; (6) Wife almost always.

58. Who prepares dinner when friends are invited over to
eat?
(0) Wife almost always; (1) Wife more frequently;
(2) Wife slightly more; (3) Both; (4) Husband slightly

more; (5) Husband more frequently; (6) Husband almost
always.

59. Who takes over in family crises such a death?
(0) Husband almost always; (1) Husband more frequently;
(2) Husband slightly more; (3) Both; (4) Wife slightly
more; (5) Wife more frequently; (6) Wife almost always.

Rate the following personality traits according to your
personal values of the ideal woman and the ideal man. There

is no correct or best answer since everyone Has their own
ideals in life.

In your own life you would personally like the following
to be characteristic of which sex more than the other?

60. Sentimental
(0) Female almost always; (1) Female more frequently;
(2) Female slightly more; (3) Both; (4) Male slightly
more; (5) Male more frequently; (6) Male almost always.

61. Adventurous
(0) Male almost always; (1) Male more frequently;
(2) Male slightly more; (3) Both; (4) Female slightly
more; (5) Female more frequently; (6) Female almost
always.

62. Dominant
(0) Male almost always; (1) Male more frequently;
(2) Male slightly more; (3) Both; (4) Female slightly

more; (5) Female more frequently; (6) Female ahmost
always.

63. Neat
(0) Female almost always; (1) Female more frequently;
(2) Female slightly more; (3) Both; (4) Male slightly
more; (5) Male more frequently; (6) Male almost always.

179

DO NOT TURN BACK

64.

65.

66.

67.

68.

69.

70.

71.

72.

Realistic

(0) Male almost always; (1) Male more frequently;

(2) Male slightly more; (3) Both; (4) Female slightly
more; (5) Female more frequently; (6) Female almost
always.

Sympathetic

(0) Female almost always; (1) Female more frequently;
(2) Female slightly more; (3) Both; (4) Male slightly
more; (5) Male more frequently; (6) Male almost always.

Tactful

(0) Female almost always; (1) Female more frequently;
(2) Female slightly more; (3) Both; (4) Male slightly
more; (5) Male more frequently; (6) Male almost always.

Logical

(0) Male almost always; (1) Male more frequently;

(2) Male slightly more; (3) Both; (4) Female slightly
more; (5) Female more frequently; (6) Female almost
always.

Religious

(0) Female almost always; (1) Female more frequently;
(2) Female slightly more; (3) Both; (4) Male slightly
more; (5) Male more frequently; (6) Male almost always.

Independent

(0) Male almost always; (1) Male more frequently;

(2) Male slightly more; (3) Both; (4) Female slightly
more; (5) Female more frequently; (6) Female almost
always.

Warm

(0) Female almost always; (1) Female more frequently;
(2) Female slightly more; (3) Both; (4) Male slightly
more; (5) Male more frequently; (6) Male almost always.

Sensitive

(0) Female almost always; (1) Female more frequently;
(2) Female slightly more; (3) Both; (4) Male slightly
more; (5) Male more frequently; (6) Male almost always.

Aggressive

(0) Male almost always; (1) Male more frequently;

(2) Male slightly more; (3) Both; (4) Female slightly
more; (5) Female more frequently; (6) Female almost
always.

180

DO NOT TURN BACK

 

73.

74.

75.

76.

77.

78.

79.

Competitive

(0) Male almost always; (1) Male more frequently;

(2) Male slightly more; (3) Both; (4) Female slightly
more; (5) Female more frequently; (6) Female almost
always.

Ambitious

(0) Male almost always; (1) Male more frequently;

(2) Male slightly more; (3) Both; (4) Female slightly
more; (5) Female more frequently; (6) Female almost
always.

Gentle

(0) Female almost always; (1) Female more frequently;
(2) Female slightly more; (3) Both; (4) Male slightly
more; (5) Male more frequently; (6) Male almost always.

Dynamic

(0) Male almost always; (1) Male more frequently;

(2) Male slightly more; (3) Both; (4) Female slightly
more; (5) Female more frequently; (6) Female almost
always.

Affectionate

(0) Female almost always; (1) Female more frequently;
(2) Female slightly more; (3) Both; (4) Male slightly
more; (5) Male more frequently; (6) Male almost always.

Polite

(0) Female almost always; (1) Female more frequently;
(2) Female slightly more; (3) Both; (4) Male slightly
more; (5) Male more frequently; (6) Male almost always.

Self-Confident

(0) Male almost always; (1) Male more frequently;

(2) Male slightly more; (3) Both; (4) Female slightly
more; (5) Female more frequently; (6) Female almost
always.

Rate the following family jobs and responsibilities accord-
ing to your personal beliefs about the ideal husband/father
and the ideal wife/mother. We all have ideals we don't

live.

Therefore there is no correct answer since everyone

has their values in life.

Ideally the following tasks should be performed by which
spouse more than the other?

181

DO NOT TURN BACK

 

80.

81.

82.

83.

84.

85.

86.

When both of you are in the car who should drive?

(0) Husband almost always; (1) Husband more frequently;
(2) Husband slightly more; (3) Both; (4) Wife slightly
more; (5) Wife more frequently; (6) Wife almost always.

Who should do the dusting, wash the floors and clean
the bathroom?

(0) Wife almost always; (1) Wife more frequently;

(2) Wife slightly more; (3) Both; (4) Husband slightly
more; (5) Husband more frequently; (6) Husband almost
always.

Who should dress, feed and entertain the children
(child)?

(0) Wife almost always; (1) Wife more frequently;

(2) Wife slightly more; (3) Both; (4) Husband slightly
mpre; (5) Husband more frequently; (6) Husband almost
a ways.

Whose education or job should determine where you live
geographically?

(0) Husband almost always; (1) Husband more frequently;
(2) Husband slightly more; (3) Both; (4) Wife slightly
more; (5) Wife more frequently; (6) Wife almost always.

Who should send birthday, wedding, birth, bereavement
and holiday cards or notes to relatives?

(0) Wife almost always; (1) Wife more frequently;

(2) Wife slightly more; (3) Both; (4) Husband slightly
more; (5) Husband more frequently; (6) Husband almost
always.

Who should be concerned with locking doors at night
and when the family oes away on a trip?

(0) Husband almost a ways; (1) Husband more frequently;
(2) Husband slightly more; (3) Both; (4) Wife slightly
more; (5) Wife more frequently; )6) Wife almost always.

Who should give family members affection and reassur-
ance when problems arise?

(0) Wife almost always; (1) Wife more frequently;

(2) Wife slightly more; (3) Both; (4) Husband slightly
more; (5) Husband more frequently; (6) Husband almost
always.

182

DO NOT TURN BACK

 

87.

88.

89.

90.

91.

92.

93.

94.

Who should make medical and dental appointments for
family members?

(0) Wife almost always; (1) Wife more frequently;

(2) Wife slightly more; (3) Both; (4) Husband slightly
mire; (5) Husband more frequently; (6) Husband ahmost
a ways.

Who should help the children (child) find playmates?
(0) Wife almost always; (1) Wife more frequently;

(2) Wife slightly more; (3) Both; (4) Husband slightly
more; (5) Husband more frequently; (6) Husband almost
always.

Who should rough-house (be physically playful) with
the children (child)?

(0) Husband almost always; (1) Husband more frequently;
(2) Husband slightly more; (3) Both; (4) Wife slightly
more; (5) Wife more frequently; (6) Wife almost always.

Who should purchase the children's (child's)clothing?
(0) Wife almost always; (1) Wife more frequently;

(2) Wife slightly more; (3) Both; (4) Husband slightly
more; (5) Husband more frequently; (6) Husband almost
always.

Who should participate in sports activities?

(0) Husband almost always; (1) Husband more frequently;
(2) Husband slightly more; (3) Both; (4) Wife slightly
more; (5) Wife more frequently; (6) Wife almost always.

Who should choose insurance policies for the family?

(0) Husband almost always; (1) Husband more frequently;
(2) Husband slightly more; (3) Both; (4) Wife slightly
more; (5) Wife more frequently; (6) Wife almost always.

Who should decorate the house with plants, knick-
knacks, curtains, pictures, etc.?

(0) Wife almost always; (1) Wife more frequently;

(2) Wife slightly more; (3) Both; (4)'Husband slightly
more; (5) Husband more frequently; (6) Husband almost
always.

Who should initiate sexual activity between you on a
regular basis?

(0) Husband almost always; (1) Husband more frequently;
(2) Husband slightly more; (3) Both; (4) Wife slightly
more; (5) Wife more frequently; (6) Wife almost always.

183

DO NOT TURN BACK

95.

96.

97.

98.

99.

Who should plan to be the major provider for the family
economically?

(0) Husband almost always; (1) Husband more frequently;
(2) Husband slightly more; (3) Both; (4) Wife slightly

more; (5) Wife more frequently; (6) Wife almost always.

Who should make the family daily meals?

(0) Wife almost always; (1) Wife more frequently;

(2) Wife slightly more; (3) Both; (4) Husband slightly
more; (5) Husband more frequently; (6) Husband almost
always.

Who should take care of repairs and services for the
car(s)?

(0) Husband almost always; (1) Husband more frequently;
(2) Husband slightly more; (3) Both; (4) Wife slightly
more; (5) Wife more frequently; (6) Wife almost always.

Who should prepare dinner when friends are invited
over to eat?

(0) Wife almost always; (1) Wife more frequently;

(2) Wife slightly more; (3) Both; (4) Husband slightly
more; (5) Husband more frequently; (6) Husband almost
always.

Who should take over in family crises such as a death?
(0) Husband almost always; (1) Husband more frequently;
(2) Husband slightly more; (3) Both; (4) Wife slightly
more; (5) Wife more frequently; (6) Wife almost always.

The next questions ask about your dissatisfaction in married

life.
100.

101.

102.

When disagreements arise they generally result in:
(0) Husband giving in; (1) Wife giving in; (2) Neither
giving in; (3) Agreement by mutual give-and-take.

Do you and your mate agree on right, good, and proper
behavior? -

(0) Always agree; (1) Almost always agree; (2) Occa-
sionally disagree; (3) Frequently disagree; (4) Almost
always disagree; (5) Always disagree.

Do husband and wife engage in outside activities
together?

(0) All of them; (1) Some of them; (2) Few of them;
(3) None of them.

184

DO NOT TURN BACK

 

103.

104.

105.

106.

107.

108.

109.

110.

111.

In leisure time, which do you and your mate prefer?
(0) Both husband and wife to stay at home; (1) Both

to be on the go; (2) One to be on the go and the other
to stay home.

Do you and your mate agree on aims, goals, and things
believed important in life?

(0) Always agree; (1) Almost always agree; (2) Occa-
sionally disagree; (3) Frequently disagree; (4) Almost
always disagree; (5) Always disagree.

Do you and your mate agree on friends?

(0) Always agree; (1) Almost always agree; (2) Occa-
sionally disagree; (3) Frequently disagree; (4) Almost
always disagree; (5) Always disagree.

Do you and your mate agree on ways of dealing with
in-laws?

(0) Always agree; (1) Almost always agree; (2) Occa-
sionally disagree; (3) Frequently disagree; (4) Almost
always disagree; (5) Always disagree.

Do you and your mate agree on handling family finances?
(0) Always agree; (1) Almost always agree; (2) Occa-
sionally disagree; (3) Frequently disagree; (4) Almost
always disagree; (5) Always disagree.

Do you and your mate agree on amount of time spent
together?

(0) Always agree; (1) Almost always agree; (2) Occa-
sionally disagree; (3) Frequently disagree; (4) Almost
always disagree; (5) Always disagree.

How often do you kiss your mate?
(0) Every day; (1) Now and then; (2) Almost never.

How frequently do you and your mate get on each other's
nerves around the house? .

(0) Never; (1) Almost never; (2) Occasionally;

(3) Frequently; (4) Almost always; (5) Always.

Do you and your mate agree on demonstration of
affection?

(0) Always agree; (1) Almost always agree; (2) Occa-
sionally disagree; (3) Frequently disagree; (4) Almost
always disagree; (5) Always disagree.

185

DO NOT TURN BACK

 

112.

113.

114.

115.

116.

117.

118.

119.

Have any of the following items caused serious diffi-

culties in your marriage?

Difficulties over money

Lack of mutual friends

Constant bickering

Interference of in-laws

Lack of mutual affection (no longer in love)

Unsatisfying sex relations

Selfishness and lack of cooperation

Adultery

Mate paid attention to (became familiar with) another
person

Drunkenness or alcoholism

Other reaons

(0) None of the above; (1) One of the above;

(2) Two of the above; (3) Three of the above;

(4) Four or five of the above; (5) Six or more of the

above.

Have you ever wished you had not married?
(0) Frequently; (l) Occasionally; (2) Rarely; (3) Never.

Do you and your mate generally talk things over
together?

(0) Never; (1) Now and then; (2) Almost always;
(3) Always.

How happy would you rate your marriage?
(0) Very happy; (1) Happy; (2) Average; (3) Unhappy;
(4) Very unhappy.

If you had your life to live again would you:
(0) Marry the same person; (1) Marry a different
person; (2) Not marry at all.

What is the total number of times you left mate or
mate left you because of conflict?
(0) No times; (1) One time; (2) Two or more times.

What are your feelings on sex relations with your
mate?

(0) Very enjoyable; (l) Enjoyable; (2) Tolerable;
(3) A little enjoyable; (4) Not at all enjoyable.

Do you and your mate agree on sex relations?

(0) Always agree; (1) Almost always agree; (2) Occa-
sionally disagree; (3) Frequently disagree; (4) Almost
always disagree; (5) Always disagree.

186

DO NOT TURN BACK

120.

121.

During sexual intercourse are your physical reactions
satisfactory?

(0) Very; (1) Somewhat; (2) A little; (3) Not at all.

Is sexual intercourse between you and your mate an
expression of love and affection?

(0) Always; (1) Almost always; (2) Sometimes;

(3) Almost never; (4) Never.

APPENDIX C

MARITAL ADJUSTMENT MEASURE WITH
WEIGHTED SCORES

APPENDIX C

MARITAL ADJUSTMENT MEASURE WITH
WEIGHTED SCORES

I. Companionship Factor

When disagreements arise they generally result

in:

a. Husband giving in .

b. Wife giving in.

c. Neither giving in . . .

d. Agreement by mutual give- -and- take .

Do you and your mate agree on right, good,

and proper behavior?

Always agree. . .

Almost always agree .

Occasionally disagree .

Frequently disagree .

Almost always disagree.

Always disagree . . .

Do husband and wife engage in outside activ-

ities together?

a. All of them .

b. Some of them.

c. Few of them .

d. None of them. .

In leisure time, which do you and your mate

prefer?

a. Both husband and wife to stay at home .

b. Both to be on the go. .

c. One to be on the go and the other to
stay home . . . . . . . . . . .

HH'DCLOU‘ID

II. Consensus or Agreement

1.

Do you and your mate agree on aims, goals,
and things believed important in life?
Always agree. .

Almost always agree .

Occasionally disagree .

Frequently disagree .

Almost always disagree.

Always disagree .

r-hm Q-D 0‘0)

188

26
15
40

31
13

III.

Do you and your mate agree

P'hm Q0 0“”

Always a ree .

Almost a ways agree.
Occasionally disagree.
Frequently disagree.

on friends?

Almost always disagree I

Always disagree.

Do you and your mate agree
with in- -1aws?

th CLO 0‘93

Always agree .

Almost always agree.
Occasionally disagree.
Frequently disagree.

on wéyé of dealing

Almost always disagree :

Always disagree.

Do you and your mate agree
finances?

Fhfb CLO 0‘03

Always agree .

Almost always agree.
Occasionally disagree.
Frequently disagree.

on handling family

Almost always disagree :

Always disagree.

Do you and your mate agree
spent together?

moano‘m

Always agree .

Almost always agree.
Occasionally disagree.
Frequently disagree.

on amount of time

Almost always disagree .

Always disagree.

Affectional Intimacy
How often do you kiss your

1.

a.
b.
c. .
How frequently do you and your mate get on

Every day.
Now and then .
Almost never .

mate?

each other' s nerves around the house?

HH'DCLOO‘ID

Never. . .
Almost never .
Occasionally .
Frequently . .
Almost always.
Always .

189

25
70
40
13
31
40

43
52
23
23
32
50

25
15
22
22

13

16
60
41
40
31
13

25
50

52
60
50
23
32
41

190

Do you and your mate agree on demonstration
of affection? ‘
Always agree . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16

a.
b. Almost always agree. . . . . . . . . . . 33
c. Occasionally disagree. . . . . . . . . . 41
d. Frequently disagree. . . . . . . . . . . 14
e. Almost always disagree . . . . . . . . . 23
f. Always disagree. . . . . . . . . . . . . 32

Have any of the following items caused serious

difficulties in your marriages?

Difficulties over money

Lack of mutual friends

Constant bickering

Interference of in-laws

Lack of mutual affection (no longer in love)

Unsatisfying sex relations

Selfishness and lack of cooperation

Adultery

Mate paid attention to (became familiar with
another person

Drunkenness or alcoholism

Other reasons

Nothing

a. None of the above . . . . . . . . . . . . 44
b. One of the above. . . . . . . . . . . . . 80
c. Two of the above. . . . . . . . . . . . . 61
d. Thre of the above . . . . . . . . . . 24
e. Four or five of the above . . . . . . . . 23
f. Six or more of the above. . . . . . . . . 22

IV. Satisfaction with the Marriage and the Mate

1.

Have you ever wished you had not married?

a. Frequently. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
b. Occasionally. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
c. Rarely. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
d. Never . . . 26

Do you and your mate generally talk things
over together?

a. Never . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
b. Now and then. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40
c. Almost always . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
d. Always. . . . . . 16
How happy would you rate your marriage?

a Very happy. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
b. Happy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
c. Average . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40
d. Unhappy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
e Very unhappy. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13

If you had your life to live again would you:

a. Marry the same person.

b. Marry a different person?.

c. Not marry at all?. . .
What is the total number of times you left
mate or mate left you because of conflict?
a. No times . . . . .

b. One time .

c. Two or more times.

V. Sexual Behavior

1.

What are your feelings on sex relations with
your mate?

Very enjoyable .

Enjoyable.

Tolerable. . . .

A little enjoyable . .

Not at all enjoyable . .

6 you and your mate agree on sex relations?
Always . .

Almost always agree.

Occasionally disagree.

Frequently disagree.

moo‘mumaoom

191

27
12
21

54
22

43
52
13
22
31

43
33

50

Marital Interaction Process

213

APPENDIX D

QUESTIONNAIRE DATA

193
APPENDIX D
QUESTIONNAIRE DATA

Table D1. Total Scores for Items on the Ideal Gender Role

Concept Measure.

 

 

Response Frequencies

 

 

Questionnaire Item 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 Mean 323.
Female Role

60. Sentimental 10 15 31 55 1 0 0 2.20 0.99
63. Neat 12 4 15 82 1 0 0 2.49 0.99
65. Sympathetic 3 11 16 80 4 0 0 2.62 0.81
66. Tactful 3 5 5 92 5 4 0 2.90 0.80
68. Religious 0 4 8 96 4 2 0 2.89 0.49
70. Warm 5 9 19 80 l 0 0 2.55 0.83
71. Sensitive 5 6 25 76 2 0 0 2.56 0.81
75. Gentle 5 7 25 73 3 1 0 2.57 0.86
77. Affectionate 5 8 15 85 0 l 0 2.61 0.84
78. Polite 4 2 l 105 2 0 0 2.89 2.98
Male Role

61. Adventurous 7 21 20 66 0 0 0 2.27 0.97
62. Dominant 12 19 43 40 0 0 0 1.97 0.97
64. Realistic 2 12 10 88 2 0 0 2.67 0.76
67. Logical 3 8 16 85 1 l 0 2.67 0.77
69. Independent 7 12 24 68 2 1 0 2.43 0.96
72. Aggressive 5 26 40 39 2 l 0 2.09 0.95
73. Competitive 6 22 34 51 0 l 0 2.18 0.95
74. Ambitious 3 16 20 72 2 1 0 2.50 0.86
76. Dynamic 3 9 31 67 3 l 0 2.54 0.82
79. Self-Confident 4 0 10 99 0 l 0 2.83 0.64

 

194

Table D2. Women's Scores for Items on the Ideal Gender
Role Concept Measure.

 

 

Response Frequencies

 

Questionnaire Item 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 Mean 3:3.

 

Female Role

60. Sentimental 3 5 15 32 0 0 0 2.29 0.97
63. Neat 4 2 7 44 0 0 0 2.66 0.77
65. Sympathetic l 4 6 44 2 0 0 2.79 0.73
66. Tactful l 2 3 48 2 l 0 2.89 0.68
68. Religious 0 2 3 49 2 0 0 2.86 0.62
70. Warm l 3 10 43 0 0 0 2.68 0.64
71. Sensitive l 3 13 38 2 0 0 2.68 0.69
75. Gentle 3 3 12 36 2 l 0 2.64 0.86
77. Affectionate 3 1 5 48 0 0 0 2.80 0.72
78. Polite l 0 0 56 0 0 0 2.96 0.43
Male Role

61. Adventurous 3 9 7 38 0 0 0 2.43 0.89
62. Dominant 6 9 20 22 0 0 0 2.09 0.92
64. Realistic 1 2 6 47 1 0 0 2.77 0.63
67. Logical l 3 7 44 l l 0 2.77 0.74
69. Independent 4 2 12 37 1 l 0 2.59 0.89
72. Aggressive 2 15 20 18 1 1 0 2.09 0.94
73. Competitive 3 10 19 24 0 1 0 2.14 0.98
74. Ambitious o 11 37 1 I o 2.57 0.83
76. Dynamic 1 4 18 32 1 l 0 2.59 0.73
79. Self-Confident 2 0 3 51 0 1 0 2.86 0.67

 

Table D3.

Concept Measure.

195

Men's Scores for Items on the Ideal Gender Role

 

 

Questionnaire Item

Response Frequencies

 

 

0 l 2 3 4 5 6 Mean 3:3:
Female Role
60. Sentimental 7 10 16 23 1 0 0 2.02 1.08
63. Neat 8 2 8 38 l 0 0 2.35 1.14
65. Sympathetic 2 7 10 36 2 0 0 2.47 0.87
66. Tactful 2 3 2 44 3 3 0 2.91 0.91
68. Religious 0 2 5 47 2 0 0 2.83 0.63
70. Warm 4 6 9 37 1 0 0 2.42 0.98
71. Sensitive 4 3 12 38 0 0 0 2.46 0.91
75. Gentle 2 4 13 37 1 0 0 2.49 0.87
77. Affectionate 2 7 10 37 0 l 0 2.42 0.91
78. Polite 3 2 l 49 2 0 0 2.77 0.78
Male Role
61. Adventurous 4 12 13 28 0 0 0 2.11 1.03
62. Dominant 6 10 23 18 0 0 0 1.90 0.99
64. Realistic 1 10 4 41 1 0 0 2.56 0.87
67. Logical 2 5 9 41 0 0 0 2.56 0.80
69. Independent 3 10 12 31 1 0 0 2.26 1.01
72. Aggressive 3 11 20 21 1 0 0 2.04 1.00
73. Competitive 3 12 15 27 0 0 0 2.19 0.93
74. Ambitious 3 9 9 35 1 0 0 2.42 0.94
76. Dynamic 2 5 13 35 2 0 0 2.47 0.91
79. Self-Confident 2 0 7 48 0 0 0 2.79 0.62

 

196

Table D4. Total Scores for Items on the Ideal Family Role

Concept Measure.

 

 

Response Frequencies

 

Questionnaire Item

 

o 1 2 3 4 ‘5 6 Mean 51323:
Wife Role
81. Clean 29 36 10 37 0 2 0 1.55 1.28
82. Children 9 31 21 52 0 1 0 2.05 1.06
84. Cards 20 20 14 60 0 0 0 2.00 1.19
86. Reassure 0 l 2 102 4 5 0 3.09 0.51
87. Medical 20 25 21 47 l 0 0 1.86 1.17
88. Playmates 6 12 23 73 0 0 0 2.43 0.88
90. Clothing 29 32 19 34 O 0 0 1.51 1.17
93. Decorate 22 28 19 45 0 0 0 1.76 1.17
96. Meals 32 45 11 25 0 1 0 1.29 1.15
98. Dinner 29 31 20 33 0 0 0 1.54 1.24
Husband Role
80. Drive 40 31 17 26 0 0 0 1.25 1.17
83. Live 47 21 12 34 0 0 0 1.29 1.28
85. Lock l2 9 3 86 1 2 l 2.57 1.13
89. Rough-house 9 32 21 49 0 1 0 2.02 1.07
91. Sports 1 13 14 86 0 0 0 2.62 0.72
92. Insurance 16 14 11 73 O 0 0 2.24 1.13
94. Sex 1 8 16 85 3 '0 1 2.75 0.74
95. Provider 49 29 13 22 1 0 0 1.10 1.18
97. Car 44 33 12 25 0 0 0 1.16 1.16
99. Crises 10 22 15 66 1 0 0 2.23 1.06

 

 

197

Table D5. WOmen's Scores for Items on the Ideal Family 4

Role Concept Measure.

 

 

Response Frequencies

 

Questionnaire Item

 

o 1 2 3 4 5 6 Mean 3:3 I
Wife Role
81. Clean 17 16 5 l8 0 l 0 1.50 1.32
82. Children 5 12 14 25 0 1 0 2.09 0.15
84. Cards 12 7 6 32 0 0 0 2.02 1.26
86. Reassure 0 0 0 56 0 1 0 3.07 0.38
87. Medical 13 9 10 24 1 0 0 1.88 1.25
88. Playmates 3 5 12 37 0 0 0 2.48 0.85
90. Clothing 17 14 10 16 0 0 0 1.46 1.21
93. Decorate 11 12 10 24 0 0 0 1.88 1.16
96. Meals 19 21 6 11 0 0 0 1.14 1.12
98. Dinner 15 15 l3 l4 0 0 0 1.45 1.16
Husband Role
80. Drive 18 15 12 12 0 0 0 1.34 1.13
83. Live 29 7 8 13 0 0 0 1.13 1.25
85. Lock 6 3 2 43 l 1 1 2.64 1.17
89. Rough-house 4 14 10 28 0 0 0 2.09 1.05
91. Sports 0 7 7 43 0 0 0 2.63 0.70
92. Insurance 9 5 5 38 0 0 0 2.25 1.16
94. Sex 1 6 9 41 0 0 0 2.59 0.76
95. Provider 24 14 11 8 0 0 0 1.07 1.09
97. Car 19 16 7 15 0 0 0 1.29 1.22
99. Crises 3 8 7 38 1 0 0 2.48 0.93

 

Table D6.

Concept Measure.

198

Men's Scores for Items on the Ideal Family Role

 

 

Questionnaire Item

Response Frequencies

 

 

o 1 2 3 4 5 6 Mean 3:3 3
Wife Role
81. Clean 12 20 5 19 0 1 0 1.61 1.25
82. Children 4 19 7 27 0 0 0 2.00 1.05
84. Cards 8 13 8 28 0 0 0 1.99 1.14
86. Reassure 0 1 2 46 4 4 0 3.11 0.62
87. Medical 7 16 ll 23 0 0 0 1.86 1.09
88. Playmates 3 7 11 36 0 0 0 2.40 0.90
90. Clothing 12 18 9 18 0 0 0 1.56 1.15
93. Decorate 11 16 9 21 0 0 0 1.68 1.17
96. Meals 13 24 5 l4 0 1 0 1.44 1.18
98. Dinner 14 16 7 19 0 0 1 1.65 1.32
Husband Role
80. Drive 22 16 5 14 0 0 0 1.18 1.21
83. Live 18 14 4 21 0 0 0 1.47 1.30
85. Lock 6 6 1 43 0 1 0 2.49 1.10
89. Rough-house 5 18 11 21 0 l 0 1.90 0.90
91. Sports 1 6 7 43 0 0 0 2.61 0.75
92. Insurance 7 9 6 35 0 0 0 2.21 1.11
94. Sex 0 2 7 44 3 0 1 2.91 0.69
95. Provider 25 15 2 14 l 0 0 1.14 1.27
97. Car 25 17 5 10 0 0 0 1.02 1.11
99. Crises 7 l4 8 28 0 0 0 2.00 1.12

 

199

Table D7. Total Scores for Items on the Perceived Gender
Role Performance Measure.

 

 

Response Frequencies

 

Questionnaire Item

 

o l 2 3 4 5 6 Mean 13):: .
Female Role
20. Sentimental 21 43 15 17 12 5 l 1.78 1.48
23. Neat 21 16 12 37 17 8 3 2.43 1.64
25. Sympathetic 13 24 19 30 18 9 1 2.41 1.50
26. Tactful 5 24 12 29 23 16 5 2.96 1.59
28. Religious 9 15 21 49 12 2 4 2.56 1.33
30. Warm 1 18 20 46 17 10 2 2.86 1.24
31. Sensitive 17 27 27 28 9 6 0 2.03 1.37
35. Gentle 3 17 27 53 12 2 0 2.53 1.02
37. Affectionate 1 21 14 46 18 12 2 2.90 1.30
38. Polite 9 l6 16 58 10 5 0 2.52 1.21
Male Role
21. Adventurous 35 32 20 16 6 3 2 1.50 1.47
22. Dominant 19 33 23 29 7 2 1 1.84 1.32
24. Realistic 13 22 18 40 14 6 l 2.37 1.41
27. Logical 17 25 29 30 11 1 1 2.00 1.30
29. Independent 9 27 28 32 12 6 0 2.25 1.30
32. Aggressive 26 32 21 l4 l7 1 l 1.74 1.46
33. Competitive 29 30 12 30 10 1 2 1.76 1.49
34. Ambitious 23 15 21 42 10 2 l 2.10 1.40
36. Dynamic ll 31 18 36 16 2 0 2.18 2.19
39. Self-Confident 20 32 21 23 10 7 l 1.97 1.50

 

Table D8.

200

WOmen's Scores for Items on the Perceived Gender
Role Performance Measure.

 

 

Questionnaire Item

Response Frequencies

 

 

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 Mean :23:
Female Role
20. Sentimental 10 21 9 6 8 3 0 1.79 1.51
23. Neat 9 8 7 19 10 2 2 2.48 1.55
25. Sympathetic 6 10 ll 16 9 5 0 2.48 1.47
26. Tactful 3 12 4 15 14 8 1 2.86 1.50
28. Religious 2 10 ll 24 5 l 3 2.54 1.35
30. Warm 0 6 6 28 10 7 0 3.14 1.07
31. Sensitive 9 12 14 13 8 1 0 1.98 1.34
35. Gentle 1 3 15 31 5 2 0 2.75 0.90
37. Affectionate 0 6 5 27 ll 8 0 3.27 1.05
38. Polite 6 4 11 32 2 2 0 2.43 1.13
Male Role
21. Adventurous 18 16 7 9 2 3 2 1.61 1.66
22. Dominant 7 15 14 16 4 0 1 2.04 1.25
24. Realistic 5 9 10 23 6 3 1 2.48 1.39
27. Logical 9 10 12 18 6 l l 2.20 1.39
29. Independent 6 9 l4 l8 7 3 0 2.30 1.35
32. Aggressive ll 18 9 8 9 1 l 1.89 1.52
33. Competitive 15 10 4 l8 7 l 2 2.04 1.65
34. Ambitious 10 9 8 24 3 2 1 2.20 1.43
36. Dynamic 6 16 ll 13 9 2 0 2.18 1.34
39. Self-Confident 10 17 7 15 3 5 0 2.02 1.52

 

201

Table D9. Men's Scores for Items on the Perceived Gender
Role Performance Measure.

 

 

Response Frequencies

 

 

Questionnaire Item Std
0 l 2 3 4 5 6 Mean Dev:
Female Role
20. Sentimental 11 22 6 11 4 2 1 1.75 1.47
23. Neat 12 8 5 18 7 6 1 2.42 1.72
25. Sympathetic 7 14 8 14 9 4 1 2.35 1.56
26. Tactful 2 l2 8 14 9 8 4 3.04 1.69
28. Religious 7 5 10 25 7 l 1 2.46 1.38
30. Warm l 12 14 18 7 3 2 2.58 1.35
31. Sensitive 8 15 13 15 1 5 0 2.07 1.43
35. Gentle 2 14 12 22 7 0 0 2.30 1.09
37. Affectionate l 15 9 l9 7 4 2 2.58 1.41
38. Polite 3 12 5 26 8 3 0 2.60 1.29
Male Role
21. Adventurous 17 16 13 7 4 0 0 1.37 1.25
22. Dominant 12 18 9 13 3 2 0 1.67 1.38
24. Realistic 8 13 8 17 7 3 0 2.25 1.44
27. Logical 8 15 17 12 5 0 0 1.79 1.19
29. Independent 3 l8 14 14 5 3 0 2.19 1.26
32. Aggressive 15 14 12 6 8 0 0 1.53 1.40
33. Competitive 14 20 8 12 3 o o 1.46 1.24
34. Ambitious 13 6 13 18 7 0 0 1.98 1.38
36. Dynamic 5 15 7 23 7 0 0 2.16 1.25
39. Self-Confident 10 15 14 8 7 2 1 1.93 1.50

 

202

Table D10. Total Scores for Items on the Perceived Family

Role Performance Measure.

 

 

Response Frequencies

 

Questionnaire Item

 

o 1 2 3 4 5 6 Mean 3:3:
Wife Role
41. Clean 69 23 9 7 4 2 0 0.77 1.22
42. Children 25 49 10 25 3 l 1 1.47 1.26
44. Cards 76 13 4 18 l 2 0 0.78 1.29
46. Reassure 6 12 16 67 5 7 1 2.68 1.15
47. Medical 48 32 10 21 2 1 0 1.12 1.24
48. Playmates 33 28 10 41 l l 0 1.58 1.31
50. Clothing 74 21 10 9 0 0 0 0.60 0.95
53. Decorate 52 23 14 23 1 l 0 1.13 1.27
56. Meals 65 28 8 11 1 l 0 0.75 1.09
58. Dinner 77 15 4 13 2 1 2 0.76 1.37
Husband Role
40. Drive 94 14 3 1 l 0 l 0.29 0.83
43. Live 90 12 l 10 l 0 0 0.42 0.95
45. Lock 21 15 10 42 6 6 14 2.62 1.88
49. Rough-house 47 29 10 20 4 2 l 1.25 1.41
51. Sports 28 43 12 25 4 1 l 1.48 1.30
52. Insurance 53 13 13 32 l 0 2 1.33 1.46
54. Sex 29 31 25 25 4 0 0 1.51 1.19
55. Provider 72 18 6 16 1 1 0 0.76 1.19
57. Car 95 14 0 5 0 0 0 0.25 0.68
59. Crises 31 23 5 49 3 l l 1.80 1.43

 

Table D11. Women's Scores for Items on the Perceived
Family Role Performance Measure.

203

 

 

Response Frequencies

 

Questionnaire Item

 

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 Mean :23:
Wife Role
41. Clean 37 10 4 3 3 0 0 0.70 1.16
42. Children 11 23 6 14 l 1 l 1.59 1.35
44. Cards 39 5 2 10 0 l 0 0.82 1.39
46. Reassure 6 5 4 35 3 4 0 2.59 1.23
47. Medical 30 9 3 14 l 0 0 1.07 1.31
48. Playmates 15 14 3 24 0 1 0 1.70 1.36
50. Clothing 41 5 4 7 0 0 0 0.61 1.07
53. Decorate 26 12 6 12 l 0 0 1.14 1.27
56. Meals 35 ll 4 6 0 l 0 0.71 1.16
58. Dinner 40 4 2 9 l 0 l 0.80 1.41
Husband Role
40. Drive 45 7 3 1 0 0 1 0.38 1.00
43. Live 45 l 5 0 0 0 0.41 0.91
45. Lock 10 7 6 l9 3 2 10 2.71 1.96
49. Rough-house 17 15 6 l3 2 2 l 1.66 1.53
51. Sports 15 18 5 15 2 1 1 1.59 1.45
52. Insurance 24 5 8 18 l 0 l 1.50 1.49
54. Sex 14 21 10 ll 1 0 0 1.38 1.12
55. Provider 36 10 2 9 0 0 0 0.77 1.13
57. Car 46 6 0 5 O 0 0 0.38 0.89
59. Crises 13 7 3 29 3 1 l 2.20 1.47

 

204

Table D12. Men's Scores for Items on the Perceived Family

Role Performance Measure.

 

 

Response Frequences

 

Questionnaire Item

 

0 l 2 3 4 5 6 Mean 3:3:
Wife Role
41. Clean 32 13 5 4 l 2 0 0.86 1.29
42. Children 14 26 4 11 2 0 0 1.32 1.15
44. Cards 37 8 2 8 l l 0 0.75 1.20
46. Reassure 0 7 12 32 2 3 l 2.77 1.07
47. Medical 18 23 7 7 1 1 0 1.19 1.19
48. Playmates 18 14 7 17 l 0 0 1.46 1.27
50. Clothing 33 16 6 2 0 0 0 0.60 0.82
53. Decorate 26 ll 8 ll 0 1 0 1.12 1.28
56. Meals 30 17 4 5 1 0 0 0.77 1.04
58. Dinner 37 11 2 4 1 l l 0.74 1.34
Husband Role
40. Drive 49 7 0 0 1 0 0 0.21 0.62
43. Live 45 6 0 5 1 0 0 0.44 1.00
45. Lock ll 8 4 23 3 4 4 2.51 1.81
49. Rough-house 30 14 4 7 2 0 0 0.84 1.16
51. Sports 13 25 7 10 2 0 0 1.35 1.13
52. Insurance 29 8 5 14 0 0 l 1.14 1.43
54. Sex 15 10 15 14 3 0 0 1.65 1.26
55. Provider 36 8 4 7 1 l 0 0.77 1.27
57. Car 49 8 0 0 0 0 0 0.14 0.35
59. Crises 18 16 2 20 0 0 0 1.40 1.28

 

APPENDIX E

CORRELATIONS COEFFICIENTS OF
QUESTIONNAIRE DATA

- - -(L (.12 LQ_.C0.¢ mmtth 0£u
34:: catiaowL—hLCU COHUG~0HM00 UCOEOZ UODUOLL COMMQOR .HW QHQNH

206

Hoo. NH. oo. me. am. me. no. om. mm. Noo. u m
o.a ma. mm. NH. no.- mo.- No.- no.. oo.- on. muaaom .on
Hoo. eoo. moo. moo. AH. Ho. Hoo. Hoo. Hoo. u m
o.H mm. He. no. ma. om. on. no. on. menaeaaoemmm .An
Hoo. Hoo. ooo. moo. no. mo. ma. eo. u m
o.H me. mm. am.- NN. oH. ma. mm. maecmo .ne
Hoo. Hoo. mm. Ho. Hoo. ooo. no. u m
o.H on. oo.- mm. on. mm. mm. m>auanamm .HA
Hoo. AH. Hoo. Hoo. Hoo. Hoo. n m
o.m mm. on. no. on. on. name .on
Hoo. ea. no. No. Ha. u m
o.H am. No.- no. “a. naoamaamm .oo
Hoo. ooo. Hoo. Noo. u m
o.H am. mm. mm. Hammone .oo
Hoo. No. mo. u m
o.H om. oN. nanomenmaam .mo
Hoo. Hoo. n m
o.H on. enmz .mo
moo” u m

o H anaemaaaamm .oo
oaom oamfimm

 

 

 

mm mm mm an on we on mo mo om EmuH mHHmnoaummSO

 

mHom mamaom

 

 

.wuoonnam mamamh Mom whammoz uaoocoo maom Hoocoo HomoH onu
co mamuH cooBDmm mucmfioflmmooo Gowumaonuoo ucmeoz uoaooum Gownmom .Hm maan

207

 

 

Hoo. Ho. Hoo. Hoo. ooo. on. Ho. No. Ho. moo. u m
on. om. Ne. Ho. Ho. eo.- om. AN. nH. mm. eamonaoo-HHmm .ok
no. mo. Hoo. Hoo. mo. no. mH. on. om. on. u m
om. mo. on. mm. mm. o~.- NH.- no. no. no. oHaneao .oa
«N. No. 4H. 53. am. no. no. mH. mH. an. n m
oH. H~.- mH. Ho. no.. mo. oo.- mH.- mH.- Ho. naoHeHesm .on
me. am. mo. no. mo. no. Ho. mm. oH. no. u o
no. oH.- oH. no. oH. no. on. oH. NH.- Ho. m>HmHemmaoo .me
eH. oH. Ho. Hoo. moo. me. mm. no. em. mm. u m
mH. NH. Hm. on. an. mo.- oo. om. oo. oo. 6>Hnnmamm< .NH
mm. Hoo. Ho. moo. moo. He. mH. Hoo. Ho. nH. u o
oo.- me. Hm. mm. om. mo. NH. on. Hm. mH. unmoanomoaH .oo
on. AH. mH. Hoo. Hoo. mm. Hoo. mo. mm. mm. u m
eo.- 3H. mH. me. no. eo. oo. NN. oo. oo. HnonOH .Ho
no. mo. mo. Hoo. Hoo. No. Hoo. Hoo. 3o. om. u o
no. mH. mm. om. om. Ho.- mm. mm. mm. mo. oHanHHnmm .eo
oH. eoo. No. moo. Hoo. om. no. ooo. moo. no. u m
mH.- em. om. mm. 53. no. «N. mm. em. oo. manaHaoo .No
eoo. Hoo. woo. woo. Hoo. NH. moo. Hoo. Noo. No. u o
no. no. on. am. on. oH.- mm. on. mm. mm. naoaaecm>o< .Ho
mHom mamz
on an on HR on me oo no mo oo

 

oHom 3.95..“ am”; ouwmcaoflumoao

 

 

onscHeaoo Hm eHmnH

208

 

 

Hoo. Ho. No. No. Hoo. oH. noo. Noo. HH. Hoo. u m
o.H om. mN. oN. on. NH. mm. No. NH. on. mamoHHaoo-mHmm .oN
Hoo. No. oo. Hoo. Ho. Hn. no. oo. Hoo. u m
o.H oN. HN. NA. om. No. NN. HN. om. eHanaao .oN
Hoo. Noo. no. on. mm. on. NN. no. u m
o.H No. NN. No.- oo. Ho. oH. mo.- naoHaHoan .nN
Hoo. Hoo. oo. Hoo. Ho9 nH. no. u m
o.H mm. HN. on. an. nH. oH. m>HuHumoaoo .NN
Hoo. Hoo. no9 moo. Hoo. Hoo. n m
o.H on. no. No. on. Nn. maHnnmammn .NN
Hoo. mm. o9 Ho9 Hoo. n m
o.H o9 HN. o9 on. mamoamoeoaH .oo
Hoo. Ho9 No9 Ho. u m
o. H mo. N9 oN. HnonoH .No
Hoo. oo. Ho. u m
o. H HN. om. eHonHHnmm .no
Ho9 Hoo. u m
o. H mn. oenaHaoo .No
Hoo. u m
0 . H wSOHDUGm>< . Ho
oHom dams
on oN nN on INN no No no No He amuH maHnaaeHannao

 

oaom mamamm

 

 

omacHuaoo Hm mHene

. . . f a— 14...! ukcanv H. mummvH mU- H CO
.tnkLCCL CCqunOLMCU US$50: DUSUHOML. CthNwONN .NM QHDNH

209

 

 

Hoo. Hoo. noo. Hoo. No. nn. mo. Hoo. Noo. Hoo. u m
o.H mm. mm. No. oN. No. nN. mm. mm. on. meHHom .oN
Hoo. Hoo. Hoo. Hoo. nn. Hn. Hoo. Noo. Hoo. u m
o.H HN. Hm. no. No.- oo.- on. no. No. manaeHeemoon .NN
Hoo. Hoo. Hoo. nN. HH. Hoo. Hoo. Hoo. u m
o.H on. oo. oo.- nH. Hm. mm. mm. eHeamo .mN
Hoo. Hoo. NH. mm. Hoo. Hoo. Hoo. u m
o.H HN. NH. no. oo. on. No. maHeHnaem .HN
Hoo. on. mo. Hoo. Hoo. Hoo. u m
o.H oo. oH. on. em. nn. Benz .oN
Hoo. on. mH. HN. on. u m
o.H Ho. nH. no. on. naeHmHHmm .mo
Hoo. no. No. HN. u m
o.H NN. mN. HH. Hamaene .oo
Hoo. Hoo. Hoo. m
o.H mn. on. oHumsumosam .mo
Hoo. Hoo. u m
o.H Hm. ammz .No
Hoo. u m
o.H Hneamaaeamm .oo
oaom onEmm
NN NN mN HN oN no no no No oo

 

oaom onBmm

EouH oufimaaowumoso

 

 

.muoononm mamz How whammoz unmocoo oaom Hmocmo HmooH osu no

mamUH 5w03umm WUGQHUflMMGOU GOHUGHQHHOU “$0502 UUUUOHQ COmHmmm

.Nm «Home

210

 

 

Ho9 No9 N9 No. NN. Hoo. NH. No. NN. Noo. u N
Nn. N9 NH. NN. No. Nn. NH. nN. No. NN. aamoHNaoo-HHeN .NN
No. Ho9 Hoo. No. Ho9 H9 NN. No. NH. Hoo. u N
NN. NN. N9 NH. o9 No. No.- HN. NH. Nn. nHaneNo .NN
NH. No. oH. Nn. N9 nN. NN. Nn. NN. NH. n N
NH. oN. NH. Ho.- NH. oH. no. No. No. NH. naeHaHean .nN
HH. N9 NN. NN. NH. NN. oo. Nn. NH. No. u N
NH. oN. N9 No. N9 no.- NH. Ho. NH. NN. m>HeHemoaoo .NN
No. Noo. Ho. Hoo. Ho9 No. nN. Hoo. Noo. Noo. u N
NN. NN. HN. N9 Nn. NN. oH.- NN. NN. NN. n>HnnmANN< .NN

Hoo. Hoo. Ho9 Noo. Ho9 HN. NH. Noo. No. Hoo. u N
NN. NN. H9 NN. Hn. HH.- NH. NN. NN. Nn. mamoammmoaH .NN

Hoo. Ho9 No9 Hoo. Ho9 oH. NN. Hoo. Noo. Hoo. n N
NN. NN. NN. NN. nn. NH. oo. NN. NN. NN. HneHNoH .NN

Hoo. No9 No. Hoo. Hoo. NN. no. Hoo. Hoo. Hoo. u N
Nn. NN. NN. Nn. Nn. No.- nN. HN. Hn. NN. QHHNHHnmN .nN
HN. No9 Hoo. nH. H9 No. Noo. NN. nH. No. n N
N9 - NN. on. nH. oN. HN.- NN.- no. nH. nN. mamaHaeo .NN

Hoo. Hoo. Hoo. Hoo. Hoo. NH. NH. Hoo. Ho. Hoo. u N
HN. Nn. Nn. Nn. on. nH. NH. on. NN. Nn. naoaauem>o< .HN

mHeN man
NN NN NN HN oN NN NN NN NN oN

 

oaom onEom

aouH oHchcoNuNoao

 

 

nmaaHaaoo Nm mHHne

 

211

 

 

Hoo. Hoo. No. NH. No. noo. Hoo. HH. NN. .Hoo. n N
o.H on. NN. NH. oN. NN. NN. NH. No.- Nn. mamoHNaoo-NHmN .NN
Hoo. Hoo. HH. No. Hoo. Hoo. No. Ho. Hoo. u N
o.H on. NH. NN. Nn. Nn. HN. HN. on. oHamaNo .NN
Hoo. Hoo. Nn. Noo. Ho. Noo. HN. Hoo. n N
o.H NN. No. NN. oN. NN. HH. Hn. NaoHaHman .nN
Hoo. on. Noo. no. No. oH. No. u N
o.H oo. NN. nN. NN. NH. NN. m>HHHemoaoo .NN
Hoo. noo. Hoo. Hoo. Hoo. Hoo. u N
o.H NN. on. on. oN. on. maHnnmaNNn .NN
Hoo. Hoo. Hoo. Hoo. Hoo. u N
o.H oN. nN. Nn. NN. eaeoamomneH .NN
Hoo. Hoo. NN. Hoo. u N
o.H NN. No. NN. HNUHNoH .NN
Hoo. No. Noo. n N
o.H oN. NN. oHeNHHnmm .nN
Hoo. No. u N
o.H NN. uenaHaoo .NN
Hoo. u N
o.H mSOHfiqu>U< .Ho
eHoN man
mN QB ¢N m“ NR 00 N0 #0 NO HO amUH QHngaOfluwmsg
eHeN man

 

 

 

 

emacHeceo Nm mHNNN

«lifetime.
. -HLNCU
UCOEOZr C -
. Sandwizac
Lam C NN....tU.
ONHNWH
AN .MIHW
0Hn~m~rfi

212

 

 

 

Hoo. Hoo. Hoo. Hoo. Ho. Nn. no. Hoo. No9 Hoo. n N
o.H Nn. NN. Hn. HN. Ho.- NH. NN. NN. nn. eeHHem .NN
Hoo. Hoo. Hoo. Ho9 oN. NH. Hoo. Ho9 Ho9 n N
o.H NN. Nn. NN. oo. no. NN. Nn. NN. manaoHaemmmn .NN
Hoo. Hoo. Ho9 Ho. no. Hoo. Hoo. Hoo. u N
o.H Nn. HN. HN.- NH. NN. NN. N9 mHuamo .NN
Hoo. Ho9 Nn. No. Hoo. Ho9 Ho9 u N
o.H nN. No.- nH. NN. Nn. on. maHeHnamN .HN
Ho9 oN. Hoo. Ho9 Ho9 Hoo. u N
o. H oo.- HN. NN. NN. NN. sans .oN
Hoo. NN. Hn. No. an. n N
o.H no. No. NH. oo.- naOHNHHmm .NN
Hoo. No9 Ho9 H9 n N
o.H NN. NN. HN. Homeona .NN
Ho9 Hoo. Hoo. u N
o. H on. NN. 6HemaanoaNN .NN
Ho9 Hoo. u N
o. H Nn. onez .NN
Ho9 u N
o. H HmaamaHaamN .oN
oaom mamamm
NN NN NN HN oN NN NN NN NN oN

 

maom onEmm

EmuH ouamcaowummno

 

 

 

 

.muoomosm onEom pan on2 How whammoz umoocoo oaom Hooaow HmooH

ozu no maouH amo3uom muaofiowmmmou aoNumHoHHou unmaoz Donooum Comuwom

.mm mHQMH

TQZC w HQCCU mm OHQQF

 

213

u m
Nm. ucoonaooumaom .mu

u m
6HanaNo .NN

u m
Nnowuwoa< .nN

u m
m>HuHumoaoo .NN

u m
o>HNmonw< .NN

u m
uaoonoaoocH .mo

u m
HneHNoH .NN

u m
oHuNNHmom .no

u m
ucmcflaoo .NN

u m
Naousucm>o< .HN

oaom mam:

 

 

mo. No.
ma. ma.
0H. 0H.
oo. OH.
ca. 0H.
00. Ho.
Hm. coo.
mo. mN.
mo. «n.
ma. Ho.n
ON. mo.
wo.n NH.
wN. Hoo.
oo. oN.
HN. Hoo.
mo.u mm.
NH. oH.
HH.: oo.:
oN. Ho.
oo.: HN.
we we

 

oaom mamaom

BouH ouwmcGONummso

 

 

omaaHeaoo Nm mHNNN

214

 

 

Hoo. Hoo. Noo. No. Hoo. Noo. Hoo. Noo. oN. Hoo. n N
o.H NN. NN. oN. HN. NN. HN. NN. No. Nn. mamoHNaoo-mHmN .NN
Hoo. Hoo. No. Hoo. Hoo. Noo. Ho. Noo. Hoo. u N
o.H NN. NH. Hn. NN. NN. NN. NN. NN. oHanaNo .NN
Hoo. Hoo. NH. No. Ho. Noo. NH. Noo. u N
o.H Nn. oo. oN. HN. NN. HH. NN. NaoHuHean .nN
Hoo. Noo. Hoo. Hoo. Hoo. No. Noo. u N
o.H NN. NN. NN. HN. NH. nN. n>HaHemoaoo .NN
Hoo. Hoo. Hoo. Hoo. Hoo. Hoo. u N
o.H nn. NN. NN. Nn. on. maHnnmaNNn .NN
Hoo. Hoo. Hoo. Hoo. Hoo. u N
o.H oN. Nn. Nn. NN. aamoammeoaH .NN
Hoo. Hoo. No. Hoo. u N
o.H NN. NH. Nn. HneHNoH .NN
Hoo. No. Hoo. u N
o.H oN. NN. UHNNHHnmm .nN
Hoo. Hoo. u N
o.H NN. unnaHaeo .NN
Hoo. u N
O . H mDOHfiufim>fi< . H0
eHom man

 

oaom mamz

 

 

omaaHeaoo NN mHNne

215

 

 

 

 

Hoo. Hoo. Noo. Hoo. Ho. Hoo. Nm. Hoo. Noo. Hoo. u m
o.H mm. mm. «q. mN. Ho. oo. n¢. mm. no. HmaaHa .wm
Hoo. noo. Hoo. Hoo. Hoo. on. H00. H00. H00. u m
o.H Nm. cm. mm. an. No.u Nn. No. «B. mHmoz .om
Hoo. Hoo. Hoo. Hoo. «n. NNo. MN. «0. u m
o. H on. wq. on. No. mm. OH. mN. oumuooma .mm
Hoo. H00. H00. om. Hoo. Ho. Hoo. u m
o.H Hn. NN. No.- oN. HN. HN. NaHeeeHo .oN
Hoo. No. om. Noo. MN. «0. u m
o. H NN. N9 - NN. oH. nN. amenaNnHm .NN
Hoo. nN. Hoo. Ho. Hoo. u m
o. H oo.: No. mN. mo. HmoHomz .mw
Hoo. HN. on. em. u m
o. H HH.: Ho.u m9 n oudmmmom .ow
Hoo. Hoo. Ho9 u m
o.H on. wn. Noumu .qw
H00. H00. M m
o.H oo. coHoHHoo .Nw
Hoo. u m
o. H ENmHu .Hm
oHom oMHB
Na Na Na oo NN NN NN nN NN HM] aeeH maHnaaOHennao
mHom oMHB
.muoonoam onEom How dynamo: unmocoo oHom NHHEmm HomoH map
so NsmuH coosuom mucoHonmoou :oHumHouHoo usosoz uosoonm comummm .nm oHomH

 

 

 

 

pwscnucoo cm mHomH

216

 

 

 

OH. HO. NN. 00. m0. HH. «00. ON. MN. NO. u m
NH. ON. OH. MH. MH. NH. MM. HH.: 00. MN. mHmHHO .Om
H00. H00. MOO. H00. H00. H00. 0«. MO. 00. H00. n m
N«. HM. 0M. 00. H«. 0«. «0.: NN. HN. 0«. HNO .hm
H00. H00. H0. H00. 000. H00. NH. H00. N00. H00. u M
HO. Mm. OM. OM. MM. MM. MH.| H«. NM. NM. Hmwfl>oum .MM
«00. HO. OH. NO. HN. 500. NO. mo. «0. NO. n m
MM. OM. MH. MN. HH. MM. MN.| MH. MN. ON. xmm .«0
H00. H00. H00. H00. M0. HOO. H«. NH. M00. H00. n m
m«. N«. NM. ««. NN. N«. M0.n 0H. 0M. n«. QUGMHSmCH .Nm
M0. «0. MM. N«. MN. «0. MH. H«. MM. «0. w m
OH. «N. 00.: M0. M0. «N. NH.| M0. M0. «N. muhomm .Hm
MOO. M0. M00. H00. H00. HO. «H. N00. OM. NN. u m
MM. 0N. MM. M«. M«. OM. MH.I MM. «0. HH. mmfionnnwdom .MM
HH. «0. M00. MO. NOO. N00. MO. MH. MM. HO. n M
0H. «N. NM. NN. NM. MM. OH.I MH. «0.: ON. HUGH .MM
H00. H00. M00. NO. H0. HOO. OH. MO. H00. H00. u m
NM. «0. MM. MM. HM. M«. NH.: MN. M«. 00. fiOHuNUOH .MM
H00. H00. HO. H00. NO. H00. MM. MOO. H00. H00. u m
H«. OM. HM. MM. ON. ««. «0.: «M. M«. MM. m>HHD .OM
oHom vamomdm
mHOm mmw3

 

 

emacHuaoo nm mHNNN

fiGSCHUCCU «w mHomfi

 

217

 

Hoo. Noo. Noo. No. NN. NH. oH. No. moo. No. u N
o.H HN. NN. NN. No. NH. NH. NN. HN. oN. NHNHHo .NN
Noo. Hoo. No. No. NH. Noo. Hoo. Noo. Hoo. u N
o.H oN. NN. oN. nH. nN. nn. NN. Nn. ano .NN
Hoo. Hoo. Hoo. Ho. Hoo. no. Hoo. Hoo. u N
o.H on. Nn. HN. on. nN. NN. NN. HmoH>oam .NN
Hoo. Hoo. oN. NH. no. No. No. u N
o.H Nn. no. NH. nN. NN. NN. me .no
Hoo. nH. NH. nN. Hoo. Noo. u N
o.H nH. NH. No. oN. NN. moanaanaH .NN
Hoo. NH. NN. oo. NN. u N
o.H NH. No. NH. No.- nuaooN .HN
Hoo. NN. nH. No. u N
o.H No. NH. HN. mnaoe-emaom .NN
Hoo. No. No. u N
o.H oH. NH. NUOH .NN
Hoo. Hoo. u N
o.H NN. aOHanooH .NN
Hoo. u N
o.H maHao .oN
oHom osmomdm
am No No nN No Ho NN NN NN oN snaH naHnaaoHaneso

 

mHom Namensm

 

 

omsaHeaoo nm mHNna

Incl; "v.
UCOHU I
C

mm

0
U COH

218

 

 

 

 

Ho9 HOO. MOO. MO. mm. MO. om. mo. MO. HOO. u M
O. H NM. mm. MN. «O. MN. «O. MH. MN. Hn. HocaHO .MM
HOO. HOO. HOO. MO. HOO. mm. HOO. HOO. HOO. u m
O.H H«. M«. MH. Mn. «O. o«. M«. o9 mHmoz .MM
HOO. HOO. MOO. NO. nN. HOO. HOO. HOO. u m
O.H M«. NM. NN. MO.: Nn. Hn. M«. oumuooon .mm
HOO. HOO. HOO. Ma. HOO. HOO. HOO. I m
o.H Nn. NN. Ho. NN. NN. NN. NcHeeoHo .oN
HOO. HOO. MH. HOO. HOO. HOO. u m
o.H Nn. NH.- Nn. nN. Hn. nmenaNnHm .NN
HOO. MH. HOO. HOO. HOO. u m
O. H NH.» mm. sq. «m. HmoHooE .NM
HOO. ««. NH. NN. u m
O. H NO.: MH. u HH. : whammmom .MM
HOO. HOO. HOO. u m
O.H OM. o9 Noumo .qM
HOO. HOO. u m
O. H mm. amHoHHno .NM
HOO. u M
O. H cmoHO .HM
oHoM oMHS
oHom oMHB
.Nuoomosm on2 How whammoz umoocoo mHom NHHEmm HmoOH
onu Go wamuH Goozuom NucoHonwooO :oHumHonuoo ucosox nosooum comumom .mm oHLMH

 

ETSCNNCOO mm THESE

219

 

 

 

HH. no. Noo. Ho. No. Hoo. nH. Hoo. No9 Hoo. u N
NH. nN. NN. HN. NN. nn. nH.- Nn. NN. H9 NHNHao .NN
Hoo. Hoo. Hoo. Hoo. Hoo. Hoo. oN. Ho9 Ho9 Hoo. u N
NN. oN. Nn. NN. Hn. NN. oo. NN. oN. NN. ano .NN
Hoo. Hoo. Noo. Hoo. NH. Hoo. Nn. No9 no9 Ho9 u N
HN. NN. NN. on. nH. Nn. No.- NN. NN. Nn. amoH>eam .NN
Hoo. Hoo. Nn. NH. Nn. NH. Nn. NN. Nn. NN. n N
Nn. Hn. Ho. NH. No.- NH. No. No. No. - HH. NNN .no
no. No. Noo. Hoo. No. Hoo. Nn. Ho9 Noo. Hoo. u N
NN. NN. NN. Nn. NN. Nn. Ho. HN. nN. Hn. meanaaaaH .NN
Ho. Hoo. No. No. NH. oN. Hn. Ho9 No9 Hoo. u N
oN. on. NN. NN. NH. NH. N9 NN. nN. Hn. naaooN .HN
no. Ho. Hoo. Noo. Hoo. Ho. NN. noo. Noo. Noo. u N
nN. NN. Nn. NN. Nn. NN. No.- NN. NN. NN. mnaoe-eNaoN .NN
oN. oN. Noo. no. No. Ho. NN. No. No9 H9 u N
oH. No. NN. nN. NN. oN. N9 NN. nN. oN. xeeH .NN
Hoo. Hoo. Hoo. Hoo. Hoo. Hoo. NN. Noo. Hoo. Hoo. n N
Nn. NN. oN. Nn. NN. HN. No.- NN. nn. NN. aoHanooH .NN
Noo. Hoo. Hoo. Hoo. No. Hoo. No. Hoo. No. Hoo. u N
NN. Nn. Nn. on. NN. Nn. HN.- nN. NN. Hn. meHao .oN
mHom osmomsz
mHoN 6NH3

 

 

omaaHmaeo Nm mHNNN

 

 

poscHucoo mm oHomh

 

220

 

 

no. nH. Noo. noo. Ho. u N
NN. NH. NN. NN. HN. NHNHHN .NN
Noo. Hoo. noo. Hoo. Hoo. u N
NN. NN. NN. NN. nN. ano .NN
Ho. Noo. NN. Hoo. Hoo. u N
oN. NN. No. HN. Hn. amoH>oam .NN
oN. Nn. NH. HN. NN. u N
No. Ho.- NH.- HH. no. me .nN
No. NN. Hoo. Hoo. Noo. u N
NN. No. Hn. Nn. NN. moanuanaH .NN
Hoo. Noo. NN. No. Ho. u N
o.H NN. oo.- NN. oN. anooN .HN
Hoo. oH. Hoo. Hoo. u N
o.H NH. NN. nn. enaea-eNaoN .NN
Hoo. Ho. No. u N
o.H NN. NH. NeoH .NN
Hoo. Hoo. u N
o.H NN. :oHunooH .NN
Hoo. u N
o.H m>Hao .oN
mHom osmomnm
Ho NN NN NN oN

 

 

mHom osmowsm

mHHmccoHuNonc

 

 

omaaHaaoo NN mHNNN

.muowfiflflm meamh USN mHmZ How whfimmmz UQOUCOU OHOM NHHEmh HmmUH mfiu
CO MEUUH $003uwm muCQHUNMMOOU COHUNHOMHOU UCQEOZ UUDVOHR Gowkmwm .mm QHDNH

 

 

Hoo. Hoo. Hoo. Hoo. No. Hoo. oN. Hoo. Ho9 Ho9 n N
o.H NN. NN. nN. NH. Nn. No. NN. oN. NN. amaaHo .NN
Hoo. Hoo. Hoo. Hoo. Hoo. NN. Ho9 Ho9 Hoo. u N
o.H NN. HN. NN. Nn. No. on. nN. NN. NHnmz .NN
Hoo. Hoo. Hoo. Hoo. NN. Hoo. Noo. Ho9 u N
o.H NN. on. Nn. No.- Nn. NN. NN. nenaonmo .NN
Hoo. Hoo. Hoo. an. Ho9 Ho9 Ho9 u N
o.H Hn. NN. oo.- NN. Nn. NN. NaHNaoHo .oN
Hoo. Hoo. NH. Ho9 Ho9 Hoo. n N .
o.H NN. oH.- NN. NN. NN. NmenaNnHm NN
Hoo. NH. Ho9 Ho9 Hoo. u N
o.H oH.- NN. NN. NN. HnoHoez .NN
Ho9 NN. NH. HN. u N
o. H no.- No. - No. - meannnmm .NN
Ho9 Ho9 Ho9 u N
9 H Nn. NN. noano .nN
Ho9 Ho9 u N
o H NN. anaoHHNo .NN
Ho9 n N
9 H aneHo .HN
eHem mNHz
Na NN NN oN NN NN NN nN NN HN amaH 3Hnaeofineao
mHeN «NH:

 

 

.muomnonm onamm paw on2 How oHSNmoZ uaoocoo oHom NHHBmm HmoOH ozu

HMO mEMUH fi0w3umm WUCGHUHMMGOU COHUMHUHHOU US$50: U05UOHm SOmHmmm

.MM oHnma

 

 

omscnucou om mHomh

222

 

 

 

N9 Noo. Noo. Noo. Noo. Ho9 No. No. Hoo. Hoo. u N
N9 NN. NN. NN. NN. NN. oN.- NH. NN. NN. NHNHao .NN
Hoo. Hoo. Hoo. Hoo. Hoo. Ho9 on. Hoo. Hoo. Hoo. u N
Nn. NN. Nn. NN. Hn. oN. No.- NN. NN. NN. ano .NN
Hoo. Hoo. Hoo. Hoo. moo. Ho9 NN. Hoo. Hoo. Ho9 u N
HN. NN. HN. Nn. NN. HN. no.- NN. NN. NN. amoHaoam .NN
Ho9 Hoo. NH. Noo. NN. No9 NN. No. NH. Ho. u N
on. NN. No. NN. No. nN. No.- NH. oH. HN. NmN .nN
Ho9 Hoo. Hoo. Hoo. Noo. Hoo. Nn. Hoo. Hoo. Ho9 u N
NN. nN. NN. nn. NN. Nn. Ho.- NN. NN. nn. neanaanaH .NN
Noo. Hoo. NH. No. HH. N9 NN. Ho. No. Ho9 u N
NN. NN. HH. NH. NH. NH. No.- HN. oN. NN. neaomN .HN
No9 Noo. Hoo. Hoo. Hoo. Hoo. NH. Hoo. Noo. noo. u N
NN. NN. NN. on. Nn. NN. No.- NN. nN. NN. mnaoa-aNaem .NN
N9 No. Hoo. Noo. Hoo. Ho9 Nn. Noo. No. Ho9 u N
NH. nH. NN. NN. oN. nN. Ho.- oN. nH. NN. HUOH .NN
Hoo. Hoo. Hoo. Hoo. Hoo. Hoo. nN. Hoo. Hoo. Ho9 u N
oN. NN. NN. Hn. Hn. NN. No.- HN. Nn. n9 aeHeneoH .NN
Hoo. Hoo. Hoo. Hoo. Hoo. Hoo. No. Hoo. Hoo. Hoo. u N
NN. Nn. NN. Nn. NN. Nn. NH.- Nn. NN. Nn. m>Hao .oN
oHom osmomsm
No NN Na oN NN NN NN nN NN HN ameH NAHnanHannao
eHoN mNHz

 

 

NeaeHeaeo Nm mHNNN

 

 

poacNocoo om SHEEN

 

223

 

 

No. No. Hoo. Noo. n N
ON. «H. MN. ON. mHmHHO .mm
noo. Hoo. Hoo. Hoo. u N
NN. Nn. oN. Nn. ano .NN
Hoo. Hoo. Hoo. Hoo. u N
oN. NN. NN. Nn. amoHaoam .NN
oN. nN. Ho. No. w N
No. no. NN. nH. me .no
No. NH. Hoo. Hoo. u N
NH. HH. Mn. NM. mocmusmcH .NM
Hoo. Ho. No. No. u N
O.H NN. ON. «H. monomm .Hm
Hoo. Hoo. Hoo. u N
o.H nN. NN. mNooo-owsom .oN
Noo. No. u N
NN. NH. xoeH .NN
Hoo. Hoo. u N
O.H HM. GOHumUOH .MM
Hoo. u N
O.H m>HHO .OM
oHom ocmomnm
Hm Gm mm ow EQUH GHHWGOHUQmfiHU
mHom mMHB

 

 

ochHuaoo Om mHan

.muuwfinflm mHmEmh MOM thmmOZ QUCQEHOMMOR mHox Hmficmb fim>flmohmm
mfiu CO mEOUH COOBuwm muCOHUNMMNOU COHumHOHhOU UCOEOE uUDUONL COmHmmm .NM ONQQH

A.
2
2

 

Hoo. NN. oH. Hoo. HN. NN. Hoo. no. No. Nn. u N
o.H No.- NH. NN. HH.- oH.- Nn. nN. NN. oo.- meHHoN .NN
Hoo. No. No. Hoo. nH. Nn. oN. Nn. No. u N
o.H HN. nN. NN. NH.- No. HH. No. NN. manaoHoommmn .NN
Hoo. nN. no. No. Ho. Hoo. NH. HH. u N
o.H oH. NN. NH. oN. Nn. NH. NH.- NHuamo .NN
Hoo. nn. NN. No. Noo. NH. noo. u N
o.H No. No.- NH. HN. NH. NN. m>HanamN .HN
Hoo. Ho. NH. Noo. NH. Ho. u N
o.H oN. nH. NN. NH.- oN. ape: .oN
Hoo. No. No. Nn. NH. u N
o.H NN. NH. Ho.- NH. NaoHNHHmN .NN
Hoo. Hoo. oN. Nn. u N
o.H on. oo.- Ho.- Hamuone .NN
Hoo. nn. Hn. u N
o.H No.- No. oHamaHNNENN .NN
Hoo. Nn. u N
o.H Ho.- mnmz .NN
Hoo. n N
o.H HnuaeaHuaNN .oN
mHoM onamm
NN NN NN HN oN NN NN NN NN oN

 

oHom onEmm

EmuH oHHmcaOHuNoDO

 

 

.Nuoononm onaom Mom onsmmoz oocmahomuom oHom Hoocow oo>Hmouom
moo no NaouH cooBqu NuGoHonmmoO coHumHoHHou uaoaoz uoooonm comummm .Nm oHomH

MM

NM

mm

HM

OM MN MN

OHOm mHmeh

Hound—NH U230 hm 0H DNA.

MN

MN

ON

EmuH mhwmccoHummaO

225

 

u M
MH.uuamoncOOIMHoM .MM

n M
6323 .NN

u M
NSOHuHoB< .«M

u M
o>HuHuoaaoO .MM

n M
o>HNNoHMM< .NM

u M
uaooaommocH .oN

u M
HNUHNoH .NN

u M
oHuNHHmom .«N

n M
unmaHEoO .NN

u M
NaoHSuao>M< .HN

oHoM mez

 

NO. MM.
ON.: «O.
«M. «M.
NO. MO.
NO. «M.
ON.n MO.|
MN. MM.
MO. «O.u
MN. MH.
MO. NH.
NH. MM.
MH. «O.u
MO. MM.
HN.: MO.:
NOO. NN.
MM.: MO.:
HM. NM.
NO.: «O.
NM. «O.
MO.: MN.n
MN MN

 

oHom onEmh

amuH mHHmGHOHuNoDO

 

omaaHeaeo NN nHNne

 

 

pwscnucoo Nm mHomN

 

226

O.H

u M
ucooncoOuMHoM .MM

u M
oHancNo .NN

u M
NsoHuHoE< .«M

n M
6>HuHumaaoo .NN

n M
o>HNNmeM< .NM

u M
ucooaomoocH .MN

u M
HneHNoH .NN

u M
oHuNHHmom .«N

n M
ucmcHaoO .NN

n M
N30H5uao>o< .HN

mHom mHmZ

 

 

MOO. HO. «O.
NM. OM. MN.
HOO. ON. NH.
o«. NH. MH.:
MO. MO. ««.
«N. MN. NO.
NOO. HH. MH.
MM. MH. MH.:
HO. MO. «M.
OM. HN. MO.
HOO. NO. ««.
O.H ON. NO.
HOO. HOO.
O.H MM.
HOO.
MN NN «N
mHom mHmz

EmuH ouHmacOHummno

 

emacHuaoo Nm mHNne

.muummnsm mHmZ How whammmz mucmEhowuwm mHom hmocmb om>wmuumm
dfiu co mENUH CmmBumm mucmHoHMMNOU COHumeHHOU ucmEOZ uUSUOMW comhmmm .MM mNoNh

227

 

Hoo. no. oH. No. Hoo. nN. Hoo. Noo. No. No. u N
o.H nN. NH. oN. on. oo.- .Nn. nN. oN. NH. eaHHeN .NN
Hoo. Hoo. Noo. Hoo. NN. No. No. NN. Hoo. u N
o.H NN. NN. HN. No.- oN. HN. No.- HN. menaOHuoeNNN .NN
Hoo. Hoo. Noo. NN. Noo. Ho. NN. No. n N
o.H Nn. NN. No.- NN. NN. NN. NN. NHaamo .NN
Hoo. Hoo. NN. no. Hoo. NH. Hoo. n N
o.H on. No.- nN. Nn. NH. NN. n>HoHnamN .HN
Hoo. nN. No. Hoo. NN. Hoo. u N
o.H oH.- oN. Nn. No. on. suns .oN
Hoo. NN. NN. HN. Nn. u N
o.H No. no. HH. Ho. naoHNHHnN .NN
Hoo. Noo. on. NH. u N
o.H NN. No. nH. Hsmuona .NN
Hoo. NH. Noo. n N
o.H nH. NN. eHoneenmaNN .NN
Hoo. NH. u N
o.H NH. anmz .NN
Hoo. u N
o.H HaacmaHaamN .oN
oHom onaom
NN NN NN HN oN NN NN NN NN oN

 

oHom onEom

EouH oHHmncoHuNoao

 

 

.NuoonoaM on2 Mom whammmz mesmEHomuom oHoM Hoodoo Mo>HmoHom

mSu co mEmuH amm3uom mucoHonmmoo aOHumHmHHoo unmeoz uosoonm Gemummm

.MM mHHMH

 

 

UQDCNUCOU mm mNan

228

 

 

Nn. NH. NH. Noo. NN. nN. nn. No. oN. No. a N

Ho. NH. NH. nN. No. No. No. HN. HH. NN. oaeNHNaoo-NHmN .NN

no. NH. NH. NN. Noo. No. Nn. No. No. HH. u N

NN.- NH.- nH.- no.- NN.- NN.- Ho. NN.- NH.- NH.- eHanaNo .NN

Ho. Ho. nH. NN. Hoo. NN. oN. NH. No. oN. u N

oN.- oN.- nH.- No.- NN.- No. oo. NH.- NH.- HH.- naeHoHNan .nN

nN. nH. Nn. NN. oN. NN. No. oH. NN. NH. u N

oH. NH.- Ho.- No.- No.- No.- HN. NH. no. NH.- m>HeHeeoaoo .NN

NN. No. No. Nn. No. Nn. Ho. on. oN. NH. u N

No.- NN.- NN. Ho.- NN.- Ho.- oN. No. NH.- nH.- n>HnnnaNN< .NN

NN. No. No. Noo. NN. Nn. NH. NH. Nn. Noo. u N

No. NN. HN. nN. oH. No. nH. NH. Ho. NN. eaeoammmoaH .NN

NN. NN. Nn. NH. Nn. Nn. NN. Nn. NN. NH. u N

No.- oo. oo.- NH. No. Ho.- No.- No.- no. NH. HneHNeH .NN

NN. oN. NH. Ho. NN. NN. NN. Noo. NH. No. u N

No.- oo.- NH. oN. no. No.- No. HN. nH. NN. eHeNHHmmN .nN

No. nH. No. Hn. NN. NN. NN. on. No. Nn. u N

NH.- NH. NN. No. No.- No.- No. No. NN.- No. aanaHaoo .NN

NN. NN. No. NH. NN. Nn. No. NN. nn. nN. u N

HH. No. NN. NH. No.- No. NN. No. No.- oH. naoaaaam>o< .HN
mHoN Nan

NN NN NN HN oN NN NN NN NN oN

 

oHom onEom

EouH oHHmaaoHumoao

 

 

omaaHeaoo Nm NHNNN

 

 

 

HUQUCHUCOU mwnm mHnHme.

229

 

 

 

Hoo. NN. Noo. NH. No. noo. Hoo. NH. on. No. u N
o.H No. NN. NH. NH. nN. Nn. NH. No. NN. manoHNcoo-NHmN .NN
Hoo. No. Nn. Hoo. NN. NH. No. Hoo. No. u N
o.H NN. No. Nn. No.- NH. NN. Nn. HN. 6HanaNo .NN
Hoo. Noo. Ho. NN. No. Nn. NN. No. u N
o.H NN. HN. oH. NH. No. No. NN. naoHeHeam .nN
Hoo. No. Hn. Nn. oN. nN. NH. u N
o.H NN. No. No. oo.- oH. nH. eeHeHmemaeo .NN
Hoo. NN. NH. NN. Hoo. Hoo. u N
o.H No. NH. no.- Hn. Nn. m>HnnmaNN< .NN
Hoo. Hoo. NN. NH. Noo. u N
o.H Nn. HH. NH.- nN. eamoammmoaH .NN
Hoo. Ho. NH. Hoo. u N
o.H NN. NH. Hn. HnoHNeH .NN
Hoo. NN. No. u N
o.H No. NH. UHNNHHNNN .nN
Hoo. Noo. u N
o.H NN. aanaHaoo .NN
Hoo. u N
O.H msouducm>< .HN
mHoN ean
mHem man

 

 

omaaHuaoo Nm mHNNN

-muUdrfizm w—QEQK 0C9 chZ How OMDMQQZ mOCmEHOMHmm mHom Mwocmu Um>wmohmm
mfiu CO MENUH €003u0m mucmHUHmmmOU CONumHOMHOU uCOEOE uUDOOHm cowhwmm .MM mNomH

230

Hoo. NH. No. Hoo. no. NH. Hoo. Hoo. Ho. NH. u N
o.H No. NH. NN. NH. No.- Nn. NN. HN. No. meHHom .NN
Hoo. Hoo. Hoo. Hoo. NH. HH. no. NN. Hoo. u N
o.H NN. HN. nN. oH.- HH. NH. No.- NN. muncOHuommmm .NN
Hoo. Hoo. Hoo. NH. Hoo. Hoo. NH. HN. u N
o.H NN. NN. No. HN. NN. HH. No. mHucmo .NN
Hoo. Noo. NN. Ho. Hoo. No. Hoo. u N
o.H NN. No.- HN. NN. NH. Nn. 6>HHHnamN .HN
Hoo. NH. no. Hoo. NN. Hoo. u N
o.H HH. NH. nn. No.- NN. sans .oN
Hoo. no. No. oN. NH. u N
o.H NH. NH. No. No. NaeHNHHmN .NN
Hoo. Hoo. Nn. NN. u N
o.H NN. No. No. Hsmuone .NN
Hoo. NN. No. u N
o.H No. NH. eHonauNNENN .NN
Hoo. NN. u N
o.H No. unnz .NN
Hoo. u N

O.H HoucofiHucoM .ON
mHom onBom

 

 

NN NN NN HN oN NN NN NN NN oN ameH aaanaaeaaneao

 

mHom onEmh

 

 

 

 

.muoonnaM mHmBom Mam on2 How whammoz mocmsuomnom mHom Hoocoo Mm>Hmonm
on“ no maouH Gmoauom mucoHonmoou GOHumHouuoo unmaoz uoaoonm GoNHmmm .mm oHan

ooscHucoo Nm oHomN

 

 

 

 

231

 

 

 

No. No. No. Hoo. NN. NN. NN. no. nN. NN. u N

NH. nH. NH. NN. no. No.- No. NH. no. No. aamoHNaoo-NHeN .NN

oN. NH. No. NH. Noo. NN. NN. NN. No. NN. u N

No.- No.- nH. No. nN.- no.- No. No.- NH.- No.- enaneNo .NN

NH. HH. Nn. oN. Noo. oN. NN. NN. No. oN. u N

HH.- NH.- oo. No. NN.- No.- oN.- no.- NH.- No.- nsoHeHNan .nN

nN. Nn. No. NN. NH. Nn. nN. oH. NN. NN. u N

no. Ho. NH. No. No. Ho. No. NH. no.- No.- e>HeHemmaoo .NN

NN. No. Hoo. NN. No. NN. No. No. Nn. NN. u N

No. NH.- HN. No. NH.- no. oN. NH. No.- No.- m>HnnmaNN< .NN

No. no. No. Hoo. NH. NH. oN. No. Nn. Noo. u N

NH. NH. NH. on. oH. No. No. NH. No. NN. aamoamamoaH .NN

NN. NH. NH. No. No. N. NN. nH. NH. No. u N

No. HH. No. nH. NH. HH.- No.- oH. No. NH. HneHNeH .NN

Hn. NN. No. No. NH. Ho. Nn. Noo. No. No. n N

No. No. NH. NH. HH. HN.- Ho. NN. nH. NH. UHNNHHnmN .nN

NH. oH. Ho. oN. NN. NH. NN. no. Noo. No. a N

oH.- NH. HN. No. No. No.- No. NH. NN.- NH. manaHaeo .NN

Nn. HN. No. Ho. NN. NN. Nn. NN. NH. No. u N

Ho. No. nH. HN. No. No.- Ho.- No. No.- NH. naoaaaamaon .HN
mHoN man

NN NN NN HN oN NN NN NN NN oN

 

mHom mHmth

EmuH oHHmGCoHuNoao

 

 

omaaHecoo Nm mHNNN

 

omscHucoo Nm mHNmN

 

232

 

 

 

Hoo. Ho. Hoo. HH. Noo. Hoo. Hoo. No. No. Hoo. u N
o.H HN. NN. NH. NN. NN. NN. NH. nH. HN. eamoHNa o-NHNN .NN
Hoo. Hoo. Noo. Hoo. No. No. NN. Hoo. Hoo. u N
o.H NN. NN. Nn. NH. NH. No. Nn. NN. oHanaNo .NN
Hoo. Hoo. Noo. No. Noo. NN. NH. Hoo. u N
o.H NN. NN. NH. NN. No. oH. oN. naOHaHNan .nN
Hoo. Noo. noo. No. NN. No. Hoo. u N
o.H NN. NN. NH. No.- NH. NN. eaHaHanmaoo .NN
Hoo. Ho. No. Nn. Hoo. Hoo. u N
o.H HN. NH. No. Hn. NN. e>HnnmaNN< .NN
Hoo. Hoo. oN. HN. Hoo. u N
o.H oN. No. No. Nn. eamoanomoaH .NN
Hoo. Hoo. Noo. Noo. u N
o.H Nn. NN. NN. HNUHNoH .NN
Hoo. No. NH. u N
o.H nH. No. UHNNHHneN .nN
Hoo. Hoo. u N
o.H NN. HanaHaeo .NN
Hoo. u N
O.H NSOHSqu>M< .HN
oHoM onz
NN NN nN NN NN NN NN NN NN HN amuH naHnaaoHanmao
eHoN eHn:

 

 

 

neaaHaaeo NN eHNNN

.muommnsm mHmem How mudmmwz mocmEuomem wHOm MHHEmh om>NwUHmm
mfiu Co mEmuH cmm3udm mucmHUwamoo :oHumHmNHOU quEOE NUDMOHM comhmwm .OHM mHomH

233

 

 

 

Hoo. No. Nn. No. No. No. NH. No. NN. NH. u N
o.H HN. No.- NN. oN. NN. nH. NH. No.- NH. HmaaHo .NN
Hoo. Nn. NN. NH. nN. NN. NN. no. nN. u N
o.H oo.- no. NH. No.- no. No.- NN. oH. NHnez .NN
Hoo. NN. NH. nH. NN. No. Nn. Noo. n N
o.H No. NH. NH. No. NN. oo.- HN. eunaeeno .NN
Hoo. No. Noo. No. no. nN. NH. n N
o.H oN. HN. NN. NN. no. NH. NaHaeoHo .oN
Hoo. Ho. NH. No. Noo. No. a N
o.H oN. NH. NN. NN. NN. amenaNnHm .Nn
Hoo. Ho. Hoo. NN. Ho. u N
o.H NN. Nn. No. oN. HnoHoez .Nn
Hoo. No. oN. HN. u N
o.H NH. No. No. nuannnnm .Nn
Hoo. oN. NN. n N
o.H oo.- No.- noano .nn
Hoo. Noo. u N
o.H NN. amaoHHNo .Nn
Hoo. u N
o.H annHo .Hn
mHem mNHs
mHom eNHs

 

 

 

 

.muooMnDM mHmEom Mom munmmoz oofimfihomuom oHom NHHEmm oo>HooHom
onu no NamuH amo3uom muaoHonmmoo COHumHoHHou ucoEoz uofiMOHm nowumom

.OHm OHLNH

poacHucoo on NHNMN

234

 

 

 

no. NN. oN. NN. NN. nN. NH. NN. NN. No. u N
NN. no.- HH. No. No. No. nH.- No. No. NN. NmNHao .NN
HN. HH. Nn. No. Nn. HN. Ho. NN. Hn. oH. u N
No.- NH. No.- oN. No.- No.- oN.- No.- No. NH. emu .NN
Nn. HN. no. NN. No. No. NH. Nn. oH. Hoo. u N
Ho. HH. NN. No. NH. nN. NH. No. NH. on. emoHeoam .NN
NH. NH. nN. oH. Nn. nN. nH. NN. HH. nH. u N
NH.- NH.- No. NH. oo. No. nH.- No. NH.- nH.- NNN .nN
NN. nN. No. No. NN. nN. Nn. NH. No. Hoo. u N
No. No. NN. NH. No.- No. oo. NH.- HN. oN. neanaanaH .NN
NN. Noo. nN. NH. NH. NN. No. oH. No. NN. u N
oH.- HN. oH. NH. NH. no.- oN.- NH. NN. No. NaaooN .HN
NN. NN. NN. NN. NN. NN. No. NH. no. Nn. u N
no. HH.- No.- no.- no. no. HN.- NH. NN.- Ho. mnaoa-aNaom .Nn
NH. No. NN. Noo. No. nn. NH. NH. NN. Hn. u N
NH. NH. oH. NN. NN. No. NH. NH. No.- No.- aooH .Nn
Nn. HN. No. No. oH. no. HH. Nn. No. Noo. u N
oo.- No.- HN. HN. NH. NN. NH. oo. NN. HN. aoHaneoH .Nn
oH. NH. HN. No. NN. NH. oN. HN. Nn. No. u N
NH.- NH. NN.- NN. No.- nH. No.- No.- Ho.- NN. maHao .on
oHom Mamomsm
NN NN NN oN Nn Nn Nn nn Nn Hn
amuH oHHNGGOHuNoao
mHeN mNHs

 

 

 

omaaHaaoo on eHHNN

omscHucoo on mHNme

235

 

 

Hoo. nH. NN. Nn. Ho. NN. oN. no. NN. Nn. u N
o.H NH. oH. Ho.- oN. No. No. nN.- no. Ho. nNNHao .NN
Hoo. No. No. No. no. NN. NN. No. Noo. u N
o.H NH. HN. HN. nN. no. no. NN. NN. uno .NN
Hoo. NH. NH. No. nn. NN. Hoo. NN. n N
o.H NH.- NH. NN. No. no.- HN. No.- amoH>oam .NN
Hoo. nH. No. No. NH. NN. oH. u N
o.H NH. NH.- HN. NH. no.- NH. me .nN
Hoo. HN. NN. NH. NN. Noo. n N
o.H HH.- HH. NH. No. nN. nuanaanaH .NN
Hoo. NN. NN. No. NH. u N
o.H No.- no.- NN. nH.- noaooN .HN
Hoo. Nn. Nn. HN. u N
o.H No.- Ho. HH.- mnaoa-amaom .Nn
Hoo. Nn. NH. u N
o.H Ho. NH. xeeH .Nn
Hoo. nN. u N
o.H oo.- cOHeneoH .Nn
Hoo. u N
o.H 6>Hao .on
oHom Mcmomsm
NN NN NN nN NN HN Nn Nn Nn on

 

oHom Mamomsm

EmuH ouHmaGOHummdo

 

 

 

 

NeaaHeaeo on mHNmN

wfiu CC mEQuN CCCBLQI muCCMmeMcCU CCNNQHQLLCU LUZTOLQ CCMHNOR .HHM GNOME

HOO. HOO. MM. HM. M«. MO. HM. N«. NN. NN. n M

 

o.H NN. No. No.- No.- NN.- No. Ho.- No.- No.- amaaHo .NN
Hoo. NN. oH. NH. No. NH. Nn. No. HN. u N
o.H No. NH.- NH. NH.- NH. No. oN. HH. NHnnz .NN
Hoo. nN. NN. Hn. HN. Noo. NN. No. u N
o.H No. No. No. No. nN. no. oN. manaonmo .NN
Hoo. no. NN. NN. NN. No. nN. u N
o.H NN. No. no. no. NN. No.- NaHNueHo .oN
Hoo. no. NH. Nn. Noo. NN. u N
o.H NN. NH. Ho. NN. HH. amenaNnHm .Nn
Hoo. Nn. No. No. No. u N
o.H Ho. NN. NH. NH. HneHomz .Nn
Hoo. oN. NN. nN. u N
o.H No.- NN.- oH.- meannnmm .Nn
Hoo. HH. NN. u N
o.H NH. oH. noano .nn
Hoo. Hoo. u N
o.H Nn. eenoHHeo .Nn
Hoo. n N
o.H aNNHo .Hn
oHoN eNHz
NN NN NN oN Nn Nn Nn nn Nn Hn

 

 

EmuH oHHmaGOHumono
mHom oMHz

 

 

.muooMoDM on2 mo ousmmo: mocmahomumm oHom NHHEmm Mo>Hmonm
oSu so NBouH amosuom mucoHonwooo GOHumHmHHOO uoDMOHm coaummm .HHm oHomH

omacHecco HHN mHNmN

 

 

 

7
MN .MO. M«. MN. M«. MH. MH. «H. NN. N«. N«. u M
HN. OO. MO. HO. MH. NH.: MH.: MO.: MO. HO. momHHO .MM
NH. MH. MN. MM. NN. MO. M«. HM. MH. MH. u M
MH. «H. NO. MO.: HH.: MH.: HO. NO. MH. NH. Hmo .NM
NOO. OH. MO. HH. MO. OM. MH. MH. MO. HH. u M
NM. NH. MN. MH. NN. NO. NH. «H. HN. NH. HoMH>oum .MM
HO. NOO. M«. MO. NN. MM. NH. NM. ««. HN. u M
HM.n NM.: HO.: MH. OH. «O.u MH.: MO.: NO.u HH.: xoM .«M
MN. MM. «N. ««. MH. ON. MM. N«. o«. MO. n M
MO. MO. MO. No.u «H. HH.: «O. HO.: MO. HN. moamudmcH .NM
MH. MM. MO. MM. MN. OH. MO. HH. MH. N«. u M
NH. «O. MN. «O. MO.: NH.u MH. MH. «H.u MO.u muuoam .HM
MH. HH. MO. OH. ON. NM. HM. NM. MN. NM. u M
NH.- NH.- nN. NH. NH. No. No.- no. No. no.- enaoa-eNaoN .Nn
MN. MO. ON. MM. «O. ««. MM. HM. MH. NM. u M
NO.: MH. HH. «O.u MN. NO. MO. NO. «H. MO.u HooH .M«
M«. MH. MO. M«. MO. M«. MM. MO. NO. ««. n M
NO.u MH. HN. OO. MN. NO. «0.: HN. ON. NO. cOHumooH .M«
««. OM. o«. NH. ON. MN. H«. MM. MN. MH. n M
NO. NO. MO. MH.: NH.u OH.: MO.: «O.u MO. MH. o>HHO .o«
oHom Manamam
MM MM MM OM M« N« M« «« N« H«
EmuH mHHNGGOHuNoSO
oHom oMHz

 

 

 

omsaHuaoo HHN eHNNN

omSGHuCOU HHm mHomH

238

 

 

HOO. MO. NM. N«. MH. N«. NN. N«. MM. NH. n M
O.H NN. MO.- MO. NH. NO. MO.- HO.- MO. NH. NoNHHO .MM
HOO. MH. OM. «O. NN. o«. m«. MN. NO. u M
O.H «H. NO. «N. MO.- «O. NO.- MO. MN. HMO .NM
Hoo. nn. NH. oN. NN. oN. Noo. Nn. n N
O.H NO.: MH. NO. NO. NO.- MM. OO. HmOH>oum .MM
Hoo. NN. NN. NH. HH. NN. no. u N
o.H No. No. NH. NH. No. nN.- me .nN
Hoo. nN. nN. NN. Nn. NH. u N
o.H oo.- oH.- no. Ho. NH. moanupncH .NN
Hoo. oN. nn. nn. NH. u N
O.H OO. NO.- NO. MH.- Nouomm .HM
Hoo. HH. HN. nN. n N
o.H NH.- No.- No.- mnaoa-aNaom .Nn
HOO. MO. M«. u M
o.H nN. oo.- xooH .Nn
Hoo. NN. u N
o.H No. aoHunooH .Nn
HOO. u M
o.H m>HHo .on
mHQm Mcmomnm
NN NN NN nN NN HN Nn Nn Nn on

 

oHoM Mcmomam

aouH oHHmcGOHumoao

 

 

oeaaHaaeo HHm mHNNN

any Co NEouH CooBOoM muCoHonwoou coHumHoHMOOaucmEmz mw:oMuw :Mmemm .NHM mHomN

 

 

239

 

 

 

Hoo. Hoo. Nn. NH. NH. NN. NH. NH. NN. NN. u N
o.H NN. No. oH. oH. No. oH. No. No.- no. emaaHo .NN
Hoo. NN. NN. oH. HH. oN. Nn. Ho. nH. u N
o.H No. No.- NH. HH.- No. No.- HN. oH. NHnmz .NN
Hoo. nN. nH. NH. HN. Hoo. Nn. noo. u N
o.H No. oH. No. No. HN. No. NN. eunaoumo .NN
Hoo. Ho. Ho. No. No. No. NN. u N
o.H HN. NN. NH. nH. NH. no. NaHauoHo .oN
Hoo. Noo. oH. No. Hoo. No. a N
o.H NN. NH. nH. NN. NH. neonaNnHm .Nn
Hoo. No. Hoo. NH. Noo. u N
o.H NH. NN. oH. nN. HnoHomz .Nn
Hoo. NN. Nn. Nn. n N
o.H No. No. Ho.- maannnmm .Nn
Hoo. NN. on. u N
o.H No. No. nouno .nn
Hoo. Hoo. u N
o.H NN. amaoHHNo .Nn
Hoo. u N
o.H eNNHo .Hn
mHom mNHs
NN NN NN oN Nn Nn Nn nn Nn Hn aeeH mannaaeaunnao
mHeN anz

 

 

.muoonndm onEom Mam on2 How ousmmoz oocmauomuom oHoM NHHSmm Mo>HooHom
map so mamuH amo3uom NuaoHonmooo coHHMHoHHoo unoaoz uoaooum coNumom .NHm oHMMH

 

 

240

 

 

 

 

MOO. M«. MH. MM. MO. M0. M0. M«. MH. NH. u M
NN. NO.| MO. MO. MH. HO.: MH.: 00. MO. HH. mmeHO .MM
OM. MO. M«. MO. MM. «H. HO. M«. ON. MO. n M
00.: MH. 00. MH. MO.u OH.u NN.: NO.: MO. NH. HmO .NM
M0. N0. MOO. «H. N0. M0. M0. MH. NO. NOO. u M
NH. «H. «N. OH. ON. MH. MH. MO. MH. NN. HmOH>oum .MM
HO. MOO. N«. MO. MM. M«. NO. M«. MH. HH. n M
NN.: NN.: NO. MH. «0. HO. «H.n 00.: HH.: HH.: NmM .«M
MH. MN. MO. MH. OM. MM. ««. MN. MO. HOO. u M
MO. MO. NH. OH. MO. MO.: HO. NO.u «H. «M. mocmunmfiH .NM
M«. NO. «O. MH. NN. MH. MN. «0. NH. M«. u M
OO.| ON. NH. MO. MO. OH.| MO.| MH. MO. HO. munomm .HM
NM. OH. HN. M«. MH. «M. «O. NN. «N. o«. u M
MO.u NH.: MO. HO. MO. «O. MH.: NO. NO.u NO.: mmsoanswnom .M«
MM. MO. MH. MO. NOO. M«. MH. «H. N«. MN. u M
«0. MH. HH. MH. MN. NO. OH. OH. NO. MO.| HUGH .M«
M«. NM. HO. NH. HO. MO. «N. NH. HO. MO. n M
HO.I MO. HN. HH. NN. MH. NO. HH. HN. MH. GOHUQUOH .N«
MH. HH. MM. MO. NN. MN. MN. MN. «M. MO. n M
OH.1 NH. MO.| MH. MO.| MO. MO.I MO.| «0. MH. m>HHD .0«
mHoN Nanonam
mHom QMHB

 

 

neaaHoaeo NHN eHana

241

 

 

 

Hoo. No. Nn. NN. Noo. HN. NN. HH. oN. HN. n N
o.H oN. No. No.- NN. No. No. NH.- No. No. NNNHao .NN
Hoo. No. oH. Hoo. No. NH. NN. No. Hoo. u N
o.H nH. NH. NN. NH. No. No. NH. NN. ano .NN
Hoo. NN. No. No. oN. NN. Hoo. NN. u N
o.H No.- nH. NH. No. No.- NN. No.-. amoHaeam .NN
Hoo. NH. NN. oH. No. Nn. Nn. u N
o.H No. No.- NH. nH. Ho. Ho.- NNN .nN
Hoo. NN. NN. NN. NN. Noo. u N
o.H No.- No. no.- no. NN. neanaanaH .NN
Hoo. on. Hn. No. No. u N
o.H No.- No.- nH. nH.- nanomN .HN
Hoo. NN. Hn. nN. u N
o.H No.- No.- No.- anaoa-aNaom .Nn
Hoo. No. NH. u N
o.H NH. No. xeeH .Nn
Hoo. Nn. u N
o.H Ho.- aOHenooH .Nn
Hoo. u N
o.H maHao .on
oHoM Mamnmsm
NN NN NN nN NN HN Nn Nn Nn on

 

oHom Mcmomsm

EmuH mHHmcGOHuNoso

 

 

omacHaaoo NHN eHNNN

APPENDIX F

Factor Analysis of Questionnaire Data

243

Table F1. Varimax Rotated Factor Loadings of Questionnaire
Items Associated with Factor 1 ("Ideal Family-
Role Concept")

 

 

 

 

 

 

Questionnaire

Construct Item Score
Ideal Family Role Concept

(Wife Role) 96. Meals .87
(Husband Role) 95. Provider .82
(Husband Role) 83. Live .77
(Wife Role) 81. Clean .73
(Wife Role) 98. Dinner .73
(Husband Role) 97. Car .65
(Wife Role) 90. Clothing .61
Ideal Gender Role Concept

(Male Role) 62. Dominant .60
Ideal Family Role Concept

(Wife Role) 87. Medical .60
(Husband Role) 80. Drive .56
(Wife Role) 82. Children .55

Perceived Family Role Performance

 

 

 

(Husband Role) 55. Provider .52
Ideal Gender Role Concept
(Male Role) 72. Aggressive .47
Ideal Family Role Concept
(Husband Role) 92. Insurance .47
(Wife Role) 84. Cards .46

Perceived Family Role Performance
(Husband Role 43. Live .45

 

 

 

 

 

244

Table Fl. Continued
Questionnaire

Construct Item Score
Ideal Family Role Concept
(Wife Role) 93. Decorate .41
(Husband Role) 94 Sex .41
(Wife Role) 88. Playmates .37
(Husband Role) 90. Rough-House .37
Ideal Gender Role Concept
(Male Role) 69. Independent .33
(Male Role) 73. Competitive .30

 

73

—21 _All items below the broken line are not accepted as

significantly associated with the factor (p i .40).

o. V-I _
‘V u
f
1

“may. a
.I -
'1
t

245

Table F2. Varimax Rotated Factor Loadings of Questionnaire
Items Associated with Factor 2 ("Ideal Gender
Role Concept")

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Questionnaire
Construct Item Score
Ideal Gender Role Concept
(Female Role) 77. Affectionate .81
(Female Role) 70. Warm .77
(Female Role) 71. Sensitive .73
(Female Role) 65. Sympathetic .68
(Female Role) 60. Sentimental .63
(Female Role) 75. Gentle .61
(Male Role) 61. Adventurous .57
(Female Role) 63. Neat .57
(Male Role) 67. Logical .53
(Male Role) 69. Independent .52
(Female Role) 78. Polite .52
(Male Role) 64. Realistic .46
(Male Role) 79. Self-confident .44
(Male Role) 76. Dynamic .43
Ideal Family Role Concepp
(Husband Role) 80. Drive .37
Ideal Gender Role Concept
(Male Role) 72. Aggressive .35
Perceived Gender Role Performance
(Male Role) 24. Realistic .34
Ideal Family Role Concept
(Wife Role) 93. Decorate .33
(Wife Role) 84. Cards .31
Key :

- - - All items below the broken line are not accepted as
significantly associated with the factor (p:i.40).

, . m

Table F3. Varimax Rotated Factor Loadings of Questionnaire

Items Associated with Factors 3, 4, and 5.

246

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Questionnaire
Construct Item Score
Received Gender Role Performance
(Male Role) 36. Dynamic .67
(Male Role) 21. Adventurous .66
(Male Role) 31. Aggressive .61
(Male Role) 22. Dominant .54
(Male Role) 32. Competitive .44
(Male Role) 33. Ambitious .34
Received Family Role Performance
(Wife Role) 58. Dinner .32
Factor 4 ("Nurturance")
Questionnaire
Construct Item Score
Perceived Gender Role Performance
(Female Role) 37. Affectionate .81
(Female Role) 29. Warm 68
(Female Role) 20. Sentimental .38
(Female Role) 35. Gentle .36
Factor 5

Construct Questionnaire

Item Score
Ideal Gender Role Concept
(Male Role) 75. Competitive .66
(Male Role) 74. Ambitious .65
(Male Role 67. Logical. .38

 

’ .C ‘Jml.

 

 

247

Table F3 Continued

 

 

Questionnaire
Construct Item Score

 

Perceived Gender Role Performance

 

(Male Role) 33. Ambitious .32

 

1:22:

- - - All items below the broken line are not accepted as
significantly associated with the factor (p i .40).

.9?”

 

248

Table F4. Varimax Rotated Factor Loadings of Questionnaire

Items Associated with Factors 6, 7, and 8.

 

 

Factor 6 ("Lock")

 

 

 

 

 

. EH37

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Questionnaire

Construct Item Score
Ideal Family Role Concept

(Husband Role 85. Lock .63
Perceived Family Role Performance

(Husband Role) 45. Lock .62
Ideal Family Role Concgpt

(Husband Role) 88. Playmates .30

Factor 7 ("Children")
Questionnaire

Construct Item Score
Perceived Familprole Performance

(Wife Role) 42. Children .81
(Wife Role) 41. Clean .37
Ideal Familleole Concept

(Wife Role) 82. Children .36

Factor 8 ("Decorate")
Questionnaire

Construct Item Score
Perceived Family Role Performance

(Wife Role) 53. Decorate .74
Ideal Family Role Concept

(Wife Role) 93. Decorate .52

 

 

Table F4 Continued

249

 

 

 

 

 

Questionnaire
Construct Item Source
Perceived Family Role Performance
(Husband Role) 51. Sports .35
(Wife Role) 44. Cards .33
Key :

- - - All items below the broken line are not accepted as
significantly associated with the factor (p i .40).

 

250

Table F5. Varimax Rotated Factor Loadings of Questionnaire

Items Associated with Factors 9, 10

and 11.

 

 

Factor 9 ("Medical")

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Questionnaire

Construct Item Score
Perceived Family Role Performance
(Wife Role) 47. Medical .75
Ideal Family Role Concept
(Wife Role) 87. Medical .47
Perceived Family Role Performance
(Wife Role) 44. Cards .44

Factor 10

Questionnaire

Construct Item Score
Ideal Gender Role Concepp
(Female Role) 66. Tactful .64
Ideal Family Role Concept
(Husband Role) 94. Sex .35
(Wife Role) 84. Cards .33
(Wife Role) 88. Playmates .33

Factor 11

Questionnaire

Construct Item Score
Ideal Family Role Concept
(Husband Role) 99. Crises .77
Perceived Family Role Performance
(Husband Role) 59. Crises .60
Key:

- - - All items below the broken line are not accepted as

significantly associated with the factor

(p < .40).

251

Table F6. Varimax Rotated Factor Loadings of Questionnaire
Items Associated with Factors 12, 13, and 14.

 

 

Factor 12 ("Bipolar9)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Questionnaire
Construct Item Source
Perceived Gender Role Performance
(Female Role) 23. Neat .61
Perceived Family Role Performance
(Wife Role) 56. Meals -.56
(Husband Role) 45. Lock .32
Ideal Gender Role Concept
(Female Role) 75. Gentle .31
Factor 13 ("Considerate")
Questionnaire
Construct Item Source
Perceived Gender Role Performance
(Female Role) 25. Sympathetic .67
(Female Role) 26. Tactful .65
(Female Role) 38. Polite 54
Ideal Gender Role Concept
(Female Role) 65. Sympathetic .32
Factor 14
Questionnaire
Construct Item Source
Perceived Family Role Performance
(Husband Role) 57. Car .84
Husband Role 40. Drive .30
Key:

- - - All items below the broken line are not accepted as

significantly associated with the factor (p 5

.40).

252

Table F7. Varimax Rotated Factor Loadings of Questionnaire
Items Associated with Factors, 15, 16, and 17.

 

 

Factor 15

 

("Perceived Husband Family Role Performance")

Questionnaire
Construct Item Score

 

Perceived Family Role Performance

(Husband Role) 52. Insurance .66
(Husband Role) 40. Drive .43
(Wife Role) 41. Clean .39

Ideal Gender Role Concept
(Male Role) 79. Self-confident .33

 

Perceived Family Role Performance
(Husband Role) 51. Sports -.31

 

Factor 16 ("Rough-housefi)

 

Questionnaire
Construct Item Score

 

Perceived Family Role Performance

 

 

(Husband Role) 49. Rough-house T74
Factor 17
Questionnaire
Construct Item Score

 

Ideal Family Role Concepp
(Husband Role) 91. Sports .54

 

Perceived Family Role Performance
(Husband Role) 54. Sex .33

 

Ideal Gender Role Concept
(Female Role) 63. Neat .31

‘Tmmmw

253
Table F7 Continued

 

Questionnaire
Construct Item Score

 

 

Perceived Family Role Performance
(Husband Role) 51. Sports .30

 

132$

- - -All items below the broken line are not accepted as
significantly associated with the factor (p i .40).

 

 

 

254

Table F8. Varimax Rotated Factor Loadings of Questionnaire
Items Associated with Factors 18, 19 and 20.

 

Factor 18 ("Clothing”)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Questionnaire
Construct Item Score
Perceived Family Role Performance
(Wife Role) 50. Clothing .60
Ideal Family Role Performance
(Wife Role) 90. Clothing .36
(Wife Role) 84. Cards .33
Factor 19 ("Sensible")
Questionnaire
Construct Item Score
Perceived Gender Role Performance
(Male Role) 27. Logical .73
(Male Role) 24. Realistic .47
Perceived Family Role Performance
(Husband Role) 43. Live .43
Factor 20
Questionnaire
Construct Item Score
Perceived Gender Role Performance
(Female Role) 30. Sensitive .71
(Male Role) 28. Independent .53
(Female Role) 20. Sentimental .49
(Male Role) 21. Adventurous .31
Key :

- - - All items below the broken line are not accepted as
significantly associated with the factor (P i .40).

 

 

 

255

Table F9. Varimax Rotated Factor Loadings of Questionnaire
Items Associated with Factors 21 and 22.

 

 

Factor 21 ("Dinner")

 

Questionnaire
Construct Item Score

 

Perceived Family Role Performance

 

 

(Wife Role) 58. Dinner .69
............................... 1
Ideal Family Role Concept F"
(Wife Role) 98. Dinner .37

3..

Factor 22 (”Playmates")

 

 

 

Questionnaire
Contruct Item Score
Ideal Family Role Concept
(Wife Role) 88. Playmates .49

Perceived Family Role Performance

 

(Wife Role) 48. Playmates .32

Ideal Family Role Performance

 

(Wife Role) 93. Decorate .30

 

K.;-21:

- - - All items below the broken line are not accepted as
significantly associated with the factor (p 3 .40).

"IIIINIIII