OVERDUE FINES: 25¢ per day per item RETUMIMS LIBRARY MATERIALS: N Place in book retum to may charge from circulation recon SEX ROLE DIFFERENTIATION AND EQUALITY IN A JOB- SHARING FAMILY: A PARTICIPANT OBSERVATION BY Marsha Leah Boratynski A DISSERTATION Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Department of Family Ecology 1980 ABSTRACT SEX ROLE DIFFERENTIATION AND EQUALITY IN A JOB- SHARING FAMILY: A PARTICIPANT OBSERVATION BY Marsha Leah Boratynski Equality between the sexes has become an American ideal. Although married women's roles have changed toward more participation in the paid labor force, married men have not increased their work in the home. This imbalance has resulted in work overload for married working women. The work-sharing family is a new American family structure in which the total family work (paid work and homemaking work) is shared and each spouse assumes tasks traditionally assigned to the Opposite sex. Each spouse also engages in part-time (16 to 28 hours a week) paid work. Descriptive information useful to persons interested in work-sharing families is needed because this family struc- ture is so new in that it incorporates major changes in male and female roles, and because there are no prescribed role structures for such work-sharing families and members must create their own structures. Marsha Leah Boratynski In this study participant observer methodology was used to obtain a holistic description of a job-sharing family. A job-sharing family is a type of work-sharing family in which spouses divide the work load of one paid position. Spouses in this study shared a church pastor position. This study was based on Imig's (1977) expanded and operationalized version of Christensen's (1975) conceptual framework for analysis of sex role differentiation and equality. More information is needed about the relationship between differentiation and equality in families in order to promote greater equality. In addition, the conceptualiza- tion of and methodology for studying equality and differ- entiation in the family needed to become more refined and precise. Data were obtained on the job-sharing family's past history, future goals, physical environment, methods of organization, directions of sex role change, levels of equality and differentiation at work and at home and the bases of sex role differentiation. An observation schedule was designed by the researcher. This schedule provided quantifiable data on equality and differentiation in refer- ence to specific family related and work related behavioral categories. Sex role differentiation meant the degree to which behaviors were divided and carried out solely by one Spouse. Undifferentiation referred to the degree to which the behaviors were shared and carried out by both spouses. Marsha Leah Boratynski Inequality meant the extent to which spouses restricted each other's behavior in reference to specific categories. Equality referred to the absence of such restrictions. Direction of role change referred to the extent to which one sex partner assumed tasks traditionally belonging to the Opposite sex partner. The family (husband, wife, male child) was observed using the formal observation schedule for a total of 100 hours covering a two week Span of time in the summer of 1979 and a six week span of time in the fall of 1979. During these weeks, interviews were also conducted by the researcher with spouses in order to obtain pertinent data not collected in the observation schedule. The overall role pattern of their family situation was concluded to be undifferentiated and equal. The over— all structure of their work situation was concluded to be partially differentiated and equal. These role structures incorporated major changes in traditional male and female sex role behavior. It was concluded that increases in un- differentiation in family roles are probably positively correlated with increases in equality and that a certain level of sex role differentiation does not preclude equality. This family also reflected three societal trends predicted by Christensen: increased undifferentiation, increased equality between the sexes, and decreased cultural ascription as the basis for determining behavior. The participant Marsha Leah Boratynski observer methodology, the observation schedule, and Christensen's conceptual framework, with certain modifi- cations, were concluded to be apprOpriate for use in studying changing family structures. © COpyright by MARSHA LEAH BORATYNSKI 1980 DEDICATION To my husband, Fred D. Boratynski. iii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I wish to express my appreciation to my committee members, Dr. Margaret Bubolz, Dr. Donald Melcer, Dr. Marilyn Parkhurst, and Dr. Sheldon Cherney, for their excellent guidance and encouragement. Special gratitude is extended to the "Mead" family for their participation in this study. They taught me so much and were so very c00perative. I deeply respect and appreciate them for their willingness to share their lives so that others may benefit. I am very grateful to my husband for his constant support, respect, love, and encouragement. My appreciation is extended to my friends, Dr. Karen Blackman, Sagun Langhoff, Rev. Ms. Denise Tracy, and Betty Olson, for their support, encouragement and inspiration. Finally, I am especially grateful to my parents for teaching me to make my most positive dreams come true and for encouraging me to set high goals and to strive to attain them. I deeply appreciate their support. iv TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF TABLES . . . . . . . . . . . . LIST OF FIGURES. . . . . . . . . . . . Chapter I. INTRODUCTION AND CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK . . Background . . . . . . . . . . Problem . . . . . . . . . . . Purpose . . . . . . . . . . . Research Questions. . . . . . . . Nominal Definitions . . . . . . . Operational Definitions . . . . . . Conceptual Framework . . . . . . . Limitations of the Study. . . . . . II. REVIEW OF LITERATURE. . . . . . . . Participant Observer Methodology . . . Role Theory and Sex Roles . . . . . Work-Sharing and Job- -Sharing Families Changing Sex Roles in Organized Religion I I I O METHODOLOGY 0 O O O C O O O O O 0 Participant Observer Methodology: Selection, Validity and Reliability . . . . . Selection of a Family. . . . . . . Protection of Subjects . . . . Overview of Researcher Involvement With the Mead Family . . . . . . . . Development of Observation Instrument . Interviews . . . . . . . . . Preliminary Work Category Interview . Spouses' Reaction to Observation Schedule Data . . . . . . . . Page viii ix wwww M NH \lLflkOoh ab NOkOO‘U'IubNI-J H b O 40 44 47 48 53 67 69 69 Chapter IV. Self Anchoring Scale Questions . . Individual Life History Interview . Relationship History Interview . . Work Role Equality and Differentiation Interview . . . . . . . . Sex Role Classification of Family and Work Related Categories . . . . . . Data Analysis Procedures. . . . . DATA ANALYSIS AND REPORT OF FINDINGS . Life Histories . . . . . . . . Rob Mead . . . . . . . . . Ann Smith Mead . . . . . . . The Mead Family . . . . . . . Description of the Family Environment The Community. . . . . . . . The Church. . . . . . . The Organizational Structure of the Church . . . . . . . . . The Home . . . . . . . . . Family Organization . . . . . . Levels of Role Differentiation in the Situation 0 O O O O O O O 0 Family Role Differentiation by Category Family Family Role Differentiation: Summary . . Direction of Role Change in the Family Situation . . . . . . . Bases of Family Role Differentiation. Levels of Equality in the Family Situation . . . . . . . . . Family Situation Equality by Category. . Family Situation Equalty: Summary . Classification of Family Situation Using the Revised Christensen Model . . Levels of Role Differentiation in the Work Situation . . . . . . . vi Page 70 70 70 77 78 82 86 91 91 92 92 94 98 102 102 119 121 122 124 124 133 135 138 Chapter Work Role Differentiation Analysis by Category . . . . . . . . . Work Role Differentiation: Summary . Direction of Role Change in the Work Situation 0 I O O O O I O O Bases of Work Role Differentiation. . Levels of Equality in the Work Situation. Work Role Equality: Observation and Self- Report Data . . . . . . Work Situation Equality: Summary. . Classification of Work Situation Using Revised Christensen Model . . . . Shared Goals of Spouses . . . . Family Reactions to Being Studied . . Researcher' 5 Reaction to Personal Involvement in the Family Studied . V. SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND IMPLICATIONS . Summary. . . . . . . . Conclusions . . . . . . Implications for Theory . . Implications for Methodology. Implications for Families. . Implications for Socialization and Education . . . . . . . . . Implications for Institutionalized Religion. . . . . . . . . . Suggestions for Further Research . . Important Questions Lacking Research Tools for Investigation. . . . . APPENDICES Appendix A. Summarized Raw Data . . . . . . . B. Self-Anchoring Scale Questions (Cantril, 1963) o o o o o o o o o o o BIBLIOGRAPHY o o o o o o o '0 o o o 0 vii Page 139 146 147 148 150 151 154 155 158 163 165 167 167 174 179 181 182 185 186 186 187 188 191 193 Table 13. 14. 15. LIST OF TABLES Chronological Schedule of Researcher Involve- ment and Nature of Involvement . . . . . Preliminary Interrater Agreement . . . . . Family Related and Work Related Categories and Descriptions. . . . . . . . . . Symbols Used to Code Spouse Behavior on Observation Sheets . . . . . . . . . Interrater Agreement for Mead Family Observa— tions 0 I O O O O O O O O O O 0 Traditional Sex Role Classification of Family Related Categories . . . . . . . . . Traditional Sex Role Classification of Mead's Church Work Categories. . . . . . . . Family Role Differentiation Data: Frequencies and Percentages . . . . . . . . . . Family Equality Frequency Data. . . . . . Work Role Differentiation Frequencies . Work Role Equality Frequency Data. . . . . Family Situation Observation Frequencies From Most Frequently Observed to Least Frequently Observed O O O O O O O O O O O O Summarized Raw Data for Family and Work for Summer and Fall Observation Hours Combined . Summarized Raw Data for Family and Work for Summer Observation Hours . . . . . . . Summarized Raw Data for Family and Work for Fall Observation Hours. . . . . . . . viii Page 49 56 57 64 68 74 76 108 125 141 152 159 188 189 190 Figure 1. ll. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. LIST OF FIGURES Models of Sex Role Structure: Interrelationship Between Equality and Differentiation . . . Models of Partial Equality Combined with Partial Differentiation (An Elaboration of E from Figure l). . . . . . . . . . An Elaboration of the Christensen Model to Include Female Dominance . . . . . . . Elaboration of the Christensen Model to Include Female Dominance and Role Change Direction 0 O O O O O O O O O O 0 Observation Coding Sheet. . . . . . . . Sample of Observation Sheet Used to Code Mead FaIni 1y BehaVior O O O O O O O I O C First Floor of House . . . . . . . . Second Floor of House. . . . . . . . . Sample Weekly Schedule . . . . . . . . Direction of Role Change in the Family Situation . . . . . . . . . . . . Family Differentiation, Equality, and Role Change by Category . . . . . . . . Mead Family Role Pattern Symbolized . . . . Direction of Work Role Change . . . . . . Work Differentiation, Equality, and Role Change by Category . . . . . . . . . Work Role Pattern Symbolized . . . . . . Spouses' Ratings on Ten Step Ladders. . . . ix Page 15 18 20 21 63 66 95 96 103 122 137 138 149 156 157 164 CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION AND CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK Background The American family is in transition from the old stereotype of breadwinning father, homemaking mother, and dependent children. At present, only one in four families conforms to this image ("Saving the Family," 1978). A variety of social changes including the pill, abortion, new occupations, more working women, and the sexual equal- ity ideal have fostered the development of new or variant family forms which are considered to be healthy adaptations within a changing environment (Cogswell, 1975). Though the number of married working women has increased, this increase has not produced more equality in the family. For example, married women who work also tend to maintain their more traditional roles of housewife and mother with relatively little change reflected in male roles (Walker & Woods, 1976; Pleck, 1977). However, the emergence of a new balance between work and home for men and women has been predicted by several researchers (Veroff & Feld, 1970; Bernard, 1972; Safilios-Rothschild, 1975; Kanter, 1977). The work-sharing 1 family is presently considered a variant family form which incorporates major changes in male roles as well as female roles. In a work-sharing family the total family work is shared and each spouse takes on tasks traditionally assigned to the Opposite sex. The husband or wife may work in the same or different work places and combine their hours in various ways. Each works not less than 16 hours a week and not more than 28 hours a week. In 1971, the Rapoports correctly predicted an increase in dual-career families and recently (1976) pre- dicted an increase in work-sharing families. This pre- diction is partially based upon the assumption that work- sharing families will experience less strains than full- time dual-career families and will also enjoy numerous gains. Various recent publications (Leed, 1976; Nolen, Eddy: & Martin, 1977; "The Personnel Administrator," 1979; Meier, 1979) illustrate a trend toward the development of part- time careers for men and women which would allow the growth Of work-sharing families. Problem Since the work-sharing family only recently emerged in this country, little is known about it. There is a need for more information about this family structure since it incorporates such radical departures from tradi- tional family sex role behavior and is expected to increase in number in this country since it fosters a balance between work, home, and family for men and women. Descriptive data about this family structure are needed for understanding families and new family forms and for analyzing societal trends. In 1975, Gronseth studied work-sharing families in Norway and concluded that this variant form allows for a variety of combinations of work and family life and helps to foster a truer balance between the sexes in contrast to other family forms. Gronseth also claims that an essen- tial takeover by each spouse of tasks traditionally assigned to the opposite sex is necessary, though not sufficient for greater equality between the sexes. Couples consider- ing a work-sharing or job-sharing lifestyle could benefit from additional research on this family structure since unlike most other family structures, there are no prescribed sex role behaviors and couples must create their own role structures. This is difficult to do without role models. Christensen (1975) developed a conceptual framework for analyzing equality and sex role differentiation. Christensen disagrees with Gronseth and claims that equal- ity can be achieved and at the same time a level of sex role differentiation can be maintained. More information is needed about the relationship between equality and sex role differentiation in families in order to know what types of family role structure changes are necessary for achieving equality between the sexes. In addition, the concepts equality and role differentiation warrant further clarification before hypotheses can be tested using them. Instruments to measure levels Of sex role differentiation, equality, and changes in sex role structure need to be developed, tested and refined. Imig (1977) Operationalized Christensen's conceptual framework for use in a qualitative analysis of the role structure of a dual-career family using participant observer methodology. Imig discovered that the wife in the family she studied would not allow the husband to do various home- making activities he wished to do. As a result, Imig extended Christensen's framework to include female domi- nance and suggested that future researchers quantify the Christensen conceptual framework and expand it to include the extent to which males are taking on traditionally female tasks and females are taking on traditionally male tasks. Imig's (1977) study and suggestions for future research provided the foundation for this study of a work- sharing family in which spouses share the job of church pastor. Purpose This study was designed to provide in-depth infor- mation about a job-sharing family. The overall purposes Of this study were: 1. To examine and describe using participant observer methodology the role structure of a job- sharing family and the family's past history, future goals, methods of organization and physical environment in order to produce a holistic picture of this new family structure. To refine the conceptualization and methodology to obtain more precise observation and measurement of sex role differentiation and equality. To add the dimension of role change direction to Christensen's conceptual framework for analyzing sex role differentiation and equality. To provide information useful to persons inter- ested in work-sharing or job-sharing lifestyles. This study is based upon the assumption that vari- ant family forms including the work-sharing family will increase and that sexual equality is a valued American ideal that has not been attained in most families. Research Questions How do spouses organize to perform family related tasks and work related tasks? What are the levels of role differentiation in the family situation? In how many and in which categories of the family situation is the male assuming traditionally female tasks? In how many and in which categories of the family situation is the female assuming tradition- ally male tasks? 4. How is role differentiation determined in the family situation? 5. What are the levels of equality in the family situ- ation? 6. What are the levels of role differentiation in the work situation? 7. In how many and in which categories of the work situation is the male assuming traditionally female tasks? In how many and in which categories of the work situation is the female assuming traditionally male tasks? 8. How is role differentiation determined in the work situation? 9. What are the levels of equality in the work situ- ation? 10. What are the major themes or shared goals of the spouses? Nominal Definitions Social Structure refers to population distributions among social positions along various lines requiring dif— ferentiation among people. Horizontal Differentiation or nominal parameters are sub- categories with specific boundaries into which a popu- 1ation is divided. Rank order is not inherent in the subcategories, though it may be present. Examples include sex, religion, race, occupation, and place of residence. Vertical Differentiation or "graduated parameters" are subcategories into which a population is divided, which are arranged in hierarchical fashion according to the magnitude of the parameters involved. Rank order is inherent. Examples include age, education, income, prestige, power. Sex Roles are behavioral expectations lodged within the social structure that are differentiated according to sex or gender. Social Differentiation refers to the division of society into component parts and is an intrinsic part of the social structure. Social Positions are the patterned locations of people within the component parts of the social structure. Social Roles are the patterned behavioral expectations that adhere to social positions. Sex Role Differentiation refers to the distribution of role behavior based upon sex. Ascribed Roles refer to roles that are assigned by virtue of some characteristic the actor possesses and over which he/she has no control, such as age or sex. Role Behavior is conscious or unconscious behavior of members of a particular position, in accordance with, or in violation of, a given set of organizational norms that are relevant to the prevailing social structure. Equality is a situation in which either there are no restrictions upon valued positions and rewards, or the person's ascribed status which determines such restrictions is a relevant consideration. Inequality is the reverse of this situation. Dual-Career Family is a family in which both spouses pursue careers while at the same time maintaining a family life together (Rapoport & Rappoport, 1971). Work-Sharing Family is a family in which total family work is shared and each spouse takes over tasks tradition- ally assigned to the spouse of the opposite sex. The husband and wife may work in the same or different work places and combine their hours in various ways. Each works not less than 16 hours a week and not more than 28 hours a week (Gronseth, 1975). Job-Sharing is the dividing of a job by two individuals with each taking responsibility for half the total work--splitting the total work load of a single job (Dickson, 1975). Job-Sharing Family is a family in which spouses split the total work load of a single job and also share family work. It is one type of work-sharing family. Participant Observation is a characteristic blend or com- bination of methods and techniques involving some amount of genuinely social interaction in the field with the subjects of the study, some direct Observation of relevant events, some formal and much informal interviewing, and a degree of flexibility in the direc- tion the study takes (McCall & Simmons, 1969). Operational Definitions Equality is measured by the absence of restrictions on behavior placed by one spouse upon the other in a particular category. Evidence for the absence of restrictions is the lack of permission granting and permission seeking between spouses to perform behav- iors within a category and the lack of previously established restrictions. Lack of commanding and obeying between spouses in relation to performing behaviors within a category is other evidence of no restrictions. Inequality is measured by the presence of restrictions placed by one spouse upon the other on all behavior within a particular category. Evidence for the pres- ence of such restrictions is permission granting and permission seeking between spouses to perform all behavior within a particular category and/or the presence of previously established restrictions on all behavior within a category. Partial equality is measured by presence of partial restrictions on behaviors within a category placed by one spouse upon the other. Evidence for the presence of partial restriction is some permission granting and some permission seeking between spouses to perform 10 certain behaviors within a category and/or the presence of some previously established restrictions. Evidence for the presence of partial equality is also some commanding and obeying between spouses in relation to performing certain behaviors within a category. Female superordinate-male subordinate refers to categories in which the marily places restrictions on the Male superordinate-female subordinate refers to categories in which the marily places restrictions on the or female dominance female partner pri- male partner. or male dominance male partner pri- female partner. Sex role differentiation is measured by the observation of behaviors which are distributed according to sex. Differentiation refers to behavior categories which are only performed by one sex partner. Undifferentiation refers to behavior categories which are performed by both sex partners. Partial differentiation refers to behavior categories in which behaviors within the category are divided by activities, some of which are performed by one sex partner and some by the other. Conceptual Framework In response to the need for a reworking of the sociological theory of sex roles due to recent changes in male and female roles, Christensen (1975) has developed 11 a conceptual framework for studying sex role change. This study is based upon Christensen's framework. Christensen is careful to distinguish between dif- ferentiation and equality. He observes that social differentiation and sexual inequality are assumed to be the same by many researchers. Christensen disagrees and claims that differentiation does not have to be eliminated in order to have equality between the sexes. Some sex role differentiation is viewed by him as necessary due to bio- logical differences and the need for some structure to avoid unmanageable ambiguity and inefficiency. However, Christen- sen does perceive a need in this society for greater equal- ity between the sexes and less sex role differentiation. Christensen agrees that inequality often does occur with differentiation, though in contrast to Gronseth (1975), he believes it does not have to. Equality could and should be facilitated according to Christensen by more prestige attached to the traditional female role, more freedom of choice, and more role overlap. Christensen bases his framework on the work of Blau (1974), who defines social structure as population distributions among social positions along various lines. These positions affect people's role relations and social interactions. As a result, social structure requires dif- ferentiation among peOple. Blau also distinguishes between horizontal and vertical differentiation. Horizontal dif- ferentiation, or "nominal parameters," divide a population 12 into subcategories having explicit boundaries. Rank order is not inherent within these subcategories, though it may be present. Examples of nominal parameters include sex, religion, race, occupations, and place of residence. Vertical differentiation Blau labels "graduated parameters." Graduated parameters divide a pOpulation into subcategories which are arranged in hierarchical fashion according to the magnitude of the parameters involved. Rank order is inherent. Examples include age, education, income, pres- tige, and power. Horizontal differentiation or heterogeneity is the result of nominal parameters and vertical differentiation or inequality is the result of graduated parameters. In summary, social differentiation can be horizontal and ver— tical. Only the vertical type means inequality. Christensen's conceptual framework is based upon Blau's and is confined to the sex role structure. The focus is on patterned behavior across sex lines. Sex roles are defined as behavioral expectations lodged within the social structure that are differentiated according to sex or gender. Like Blau, Christensen considers social differ- entiation the division of society into component parts. Thus, social differentiation is viewed as an intrinsic part of social structure. Component parts may be arranged hori- zontally or vertically with respect to each other. Christensen defines social positions as the patterned locations of people upon these parts and social roles as 13 the patterned behavioral expectations that adhere to these positions. Positions may also be considered static or locational elements of role processes, and roles the dynamic or processual complements of positional locations. Sex roles are one type of social role and as with all role types, may be organized on either horizontal or vertical axes. Blau considers the sex factor a nominal parameter. Consequently, being female or male does not automatically put one in a subordinate or superordinate position, except when cultural imperatives are imposed. Based upon Blau, Christensen believes it is theoretically possible to elimi- nate inequality without eliminating sex role differentia- tion. He views this approach as more feasible than trying to develop a society entirely without sex role structure. Blau and Christensen agree that the sex parameter should be irrelevant for rank ordering and only valid for differ- entiating the respective sex roles on a horizontal plane. Christensen defines equality as the reverse of Rossi's (1975) definition of inequality. According to Rossi, a group may be said to suffer from inequality if its members are restricted in access to legitimate valued positions or rewards in society for which their ascribed status is not a relevant consideration. According to Christensen, equality is a situation in which either there are no restrictions upon valued positions and rewards, or 14 the person's ascribed status, which determines such restrictions, is a relevant consideration. Christensen, assuming equality and differentiation are separate concepts, has developed a model to show the various ways they might be interrelated (see Figure 1). In this model the equality-inequality structure and the differentiated-undifferentiated structure are superimposed upon each other. A horizontal bar is used to depict equal- ity since equality implies the total absence of superordi- nation and subordination. Inequality means the Opposite and is depicted by use of a vertical bar. The following are used to depict differential factors: a lined bar desig- nates the differentiated male role, a white bar designates the differentiated female role, and the shaded or black bar designates roles undifferentiated by sex or role over- lap. Model B is the only one which allows for varying the equality and differentiation factors at the same time. Christensen claims this model will come closest to empirical reality since the other models depict extremes. The top row of Figure 1 (A, B, C) assumes complete equality with the differentiation factor varying. The bottom row (G, H, I) assumes complete inequality with the differentiation factor varying. The left hand column (A, D, G) assumes complete differentiation with the equality factor varying. The right hand column (C, F, 1) assumes complete nondifferentiation with the equality factor 15 Degree of Role Differentiation Degree of Partially Role Differentiated Differentiated Undifferentiated Equality A C B Equal F-I-I: j a: — Equality; Roles Equality; Some role Equality; No role strictly defined overlap structure D F Partially Equal “\“ Partial equality; Partial equality; Partial equality; Roles strictly Some role overlap No role structure defined Unequal _. - Inequality; Roles Inequality; Some Inequality; No strictly defined role overlap role structure Figure 1. Models of Sex Role Structure: Interrelationship Between Equality and Differentiation. E Male role Horizontal axis = total equality B Female role Vertical axis = total inequality Source: H. T. Christensen, "Are Sex Roles Necessary?" Institute for the Study of Social Change, Department of Sociology and AnthIOpology, Purdue University, Institute Monograph Series No. 5, 1975. 16 varying. In every model shown except E one factor is varied while the other is held constant. The four corner cells (A, C, G, I) picture hypo— thetical combinations of the most extreme positions and are assumed by Christensen to be farthest from reality. They are included because they represent what Max Weber labels "ideal types." They are logical constructs which describe ultimate extremes and are used for orientation purposes in conceptualization and measurement. Though few cases are expected to fall in these extreme forms, their formulations can help give meaning to concrete situ- ations. Models B, D, F and H all assume some kind of abso— lute position and consequently Christensen views these also as ideal types, though more reachable than the corner models. In addition, models F and I represent a contra- diction of terms in that a superordinated-subordinated sex role structure along with the assumption that no sex role structure exists is an impossibility. They are maintained to preserve the symmetry of the scheme. Cell C does not represent a contradiction of terms because equality accord- ing to Christensen, does not preclude a nondifferentiated structure nor vice versa. Christensen claims his model is limited in that it only pictures the male in superordinated positions and does not picture the female in superordinated positions. The model is also limited in that the middle categories 17 for both factors (B, D, E, F, H) which are labeled parti- ally do not picture the full range of possible variability (see Figure 2). Finally, the model does not provide infor- mation about the quality of sex norms in terms of norm flexibility and the severity of sanctions imposed. For example, the bars in the partially differentiated cells could have been broken down into five segments as opposed to three including exclusively male, favored for male but permitted for both, permitted equally for males and females alike, favored for female but permitted for both, and exclusively female. Christensen, in applying his model to social change, makes some predictions. The first is a movement toward greater equality as illustrated by the tipping of the axis in the vertical to horizontal direction. His second prediction is the expansion of role overlap. This represents a breakdown of differentiation and means a merg- ing of the separate worlds of men and women. The third is a decline of cultural ascription to make room for greater individual choice. Imig (1977) operationalized Christensen's conceptual framework of equality and role differentiation for use in a participant Observer study of a dual-career family. Role behaviors were analyzed using a classification system of 15 categories of household tasks. Permission granting and permission seeking were used as determinants of inequality. Due to the discovery of some female dominance in family 18 Degree of Role Differentiation Degree of High Medium Low Role Differentiation Differentiation Differentiation Equality E 1 E2 E3 High Equality Medium Equality Low Equality Figure 2. Models of Partial Equality Combined with Partial Differentiation (An Elaboration of E from Figure 1). Source: H. T. Christensen, "Are Sex Roles Necessary?" Institute for the Study of Social Change, Department Of Sociology and AnthrOpOlogy, Purdue University, Institute Monograph Series No. 5, 1975. E Male role [:::] Female Role overlap 19 role behaviors, Imig extended Christensen's framework to include female superordination (see Figure 3). Spouses in Imig's study had achieved greater equality in roles related to their careers than in family roles. Family roles were partially differentiated with considerable role overlap and female dominance. Imig concluded in support of Christensen's premise that some sex role differentiation need not preclude the obtaining of sex role equality. As suggested by Imig (1977), this researcher has extended Christensen's model so that it also depicts the direction of sex role change or the extent to which the male is assuming traditionally female tasks and/or the female is assuming traditionally male tasks (see Figure 4). The symbol "Mf" means the male assumes traditionally female tasks and the symbol "Fm" means the female assumes tradi- tionally male tasks. The letter "n" represents the number of categories in which either the male assumes female tasks or the female assumes male tasks. In this study, work related activities and family related activities have been categorized and also identified as traditionally male, traditionally female, traditionally male and/or female, and traditionally both with some differentiation by activity. Data obtained on male and female behavior within work and family categories will provide the basis for deter- mining a figure for "n" in the model. Inequality Male Dominance Partial Equality Male Dominance Equality Partial Equality Female Dominance Inequality Female Dominance Figure 3. rsd nrs 20 Partially Differentiated Differentiated Undifferentiated A B C male dom male dom male dom ineq. _ __ ineq. ineq. rsd sro nrs Ld v\ \ partial eq./ma1e dam/rsd ”X partial eq./male dam/sro \ partial eq./male dom/nrs G l H I r—-; 1 5*: * equality, equality, equality, rsd sro nrs J ’ K f L l fem dom equal. fem dom equal. fem dom equal. partial rsd partial sro partial nrs M N 0 j fem dom fem dom fem dom ineq. __ _ ineq. ineq. rsd sro nrs = roles strictly defined sro = some role overlap = no role structure An Elaboration of the Christensen Model to Include Female Dominance (Imig, 1977). 21 Partially Differentiated Differentiated undifferentiated A B C f Fm Mf Fm Mf Fm Inequality M n n n n n n Male .1 F. Dominance male dom male dom male dom ineq. L_ ineq. ineq. rsd D E F Partial f Fm Mf Fm Mf Fm Equality M n n n n n n Male Dominance partial eq./male partial eq./male partial eq./ma1e dom/rsd dam/sro dom/nrs G l H I Mint—i 1m. (5*: * M ' F Mf Fm , fn mn n n Equality equality, equality, equality, rso sro nrs J L Partial an ’ n n an Fm Equal1ty n) Female ‘d‘sa' Dominance ' fem dom equal. fem dom equal. fem dom equal. partial rsd partial sro partial nrs M '—1 N O Inequality an an an Female _. P Dominance fem dom fem dom fem dom ineq. ineq. ineq. rsd sr Figure 4. Elaboration of the Christensen Model to Include Female ‘ Dominance and Role Change Direction. rsd = roles strictly defined Mf = Male assumes traditionally female sro = some role overlap tasks nrs = no role structure F a Female assumres traditionally male tasks n = Number of categories 22 Limitations of the Study The participant observer data used in this study are subject to three major limitations. The first is the reactive effect of the observer's presence on the behavior that is being observed. For example, family members may have made special preparations since they knew in advance when the researcher was coming and thus may have behaved differently than usual due to the researcher's presence. However, it is probably more difficult to do things differ- ently than usual than to say things differently than usual (Johoda, Deutsch & Cook, 1955). The second limitation is the possible distorting effects of selective interpretation on the observer's part. These may be due to the Observer's own role, personal characteristics and intellectual biases (McCall & Simmons, 1969). The third is that the observer is limited in ability to witness all relevant aspects of the phenomenon in question. In this study Observations covered a two week span of time in the summer and a six week span of time during the fall. Observations were scheduled to include various times of the day and days of the week. Participant observer methodological approaches are also limited due to lack of standardized tests of validity and reliability. However, the observation schedule devel- oped by the researcher for use in this study was assessed for interrater agreement using videotapes of family behavior before the Observations of this family began. Interrater 23 agreement was also assessed at the close of the observa- tions by placing two independent observers in the home of the family studied. A limitation of this particular study is that data related to the career setting were primarily self-report data and thus limited. In contrast, data related to the family situation were primarily observation data. Finally, the use of one unique family for this study limits general- izability, since there will be no information about inter- family differences in behavior. CHAPTER II REVIEW OF LITERATURE The literature review of this study includes four sections. In the first section, participant observer methodology is reviewed. The focus of the second section is on theoretical and conceptual issues related to roles in general and sex roles in particular. Work-sharing and job-sharing family literature are reviewed in the third section and changing sex roles in organized religion are examined in the last section. Participant Observer Methodology The first participant observer studies originated from the Chicago School of North American Sociology (Friedrichs & Ludtke, 1975). The expression participant observer was coined by Lindemann (1924), a sociologist from this school. He differentiated between an objective observer who approaches a culture from outside using interviewing as an instrument and a participant observer who researches a culture from within. The classical study using this methodology was done by Whyte (1961). Living in a part of Boston he called "Cornerville," he analyzed the relationships between two 24 25 groups of Italian immigrants: the "North Street Gang," and the "Italian Community Club." He made available detailed descriptions of his problems ranging from the role he assumed to how he recorded his results. He described city life from the viewpoint of the group members and also examined and analyzed group dynamics. Several researchers have used the participant observer methodology to study family life. In all of the following studies, the researchers involved themselves as closely as possible with the families, studied family members perceptions of themselves and their lives, and observed over an extended period of time in the family's natural environment. Komarovsky (1967) used the participant observer methodology to describe blue collar families and to investigate how social class influences marriage. Lewis (1959, 1966) used the methodology in two classical works: poor families in Mexico, and urban slum families in Puerto Rico. In both studies, he used detailed Observations of typical days in the life of a family, autobiographies of family members, typical conceptual categories, and the intensive study of family reactions to problems and crises. He selected OOOperative families and established personal ties with them to uncover more intimate data. He compared and contrasted the Mexican and Puerto Rican families as a way of testing and develOping his concept of the culture of poverty. 26 In 1973, Howell used the participant observer methodology to study poverty level blue collar families in the United States. The impetus fOr his work came from the needs of planners and policy makers to learn more about such families in order to create better public policy for these families. Howell kept a chronicle of events he observed by living in a working class suburb of Washington, D.C. during 1970—71. He intensely observed two families and analyzed and reported his results in Hard Living on Clay Street. He described in chronological for- mat the lives of each family over one year. In addition, he organized his data using seven general themes discovered in the process of the studies which characterized the families' lives. Finally, he developed a continuum rang— ing from "hard living" at one extreme to "settled living" at the other which allowed for a general classification of these families. Finally, Kantor and Lehr (1975) incorporated the participant Observer methodology as one of several research methods in a study designed to develOp descriptive theory of family themes and processes. The participant observer methodology was selected by them for the purpose of dis- covering role behaviors and role conceptions. The Rapaports (1977) contend that in selecting a method to study sex roles, internal validity is usually a problem because the area of sex roles is Often a sensi- tive issue for family members and is likely to arouse 27 defenses. As a result, survey methodology may not be most effective in uncovering truth in this area. Campbell (1957) and Blumer (1974) state that the demands of internal and external validity often contradict one another, and, when the two are in conflict, priority should be given to internal validity. Participant observer methodology favors internal validity and is thus a particularly appropriate methodology for use in studying sex roles. Imig (1977) used the participant observer method- ology along with Christensen's (1975) conceptual framework to produce a holistic, qualitative picture of the sex role structure of a dual-career family. Imig used a general, Open ended observation form to record behavioral informa- tion. The dimensions listed on the form included: action, who performed the action, who made the decision about the action, how action was carried out, and, for whom action was carried out. Imig took extensive notes using these forms. Imig also develOped a classification system of fifteen categories of family and household tasks prior to observations as a means of classifying the actions recorded. Additional information was obtained by use of interviews. Observations of the family were conducted over a six week span of time in the summer. Throughout the Observations Imig asked the family members to explain activities and role behavior patterns from their point of view so that family members' perspectives and researcher perspectives on role behavior could be compared and 28 discussed. Imig concluded that this methodology is appropriate for use in family studies and suggested the replication of her study with certain modifications using other variant family forms for contrast purposes. Imig's work marks a departure from previous participant observer studies of families in that the focus is on an innovative family form which has developed in response to the sexual equality ideal. By studying such innovations, clues may be obtained about directions to take in fostering the actualization of this ideal. In a discussion of potential uses of participant observer methodology, Whyte (1979) stated that successful use of this methodology is more dependent upon the ability of the researcher to build mutually supportive relation- ships with subjects than upon the mastery of certain tech- niques. He claims that the most effective work using this methodology in the future will be done by researchers who view the individuals they study as active collaborators in the research process. He claims that without solid relationships the best techniques are fruitless and that as solid relationships build, individuals studied will help the researcher correct mistakes in the use of tech- niques. Friedrichs and Ludtke (1975) contend that partici- pant observation, like any other methodology needs to be developed and refined. They claim that participant obser- vation should be systematized and advanced toward a more 29 precise research instrument. In order to move in this direction they contend that observation schedules should be as concrete as possible, should define the number and kinds of observation units, and should provide quantifi- able data when possible. The aim of the schedule should be to standardize situations which are to be observed. This research study is based upon Imig's (1977) participant observer study of a dual-career family. In this study, the family role structure and work role struc- ture of a job-sharing family was analyzed using more structured and precise participant Observer methodology than that used by Imig. This researcher quantified Christensen's model and developed a concrete structured observation schedule which provided quantifiable data for use in analyzing role structure. Interviews were also used to collect data and family members were viewed by the researcher as active collaborators. This study is an attempt to systematize and advance participant observer methodology toward a more precise research instrument without losing the benefits of building a collaborative, mutually supportive relationship with family members. Role Theory and Sex Roles During the 19303 a discriminable role language and specialized study of the problems of roles emerged. Mead (1934) and Linton (1936) were the first to use the term role technically in writings on role problems. Mead 30 claimed that as an individual matures he develops the capacity to respond to the "generalized other." An indi- vidual learns to take the role of the other as he learns to control his behavior in light of another individual's attitude toward that behavior. Mead defined the general— ized other as the organized community or social group which gives to the individual his unity of self. In 1936, Linton prOposed a classic distinction between "status" (position) and role. He defined status as a collection Of rights and duties which were distinct from the individual who occupied the particular status. He used the term role to refer to the dynamic element of status. When an individual puts the rights and duties which constitute a status into effect, he is performing a role. Based upon a systematic study of the develOpment of role theory in the behavioral sciences, Biddle (1966) concluded that role concepts come closer to a universal language of the behavioral sciences than any other vocab- ulary. The body of knowledge in the field of role is large and ranges over many subjects. During the late 19505, the terms sex role and gender role began to appear in titles of empirical studies. Pleck (1979) identified three different value perspectives underlying research and theory concerning male and female family roles. They are: the traditional 31 perspective, the exploitative perspective and the changing roles perspective. In the "traditional perspective" identified by Pleck women did most of the housework and childcare and men worked outside the family to support the family. This is considered functional and is illustrated by the frame- work of Parsons and Bales (1953). They distinguished between an "instrumental" family role which focused on mediating between the family and the outside, and an "expressive" family role which focused on concern for relationships within the family. Fathers were viewed as mostly instrumental and mothers mostly expressive. This division was deemed functional for the family and society. Parsons and Bales claimed spouses had equally powerful positions and simply differed in area of primary responsibility (Swenson, 1973). Several research studies (Zelditch, 1955; Tharp, 1963; Emmerich, 1966; Heiss, 1962) produced evidence in support of Parsons' and Bales' theory. However, beginning in the late 19605 their theory came under attack. Numerous studies (Leik, 1963; Rossi, 1964; Goodrich, Ryder & Raush, 1968; Barry, 1970; Laws, 1971; Millman, 1971; Broderick, 1971; McIntire, Nass & Dreyer, 1972) indicated that the Parsons and Bales model did not typify spouse interaction, was oversimplified, and no longer apprOpriate. Two other theoretical frameworks were also used to support the traditional perspective. Scanzoni (1970) 32 applied exchange theory to the family and indicated that husbands exchanged their earning ability for their wife's provision of love, companionship, and household services. Blood and Wolfe (1960) used resource theory to analyze family role behavior. The premise of this theory is that roles vary among family members because members vary in the resources needed to perform these roles. They con- tended that husbands' low contribution to family work was due to husbands having fewer resources, such as time, to use in performing these tasks. All three theories described within the tradi- tional viewpoint supported the traditional division of labor between spouses and considered such division of labor legitimate and desirable. The second value perspec- tive identified by Pleck (1979) began in the early 19705 and is labeled the "exploitation perspective." Feminists contended that the traditional female family roles promoted the inferior status of women in this society and perpetu- ated male domination of women. During the 705 the tradi- tional female role began to change and a marked increase in women working outside the home occurred. At this point, research on family roles Often incorporated the time budget methodology and data were collected on the total work per- formed by husbands and wives including both family and paid work. Several studies (Hedges & Barnett, 1972; Holmstrom, 1973; Walker & Woods, 1976; Bryson, Bryson, Licht & Licht, 1976; Pleck, 1977) illustrated that in dual-career and 33 dual-worker families women maintained primary responsi- bility for homemaking activities even though they were also involved in paid work and men did not take on more responsibility in the home as women joined the work world. This role overload of employed wives was associated with an increased sense of time pressure and diminished well being (Robinson, 1977). This is considered a significant problem since at present in at least half of all husband- wife couples in this country, both spouses are employed (Hayghe, 1978). These studies based upon the exploitation perspective have been used to illustrate the continuation of inequality and male dominance. They also suggest that the traditional perspectives described earlier are no longer appropriate for explaining sex role behavior in most families. The third and most recent values perspective iden- tified by Pleck (1979) is the "changing roles perspective." Pleck considers this perspective the most apprOpriate at the present time for research on family sex roles. This perspective is based on the assumption that male family roles can and will change although this change will come about more slowly than the change in women's roles toward more paid work outside the home. Pleck contends that the focus of research within this perspective should be on evidence of changes in male family roles, however small, along with information useful for bringing about such changes. Pleck suggests some specific types of research 34 needed based upon this perspective. Research on factors which are associated with variations in men's family roles are needed in order to design effective change strategies. For example, in a recent study of determinants of male family role performance (Perrucci, Potter & Rhoads, 1978) socialization experiences of men related to appropriate male family role behavior accounted for a modest amount Of variation in male family role behavior. Pleck also states the need for research on innovative family patterns WhiCh incorporate changes in men's family roles even though this may occur in only a very small number of families. Such research is needed to demonstrate men's ability to assume a much larger family role than previously thought possible and also to provide models for change. More research is also needed on the consequences for family members of increased male participation in family roles. This research study is based upon the changing roles perspective. The job-sharing family analyzed in this study is an innovative family form which incorporates major changes in male and female family roles. The descrip- tion of this family can be used as a model for change and as an illustration of male capacity for greater involvement in family roles. In addition, possible factors accounting for increased male involvement in family roles can be ascertained. Finally, Christensen's (1975) model for studying sex role change as Operationalized by Imig (1977), 35 has been expanded and quantified in this study for the purpose of studying a job-sharing family and can be used in future studies of sex role change. Work-Sharing and Job-Sharinngamilies The RapOports (1976) predict that a variation of the dual-career family labeled the work-sharing family will become an important form for creating more balance between work and family for men and women. In the work- sharing family both spouses work part-time and share responsibility for homemaking and child rearing. In 1975, Gronseth studied 16 Norwegian work-sharing families in which each spouse took over tasks traditionally assigned to the Opposite sex. Both spouses worked between 16 and 28 hours a week. They were contrasted with a sample of "traditional" families plus families who desired the pattern but were unable to get part-time work. Gronseth found the work-sharing couples showed a greater tendency to achieve a genuine sharing of domestic and child rearing work. Seven of them shared these tasks about 50-50. Couples reported choosing this option primarily because they highly valued family life and wished to share more equally in child rearing. In a study of middle class working couples Lein (1974) discovered that in families where domestic work- sharing was arranged with flexible occupational patterns, the males spent more time in child rearing as well as 36 domestic work than other males in the sample, and enjoyed their new roles more than they expected to. More and more approaches to a concept of masculinity, in Opposition to earlier works, are pointing out the disadvantages for personal fulfillment embodied in the traditional masculine role and self concept (Petras, 1975). A new value stance has assumed the androgynous model of sex role conceptions in which masculinity and feminity are combined within both sexes (Farrell, 1974; Rowe, 1976). A job—sharing family is a particular form of the work-sharing family. In job-sharing families, spouses equally divide the work of one full time job (Dickson, 1975). Fewer work hours and more flexibility in compari- son to other family forms create additional time for both spouses which can be devoted to domestic tasks, leisure activity, social interaction, and childrearing. Job- sharing is based upon the new shared role ideology. Arkin and Dubrofsky (1978) studied 21 job-sharing couples in the United States. These couples experienced less strain than either traditional or dual-career couples in terms of work overload. They reported the following advantages: increased personal and leisure time, shared child care and domestic tasks, and increased work flexi- bility. The job-sharing couples also experienced certain strains. Many felt exploited because employers expected them to work more than a 40 hour week. Others reported that the male was Often treated as the "real" professional. 37 In addition, both partners were Often considered less of a professional due to their part-time status. As illus- trated in a study of job-sharing Methodist ministers (Herron, 1975), 30 of 49 reported they felt more acceptance from lay persons in their church than from other church professionals. However, most couples in Arkin's sample reported that the advantages of being job-sharers out- weighed the disadvantages. In this study one job-sharing family is analyzed and described in depth. The nature and method of their division of responsibilities are outlined along with an analysis Of the extent to which they have achieved equal- ity both in the work setting and the home setting. The history of the family is also reported including the evolu- tion of their job-sharing pattern along with initial adjust— ment problems. Such information could be useful to individ- uals interested in work-sharing and job-sharing lifestyles. Changing Sex Roles in Organized Religion Though over half of the lay membership of churches are women (Giele, 1978), women have historically been barred from the clergy. A 1975 report from the Presby- terian Church, U.S.A. revealed that 3 percent of their clergy are women. Even in denominations that have per- mitted the ordination of women, women clergy have typically been a tiny minority. 38 However, the number of women in the clergy has increased. Between 1958 and 1970, 24 different religious denominations changed their policies and Opened up full ordination for women ("Women and Holy Orders," 1966; Hewitt & Hiatt, 1973). This number is still increasing. In addition, 30-50 percent of entering seminarians are women (Giele, 1978). Such changes have come about as a result of the efforts of feminist groups, lay persons, and concerned clergy. The ordination issue is part of a broader issue concerning the appropriate place of the church in today's society and the apprOpriate role of the clergy. The role of church and clergy is often defined in traditional, sacramental terms by those against women clergy. Those pro tend to want the church to focus on current personal and social issues and argue that clergywomen will facili- tate this focus. In addition, they envision a new church structure which abandons hierarchy and calls upon the clergy to explore new structures to serve the people (Russell, 1974). In reference to this issue Mary Daly (1970) states: The church of the future may be envisioned as a com- munity based on "charismatic ministries." In order that it be transformed into a more adequately human social order there will have to be a continuing development away from symbolic roles identified with fixed states of life, toward functional roles freely assumed on the basis Of personal qualifications and talents (p. 137). 39 Efforts are also being made to eliminate sexism in religious symbolism and liturgy, and also to foster an equalitarian as Opposed to patriarchal model of marriage and family (Kung, 1976). The acceptance of spouses who share the ministry of churches is one manifestation of this trend. This study will add to the literature on changing sex roles in the context of organized religion by describing the work and family sex role structures of a job-sharing clergy couple with children. CHAPTER III METHODOLOGY In this chapter, the rationale for selecting par- ticipant observer methodology will be explained along with general information about the validity and reliability of the method. Also, the process of selecting the family and the methods of protecting the family will be described. Next, a chronology of the researcher's involvement with the family will be presented and will include a general description of the researcher's role. In addition, the development of the formal observation schedule created by the researcher in order to provide quantifiable data on equality and differentiation will be outlined and a descrip- tion Of the interviews used in this study will be included. The traditional sex role classification of family and work categories will be delineated and a general description of methods of data analysis will be presented. Participant Observer Methodology: Selection, Validity and Reliability Participant observer methodology is actually a characteristic blend or combination Of methods and tech- niques involving some amount of genuinely social 40 41 interaction in the field with the subjects of the study, direct observation of relevant events, some formal and a great deal of informal interviewing, and a certain amount of open-endedness or flexibility in the direction the study takes (McCall et al., 1969). All of these techniques are incorporated in this study Of a job-sharing family. Participant observer methodology is often employed in studies of social situations in which there is a need to understand the situation rather than to test hypotheses about it. It is also appropriate for exploring small groups about which so little is known that more systematic procedures would be out of place. The participant Observer methodology is used in this study since the job—sharing family structure is a new family form and there is little in-depth information about this family structure. In the process of such exploratory research, significant problems can be uncovered and hypotheses can be prOposed. Based upon a review of sex role research, Hochschild (1973) discovered that most of it is survey research with some content analysis and very little participant obser- vation. He contends that more sex role research using in-depth observational techniques is needed because, ”the balance of power in society is linked in complex ways not yet understood to various characteristics of face to face interaction" (p. 258). In this study face to face inter- actions Of subjects are Observed. In addition, dynamics and processes Of setting and changing role patterns are 42 uncovered. An in-depth, holistic description of the sex role structure of the job—sharing family is produced. Such qualitative information can be useful in supporting trend theories (Barton & Lazarsfeld, 1969). Standardized methods of checking the validity of this methodology are not typically available. However, several aspects of the participant observer methodology used in this study helped to insure validity. By inter- viewing participants concerning their motives, intentions and interpretations of events in question, a check on the validity of inferences made by the researcher was provided. Such perceptions of the subjects about their role behavior are an important contribution. Insuring confidentiality encouraged spontaneity and thus fostered the validity of findings. In addition, the researcher used a formal observation schedule which helped the researcher maintain objectivity and as a result increased validity. Validity was also increased since the use of Observation and interview helped avoid possible discrepancies between actual behavior and verbal reports of behavior. Often statements made in interviews are not in accordance with the actual behavior of the interviewed persons (La Piere, 1934; Kutner, Wilkins & Yarrow, 1952; Linn, 1965). Valid- ity was further increased using this methodology since the researcher was able to Obtain data within experiential worlds and categories which had meaning to the subjects. 43 A weakness of participant Observer methodology is considered the reactive effect of Observer behavior on subject behavior. White (1978) conducted longitudinal research on the major influences on the development of the young child. In order to collect data on parent child interaction in a naturalistic setting, White employed Observers in the homes of families. White discovered that when an observer visited a home only once, the observer effect dominated the scene. He also discovered that even visiting the home two or three times seemed inadequate for preventing Observer effect. He concluded that most peOple got used to the observer's presence after five or six visits. In this study of a job-sharing family, observer effect was minimized since repeated observations were con- ducted over the course of eight weeks. The reactive effect of observer behavior on subject behavior is a limitation not solely confined to participant Observer research. McCall and Simmons (1969) report that a growing literature on experimenter effect shows con- siderable reactive effect of experimenter behavior on subject behavior. In this light, psychological experi- menters are also participant observers. Sykes (1978) discovered that observers whose role is known to subjects have less observer effect than observers whose role is unidentified. In this study, validity was increased because the subjects knew the role of the observer. 44 Standardized methods of checking the reliability of participant observer research are also not typically available. Friedrichs and Ludtke (1975) state that as time between observing and recording decreases, reliability of observations increases. In this study reliability was increased since most observations were recorded as soon as the event occurred. This was accomplished by using an observation schedule created by the researcher. This schedule provided quantifiable data and in the develOpment and use of this instrument, the researcher's findings were compared to the findings of other observers trained to use the instrument. Interrater agreement was calculated and is reported in the section of this chapter on the devel- Opment of the observation instrument. Selection of a Family The following criteria served as the basis for the selection of the family: 1. Both spouses engaged in part-time work of at least 20 hours per week and not more than 30 hours per week. 2. Marriage of partners. 3. At least one child, preferably of early elementary school age or lower. This was included because young children tend to demand more parental involve- ment and thus would provide more Opportunity for Observing parental roles. 45 4. Willingness to COOperate. 5. Self described attempt at building a relationship based upon equality. 6. Spouses considered their careers or work of equal importance. In this research design it was considered neces- sary to obtain only one family situation which met the above criteria. Random sampling was not considered neces- sary since the focus of this study is on the development of a model describing variables, not the testing of hypoth- eses. Glaser and Strauss (1970) contend that the researcher who generates theory does not have to combine random sampling with theoretical sampling when clarifying rela- tionships among prOperties and categories. "The assumption is made that if the relationship holds for one group under certain conditions, it will most likely hold for other groups under the same conditions." The process used to find an apprOpriate work- sharing family was based upon Holmstrom's (1973) modified network approach with the researcher as the common link in the chain. First, a list of key people in the com- munity who were likely to know large numbers of families was compiled. The researcher then began contacting these individuals. They were given a brief description of the proposed research and were asked if they knew any families who met the criteria. The researcher dealt with each lead as it came up. The first family suggested involved spouses 46 who shared the work of a small, local business and also had a child. The researcher did not contact this family immediately because of a preference for a family whose work situations were within larger institutions or orga- nizations, since the research results might be helpful to such institutions in examining their policies. The second family suggested shared one full-time job as minister for a congregation. Initial contact with this family was made by phone on February 7, 1979. The husband, Rob Mead, was very interested in the proposed research and it seemed that the family met the criteria. He believed his wife, Ann Smith Mead, would also be interested (she was out of town at the time). A tentative time was set up for the researcher to meet with both spouses at the church office, depending on his wife's agreement. On February 20th an exploratory interview was conducted with both spouses. The researcher attempted to determine if they had an equalitarian relationship. The following questions (Imig, 1977) based upon aspects identified by Holmstrom (1973) guided the interview: 1. In what ways do each of you accommodate to your spouse's careers? 2. Do you consider your time equally valuable? 3. Who is ultimately responsible for domestic realms of your life? The family met the selection criteria. Spouses reported sharing a 42 hour work week, had been married 47 for 10 years, and had one male child, Jason Mead, age 3. They considered their careers of equal importance and had a self described relationship based upon equality as indi- cated by their responses to the exploratory interview. The family agreed to cooperate with the researcher in this study. Protection of Subjects Fichter and Kolb (1973) describe three harmful effects to which participant observer research is vulner- able. They are: revealing secrets, violating privacy, and damaging reputations of subjects. This research will incorporate the following precautions to protect the sub- jects: l. Fictitious names are used in reporting results. 2. The name of the church and the denomination will not be disclosed. 3. The community of residence of the subjects will not be disclosed. 4. The researcher will not reveal the identity of the subjects or church to others. The findings revealed in this dissertation have been reviewed by the subjects and approved for publication by the subjects in consultation with the researcher. 5. The organization and structure of the church sys- tem will be described using synonyms for those 48 positions and areas of responsibility which might easily allow readers to identify the denomination. 6. Field notes are kept in locked files. 7. Observation times were worked out with the family ahead of time. Although free access to the family at any time would have been ideal for data collec- tion purposes, it would have violated the privacy of the subjects. 8. The graduate student trained by the researcher to observe the family one time with the researcher for the purpose of establishing interrater agree- ment also agreed not to disclose the identity of the subjects nor their denomination. Overview of Researcher Involvement With the Mead Family' A chronology Of the researcher's involvement with the Mead family is presented in Table l. The researcher observed the Mead family a total of 100 hours using the formal observation schedule which will be presented later in this chapter. About 1/4 Of the hours occurred in the summer and the rest occurred in the fall. Observations were strategically scheduled to cover various times of the day and days of the week. Since spouses switched work days every other day, Observations were scheduled so that they covered an equal amount of time when Ann was home and when Rob was home. Due to the unpredictable nature of their work, lack of formal hours for their work, and the 49 Table l.--Chronological Schedule of Researcher Involvement and Nature of Involvement. 3/6/79: (3/7/79 to interrater for use in 7/17/79: 7/17/79: 7/18/79: 7/29/79: 7/29/79: 7/29/79: 7/30/79: Interview with Mead family to find out general information about the structure of their church and to obtain a set of general categories for use in classifying job related activities. 7/16/79: Researcher developed and tested for agreement a quantifiable observation schedule this study.) Meeting with Mead family to set up a schedule for researcher involvement in the family. 2:35 PM - 10:25 PM Observation 9:30 AM - 2:30 PM Observation 8:15 AM - 9:15 AM Observation Observation of Church Service (observation schedule not used) 5:25 PM - 8:45 PM Observation 12:10 PM - 5:00 PM Observation (7/31/79 to 8/6/79: Spouses kept a log of daily activity for one week.) 9/22/79: 9/30/79: 9/30/79: 10/1/79: 10/1/79: 10/2/79: 10/3/79: 10/4/79: 10/5/79: Cantril's (1963) "Self Anchoring Scale Ques- tions" (interview) administered in order to determine work and family goals. Observation of Church Service (observation schedule not used) 5:00 PM - 10:00 PM Observation Spouses' Reactions to Summer Data (interview) 12:00 Noon - 4:30 PM Observation 2:30 PM - 10:15 PM Observation 1:30 PM - 5:00 PM Observation 9:00 AM - 1:00 PM Observation 1:00 PM — 5:00 PM Observation 50 Table l.--Continued. 10/12/79: 10/13/79: 10/15/79: 10/16/79: 10/18/79: 10/26/79: 10/26/79: 11/5/79: 11/7/79: 11/7/79: 11/8/79: 11/10/79: 11/11/79: 11/11/79: 11/12/79: 11/13/79: 11/20/79: 2/8/80: 2/25/80: 9:00 AM — 1:00 PM Observation 9:00 AM - 5:00 PM Observation 9:00 AM - 1:00 PM Observation 1:30 PM - 4:30 PM Observation 9:00 AM - 1:00 PM Observation 9:00 AM - 12:00 Noon Observation 5:40 PM Observation 1:40 PM Life History Interview (Rob Mead) Life History Interview (Ann Smith Mead) 6:00 PM — 10:05 PM Observation 3:30 PM - 5:00 PM Observation 12:00 Noon - 11:45 PM Observation 8:00 AM - 9:30 AM Observation Observation of Church Service (observation schedule not used) Spouses' Reactions to Fall Data (interview) Work Role Equality and Differentiation Interview Family History Interview (Rob and Ann) 5:30 PM - 8:30 PM Observations of Mead family by researcher and a second trained Observer for the purpose of calculating interrater agreement. Researcher gave the family a written report of findings (Chapters III and IV) for review. Family supplied pertinent missing information about their personal histories. They agreed that the report was accurate for the time period covered and gave permission to the researcher to publish the results. No aspects of the report were deleted. 51 amount of time one or both spouses traveled, contact hours with the family were usually set up one to two weeks in advance. The researcher originally intended to gradually increase the number of days and number of hours of obser- vations week by week. However, due to the short period of time the subjects were available to be observed during the summer (they traveled quite a bit) and due to the irregu— larity of the subjects time spent at home from week to week, the number of hours a day and days of the week the family was observed varied from week to week. During observations, the researcher kept the observation schedule coding sheets on a clip board and followed the members of the family, attempting to keep them in view at all times except when they used the master bedroom to change clothes or retire and when they used the bathroom for personal hygiene purposes. The researcher did not follow individuals. When one member left the house or moved out of sight of the others, the researcher followed the remaining two. Several anthrOpologists and sociologists have shown that it is important for participant observers to be frank and to be willing to give any information requested by the subjects. These guidelines were followed by the researcher. The researcher often engaged in conversation with the family (members before the scheduled observation hours and after the Observations. Sometimes this conversation dealt with 52 topics not related to this study and other times the researcher asked questions pertinent to the research study. There were also times when the researcher and family members communicated during the Observations. Sometimes subjects explained something about their situation to the researcher. Sometimes the researcher asked pertinent questions when asking such questions did not interfere with family member behavior. Other times the researcher answered family members' questions. However, the researcher pri- marily attempted not to interact with the subjects during the scheduled observation hours. In addition to the quantitative and qualitative data Obtained on equality and differentiation using the formal coding sheets during the observation hours, often other information was obtained during this time pertinent to the other research questions. The researcher kept a file on each research question and after each period Of observation pertinent information obtained was filed under the appropriate research question. Four general types of observer roles can be dis- tinguished; complete participant, participant as observer, observer as participant and complete observer. In the complete participant role the observer is involved in activities with the subjects and is not known to the sub- jects as an observer. In the participant as observer role, the observer is usually involved in activities with the subjects and is also known to the subjects as an observer. 53 In the observer as participant role, the observer does only a limited amount of interacting with subjects and does not usually get involved in the activities of the subjects. The observer as participant is also known to the subjects as an Observer. Finally, in the complete observer role, the observer does not participate in the events studied at all and is known to the subjects as an observer. In this study, the Observer as participant role was implemented. Development of Observation Instrument Friedrichs and Ludtke (1975) emphasized that in order to be accepted scientifically participant observer methodology should be as systematized as possible, should be regulated by a predetermined observation schedule which defines what is to be observed, and should provide quanti- fiable data whenever possible. These guidelines were followed by this researcher in the develOpment of an observation schedule designed to provide quantifiable data concerning levels Of role differentiation and equality in the family and work situation of the Meads. Actions of family members in areas other than career or work were classified using a categorical system of family activity based upon the system develOped by Imig (1977). Some of Imig's categories were collapsed, some were expanded, and some were combined in order to produce a clearly defined set of categories for use in a formal Observation schedule. 54 Family activity in areas other than work fell within the general areas of homemaking, recreation, and civic involve- ment. In addition two general work related categories were develOped for use in preliminary pilot studies. These categories were labeled "doing career related work at home" and "talking about job or career at home." Along with the family categories and work categories, a symbolic coding system was developed to produce quantifiable data about equality and differentiation within the specific categories of spouse behavior. This version of the formal observation schedule was piloted by the researcher in a dual—career family. In order to improve the observation schedule and to test it for interrater agreement, the researcher pro- duced two unedited videotapes of on-going family activity in the homes of two dual-career families. A male and female professor in human ecology were trained to use the observation schedule. They, along with the researcher, used the schedule to Observe one of the family videotapes. The results were compared and discussed. As a result, one category, politics, was expanded and relabeled current events. In addition, behavioral evidence of inequality was clarified and expanded to include commanding and obey- ing behavior between spouses. Next, the schedule incor- porating the above two changes was used by the researcher and both professors in viewing the second videotape. These results were used to determine preliminary interrater 55 agreement for coding of instances that spouses were observed behaving within particular categories (see Table 2). Interrater agreement was computed using Spearman's rank—difference correlation method. The interrater agree- ment of the female researcher and the female professor was computed separately from the interrater agreement of the female researcher and the male professor. In addition, data on the husband's behavior and the wife's behavior were considered separately. These sex distinctions were con- sidered necessary in this analysis since sex role behavior was being studied and observations biased by sex of observer and sex of subject were possible. In the training videotape, one instance of female superordinate behavior was observed and was coded consistently by all three observers. In the second videotape, observers' coding for verbal evidence of behavior within a category was somewhat inconsistent and Observers agreed that it was difficult to hear what spouses were saying on the video- tapes. This is a particular problem when using videotapes in place of on the spot observations. In general, inter- rater agreement was high and the family related activity categories and coding system were considered acceptable for use in this study of a job-sharing family. The Observation schedule used to_study the Mead family contained the set of categories presented and described in Table 3. They are listed in the order they appear on the Observation schedule. Categories 11 through 56 Table 2.--Preliminary Interrater Agreement. Categories Observed Female Researcher M Mv F Fv Male Female Professor Professor M Mv F FV M MV F FV Food Preparation and Cleanup l 6 l 6 1 6 Parenting 3 6 2 x 6 2 6 Housecare and Cleaning 0 O l 0 O O Spouse Interaction 3 3 3 3 3 3 Special Household Work 0 0 O 0 l 0 Talking About Career 0 1 0 O 0 1 Care of Clothing 0 O O 0 0 0 x Athletics 0 x O 0 x O O x 0 Marketing 0 O 0 0 0 0 x Correlation of researcher's data and male professor's data for the male: .90. Correlation of researcher's data and female professor's data for the male: .96. Correlation of researcher's data and male professor's data for the female: .90. Correlation of researcher's data and female professor's data for the female: 1.00. Legend: M = Male F = Female Mv = Verbal evidence of male performing within a category. Fv n Verbal evidence of female performing within a category. Frequency Of instances Observed. x = Categories within which verbal evidence of spouse per- formance was noted during observations. 57 Table 3.--Family Related and Work Related Categories and Descriptions. Category Description 1. Food Preparation and Cleanup 2. Parenting and and Childcare 3. Housecare and Cleaning All preparation of food, such as breakfast, noon, and evening meals; snacks, packed lunches; baking, canning, or freezing food; preparation Of food for guests and special occasions such as holiday meals, party refresh- ments, food gifts, and food to be served at functions outside the home; cleanup incidental to all food preparation; setting the table; serving the food; after meal care of table, dishes, left- overs, kitchen equipment and refuse. All parent/child interaction including bathing, feeding, and dressing of the child; giving child bedside care, first aid; taking child to dentist, doctor, beauty or barber 5hOp; taking the child to social, recreational or educational functions or activities; playing with the child; comforting the child; giving the child affection; reading, talking, and listening to the child; helping the child learn something; disciplining the child; supervision Of the child. Also includes caring for children other than one's own. Daily or regular cleaning of house and appliances, such as: mopping, disting, vacuuming; making beds, putting rooms in order (picking up); caring for houseplants and flowers; caring for pets. Also occasional or seasonal care and cleaning of house such as: Washing windows, cleaning closets, waxing floors, defrosting refrig- erator, cleaning oven. Also includes care of trash. Table 3.--Continued. 58 Category Description 4. Spouse Interaction 5. Care of Clothing 6. Care of Yard and Car and Garden 7. Marketing 8. Record Keeping 9. Special Household Upkeep and Repair Includes affection giving, emo- tional support, listening, infor- mation, conversation, planning, conflict resolution, decision making and discussing marital relationship (any spouse inter- action regardless Of tOpic of conversation or nature of inter- action). Washing clothes or household tex- tiles at home or at laundromat; collecting and sorting soiled things for washing; pretreating; loading and unloading washer and dryer (leave out time taken by machine); hanging things on line and taking them down; cleanup incidental to washing; folding; ironing clothes; storing clothes; mending; sewing; use of dry- cleaners. Daily and seasonal care and main- tenance of yard, garden areas, walks, garage, car, and equipment for these activities. All activities related to shOpping including shOpping related to pro- curement of services. Includes shOpping in person, by mail, by telephone, home sales or delivery. Also includes time for putting purchases away. (Does not include purchasing which is part of career responsibility and uses company or organization money.) Includes paying bills; making deposits; making and working on records of receipts and expend- itures. Painting and papering, repairing furniture, equipment, appliances; redecorating. Table 3.--Continued. 59 Category Description 10. Socializing with Friends, Neighbors, Kin 11. Formal Religious Services 12. Counseling and Home Visits for Parish- ioners 13. Education for Parish 14. Social Activ- ities for Parish Parties, special dinners, picnics, holiday with friends, neighbors or kin; visiting or talking on the phone; corresponding by mail. (This does not include interaction with mate or own children.) a. Sunday mornings: put together hymns, scripture, get musician, write sermon, present service. b. Weddings: premarital counsel- ing, three meetings before ceremony, help couples write ceremony, write sermon, pre- pare liturgy, officiate. c. Funerals: two to three family visits before funeral, one visit at funeral home, prayers, meditations, graveside ser— vice, church service. d. Special Seasonal Services: Same activities as Sunday plus preparation and presentation of special rituals. Visits during crises, marriage and family counseling, hospital visits, visits to newcomers in church community and families with new babies. DevelOp, organize and lead adult study groups; direct Sunday school program. Help committee plan events, attend events, work on decorations, food, and recreation/entertainment, Opening and closing prayers at social events. Table 3.--Continued. 60 Category Description 15. Administrative Sort mail, file, clean office, and Clerical reorganize office, sort materials, Activities order new materials, type bulle- for Church tin, edit newsletter, mimeograph, order and purchase office sup- plies, schedule church activities. 16. Conferences and Attend national annual denomi- Other Profes- national conference, state dis- sional Enrich- trict conference, monthly local ment Activities denominational meetings, and pastoral counselors weekly group meetings. 17. Ecumenical Serve on various local, state, Responsibilities and national committees, advisory councils, and boards. 18. Building and Shoveling snow, mowing lawn, turn- Grounds of ing on heat, unlocking doors. Church 19. Community Coun- Marriage, family, and individual seling for Non- counseling to nonchurch members. parishioners 20. Community Service Any activities engaged in which (Volunteering) provide a service for the commun— ity or community individuals or groups, either locally or on a broader scale such as fundraising for charity. 21. Current Events Political activity of any sort, reading newspaper, watching news, reading mail. 22. Athletics Includes participating in or attending (viewing) sports events, athletic events. 23. Hobbies or Includes playing musical instru- Avocational Areas of Interest ments, arts and crafts work, photography, woodworking. 61 Table 3.--Continued. Category Description 24. Games Includes such activities as play- ing cards, chess, box games such as MonOpoly, Scrabble. 25. Entertainment Includes watching television, reading for pleasure, listening to music, radio, live theater, concerts. 26. Other Recreation Includes naps, meditation, and other recreational activities not included above. 27. Personal Hygiene* Includes showering, using bath- room, dressing, eating, and sleeping when ill. 28. Packing for Includes all packing related to Trips** travel for family. 29. Other Work Includes church work activities Related*** Observed in the home which could not be classified using specific church work categories. *The category personal hygiene was added shortly after the study began so that all spouse behavior could be coded. The addition of this category was suggested by Ann Mead. **The category packing for trips was also added after the study began since this activity did not fit within any other categories. It is considered a family related category. ***Since spouses did not do much church work at home and since it turned out to be difficult to distinguish between church related categories based upon observation, much of spouses's church work behavior was coded under other work related. Due to such limited Observational data, levels of equality and role differentiation for work were mainly determined using self-report data. 62 19 and category 29 relate very specifically to the Mead's work situation and were obtained by interviewing the Meads before the observations began in order to obtain a set of categories within which their career activities could be classified. These 10 work related categories were used in place of the two preliminary work categories in order to obtain a more detailed analysis Of the Mead's work role structure. The rest of the categories, except where noted, are the family related activity categories develOped and tested in the pilot studies. Each observation schedule coding sheet (see Figure 5) contained the family and work categories listed in a column on the left hand side. Each sheet represented one hour of observation. Each of the 12 squares at the top of the sheet represented five minute intervals. Spouse behavior was coded by the researcher based upon five minute intervals. The symbols used to code spouse behavior during each five minute interval are presented in Table 4. In addition to the symbols used in coding, the space at the bottom of each observation schedule coding sheet was used by the researcher to write who did which specific activities within the categories. This informa- tion was important for determining levels of differenti- ation within categories. An example of an observation schedule sheet used by the researcher to record one hour of Mead family activity is presented in Figure 6. 63 1500.5. mcwooo nodumzuuno .m ousowh Iii III.|. )liI '1‘ l 631.3: Rheum}; : III 1|. III- I III- III I III ) I III lawn. new $55.05 : II III III II ITIIII III I ,,,,, 0232.: H5523 : U I III- IIII II. III I I mwflmuuoz 527° .. II II I ace-:«uauoacm = IIIIII IIIII condo v IIIII II | IllI I. I I 1! 2.3039; Joanne: : II II- I' I IIIII I .I. II- . III. I 8.3.3.“? 5 III I I. II II ,,,,, IIII III na=o>m sausage r I I I I- II I i I IIIIIII III -I I I II II IIIII .motiomaiiww »¢«:=IlI.no|0I 2 IIIIIIIII IIIII IIII.I I IIII.IIIII IIII II III I I I II.I II I- IIII I umm:oz.me«~on:=oo .Iloo : II II IIIII IIIIII III I. I- I I I I I I III II aucsouu a wadeuaan 2 II I- -I II IIlI I III I II II I I I I I I III I I lI .mamecenInwxl :35..st : I II II III III III III I )II- I II III II .. sauna. Honk .moocwuufinoo .. I I i -II II lI I I- III II I I I- I III .8188 3.38.355... .. I I I I I II I I 1 .I I II I III II IIIIIIIII .E..uo3a>flo< .308 I I I I III I I- IammuflI you 5385.... u. I I I I I I I II III I I II III II I. Em #33; one: \I 9.500 : I I I II I II II IIII, .u«>uom naoawaaom finance : III IIII IIIII I I.I IIIII I III .I II .«a .zmduz .nucha : .oom : I I III Raciamoxm... 698:. .nqfl I I III F I I II I II I III I I III I II . mean—Ion: lemon . II I I III I I ii II I IIIIII I I I I III III unaonxuu: .I II II II IIII II I II -II I I -II III. II II - .II I Hauling: mo. and... I I I I I - I I. I III III I I I IIIIII 9550.8 ho 8a... . I II II I I. II II codaoauovcn onzonm u I I I II I IIII I I II addenduo a ouaoonnox. I II I I I II I III IIII |IIIIwzaacomnm. nacaouo d .aoum noon. $43.3 :— .nv...m :3 $2030 on; Seaman coggoopo 01.2. .38 64 Table 4.-—Symbols Used to Code Spouse Behavior on Observation Sheets. Symbol Meaning and Use M Male spouse observed behaving within a particular category during a particular interval Note: The male spouse may be observed behaving within more than one cate- gory per interval. Use the symbol M to code all categories within which the male was observed during each interval. However, only code, at most, one M per category per interval, even if the male spouse did one task within a particular category during the first minute of the interval and then did another task within the same category during the last minute of the interval. Use this same pro- cedure to code female spouse behavior within categories. F Female spouse observed behaving within a particular category during a particular interval. C) Male commands and female obeys or, female requests and male gives permission (used in reference to activities within specific categories). This symbol is placed in the appropriate category within the interval such interaction occurs. Examples: Male spouse to female spouse, "Make lunch. I'm hungry." Female spouse makes lunch. (Food Preparation and Cleanup category) Female spouse to male spouse, "Can I buy myself a new coat?" Male spouse grants or denies per- mission. (Marketing category) 65 Table 4.--Continued. Symbol Meaning and Use ® MV FV Female commands and male obeys or male requests and female gives permission (used in reference to activities within specific categories). This symbol is placed in the apprOpriate category within the interval such interaction occurs. Examples: Female spouse to male spouse, "Take Jill (child) outside to play." Male spouse takes child outside. (Parenting category) Male spouse to female spouse, "Can I go to the football game tomorrow?" Female spouse grants or denies permission. (Athletics category) Verbal evidence that the male has behaved or will behave within a particular category. For example, "Tomorrow I'm going to mow the lawn." (statement made by male spouse) (Care of Yard, Car, and Garden category) This symbol is placed in the appropriate category within the interval such verbal evidence occurs. Verbal evidence that the female has behaved or will behave within a particular category. For example, "Yesterday I visited my brother and sister-in-law." (statement made by female spouse) (Socializing with Friends, Neighbors, and Kin category) This symbol is placed in the apprOpriate category within the interval such verbal evidence occurs. Note: The data collected using the symbols below were not analyzed for the pur- poses of this study. If the symbol M or F appears in more than one category per interval, underline the M or F in the category within which the spouse was primarily involved during that interval. 66 :0 9.30 :unuOOw cu ocwcoun: can 05:35: m... 1 5.5003. : .§50u> Ga 30.. £0.25on >335. two: 0000 0... can: youzm cauuozwmno mo ode-om .o 0.55.: 60.39.50 : :Juoufidz aw noon. on u... :5 mu»... m: 3.350. 1.2 Anon... .: 00 h .:.m m~un u: £0550 new no.5": h .column v.3 tau—.0 ”50...? awth—oo .— 0.3 .- .>c:u :05: Sum Bea yam h «:3 : 612.0 95.3 x 50an :0 madame: a: H. : AHV I.. N N eoanHoz sue: mozao Ian—«u... .3.“ msxoum | I .23»? ~23qu noIHanIouooz Iuofio acoscHueuoacm condo TIIIIII anoHaaoo>< I. «$.50: noua0d5< 5:05 c.8830 .Ho>v ouH>uom .HHnanaou nan—:02. $5 “09500 . luau nansouo a uuHuHHan .HHnHacoanox HuoHco-aom diam. wouAJI 30:23.50 «3.3.8 \25095 . . . Jam .nofifiifii H303 IIII..wIHumA .HIou :033331 .fiIIJ3Hn«>I one: I\II.I EHIHISIo .uHiom 0:337: Hanson .3 .szoz .35.. r .oom Jaofimoofia .026... .Am mcHaoo. anon»: ucHaoxuaxI ado-.. any .«oI undo $3.530 uoI ouImw Inosouuovcn 026nm II II 53.303 a 38025: III II I II 9.3:ng A3336. a .Aoum coo..— mmJSa.» : Nat: AHIOA 07.0 uloomoauo ECG; aim ceaaaion yo 01:. . :5qu .I .c Ila. on :6: Jam .38 67 The Mead family was observed by the researcher using the observation schedule for a sum total of 100 hours. The raw data obtained using the observation schedule were summarized and this summary data is presented in Appendix A. After the 100 hours of observation were completed a graduate student in family ecology was trained by the researcher through use of videotapes to use the observation schedule. Next, both the researcher and the graduate student observed the Mead family in their home for a period of three hours. The results were compared and interrater agreement was computed using Spearman's rank difference correlation method (see Table 5). The interrater correlation for data on the male is .98 and the interrater correlation for data on the female is .95. These figures indicate a high level of interrater agree- ment. Observers agreed that there were no instances of superordination. In addition, observers agreed that there was verbal evidence of the male behaving within the care of clothing category and the marketing category. Only one observer coded verbal evidence of the female behaving within the marketing category. Interviews The interviews used in this study ranged from very informal interviews to more structured interviews. Many times before and after observation periods the researcher asked spouses a few pertinent questions. For example, as 68 Table 5.--Interrater Agreement for Mead Family Observa- tions. Researcher Second Observer Categories Observed M Mv F Fv M Mv F Fv Food Preparation and 2 15 3 l4 Cleanup Parenting 12 30 12 28 Housecare and Cleaning 0 3 O 4 Spouse Interaction 14 14 18 18 Care of Clothing 0 x 10 0 x 10 Care of Yard and Car 1 O 1 0 Marketing 1 x 0 1 x 0 x Community SerVice 4 0 4 0 (Volunteering) Current Events 11 13 13 16 Entertainment 2 2 4 4 Personal Hygiene 0 3 0 2 Other Work Related 2 0 3 1 Interrater correlation for M = .98. Interrater correlation for F = .95. Legend: M = Male F = Female Mv = Verbal evidence of male performing within a category. Fv = Verbal evidence of female performing within a category. n = Frequency of instances observed. x = Categories within which verbal evidence of spouse performance was noted during observa- tions. 69 the researcher noticed that only one spouse seemed to per- form a particular activity, spouses were asked if this were true and if so, how this differentiation had been deter- mined. In this section the formats for the interviews con- ducted will be presented. The researcher used notetaking to record interview data. Preliminary Work Category Interview 0 Before the observations began, spouses were inter- viewed by the researcher in order to determine a set of general work categories for use in classifying job related behavior on the observation schedule. The researcher asked the Meads to describe the general categories their work behavior fell within and to give a general description of activities within these categories. This information was the basis of the work categories described in Table 3. These categories also appear on the observation schedule. Spouses' Reaction to Observation Schedule Data After the summer observation hours were completed and also after the fall hours were completed, spouses were presented with a summary of the observation schedule data gathered and were asked for their reactions. The purpose of this interview was to compare the objective description of spouse behavior obtained using the observation schedule with Spouses' subjective perceptions about their role behavior. 70 Self Anchoring_Scale Questions In order to determine Spouses' work and family related goals, Cantril's Self Anchoring Scale Question interview was used by the researcher. The structure of this interview is presented in Appendix B. Individual Life History Interview Spouses were interviewed in order to obtain their individual life histories before they met each other. Each spouse was interviewed separately. The following general topics were used by the researcher to guide the interview: parents' relationship with each other, subject's relationship with parents and siblings, house- hold division of labor, relationships with kin, major family moves, subject's educational background, extra curricular activities, jobs, and involvement in religion. Spouses were also asked the fdllowing factual information: state and date of birth, date of birth of siblings, and occupation of parents. This is considered a focused or a semi-structured interview. Life histories are con- sidered an important element in presenting a holistic description of the family. Relationship History Interview Spouses were interviewed jointly in order to obtain the history of their relationship. The following general tOpics were used by the researcher to guide this focused interview: how and when spouses met, premarital 71 relationship, decision to marry, major moves, education and work experience, division of labor, birth of child, adjustment to parenting and evolution of the job-sharing lifestyle including the problems encountered and Spouses' perceptions of its advantages and disadvantages. Spouses were also asked the following factual information: date of marriage, their child's birthdate and their income at the present time. The relationship history is also an important element in a holistic description of the family. Work Role Equality and Differ- entiation Interview Since spouses did not do much church work at home it was necessary to conduct an interview with the spouses in order to describe equality and differentiation in the work situation. During the course of the study, as part of their job as pastors, spouses developed a position description of their job. They identified six major areas of responsibility and broke each area up into well defined subcategories. Since the nine work related categories on the observation schedule were rarely observed, and since spouses provided the researcher with a c0py of their formal position description, the six categories presented in the position description were used by the researcher as a basis for interviewing spouses about equality and differentiation at work and were also used by the researcher in reporting findings. The interview was conducted using the following six categories: Corporate Experience, Caring and Healing, 72 Evangelism, Supportive Growth and Religious Education, Ecumenical Work, and Administration. Within each of these categories, spouses were asked who typically does particular tasks, which tasks are shared or interchangeable, if any, and which tasks if any are only done by one spouse. Spouses were also asked how they determined who was primarily responsible for certain tasks. Finally, spouses were asked if they did any permission seeking and granting to perform tasks within categories and if they were aware of any super and subordinate or com— manding and obeying behavior within categories. Infor— mation obtained in this interview was used along with observation schedule data to answer the research questions related to equality and differentiation in the work situ- ation and how differentiation in the work situation was determined. Sex Role Classification of Family and Work Related Categories The family and work related categories were classi- fied as traditionally female, traditionally male, tradi- tionally both with some differentiation by activity, and traditionally male and/or female. The family situation classification was based upon the work of Nye and Gecas (1976). The work situation classification was determined by the researcher in conjunction with Rev. Denise Tracy, founding member of the National Council of Churches' Commission on Women in Ministry and specialist in sex roles 73 in organized religion. These classifications served as the basis for determining the direction of role change in the Mead family and are presented in Tables 6 and 7. Data Analysis Procedures For each category in the work and family situ- ations the total number of instances the male was observed behaving within each category was determined by counting the total number of times the symbol M appeared within that category on observation schedule sheets. The same process was used for the female. In addition, for each category in the work and family situation the total number of instances the male was observed in the superordinate position in each category was determined by counting the total number of times the symbol ® appeared within that category on the observation shcedule sheets. The same process was used for the female. The coded hours totaled 100 and included both the summer and fall data. Levels of family role differentiation and equality were determined by calculating the percentage difference between total instances of male and female performance in each category. Information about the Meads not obtained by use of the formal observation schedule but obtained by means of interviews or spontaneous disclosure of spouses are termed self-report data in the data analysis and report of findings chapter, and were used to verify the observa- tional data. Details of these procedures are reported in Chapter IV. 74 x mow>uwm mpflcsEEou .HH CHM new x muonnmflmz .mpcmaum £ua3 mGHNfiHMHUOm .oa .M wammm paw x mmmxmo oaonomsom Hmflommm .m x mnemomxpuooom .m x mafiumxumz .h ampumw x 0cm HMO .Uumw mo mumu .w x msflnuoHo mo mumu .m x cofiuomumucH omsomm .v x maficmmau can oumoomsom .m .m GHHSU mo oumu HMOmecm x oumopawzo can mcflucmumm .N x mscmmau 6cm coflumummmum boom .H manEmm >uH>Huo¢ >2 >HamcoflqumHB m nu. cu m Ha .u.p 8 Ha .u.p H9 xaamcoHuHUmHB I I- II'II'- IIIIII" -‘II'l I..Il I. III'.‘I‘I'| III I I- .mofluomoumo UmumHmm >HHEMh mo II.-- II"! It! 1.1.!!! l COHDMOHmemmHU oaom xwm Hmcofluwpmuell.o manna 75 x mmflua How mafixomm .mH x msmflmhm HMCOmMmm .hH x :oHummqum Hmnuo .mH x unmecwmuumucm .mH x mwfimw .va x moaumanufi .ma x mucm>m uswnuso .NH mHmsmm cowwwwwwwwmwwHo mHmsmm mHmz smmmmmmuwwmwe wwwmwmwwwcmwmm sHHmcoHuHomHB >HHmcoHuHomne mmHuommumo anMHmm HHHsmn .pOBCHHGOUII.m manna 76 coaumuumwsflfipd .0 x xuoz HMOficmEdom .m .M mucm>m Hafioom x coflumospm msofimwamm paw :u3ouw m>wuu0mmsm .v x Emwammsm>m .m x mafiamom can unflumu .N m. chEumm x mocmfluomxm oumuomnou .H mamamm >DH>Huo< wm .2... .3. .Mm......m..w. . .mwm..- . 2mm. .. 82...... .3. .2... >HamcoHUHpmue m n . s m Ha . .6 HH . .U B .HHmcoHuHomue .mmfluommumu xuoz nousno m.©mmz mo :oHumOHmwmmmHU maom xom Hmcowuflwmnell.h wanna CHAPTER IV DATA ANALYSIS AND REPORT OF FINDINGS This chapter presents a history of the Mead family along with a description of the Mead family environment including their community, home, and church. It also includes a presentation and analysis of data related to each research question. The research questions focus on organi- zation of family and work activities, levels of equality and differentiation at work and in the family situation, the direction of sex role change in the family and work situa- tion, determination of differentiation at home and at work, and themes and shared goals for family and work. The revised Christensen framework is used to describe and classify Spouse behavior in the work and family situation. Finally, the reaction of spouses to being studied and the researcher's reaction to studying the family are presented. Life Histories In order to understand Ann and Rob Mead's situation at the time of this study (1979), historical information is included about each spouse and about their marriage. In addition, spouse's adjustment problems to job sharing along 77 78 with their perceptions of the advantages and disadvantages of job sharing will be presented. This section is based upon self report data. Rob Mead Rob was born in 1946 in a small town in the state of Pennsylvania. He is the oldest of three children. His brother is four years younger and his sister is eight years younger. Rob's father had worked for a farm implement dealer and as a part-time barber. When Rob was in second grade, his family moved to a new home and his father became a full-time barber with a shop of his own adjacent to the new home. He is still operating this shOp at the present time. Rob's mother worked as a registered nurse until three months before Rob was born. She returned to part- time work as a private duty nurse after her children were grown. Rob's mother was mostly involved in the home and his father was mostly involved in his business. However, there were exceptions to this traditional division of labor. Rob's father would do dishes and sometimes cook on weekends. When Rob's father worked in his own shop, he also began to help get the children up in the morning, give them breakfaSt, help them dress and get them off to school. Rob recalled that his mother did not like the fact that his father often only took one half hour off from work for meals. She wanted him to spend more time at meals with the whole family. 79 This issue often became a focus for disagreement. Rob observed occasional overt expressions of affection in his parent's relationship with each other. Rob described his relationship with his brother as very competitive, though not usually hostile. His brother often wanted to tag along with him, which Rob found aggra- vating. This relationship did not change until Rob left for college. Rob did not feel competitive with his sister. When she was born, he felt proud to be her big brother and enjoyed giving her bottles. He still has warm feelings for her. Rob also recalled lots of playful wrestling with his brother and sister while they were growing up. When Rob was a young child, his mother read him stories at bedtime and gave him goodnight kisses. Both his mother and his father used physical punishment as a means of discipline. However, his father was the final authority on discipline and Rob felt he was overly harsh. At times he would get angry and lash out at Rob and Rob recalled feeling hurt and angry as a result. Beginning in junior high school, Rob's parents expected Rob and his siblings to help with the dishes, clean their own rooms weekly, and to do some basic cooking. Since Rob and his siblings liked their eggs cooked differently, they often prepared their own eggs for breakfast. Rob's mother used his father's domestic skills as an example and she would say that Rob and his siblings should learn how to take care of themselves, like their father. Besides being 80 able to cook, Rob's father also at times cared for his own clothing. Consequently, before Rob left home for college, his mother made a point of having Rob practice doing washing and ironing so that Rob would be able to take care of himself. The Mead family belonged to a strict conservative religious group. During early elementary school Rob did not have many friends because his parents sheltered him from associating with certain other children. However, by third grade Rob had an acceptable neighborhood friend from a con- servative family. Rob's paternal and maternal grandparents lived in the same general area and belonged to the same religion. His paternal grandparents were very conservative and strict in their lives and religion. His maternal grand- parents were more worldly. His maternal grandfather smoked pipes, stOpped going to church, and had one of the first televisions when such material goods were considered a sin by some families. Rob's father, who had been raised on a farm, highly valued education and Rob's parents were very proud of Rob's academic achievements. From kindergarten through senior high school Rob was an above average student. In certain subjects he excelled. However, during early elementary school, Rob tended to daydream in class and often had to stay in from recess to finish his work. In junior and senior high Rob was in the tOp sections academically and by this time he had several school friends. However, he was not part of the larger social scene. He felt ill at ease 81 at parties and in large groups. Though his parents did not forbid him to go to the movies and to dances, they indirectly discouraged him. In tenth grade he went to the movies with friends for the first time. His parents did forbid him to drink and smoke. In junior high he was a member of a children's temperance group. He described feeling somewhat like a minority in school, although the community he lived in contained a large number of members of his faith. During junior and senior high school Rob played the trumpet in the band. In senior high he was elected to the student council and also began dating. His summer jobs during high school included delivering bread on a bakery route, delivering newspapers, and working in a chemistry lab. Rob was involved in church activities from the time he was a young child. He recalled starring in early ele- mentary church school plays. During high school he was elected to the denomination's District Youth Cabinet. This was his first involvement in the translocal church community and it was a very significant and positive experience for him. Rob used his mother's nursing books as a means of learning more about sexuality. Rob began dating a girl in the band in high school. The next summer he met another girl he liked at church camp. He was surprised at how fast his feelings for women changed and, as a result, became more cautious in his involvement with the Opposite sex. 82 Rob chose to go to a small church related liberal arts college about three hours away from home. He described his involvement in college as a period of individual growth. He switched from a chemistry major to phi1050phy, took poetry classes, occasionally smoked cigars, sampled alcohol, and read magazines such as Playboy and The New Yorker. He only occasionally went to the local church although he still maintained some basic religious beliefs. He paid for his education with money from his parents and by working in a cloth mill, painting homes, and working in a machine shOp. He continued to be active in translocal church activity. During his sophomore year in college he met Ann. Ann Smith Mead Ann was born in 1946 in a city in Illinois. She is the oldest of four children. She has a sister four years younger, a brother six years younger, and a brother eight years younger. At the time of Ann's birth, her father was in seminary. He finished seminary and in 1948 the family moved to New York where her father worked on a Ph.D. in Recreation and Camping while working part-time as a pastor. In 1951, the family moved to Virginia where Ann's maternal grandparents lived. Her father was an associate executive of the church region and travelled a lot doing youth and camp work. In 1959, the family moved to Pennsylvania where Ann's father became the pastor of a large church. Ann recalls being told that this move occurred so that the boys 83 could have their father around more often. Shortly after Ann and Rob's wedding in 1968, her parents moved to Indiana where her paternal grandparents lived and her parents built a house on the old family farm. They are still living there at the present time. After two years as an associate pastor in Indiana, Ann's father made a career change and began teaching math in junior high school. He is still doing this at the present time. In 1962, in Pennsylvania, Ann's mother did substitute teaching in home economics and in 1964 she taught full time. When the family moved to Indiana, she got a job teaching home economics and is still doing this at the present time. Ann describes her parent's relationship with each other as warm, supporting, and loving. Though they did not always agree, they did not have huge fights. Her mother believed that a good wife supports her husband's career and that a woman should be emotionally dependent on her husband. Every so often, Ann's mother initiated family meetings in which allowances, housework, and bedtime issues were worked out. The children were expected to help with the household work and as they got older, they were given more responsi- bility along with more privileges. Ann's father did not do much housework or provide much childcare, although he did spend a large amount of time playing with the children. Ann's mother tended to be the organizer and rule maker in the family. She tended to use guilt as a means of dis- cipline. She was also very frugal. Ann viewed her father 84 as a good counselor and felt that no matter what she did, he would accept her. However, when he was angry, he tended to be impatient and gruff. Ann's family also participated in many recreational activities together such as going to the drive-in theater, going to folk dances, and having family game nights. Family life was important to her parents and they told lots of family stories and took lots of family pictures. Ann describes herself as having been a dependable, responsible child who followed parental expectations and was a second mother to her brothers and sister. She earned a bicycle by caring for her youngest brother. Ann was also very sensitive to criticism and never had privileges taken away from her because she was always so good. Ann recalls that she did not feel overly burdened by caring for her siblings and that she did not feel very competitive with them. There seemed to be enough love and attention to go around. Ann's sister confided in Ann and they still feel very close. Ann also felt close to her eldest brother and still does. However, her brothers did tend to fight with each other along with doing a lot together. Ann did extremely well academically in school and did not have to try very hard. During early adolescence, Ann was teased by her peers for being bossy and "goody, goody.” She did not wear faddish clothes due to her mother's frugality and she felt big and heavy. Just before eighth 85 grade, her family moved and Ann made a new start in a school which was smaller and less cliquish. During elementary school Ann was involved in Brownies, Scouts, chorus, and girl's basketball. In junior and senior high she was involved in band, chorus, girl's trio, district chorus, and plays. She also edited the high school year book and wrote for the paper. From the time she was a young child, she was very active in church activities. Ann and Rob belong to the same religion. Ann felt a strong sense of belonging in this religious group and many church peOple were perceived as extended family. Even the family vacation was planned around the annual church conference. Ann's parents had met each other at an annual conference. Her church related activities included attending church camp, serving as vice president of a district youth cabinet, attending national and regional youth conferences, serving as president of a local youth group and winning the national award in a speech contest. Ann, like Rob, considered translocal church activities as most significant. Ann began dating in high school with warnings from her mother not to get involved too soon since she had plenty of time. She continued dating through college and realized that in order to attract the Opposite sex, she should not come on too strong, nor be too desperate for a relationship. Ann attended the same college that Rob did although they did not meet until their sophomore year. Ann majored 86 in elementary education and minored in psychology. She was encouraged by her mother to have a career so that when she got married she would have something to fall back on. During college Ann was involved in musicals and plays, was elected to the student government, and maintained an active involve- ment in student oriented church activities. She also Spent ten weeks each summer employed at a church camp. The Mead Family Ann and Rob first got to know each other when they travelled by car with several others to a national church conference for students. They were both SOphomores at the time. About three months later they began dating and con- tinued to date during their SOphomore, junior, and senior years. They did not see each other during the summers. They discovered they had a common interest in religion and psychology. At Christmas in their senior year, they planned to go separate ways upon graduation. However, they decided to marry and did so the month following their college graduation in July of 1968. Ann and Rob moved to Illinois and remained there for six years. During these years, Rob completed seminary, and worked part-time on a degree in counseling psychology, for which he completed the course work but not the thesis. ROb took various summer jobs including dairy work, work in a psychiatric hospital, and a summer internship in a church. Ann taught first grade and also obtained a master's degree 87 in guidance and counseling. In 1972, Ann began working as an elementary school counselor and then became the affective educational consultant for the district. During their six years in Illinois, Ann and Rob shared household responsibilities. However, in contrast to the present, they usually did the cleaning together and Rob did the finances. They also participated in couple's counseling groups as part of Rob's seminary program and found this experience very beneficial to their relationship. One summer Rob worked full-time and Ann stayed home. She thought she would enjoy the change. However, she dis- covered that without her work, and with Rob so involved in his work, she began feeling very empty, lonely, and depressed. They discussed this situation and agreed upon a goal of sharing work in order to allow prime time to also involve their relationship. They thought they might do marriage and family counseling together in the future. During their last year in Illinois, Rob and Ann had to deal with a major conflict concerning their careers. Rob was feeling comfortable with the institutional church, knew he wanted to be a generalist, and decided he wanted to be a church minister. Consequently, Rob wanted to move. Ann had just been offered an excellent job which she wanted to take and which would require her to remain in Illinois where she was quite content and very involved. They spent a lot of time discussing ways to resolve the conflict and finally agreed that if Rob got a church position by June in an area 88 where there were career possibilities for Ann and a univer- sity nearby, they would move. If not, they would stay in Illinois and Ann would take the new job. Rob was offered a job by June that met the stipulations and consequently Ann and Rob moved to Michigan in 1974. They moved into the house they are living in at the present time and Rob became the minister of a local church. In Michigan, Ann got involved in a transactional analysis training group, since Ann and Rob still had the goal in mind of being counselors together in the future. Ann also accepted a job as a campus minister doing individual coun- seling, leading a religious study group, and leading the youth group. She worked half-time and became licensed to ministry at the church and took the reverend title. In April of 1975 Ann became pregnant. On Ann's thirtieth birthday in January of 1976, Jason was born. Ann and Rob felt very stressed with an infant and one and a half jobs. In addition, they were involved in very separate communities and felt fragmented. They decided against full time child care as a solution. Since Ann had become more comfortable with ministry, Rob and Ann decided to prOpose to Rob's congregation an experiment in which Rob and Ann would share the pastorate, with Rob working 60 percent of the time and Ann working 40 percent of the time. In October of 1976 the experiment was accepted by the congregation and on January first of 1977 it began. By October of 1977, Ann and Rob were identified as co-pastors 89 and began receiving separate checks for the same amount and sharing the job equally, rather than sixty-forty. At the present time their combined yearly income is $11,500, plus $600 for professional enrichment which they Split, and $900 for car. In addition, their present home is owned by the church and they live there rent free. Ann and Rob keep their money in joint accounts and make mutal decisions on how it will be spent. However, money they receive as gifts they keep separate and have free choice in Spending it. Ann and Rob reported experiencing some difficulties adjusting to job-Sharing. At first, they struggled with differentiation and identity issues. They wanted to be able to hold individual identities with separate strengths and weaknesses and not allow themselves to become too merged. They learned to accept that differences did not necessarily mean better than or worse than, and they real- ized that they were not going to agree with what each other said or did all of the time. Also, they learned to accept that when one spouse made a mistake, the other spouse was not responsible for it. In addition, when Ann and Rob first began job- sharing, Rob feared that not enough of the church work was getting done and Ann feared that Jason was not getting enough "real" parenting. When they examined the Situation, they realized that their fears were a result of having difficulty letting go of responsibilities they were used to having. Ann and Rob also had to adjust to the difficulties 90 and complexities of scheduling their time in order to carry out church and family responsibilities. At the present time, Ann and Rob agree that job- sharing has both advantages and disadvantages. Rob has the advantage of being able to share more fully in parenting and Ann has the advantage of being involved in professional work and parenting. For both Ann and Rob, parenting and profes- sional work are more balanced in the dual-career job-sharing lifestyle in comparison with other alternatives they con- sidered. Ann and Rob have more contact with each other and have a common focus in life. As a result, they claim they are less lonely. Ann and Rob also have the advantage of being able to complement each other's strengths and weak- nesses. They agree that two heads are better than one. Since the quality of their work is dependent upon the quality of their personal relationship, they believe that their job-sharing lifestyle encourages them to develop and maintain a good relationship with each other. They also agree that their son has the advantage of having two parents very involved in childcare. Ann and Rob also experience some disadvantages in this arrangement. They only make one half of the salary they would be making if they both worked full time. They also find that it is very difficult to be good at passing on important information to each other. In addition, if they do not perform in their areas of weakness, then they do not grow as much professionally and personally. Finally, 91 Jason encounters the weaknesses of both parents along with the strengths. However, at the present time, Ann and Rob agree that the advantages of their lifestyle outweigh the disadvantages. Recently, Ann and Rob decided to have another child and in July of 1979 Ann became pregnant again. At the present time they intend to continue their job-sharing life- style since they think it is working out well for them and for the congregation. Description of the Family Environment In this section a description of the Mead family environment at the time of this study is presented. This description includes the community, the church, the organi- zational structure of the church and the family home. The Community Observations began in July of 1979. Most of the observations were done in Rob and Ann's home which is located in a city in central Michigan with a pOpulation of over 100,000. The city is the headquarters for many trade and professional associations and has much heavy industry. The Mead home is in a middle class neighborhood with a park, hospital, and various small businesses and stores located nearby. Most of their neighbors are older and retired. Ann is one of at least five women ministers in the community. Ann and Rob were able to job share due to the 92 positive attitudes of the leaders within their church and at their district level. These leaders were acceptant of women in the minstry and of job-sharing by Spouses within the ministry. Ann and Rob also believe that because they live in a relatively urban community as opposed to a small town, community members are more accepting of job-sharing and women in the ministry. The Church Their church is less than one mile away from their home. It is situated on a small, unpaved plot of land on a corner. The main floor contains a worship room, an office, a nursery, a coatroom, two small classrooms, and a small meeting room. The basement is a multi-purpose room which also includes a kitchen area, three small rooms for children's groups, and the lavatories. The congregation consists of about seventy members. The Organizational Structure of the Church In this section, synonyms will be used for those church related positions and areas of responsibility that might allow readers to identify the denomination and as a result, identify the subjects in this study. The church is governed by a set of bylaws. The congregation, in consultation with the apprOpriate church authorities, is responsible for employing a pastor. Selec- tion is based upon the person's faith, educational 93 qualifications, and ability to teach, preach, counsel and administer. According to the bylaws, the pastor is to be the Spiritual guide of the congregation and the executive director of the church program. The pastor is also an ex— officio member of the church board of directors, the church committees, and the church task forces. These groups, along with the pastor are responsible for carrying out the work of the church. Members of the board of trustees and the com- mittees are elected by the congregation. Members of the task forces are appointed or volunteer. The church board of trustees has an executive com- mittee. The pastor is reportable (defined as vertical responsibility between superior and subordinate) only to the executive committee of the church board on interpretation of contract, working conditions, relationships, and position description. The pastor is reportable to the congregational business meeting in terms of final budget consideration annually and in terms of tenure. This is the ultimate employing body of the congregation with whom the pastors must deal. The pastors are also accountable (defined as horizontal responsibility as a co-worker) to the church board and its committees on program planning and administra- tion, and to the congregational business meeting for periodic reports. There are three general areas of church responsi- bility with three corresponding committees with task forces. The first and largest is the Supportive Growth-and Religious 94 Education Committee. Ann is primarily responsible for meeting With this group. Their area of responsibility in- cludes music and worship, religious education, and social activities. There is also the Outreach Committee with which Rob primarily works. Their area of responsibility involves social action, community outreach, evangelism, public rela- tions, peace and justice concerns, and ecumenical relation- ships. The third committee is the Management Committee. Rob is also primarily responsible for working with this group. Their area of responsibility includes prOperty issues, money, and leadership development. Ann and Rob also have a Minis- terial Helpers group to help them with ministerial tasks. The'Home The Mead house, which is owned by the church, is brick and has two floors, a front porch, and an unfinished basement. It is located on a small lot with houses on both sides, across the street, and behind. There is a small front yard, a two car garage located behind the house to the right, and a small back yard with a garden. Ann and Rob own two automobiles. One was bought new in 1969 and the other was bought new in 1975. The Meads also have a large garden located several miles from their home. They plant and harvest it yearly. This garden is on land owned by their friends and they use this land for gardening free of charge. Rough sketches of the floor plans of the house the Mead family lives in are located in Figures 7-8. The front entry 95 .omsom mo nooam umuflm .n musmwm E I .._I2m_ .._I I :88 \i E memo *Eo :1 .3 H2 Zmo .2... .II N .5... gm... 0 .15 # um>ummno mo sowumooq ascent? * .mmsom no noon osoomm .m ousmwm 96 IrZOEu . Jo .2mm .5 I. T. T q .1 J Exam. $0.510: .2QO I. <2 1TH 5.. _I_._Iummn0 mo counumooq Hmowmaa * 97 of the house leads into the living room‘on the left and the dining room on the right. Directly across from the front entrance are the stairs to the second floor and a coat closet. The kitchen is located off the dining room and the den or television room is located off the living room. The rear exit is situated in a hallway off the kitchen along with the stairs to the basement. The basement is used primarily as a laundry room and a storage room. In the basement is a freezer containing fresh frozen food from their gardens. Since the Meads have two long haired cats who are not allowed outside, the base- ment also houses their litter box. The bathroom is located on the second floor of the house at the tOp of the stairs. Jason's bedroom, the master bedroom, a sewing room, and a storage room are also located on the second floor. The most common place from which to observe on the first floor of the house was the dining room table since it offered a good view of activity in both the kitchen and the living room. The most common place from which to observe on the second floor was the hallway since action in most of the upstairs rooms could be viewed from there without getting in the way. The family was also observed in their yard, in the car, in the park, in the neighborhood, in their garden, and in church. 98 Although the Meads do not own the home they are living in, they do own the furniture in the house along with the electrical applicances they use except for the oven and refrigerator. Their appliances include a dishwasher, a freezer, a clothes washer and dryer, a blender, a mixer, and assorted other small appliances. Family Organization In order to accomplish tasks and attain goals, most families develOp some methods of organization. The focus of this section is on the organizational methods of the Mead family. RESEARCH QUESTION #1--How do Spouses organize to 'perform family related tasks and work related tasks? Rob and Ann use a rather complex system of organi- zation to accomplish family and work related tasks. They consider Tuesday through Saturday their weekdays or work- days. Their weekend or days off include Sunday afternoon and evening, and Monday. Generally, Ann and Rob take turns Spending a full day at church or doing church related work and spending a full day at home or doing family related work. At the time this study began, Ann generally worked at church on Wednesday and Friday. Rob generally worked at church on Thursday and Saturday. Every week on Tuesday, Rob and Ann work together at church in the morning. Tuesday afternoons vary. Sometimes they both work together at home, sometimes one or the other works at church, and sometimes 99 they take turns working at church. The whole family attends church on Sunday morning. The spouse who is responsible for the Sunday service leaves early for church and the other spouse remains home with Jason and gets him ready for church. On some Sundays, neither spouse is responsible for the ser- vice and the family goes to church together. There are many exceptions to this general pattern. During certain weeks, Rob Spends one-half day at an ecumeni- cal meeting and as a result misses his time at his church. During such weeks, Ann and Rob Split one work day to com- pensate. Rob and Ann also do church work either separately or together on some evenings and weekends. In addition, they sometimes do family related work during times they would typically be doing church work. Since Ann and Rob take turns preaching, the person reSponsible for the Sunday service usually spends more time at church during the pre- ceding week than the other person. When Ann and Rob need to Spend short periods of time away from home together, Jason stays with babysitters. Ann and Rob often travel out of town for conferences, meetings, professional enrichment activities, and pulpit exchanges. When they are out of town together for an ex- tended period of time, Jason stays with his maternal grand- parents on their farm in Indiana. Since Ann, Rob, and Jason see these kin often and maintain close ties, Jason tends to enjoy these visits. Ann and Rob call Jason every other day while they are away. Sometimes one or the other spouse will 100 spend an extended period of time out of town. When this happens, the Spouse who remains home hires babysitters when necessary in order to accomplish church and family related work alone. Ann and Rob agree that although they follow a basic structure for organizing their time, there are so many exceptions to the basic structure that they have to revise their schedules and work them out on a weekly basis and often on a daily basis. Both Rob and Ann use schedule books and "do lists" as organizational aids. They agree that scheduling and organizing their time in order to Share work and family life is often a complex and confusing task. They both need to be very flexible. However, they are able to be flexible since they structure so much of their own time. During this study, Ann and Rob switched working days. They made this switch so that Rob could be out of town on Wednesdays in order to do work toward special certification in pastoral counseling. Ann and Rob agree that their method of organizing to perform church related work is working well. They com— municate daily about work over the telephone and when they are together. They meet every Tuesday together at church from 9:00 A.M. to 1:00 P.M. They cover a specific agenda, evaluate the past week, and discuss and decide who will do what the next week. When problems or issues come up during the week that do not need to be dealt with immediately, they 101 put them on the agenda to discuss the next Tuesday. Some- times during their Tuesday meetings at church, Ann and Rob also discuss issues about household work and childcare. They would prefer to keep these meetings confined to church issues only. However, they have discovered that some house- hold issues seem so related and so pressing, that they slip into these meetings. Organizing to perform family related tasks is not working out as smoothly as church work. In particular, housework is a sensitive issue for Rob and Ann. Sometimes, the quality of Rob's work is not acceptable to Ann. Origi- nally, they had agreed to be responsible for cleaning spe— cific areas of the house and divided it up by rooms. However, Ann prefers to clean daily or weekly. In contrast, Rob agrees he is a "binge" cleaner. He will often wait until company is coming or until Ann complains before he cleans. As a result, Ann still feels responsible for the housework since she seems to have to keep reminding Rob to do it. During this study, Ann and Rob discussed this problem and decided to hold a "staff of the house meeting" at home, similar to their Tuesday organizational meetings at church. They agreed to meet each week on their day off to map out what needs to be done for the household and divide it up. At the present time, Ann and Rob have not followed through fully on this decision and do not hold formal meetings. However, each week at some time on their day off, they informally discuss household issues, such as how to redo the 102 house for the new baby and how to celebrate family birthdays. Nevertheless, they report that organization of household work has not yet been resolved to their satisfaction. Ann and Rob each kept a daily schedule of activities for one week from July 31 to August 6. This schedule illustrates how they generally organize their work and family life. During this week, Rob spent more time at church than Ann, since it was his week to do the Sunday service. The schedule is presented in Figure 9. Levels of Role Differentiation in the Family Situation In this section data pertinent to role differentia- tion in each family-related category are reported and the level of role differentiation for each category is deter- mined based upon Christensen's conceptual framework. In addition, the primary role differentiation pattern of the Mead's family Situation is determined. RESEARCH QUESTION #2--What are the levels of role differentiation in the family situation? Family Role Differentiation by Category Based upon data obtained from the observation schedule (see Table 8) plus self-report data, spouse be- havior within the family related categories is described and each individual category is classified as differentiated, partially differentiated, or undifferentiated. Since quanti- fiable data relevant to differentiation in the family 7:30 A.M. 8:00 9:00 9:30 to 1:15 P.M. 1:15 1:40 :15 :30 :00 :15 :00 OU‘UINN 0‘ :45 10:00 10:30 12:00 midnight 7:00 A.M. 8:40 9:00 9:30 10:00 Figure 9. 103 Tuesday, July 31, 1979 ANN Got up and showered. Jason was up. Dressed him and 8:00 A.M. prepared breakfast. 8-30 Left for sitter--visited briefly. 9:00 Staff meeting with Rob at the church. 1:15 P.M. Picked up Jason and visited with litter. 1:30 Arrived home, got lunch, changed clothes. Left for garden with Jason. At garden working. 2:30 Picked up church member. 3:30 Arrived home, showered, relaxed. Shelled peas, fixed supper, cleaned up kitchen, changed 6:30 clothes. Ate supper. Left for church. (Appointment 7:15 didn't show.) Took Rob to his ecumenical church board meeting. Back to pick up Jason at sitters 8:30 and visit. Took Jason for treat on the way home. Arrived home. Rob called. Left to pick up Rob from ecumenical board meeting. Arrived home, relaxed. 10:00 P.M. Started typing church camp materials. Ran out of typing paper, went to bed. Wednesday, August 1 6:45 A.M. Got up, began typing camp material. Called Browns,‘ finished typing, 8:30 dressed. Took camp materials to Browns. 9:00 Arrived home, fixed breakfast, 9:30 collected materials. Left for church office, ran errands--post office, office supply store, book store. 11:00 Worked on worshop service, position description. 8:00 Sample Weekly Schedule. 'Fictitious names will be used in this schedule. 0p and showered. Ate breakfast. To church staff meeting with Ann. Picked up Jason at sitters with Ann. Home and ate lunch. To hospital for visit. To church to work. Home for supper. To church to drop off Ann, took Jason to sitters. Ecumenical board meeting. Home and put Jason to bed. Up and to airport to greet refugee family. Home. Jason up and I made breakfast for us. Watch Sesame Street with Jason. Shell peas while watching T.V. and dozing. Start lunch and play with Jason occasionally, read mail. 12:45 P.M. 1:45 2:30 6:10 6:55 7:30 9:15 9:35 10:00 10:30 9:00 A.M. 10:15 10:30 10:50 1:20 P.M. 2:15 3:30 6:00 Figure 9 104 Wednesday , August 1 ANN Home for lunch with Rob and Jason. Filled in new schedule book, up- dated lists to do. Took nap. Talked to Rob. Woke up, dressed, left for hospital Visited Jill at hospital, went back to church. Worked at church office. Picked up Jason, went to pick up Mary (Jason's friend), took them home, picked up John (church member) and took him home. Back at church. Home to eat supper. Started snapping beans. Played Candyland with the kids, looked at scrapbooks and photo album, read story books. Snapped beans. Visited with Connie. Put Jason to bed. Went to bed. 12:45 P.M. 1:30 2:30 3:00 4:30 5:00 5:30 5:45 6:45 7:15 7:45 10:15 11:00 Thursday, August 2 Got up-—dressed--fixed breakfast, cleaned kitchen. Dressed Jason Left for fair. Arrived at fair--saw sheep-- visited with Knights--saw animals and farm machinery. Arrived home, put Jason to bed, started lunch, planted garden. Ate lunch, visited with Rob, talked and read about early pregnancy. Went to church to get materials. Returned home and worked on position description. Finished position description, fixed supper with Jason. (cont'd). 9:00 A.H. 9:45 10:15 2:15 P.M. 3:30 3:30 5:30 6:25 ROB Lunch. Clean up and do dishes. Play with Jason and put him down for nap. Do laundry, read paper, listen to tapes. Clean green beans and start supper. Get Jason up. Friend comes to visit. Finish making supper. Ready to eat supper. I leave for church to collect papers and make phone calls. To ecumenical meeting. Visit friends to pick up watch. Home and to bed after hanging up wash. Up and showered. Ate breakfast. To church to work. Home for lunch. To church for materials. Returned home and did church work with Ann at home. To church to type. Ate supper. 7:00 7:30 to 9:45 9:45 to 10:15 10:15 to 11:00 11:00 to 11:30 12:00 midnight 8:00 A.M. 2:15 P.M. 5:30 5:50 7:45 8:30 9:15 9:30 10:30 Figure 9 105 Thursday, August 2 ANN Ate supper, changed clothes. Took Jason to sitter. Went to church. Executive canittee meeting . Picked up Jason, visited with sitters. Fixed twin bed for Jason. Put Jason to bed. Went to bed. 6:30 7:30 10:00 11:00 12:00 midnight Friday, August 3 Got up, showered, fixed break- fast, ate, cleaned up kitchen. Left for church. Set up and started secretary. Wrote August newsheet. Arranged worship ser- vice. Typed bulletin stencil. Planned Sunday school. Went home for lunch. with Jean. Left for hospital. Visited Back to church for individual counseling session. Talked to Rob on phone. Straightened office. bulletin. Went home, changed clothes, fixed and ate supper, played with Jason. Mimeoed Planted backyard garden with Jason. Put Jason to bed. Wrote out shopping list and planned Saturday. Read in bed. To sleep. (cont'd). 8:30 A.M. 9:00 9:15 to 12:00 noon 12:00 to 1:00 P.M. 1:30 to 2:15 2:30 5:30 5:45 to 7:30 7:30 9:45 10:00 11:15 12:00 midnight. ROB Left for town to have materials copied. Executive committee meeting. Home and set up bed for Jason. Read paper. Read and went to bed. Up and dressed Jason. Ate breakfast. Took care of Jason and Diane (secretary's daughter). Watched them inside and outside. Changed Diane's diaper. Prepared lunch while keeping an eye on the kids. Cleaned up kitchen while watching kids. Changed diaper. Changed clothes and left to take refugee man to look for jobs. Took Jason along and Jason stayed with his wife. Went with Jason to bread store. Home, read paper, ate, attended to Jason. Watched T.V. news, talked to Ann. Left for garden. Went to drugstore. Went to grocery store. line for 15 minutes!!! Waited in Home and put groceries away. Bed. 9:00 A.H. 9:50 10:45 12:10 P.M. 12:30 1:00 2:00 2:30 2:55 3:40 4:45 5:30 11:00 11:30 12 :60 midnight 12. 35 3.14. 7:45 A.M. 8:20 8:30 9:15 12:45 P.M. 2:15 2:45 3:15 3:30 to 6:00 6:00 to 6:30 6:30 7:00 Figure 9 106 Saturday, August 4 ANN Woke up, talked to Rob, played with Jason, got dressed. Made breakfast, ate breakfast, cleaned up kitchen, ate breakfast. Prepared beans for freezing. Played game with Jason. Freeze beans. Began lunch, continued freezing beans. Ate lunch. Called R. Dressed Jason for wedding, read his story, put him to bed. Freeze beans, cook dish for potluck. Get dressed, fix ribbons. Leave for wedding. Return from wedding. Finish up beans and finish storing pork. Get ready for bed, cuddle time. Plan for Sunday school class. To sleep. 9:00 A.M. 9:45 10:15 10:30 11:00 1:00 P.M. 3:00 4:00 5:00 5:30 11:00 11:30 12:00 midnight Sunday, August 5 Get up, shower, get dressed. Wake Jason, finish dressing. Dress Jason. Leave for church. Return from church. Get lunch, change clothes, comfort Jason, assist Jason in bathroom, read paper. Read. Eat lunch, clear table. Read book. Hap. Cuddle time. Watch news. Fix food for snack, eat, talk with Jason. (cont'd). 5:30 A.M. 6:30 9:30 12:45 P.M. 1:15 1:45 2:45 3:15 3:30 5:45 6:30 7:00 ROB Up and showered. Ate breafkast. Read paper and mail. Played with Jason. To church to work. Home to get note papers, lunch. Ate lunch. Go to store, get food and gas. Go to hoSpital to visit. Get ready for wedding. Leave for friend's wedding. Home from wedding. To bed. To sleep. Up and shower. Walk to church and work on sermon and worship details. Church and study hour. Home from church. To church to prepare for chapel service. To hospital for chapel. Home and eat dinner. Family relax time. Nap. Carry Jason to his bed. Couple. Watch news. Get ready for family walk. do load of wash, snack. 7:55 9:10 10:00 10:45 11:45 12:30 P.M. 8:15 A.H. 9:15 9:45 10:15 11:30 12:00 noon 1:00 3:00 Figure 9 107 Sunday, August 5 ANN Family walk. Home from walk, eat, start dish- washer, put away food. Take down crib, clean and re- arrange Jason's roam, put clean sheets on bed. Read. Talk with Rod and read. To sleep. Monday, Wake up, read in bed. Hake decorations. Talk with Rob. Hake decorations. To drugstore. Leave for Commemoratia. To hospital with Rob and Jason. To garden with Rob and Jason. (cont'd). 7:55 9:00 9:45 10:00 11:00 11:45 12:30 P.M. August 6 7:30 A.M. 7:50 9:30 11:00 12:00 1:00 3:00 6:00 6:30 7:15 10:00 11:00 ROB Leave for walk. Cane back fran walk and go to hospital. Home and play with Jason. Hatch T.V. Get Jason ready for bed. Go to bed, talk and read with Ann. To sleep. Wake up and dress. Leave for prayer service. Home and talk to Ann. Do wash, mow lawn. Go downtown to meeting. To hospital with Ann and Jason. Go to garden and pick beans, etc. Go to visit church people with beans. Home and change clothes. Go to worship service downtown. Home again, read paper. To bed. 108 Table 8.--Family Role Differentiation Data: Frequencies and Percentages. Figures Based on Combined Over Summer and Fall Data M F % M % F % Dif. 20% Dif. Food Prep. & Cleanup 258 221 54 46 8 Parenting 359 337 49 51 2 Housecare & Cleaning 44 35 56 44 12 Spouse Interaction 323 323 50 50 0 Care of Clothing 41 43 49 51 2 Care of Yard & Car 32 16 67 33 34 x Marketing 1 8 ll 89 78 x Record Keeping 4 21 16 84 68 x Sp. House. Upkeep/Repair 54 ll 83 17 66 x Soc. w Frnds, Neigh, Kin 50 93 35 65 30 x Current Events 40 9 82 18 64 x Athletics 32 3 91 9 82 . x Hobbies, Avocations O 0 Games 0 0 Entertainment 45 34 57 43 14 Other Recreation 6 8 43 57 14 Personal Hygiene 27 8 Packing for Trips 1 10 9 91 82 x Legend: M = Male F - Female t M = The percentage of instances the male performed activities with a category 8 F = The percentage of instances the female performed activities within a category % Dif. = The difference between the male percentage and the female per- centage n - Frequency of instances each Spouse performed activities within a category. 109 situation were obtained using the observation schedule, the following expanded Operational definitions were used to determine level of differentiation in this section: Differentiation refers to behavior categories per- formed by only one sex partner. Undifferentiation refers to behavior categories which are performed by both sex partners with a similar degree of frequency. Similar is defined as 20 percent or less difference between the percentage of instances one spouse performs activities within a category as compared to the other. Twenty percent was chosen as the cut off point because any difference greater than this was judged to represent considerable differentiation. Partial differentiation refers to behavior categories in which behaviors within the category are divided by acti- vities, some of which are performed by only one sex partner and/or some by only the other. It also refers to categories in which one sex partner performs within the category with significantly greater frequency than the other. Signifi- cantly greater is 20 percent or more difference between the percentage of instances within a category that one Spouse performs activities as compared to the other. Food preparation and cleanup.--Both Ann and Rob were observed performing food preparation and cleanup activities. They both prepared, served and cleaned up after breakfast, lunch, and dinner. They both participated in the process of 110 freezing food. They both prepared dishes for pot luck dinners and they both prepared meals for guests. Sometimes they worked together on food preparation and cleanup activi- ties. More often, one or the other prepared, served and cleaned up a meal. Only Ann was actually observed baking. However, based upon self-report information, Rob has baked on occasion, although Ann does the majority of the baking. Of the total amount of food preparation and cleanup activities performed during the 100 hours of observation, Rob's frequency of involvement was 54 percent and Ann's was 46 percent (see Table 8). Since Ann and Rob both performed the activities within this category, and since they performed in this category with a similar degree of frequency, the role structure of this category is considered undifferen- tiated. Parenting and childcare.--Both Ann and Rob were observed performing all types of parenting activities. They both bathed, fed, and dressed Jason. They both took care of his health. They both took him to social, recreational, and educational activities. They both played with him, comforted him, gave him affection, read to him, talked and listened to him, helped him learn things, disciplined him, and supervised him. They also cared for other chil- dren along with Jason. Though Ann and Rob sometimes did certain parenting activities together, usually one or the other performed a particular activity at a given time. 111 Based upon observation schedule data, Rob's frequency of involvement in this category was 49 percent and Ann's was 51 percent. It was difficult to distinguish between the two categories undifferentiation and partial differentiation. For example, both spouses taught the child activities within the arts. If teaching in the arts is one activity within parenting and both Spouses do it, parenting may be con- sidered undifferentiated. However, one parent teaches the child to play a musical instrument and the other parent teaches the child crafts. Based upon such subcategoriza- tion, parenting could be considered partially differentiated. The choice of level of differentiation is based upon how finely activities within a category are broken down. In this study, the choice of level of differentiation was based upon the subcategories used to describe the major family categories. For example, helping the child learn something is listed as a subcategory within the Parenting and Childcare category. Although, only Ann helped Jason learn to do art work and only Rob helped Jason learn to play the trumpet, they both engaged in helping the child learn something. Since both Ann and Rob performed the activities in this category, and Since they performed with a Similar degree of frequency, the role structure of this category is con- sidered undifferentiated. 112 Housecare and cleaning.--Both Ann and Rob were observed performing housecare and cleaning activities. They both vacummed, made and changed beds, picked up, cared for pets, and took care of trash. Certain activities in this category Ann did more often than Rob and other activities, Rob did more often than Ann. For example, Ann spent more time picking up than Rob, and Rob took care of the trash more often than Ann. Based upon observation schedule data, Rob’s frequency of involvement in this category was 56 per— cent and Ann's was 44 percent. Since they both performed the activities in this category, and since they performed in this category with a similar degree of frequency, the role structure of this category is considered undiffer- entiated. Spouse interaction.--Both Rob and Ann were observed giving each other affection and emotional support. They listened to each other and shared information. They planned, made decisions, resolved conflicts, and discussed their relationship together. Based upon observation schedule data, Ann's frequency of involvement in this cate- gory was 50 percent and Rob's was 50 percent. This cate- gory is different from the other categories in that in order for an activity to be coded as spouse interaction, both spouses needed to be involved. Consequently, compared frequency of involvement in this category would always be 50-50. Since Ann and Rob both performed the activities in 113 this category, the role structure of this category is con- sidered undifferentiated. Care of clothing.--Rob and Ann were both observed performing clothing care activities. They both collected and sorted clothes for the wash, loaded and unloaded the washer and dryer, hung clothes on the line, folded clothes, and put clothes away. They both worked on mending. However, only Ann used the sewing machine to make clothes. Based upon observation schedule data, Ann's frequency of involvement in this category was 51 percent and Rob's was 49 percent. Even though they both performed in this cate- gory with a similar degree of frequency, one activity in the category was only performed by Ann. Consequently, the role structure of this category is considered partially differ- entiated. Care of yard, car, and garden.—-Certain activities in this category were performed by both Ann and Rob. They were both observed gardening. Also, they reported that they trimmed bushes, took care of leaves, and cleaned the garage together. Other activities in this category were only per- formed by Rob. He was observed changing the antifreeze on the car. Based upon self-report data, he does the mainten- ance work on the car. In addition, he usually washes the car and mows the lawns. 114 Based upon observation schedule data, Ann's frequency of involvement in this category was 33 percent and Rob's was 67 percent. Since some activities in this category were performed only by Rob, and since Rob performed within this category with significantly greater frequency than Ann, this category is considered partially differentiated. Marketing.--Based upon self-report data, both Ann and Rob perform activities in this category. However, Rob usually does the grocery shOpping and puts the groceries away. In addition, Rob usually does the research related to major and minor purchases. Occasionally, Ann will do the grocery shopping. They both do purchasing of clothing. Ann was observed shopping for a physician to deliver their child. They both report shOpping for major purchases. Based upon observation schedule data, Ann's frequency of involvement in this category was 89 percent and Rob's was 11 percent. However, the percentages in this category are misleading, Since grocery Shopping was not observed during the 100 hours. Based upon self-report data, Rob probably does significantly more marketing than Ann. Thus, since one activity in this category is usually performed by Rob and Since another was performed by Ann, and since one spouse performs within this category with Significantly greater frequency than the other, the role structure of this cate- gory is considered partially differentiated. 115 Record keeping.--Both Ann and Rob were observed behaving in this category. Ann paid bills, balanced the checkbook, and made deposits. Activities in this category are primarily Ann's responsibility. However, Rob made some deposits and let Ann know what checks he had written. He and Ann discussed and agreed on how much money to deposit. Based upon observation schedule data, Ann's frequency of involvement in this category was 84 percent and Rob's was 16 percent. Since some activities in this category were performed only by Ann, and since Ann performed within this category with significantly greater frequency than Rob, the role structure of this category is considered partially differentiated. Special household upkeep and repair.--Rob was ob- served repairing equipment and appliances. Ann and Rob were both involved in redecorating activities, such as changing the house for the new baby. Based upon observation schedule data, Ann's frequency of involvement in this category was 17 percent and Rob's was 83 percent. Since one activity in this category was performed only by Rob and Since Rob's frequency of involvement in this category was significantly greater than Ann's, the role structure of this category is considered partially differentiated. Socializing with friends! neighbors, and kin.--Both Ann and Rob were observed socializing with friends. They both reported going to parties, special dinners, weddings, 116 picnics, and other social gatherings. They both visit with kin and they both correspond by mail with significant others. However, based upon observation schedule data, Ann's fre— quency of involvement in this activity was 65 percent and Rob's was 35 percent. Since Ann performed in this category with significantly greater frequency than Rob, the role structure of this category is considered partially differ- entiated. Packing for trips.--Both Ann and Rob were observed packing for trips. However, based upon observation schedule data, Ann's frequency of involvement in this category was 91 percent and Rob's was 9 percent. Ann usually packs boxes and suitcases and Rob usually packs the car. Since Ann per- formed within this category with significantly greater frequency than Rob, and Since Ann and Rob perform different aspects of packing, the role structure of this category is considered partiallypdifferentiated. Community service.--Rob and Ann are primarily involved in doing community service work as part of their ministerial job. Community service activities that are part of their job will not be included in this category. However, Ann and Rob were both involved in other types of community service. They participated in this research study. Ann recently agreed to be involved in another research study. In addition, Rob participated in a study by reSponding to a telephone survey on grocery shOpping in their community. 117 Participation in this study was not coded on the observation schedule. In addition, the other two voluntary activities were not observed during the 100 hours. Consequently, there are no figures for this category. However, Since Ann and Rob seemed to be involved in community service activities to a Similar extent, the role structure of this category is considered undifferentiated. Current eventS.--Both Ann and Rob were observed behaving in this category. They both watched the news on television and listened to the news on the radio. Rob read the newspaper frequently and Ann read it occasionally. Based upon observation schedule data, Rob's frequency of involvement in this category was 82 percent and Ann's was 18 percent. Since Rob performed in this category with significantly greater frequency than Ann, the role structure of this category is considered partially differentiated. Athletics.--Both Ann and Rob were observed perform- ing in this category. Ann went for a run in the park. Rob watched a football game on television. Based upon self- report data, Rob played paddleball with a friend, and both Ann and Rob went with Jason to the family swim at the YMCA. Based upon observation schdule data, Ann's frequency of involvement in this activity was 9 percent and Rob‘s was 91 percent. Since Rob's frequency of involvement in this category was Significantly greater than Ann's the role 118 structure of this category is considered partially differ- entiated. Hobbies, avocations.--No behaviors were observed in this category. Ann and Rob were not involved in this cate- gory at the time of the study. Games.-—No behaviors were observed in this category. Ann and Rob did not play games at home, except when playing games with Jason, which is considered parenting. Entertainment.--Ann and Rob were both observed participating in activities in this category. They both watched television, listened to the radio, and read for pleasure. Based upon self-report data, they attend plays and go to the movies. Based upon observation schedule data, Ann's frequency of involvement in this category was 43 per- cent and Rob's was 57 percent. Since Ann and Rob both participated in activities in this category, and since they performed in this category with a Similar degree of frequency, the role structure of this category is considered undiffer- entiated. Other recreation.--Ann and Rob sometimes took naps in the afternoon. Also, based upon self—report data, Ann and Rob took one day when they were at their National Con- ference and spent it doing recreational activities. Based upon observational data, Ann's frequency of involvement in this activity was 57 percent and Rob's was 43 percent. 119 Since Ann and Rob both performed activities in this category and Since they behaved in this category with a similar degree of frequency, the role structure of this category is considered undifferentiated. Personal hygiene.--Of course, Ann and Rob were both observed doing activities related to personal hygiene. Since this category was added after the 100 hours of obser- vation began, percentages were not calculated for it. How- ever, it seemed that Rob spent more time in the Shower and in the bathroom than Ann. Ann considered this area parti- cularly important because she considered Spending time alone in the bathroom a luxury. They reported that this category was sometimes an area of conflict for them. Since there was often limited time to get ready for certain activities outside the home, when one spouse Spent a long time in the bathroom, the other spouse had to dress the child and as a result did not have as much time to get ready. Family Role Differentiation: Summary Observation schedule and self-report data for each family role category were reported and categories were classified according to the extended Operational definitions of differentiation. The three levels of role differentiation used to classify categories were differentiated, partially differentiated, and undifferentiated. 120 Seven categories were undifferentiated: Food Pre— paration and Cleanup; Parenting and Childcare; Housecare and Cleaning; Spouse Interaction; Community Service; Enter- tainment; and Other Recreation. Nine categories were parti- ally differentiated: Care of Clothing; Care of Yard, Car, and Garden; Marketing; Record Keeping; Special Household Upkeep and Repair; Socializing with Friends, Neighbors, and Kin; Packing for Trips; Current Events; and Athletics. No categories were considered differentiated. Although nine categories were partially differentiated and seven categories were undifferentiated, 82 percent of Ann's total involvement was in the seven undifferentiated categories and only 18 percent was in the nine partially differentiated categories. Similarly, 83 percent of Rob's total involvement occurred within the seven undifferentiated categories and only 17 percent occurred in the nine partially differentiated categories. Consequently, the primary role pattern observed in the family situation is considered undifferentiated. A very small number of activities within categories were performed by one or the other Spouse only. Most activities in the family Situation were performed by both Spouses. When presented with observation schedule findings relevant to family role differentiation, Spouses agreed that except for the category of Marketing, findings seemed to reflect accurately most of their perceptions about how much each performed within categories. However, both spouses 121 were somewhat surprised that Rob performed as frequently as he did within household work categories. Direction of Role Change in the Family Situation In this section the extent the male is assuming tra- ditionally female tasks in the family situation is reported. The extent the female is assuming traditionally male tasks in the family situation is also reported. RESEARCH QUESTION #3--In how many and in which cate- gories of the family Situation is the male assuming traditionally female tasks? In how many and in which categories of the family situation is the female assuming traditionally male tasks? The family related categories were classified as traditionally male, traditionally female, traditionally male and/or female, and traditionally both with some differentia- tion by activity (see Table 6). Based upon observation schedule data (see Table 8) and self-report data, Rob assumed traditionally female tasks in Six categories of the family Situation: Food Preparation and Cleanup; Parenting and Childcare; Housecare and Cleaning; Care of Clothing; Marketing; and Packing for Trips. Ann assumed traditionally male tasks in one category in the family situation: Care of Yard, Car, and Garden. The Parenting and Childcare category was classified as traditionally both with some differentia- tion by activity. Within the parenting category, physical care of the child was classified as traditionally female. Since Rob participated in the physical care of Jason, he 122 assumed traditionally female tasks within the parenting category. Direction Of role change in the family Situation is summarized in Figure 10. Ann and Rob have both taken on tasks traditionally belonging to the Opposite sex in the family Situation. Traditional Role Direction of Categories Differentiation Role Change Food Preparation and Traditionally Female Mf Cleanup Parenting and Childcare Both with some differ- Mf tiation by activity Housecare and Cleaning Traditionally Female Mf Care Of Clothing Traditionally Female Mf Marketing Traditionally Female Mf Packing for Trips Traditionally Female Mf Care Of Yard, Car, and Garden Traditionally Male Fm Total Mf in family situation: Mf5 Total Fm in family Situation: le Figure 10. Direction of Role Change in the Family Situation Legend: Mf Fm Male takes on traditionally female tasks within a category. Female takes on traditionally male tasks within a category. Bases Of Family Role Differentiation The focus Of this section is on how role differ- entiation iS determined in the Mead family situation. The bases for determining role differentiation in family related categories are reported. 123 RESEARCH QUESTION #4--How is role differentiation deter- mined in the family Situation? The role differentiation that does exist in the family situation is determined on the basis of Skill, inter- est, circumstances, efficiency, personal values, and tra- ditional sex role norms. This section is based upon self- report data. Rob does mechanical work on the car and fixes appli- ances and other equipment because he is interested and Skilled in this area. In addition, a trait he carried from his family Of origin is ingenuity in the sense of being able tO fix almost anything with a coat hanger. Ann has mechanical aptitude, but no interest. She enjoys Rob being the expert in this area. Rob does most of the grocery shOpping because he likes to read the newspaper for coupons and sales and is Skilled at finding good buys. Ann makes clothing since She has had training and experience in this area and since She values good quality clothes with a good cut and style. Although Rob can sew and does use the sewing machine to do mending, he is less interested and skilled in this area in contrast to Ann. Ann takes care Of the family finances because at the time Ann and Rob were working out the division of labor for a job-sharing lifestyle, Ann needed an additional area of responsibility to balance the workload. They consider themselves equally skilled in this area. 124 Neither Ann nor Rob are interested in nor like to pack fortrips. It has become Ann's job primarily since she is good at organizing and gOOd at details. In addition, she feels that if it is going to be done efficiently and well, she will have to do it. Rob is involved in current events and athletics more than Ann since he is more interested in these areas than she is at the present time. Ann is more involved socially with others than Rob since she is more interested in this area than he at the present time. Levels Of Equality in the Family Situation In this section data pertinent to equality in each family related category are reported and the level Of equality for each category is determined based upon Christensen's conceptual framework. In addition, the overall level Of equality in the Mead family situation is determined. RESEARCH QUESTION #5--What are the levels Of equality in the family Situation? Family Situation Equality by Category Based upon self-report and Observation schedule data (see Table 9), family related categories will be classified as equal, inequal, or partially equal. The cate- gories which have some inequality will be further classified as female superordinate-male subordinate or male super- ordinate-female subordinate. 125 Table 9.--Family Equality Frequency Data. Combined Summer and Fall Data M F ® ® Food Prep. & Cleanup 258 221 4 6 Parenting 359 377 l 5 Housecare & Cleaning 44 35 l l Spouse Interaction 323 323 Care Of Clothing 41 43 Care Of Yard & Car 32 16 3 Marketing 1 8 Record Keeping 4 21 3 Sp. House. Upkeep/Repair 54 ll 3 Soc. w Frnds, Neigh, Kin 50 93 1 Community Service (VOl.) 0 0 Current Events 40 9 Athletics 32 3 Hobbies, Avocations 0 0 Games 0 0 Entertainment 45 34 Other Recreation 6 8 Personal Hygiene 27 8 Packing for Trips l 10 Column Totals 1,317 1,220 9 19 Combined M & E Total: 2,535 Legend: M = Male g= Male in Superordinate Position F = Female = Female in Superordinate Position n = frequency Of instances Observed 126 The following Operational definitions will be used to determine levels Of equality in this section: Equality is measured by the absence Of restrictions on behavior placed by one spouse upon the other in a parti- cular category. Evidence for the absence of restrictions is the lack Of permission granting and permission seeking between Spouses to perform behaviors within a category and the lack of previously established restrictions. Lack Of commanding and obeying between spouses in relation to per— forming behaviors within a category is other evidence of no restrictions. Equality is also measured by a Similar amount Of restrictions on behavior placed by the Spouses upon each other in a particular category. Similar amount Of restriction exists when there is 5 percent or less difference based upon the total possible frequency between the frequency one Spouse as compared to the other is Observed in the superordinate position. Total possible frequency that spouses could have been Observed in a super- ordinate position within categories is Obtained by combining the total the female performed within the category with the the total the male performed within the category. The total number Of instances when any superordination was Observed was small, therefore a difference Of more than 5 percent was considered to represent some degree Of superordination. 127 Inequality is measured by the presence Of restrictions placed by one Spouse upon the other on all Of the behaviors within a particular category. Evidence for the presence Of such restrictions is permission granting and permission seeking between spouses to perform all behaviors within a particular category and/or the presence of previously established restrictions on all behavior within a category. Partial equality is measured by the presence Of partial restrictions on behaviors within a category placed by one spouse upon the other. Evidence for the presence of partial restriction is some permission granting and per- mission seeking between Spouses tO perform certain behaviors within a category and/or the presence Of some previously established restrictions. Evidence for the presence Of partial restriction is also some obeying and commanding between spouses in relation to performing certain behaviors within a category. Female Superordinate-Male Subordinate or Female Dominance refers to categories in which the female partner primarily places restrictions on the male partner. Male Superordinate-Female Subordinate or Male Dominance refers to categories in which the male partner primarily places restrictions on the female partner. Food preparation and c1eanup.--Ann and Rob usually took turns cooking. On a few days when it was one spouse's responsibility to cook, the other Spouse assisted and played 128 a subordinate role. Consequently, at times Ann was observed commanding Rob to do a particular task within this category and at other times, Rob was Observed commanding Ann to do a particular task within this category. On two occasions, Ann told Rob what to do in a food preparation task Ann was more experienced at than Rob, and Rob did what she said. Based upon observation schedule data during the 100 hours of observation Rob was observed in the superordinate position in this category four times and Ann was observed in the superordinate position in this category Six times. Although partial restrictions on behaviors in this category were observed, Since so little restriction was observed and since Ann restricted Rob and Rob restricted Ann with a similar degree of frequency, this behavior cate- gory is classified as equality Parenting and childcare.--Based upon observation schedule data, during the 100 hours of observation Rob was Observed in the superordinate position in this category once and Ann was observed in the superordinate position in this category five times. On five occasions, Ann told Rob a particular parenting activity to do and Rob did it. On one occasion, Rob told Ann a particular parenting activity to do and Ann did it. None of the activities each told the other to do took more than one 5 minute interval. Spouses were observed behaving within the parenting category a com- bined frequency of 736 times. It was theoretically possible 129 for spouses to be observed in superordinate and subordinate positions at least 736 times. The one time Rob was Observed in superordinate position only accounted for .14 percent of the total possible frequency he could have been observed in the superordinate role. The five times Ann was observed in the superordinate position only accounted for .28 percent of the total possible frequency she could have been observed in the superordinate position. There is only .14 percent different between Ann and Rob's percentage of superordina- tion based upon the total superordination possible. This difference is small enough to easily be due to sampling error. Consequently, the difference between Ann's frequency and Rob's frequency is not considered great enough to imply female dominance. As a result, this behavior category is classi- fied as equality. This conclusion is supported by self- report data. Ann and Rob, when questioned, stated that they tend to do little restriction setting with each other, if any. Housecare and c1eaning.--During the 100 hours of observation, Ann and Rob were each observed only once in the superordinate position in this category. Once Ann told Rob to do a particular housecare task and Rob did it. Also, once Rob told Ann to do a particular household task and Ann did it. Although partial restrictions on behaviors in this category were observed, Since Ann and Rob restricted each 130 other with equality frequency, this category is classified as equality. Spouse interaction.--There was no evidence of restriction setting in this category. Consequently, this category is classified as equality. Care of clothing.--There was no evidence Of restric- tion setting in this category. Consequently this category is considered equality. Care of yard, car, and garden.--During the 100 hours of observation, Rob was observed in the superordinate position three times. Rob told Ann to do particular tasks and Ann did them. Spouses were observed behaving in this category a combined frequency of forty-eight times. Thus it was theoretically possible for spouses to be observed in super- ordinate and subordinate positions at least forty-eight times. The three times Rob was observed in the superordinate position accounted for 6.25 percent of the total possible frequency he could have been observed in the superordinate position. Since the difference between 6.25 percent for Rob and 0 percent for Ann is greater than 5 percent, this cate- gory is considered partial equality--male dominance. Marketing.--There were no observations of restriction setting in this category. However, based upon self-report data, some permission granting and permission seeking behavior occurs between spouses in this category. 131 Occasionally Rob asks Ann's permission to purchase some- thing and Ann asks Rob's permission to purchase something. Since partial restriction on behavior in this category was reported and since Spouses agree that Ann tends to restrict Rob in this category significantly more than Rob restricts Ann, this category is considered partial equality--female dominance. Record keeping.--During the 100 observation hours, Ann was observed in the superordinate position within this category three times. Ann told Rob to do particular tasks and Rob did them. For example, Ann told Rob to deposit money at the bank and Rob did so. Spouses were observed behaving in this category a combined frequency of twenty- five times. Thus, it was theoretically possible for spouses to be observed in superordinate and subordinate positions at least twenty-five times. The three times Ann was observed in the superordinate position accounted for 12 percent of the total possible frequency she could have been observed in the superordinate position. Since the difference between 12 percent for Ann and 0 percent for Rob is greater than 5 percent, this category is considered partial equality-- female dominance. Special household ppkeep and repair.--During the 100 observation hours, Ann was observed in the superordinate position three times within this category. On three occasions, Ann told Rob to do a particular task and Rob did 132 so. Spouses were observed behaving in this category a com- bined frequency of sixty-five times. It was thus theoreti- cally possible for Spouses to be observed in superordinate and subordinate positions at least Sixty-five times. The three times Ann was observed in the superordinate position accounted for 4.6 percent of the total possible frequency she could have been observed in the superordinate role. Since the difference between 4.6 percent for Ann and 0 per- cent for Rob is less than 5 percent, this category is con- sidered partial equality—-female dominance. Socializing with friends, neighbors, and kin.-- During the 100 observation hours, Ann was observed once in the superordinate position in this category. Spouses were observed behaving in this category a combined frequency of 143 times. It was thus theoretically possible for spouses to be observed in superordinate and subordinate positions at least 143 times. The one time Ann was observed in the superordinate position accounted for .699 percent of the total possible frequency she could have been observed in the superordinate position. This behavior category is classified as equality. Based upon observation and self—report data, the following categories are labeled equality Since there was no evidence of restriction setting: 133 Packing for Trips: equality. Personal Hygiene: equality. Community Service: equality. Current Events: equality. Athletics: equality. Entertainment: equality. Other Recreation: equality. In two categories there was no behavior observed or reported: Hobbies: no data. Games: no data. Family Situation Equality: Summary Observation schedule and relevant self-report data on equality for each family role category were reported and categories were classified using Operational definitions of equality and dominance. Thirteen categories were labeled equality: Food Preparation and Cleanup; Parenting and Child- care; Housecare and Cleaning; Spouse Interaction; Care of Clothing; Socializing with Friends, Neighbors, and Kin; Packing for Trips; Personal Hygiene; Community Service; Athletics; Entertainment; and Other Recreation. One category was classified as partial equality-male dominance: Care of Yard, Car, and Garden. Three categories were classified as partial equality-female dominance: Marketing, Record Keeping; and Special Household Upkeep and Repair. 134 Based upon the combined totals for all of the family related activities, Rob was observed in the superordinate role nine times and Ann was observed in the superordinate role nineteen times. Spouses were observed behaving within the family related categories a combined frequency of 2:535 times. Thus it was theoretically possible for Spouses to be observed in superordinate and subordinate positions, 2,535 times. The nineteen times Ann was Observed in the super- ordinate position only accounted for .75 percent of the total possible frequency she could have been observed in the superordinate role. The nine times Rob was observed in the superordinate role only accounted for .36 percent of the total possible times he could have been observed in the superordinate role. The difference between Ann's frequency overall and Rob's frequency overall is not great enough to imply dominance. Consequently, since, overall, spouses placed a small, but similar degree of restriction on each other in the family related categories, the family situation is classified as equality with some very Slight male dominance in one category and some slight female dominance in three categories. This conclusion is consistent with self-report data. When questioned about equality in the family situation, spouses reported that they tended to do very little restric— tion setting, very little permission seeking and granting, and very little commanding and obeying. They were hard pressed to come up with examples of inequal behavior. 135 Classificatin of Familnyituation Using the Revised Christensen Model Family differentiation, equality, and role change information is summarized in Figure 11. In addition, Figure 11 also illustrates the section of the revised Christen- sen model within which each family related category falls. Seven individual family related categories fall within section I of the revised Christensen model. Five categories fall within section H of the model. Of these five categories, one is considered partially differentiated because some activities within the category are shared, some are performed by Ann only and some are performed by Rob only. Two are considered partially differentiated because some activities are shared and some are performed only by Rob. Two others are considered partially differentiated because some are Shared and some are performed only by Ann. Three categories fall within section K of the model. All three categories are considered partially equal with slight female dominance. Of these three categories, one category includes some shared activities, some activities done only by Rob, and some activities done only by Ann. Another of the three includes some shared activities and some activities done only by Ann. The third of the three includes some shared activities and some activities done only by Rob. Finally, one individual category falls within section E of the model. This category is partially equal with slight male dominance. This category is considered partially differentiated since 136 Figure 11. Family Differentiation, Equality, and Role Change by Category. Legend: Black indicates extent of activities shared by male and female within a category. White indicates extent of activities done only or primarily by the female within a category. Barred white indicates extent of activities done only or primarily by the male within a category. Mf indicates the male taking on traditionally female activities within a category. Fm indicates the female taking on traditionally male activities within a category. 137 ROLE BEHAVIOR CATEGORY DIFFERENTIATION EQUALITY Mf SYMBOL Fm Food Preparation and Undifferentiated Equality Mf I Cleanup Parenting Undifferentiated Equality Mf I — Housecare and Undifferentiated Equality I Cleaning Spouse Interaction Undifferentiated Equality I — Care of Clothing Partially Equality Mf H Differentiated Care of Yard, Car, Partially Partial Equality— E Fm and Garden Differentiated Male Dominance * Marketing Partially Partial Equality- Mf K Differentiated Female Dominance Record Keeping Partially Partial Equality- K Differentiated Female Dominance Special House- Partially 7 Partial Equality- K hold Upkeep/Repair Differentiated Female Dominance Socializing with Partially Equality H Friends, Neighbors, Differentiated Kin Community Service Undifferentiated Equality I — Current Events Partially Equality H Differentiated Athletics Partially Equality H Differentiated Entertainment Undifferentiated Equality I — Other Recreation Undifferentiated Equality I — Packing for Trips Partially Equality Mf H Differentiated Hobbies No Data Games No Data Total Number of Categories Within Which Mf and Fm: 5 l Figure 11. 138 some activities within it are shared and some are done only by Rob. Based upon family differentiation, equality, and role change information the Mead family situation, as a whole, best fits within section I of the revised Christensen model. This overall role description is symbolized in Figure 12 and this symbol illustrates the primary family role pattern in the family Situation. I MfS = In five categories within the family situation the male is taking over traditionally female tasks. Mf5 le le = In one category within the E lit no role family situation the female is qua y, taking over traditionally male structure tasks Figure 12.--Mead Family Role Pattern Symbolized. Levels of Role Differentiation in the Work Situation In this section data pertinent to role differentia- tion in each work related category are reported and the level of role differentiation for each category is deter- mined based upon Christensen's conceptual framework. In addition, the primary role differentiation pattern of the Mead's work situation is determined. RESEARCH QUESTION #6--What are the levels of role differentiation in the work situation? 139 Work Role Differentiation Analysis by Category Based upon data obtained in the work role interview, Spouse behavior within the work related categories is described and each individual category is classified as differentiated, partially differentiated, or undifferentiated. The following Operational definitions were used to determine level of differentiation in this section: Differentiation refers to behavior categories per- formed by only one sex partner. Undifferentiation refers to behavior categories performed by both sex partners. Partial differentiation refers to behavior cate- gories in which behaviors within the category are divided by activities, some of which are performed by one sex partner and some by the other. Since Spouses did not do a great deal Of church work at home and since it was not possible to observe most work related categories, levels of differentiation at work were determined using self-report data. In addition, when spouses were observed doing church related work at home, it was difficult to distinguish within which category of church work spouse behavior fell. Many times Spouses were reading at home in order to prepare a sermon, an educational experience, or an ecumenical presentation. Sometimes the same book was being read in order to do tasks within two or more cate- gories. Consequently the category Other Work Related was 140 added to the observation schedule after the study began. Most of the work related behavior Observed at home was coded within this category. The work related categories which appear on the observation schedule were obtained by interviewing Spouses before the observations began to Obtain a set of categories to use to classify job related behavior observed. During the course of the study, as part of their job as pastors, Spouses developed a position description of their job. They identified six major areas of responsibi- lity and broke each area up into well defined subcategories. Since the categories and frequencies on the observation schedule were not useful for determining levels of work role differentiation (see Table 10) Spouses were interviewed by the researcher using their new position description in order to determine levels of work role differentiation. Thus, role differentiation will be described using the six cate- gories which appear on Spouses' formal position description. Corporate experience.--Rob and Ann share the reSpon- sibility for coordinating and planning forty-seven Sunday services during a year. They take turns being responsible for Sunday mornings. Both Ann and Rob together meet with the Ministerial Helpers group, and they take turns leading the discussion of issues.. In addition, Rob and Ann jointly plan two Special worship services each year. Certain other corporate experience responsibilities are only performed by Ann. She meets monthly with the Music 141 Table lO.--Work Role Differentiation Frequencies. Based upon 100 Hours of Observation M F Mv Fv Formal Religious Service 4 53 x x Couns./que Visits, Par. x x Education for Parish x x Social Activities, Par. x x Administrative/Clerical l x x Conferences, Prof. Enrich. x x Ecumenical Responsibility x x Building & Grounds Comm. Counseling, NonPar. Other Work Related 70 106 x x Legend: M = Male F = Female Mv = Verbal evidence of male performing within a category Fv = Verbal evidence of female performing within a category x = Categories in which verbal evidence of spouse performance was noted during observations n = Frequency of instances Observed 142 and Worship Task Group to consult about the schedule for Sunday morning experiences and to include special events and media. Ann meets quarterly with the Supportive Growth Committee to Share the schedule for Sunday morning experi- ences. Also, Ann works with the Music and Worship Task Group to provide for ongoing feedback groups to elicit congregational response about the Sunday morning experiences. Both Ann and Rob were observed doing work within this category at home. Although Ann and Rob Share certain responsibilities in this category, there are a number of reSponsibilities which only Ann performs. As a result, this category of activities is partially differentiated. Caring and healing.--Ann and Rob usually take turns doing hospital visits, reporting hospitalizations to the Ministerial Helpers group, and Sharing with the congregation special needs of members. They both provide counseling for church members. Although they sometimes do counseling jointly, usually one or the other provides it. Ann and Rob attend Ministerial Helpers group meetings together to dis- cuss with the group current needs for caring. They take turns reporting to the monthly church board meetings the amount of visiting and counseling done during the month. Ann and Rob have both done memorial services and related visiting together, and Rob has done much of this him- self. Ann and Rob do wedding services and related activities together. Rob always performs the hospital chapel services. 143 Though Ann and Rob primarily Share the activities in this category, one is only done by Rob. Thus, this category of activities is considered partially differential. Evangelism.-—Rob and Ann both plan a sermon series on evangelism and both work on follow-up outreach activities. They also meet with the Ministerial Helpers group together to review church membership roles and to discuss the spiritual life of the congregation along with ways of fostering spiritual growth. Both Ann and Rob visit new attenders either separately (one or the other) or together. In addition, they have both jointly conducted membership classes for youth and adults. Usually one or the other conducts the youth membership classes. Finally, there is one activity in this category which is performed only by Rob. Rob meets with the Outreach Committee on the evangelism sermon series and the follow-up activities. Ann and Rob both do most activities in this category, except for one activity which is Rob's alone. Thus, this category is considered partially differentiated. Supportive growth and religious education.--Ann coordinates three quarterly meetings for Sunday school teachers for growth and support. She also meets with the Supportive Growth Committee to plan the summer Sunday school schedule. Though it was Ann's job last year, this year Rob leads the teaching team for the youth Sunday school class. Ann meets with the Single young adult group and Rob 144 coordinates a Big Brother/Big Sister program for the teen- agers. Ann and Rob both brainstorm together ideas for the yearly Spiritual growth study Opportunity and Ann works with the Supportive Growth Committee to Offer the Opportunity. Ann is primarily responsible for coordinating one family- oriented prOgram for each of three holiday seasons. Ann and Rob brainstorm ideas for these programs together. Ann and Rob both attend parish social and recre- ational activities. However, Ann works with the social planning task groups to plan and carry out social and recre- ational activities for parishioners. Ann and Rob together report annually the sources from which they find support and receive the counsel of the Executive Committee. They each attend continuing education programs approved by this committee. Certain activities in this category are performed by Ann alone. Some are performed by Rob alone. Some activities they both do either jointly or separately. Con- sequently, this category is considered partially differ- entiated. Ecumenical.--Ann and Rob both brainstorm together ideas for the yearly study Opportunity related to peace, justice, or personal lifestyle issues. Rob works with the Outreach Committee to offer the Opportunity. Ann and Rob both serve for a session on the staff Of church camp. They both find opportunities to Speak for the church on social 145 justice issues, though Rob does this more than Ann. In addition, Rob and Ann both secure the support of the Execu- tive Committee for local, district, or national assignments that will involve more than two days a month, agreeing on the amount of time to be given and the duration of the commitment. Several activities in this category are performed only by Rob. Rob serves on the board of a local ecumenical group. Although in the past they were both on this board, they agreed that it was too time consuming for them both to do it. Rob also attends two yearly governing meetings of the Cabinet of Churches and also attends other ecumenical gatherings occasionally. In addition, Rob leads or helps with ecumenical peace programs at least once a year. Some activities in this category are performed by both Ann and Rob. Others are Rob's responsibility alOne. As a result, this category is considered partially differ- entiated. Administration.--Both Ann and Rob together report their liaison relationships for the year with various insti- tutional ministries and receive the counsel of the Executive Committee. They both together attend executive committee meetings and they both attend church board meetings. Ann meets prior to church board and executive meetings with the Church Board Chairperson to plan the agenda. Both Rob and Ann attend together district and annual conferences. 146 Rob meets annually with the Management Committee in planning budget and planning for use of church material resources. Ann meets annually with the Outreach Committee to plan for all special Offerings. Last year Rob published a church directory supple- ment. Ann and Rob both work on publishing the bimonthly church newsletter. They jointly outline articles to include and they both do the rest of the work, although Ann does it more often than Rob. Also, one or the other prepares bulletins as needed for corporated worship services. Both spouses do most activities in this category. However, certain activities are done by Ann only and others are done by Rob only. As a result, this category is con- sidered partially differentiated. Work Role Differentiation: Summary Self-report data for each work role category were classified according to the Operational definitions of differentiation. The three levels of differentiation used to classify categories were differentiated, partially differ- entiated, and undifferentiated. All Six work role categories were partially differ- entiated. They included: Corporate Experience; Caring and Healing; Evangelism; Supportive Growth and Religious Educa- tion; Ecumenical, and Administration. Consequently, the over- all role pattern in the work situation would be considered 147 partially differentiated. Since there is considerable role overlap in the work categories, they are closer to being undifferentiated rather than totally differentiated. Direction of Role Chagge in the Work Situation In this section the extent the female is assuming traditionally male tasks in the work Situation is reported. The total number of work related categories in which the female is assuming traditionally male tasks is determined. RESEARCH QUESTION #7e—In how many_and in which cate- ggries of the work Situation is the male taking on traditionally female tasks? In how many and in which categories of the work situation is the female taking on traditionally male tasks? The work related categories were classified as tra- ditionally male, traditionally male and/or female, and traditionally both with some differentiation by activity (see Table 7). No categories in the work Situation were classified as traditionally female Since the job of pastor is a traditionally male role. Some categories were classi- fied as male and/or female and both since minister's wives have traditionally helped their husbands by taking on numberous roles and responsibilities within categories. Ann assumed traditionally male tasks in three categories of the work situation: Corporate Experience; Evangelism; and Ecumenical Work. The category Corporate Experience was labeled traditionally both with some differentiation by activity. Within this category, giving sermons was 148 classified as traditionally male. Since Ann gives sermons, She is aSsuming traditionally male activities within the Corporate Experience category. Direction of role change in the work situation is summarized in Figure 13. Bases of Work Role Differentiation The focus of this section is on how role differ- entiation is determined in the Mead work situation. The bases for determining role differentiation in the work related categories are reported. RESEARCH QUESTION #8--How is role differentiation determined in the work Situation? Role differentiation in the work situation is deter- mined on the basis of skill, education, interest, circum- stances, efficiency, personal values, expectations of others, and traditional sex role norms. This section is based upon self-report data. Ann meets,month1y with the Music and Worship Task Group since she is interested, skilled, and educated in the area of music and education. Also, Ann works with task forces to plan social activities for the parish, since She is interested and skilled in this area. However, both Ann and Rob attend parish social activities. Rob always does the hospital chapel services and he also performs funerals more than Ann. Ann is not interested in these activities. In addition, Rob gets asked to perform 149 Traditional Role Direction of Category Differentiation Role Change Corporate Experience Primarily male with some Fm differentiation by activity Evangelism Traditionally male Fm Ecumenical WOrk Traditionally male Fm Figure 13. Direction of work Role Change. Total Mf in work Situation: MfO Total Fm in work situatiion: Fm3 Legend: Mf = Male takes on traditionally female tasks within a category. Fm = Female takes on traditionally male tasks within a category. funerals more than Ann. Thus, interests and expectations of others determine differentiation in this category. Rob meets with the Outreach Committee in planning for the sermon series on evangelism along with other out- reach activities. Rob is more interested in this area than Ann and is talented in this area. He considers himself an activist, a visionary, and when necessary, a demonstrator. For these reasons, he is also on the local ecumenical board, attends two cabinet of churches governing meetings, and does an ecumenical peace program. Within the area of supportive growth and religious education, Ann coordinates three meetings with Sunday school teachers, meets with the Supportive Growth Committee, leads the singles adult group, and does family programs for the holidays. She does these tasks because of her ability, 150 interest, and background in music, education, and program planning. Within this same major area, Rob runs the program for teens, Since he likes working with this age group better than Ann. Though last year, Ann led the teaching team for the youth Sunday school class, Rob is doing this job this year since the work load needed rebalancing. Ann meets with the church board chairperson to set board meeting agendas, because she considers herself a highly skilled organizer. Rob meets annually with the Management Committee to plan the church budget and Ann meets annually with the Outreach Committee to plan for all special offerings. Ann and Rob consider themselves equally skilled and interested in financial planning and as a result, divide up the labor within this area. Ann and Rob are also generally responsible for meeting with particular committees since it is more efficient for one person to meet consistently with a . particular committee. Levels of Equality in the Work Situation In this section data pertinent to equality in each work related category are reported and the level of equality for each category is determined based upon Christensen's conceptual framework. In addition, the overall level of equality in the Mead work situation is determined. RESEARCH QUESTION #9--What are the levels of equality in the work Situation? 151 Work Role Equality: Observation and Self-Report Data Based upon self-report and observation schedule data (see Table 11), work related categories will be classi- fied as equal, inequal, or partially equal. Those categories which have some inequality will be further classified as female dominance, or male dominance. The same Operational definitions used to determine levels of equality in the family Situation will be used in this section to determine levels of equality in the work Situation. However, equality in the family situation was primarily assessed using obser- vation schedule data. In this section, due to limited observation of work-related behavior, equality is primarily assessed based upon self—report data. Corporate experience.--Neither Ann nor Rob were actually observed in superordinate or subordinate positions in relationship to each other within this category. However, based upon self-report data, Ann sometimes gives Rob a script to read for the Special worship services they plan together within this category. Since she tells him to read a parti- cular script, and he does it, She is in the superordinate role in this interaction. Since partial restriction on behavior in this category was reported and Since Ann restricts Rob, this category is classified as partial equality-female dominance. 152 Table ll.--Work Role Equality Frequency Data. Combined Summer and Fall Data M F @ ® Formal Religious Service 4 53 Couns./Home Visits, Par. Education for Parish Social Activities, Par. 1 Administrative/Clerical l 1 Conferences, Prof. Enrich. Ecumenical Responsibility 1 Building & Grounds Comm. Counseling, NonPar. Other Work Related 70 106 2 l M and F Totals 3 3 Legend: M = Male = Male in Superordinate Position F = Female = Female in Superordinate Position n = frequence of instances Observed 153 Caring and healing.--Based upon observation and self-report data, there was no evidence of restriction setting in this category. Consequently this category is classified as equality. Evangelism.—-Based upon observation and self-report data, there was no evidence of restriction setting in this category. Consequently, this category is classified as equality. Supportive growth and religious education.--Based upon Observation and self-report data, there was no evidence of restriction setting within this category. Consequently, this category is classified as equality. Ecumenical.--Rob was observed in the superordinate position in this category one time during the 100 hours of observation. Based upon self-report data, Ann took on a superordinate role within this category at times during church camp. Since Ann was more experienced at doing church camp work than Rob, Ann did more of the administrative work than Rob. Although partial restrictions on behaviors in this category were observed and reported, Since Ann and Rob both restricted each other, this category is classified as equality. Administration.--Ann was observed in the super- ordinate role in this category once during the 100 hours of Observation. Based upon this observation and upon 154 self-report data, sometimes when one Spouse has been in the office on a particular day, that Spouse will tell the other spouse what to do the next day. This type of commanding and obeying is used by spouses to insure continuity and effi- ciency in getting work done. Ann and Rob both do this sort of commanding and obeying. Although partial restrictions on behaviors in this category were observed and reported, since Ann and Rob both restrict each other, this category is classified as equality. Other work related.--Based upon observation schedule data, Rob was observed in the superordinate position twice within the Other Work Related category and Ann was observed in the superordinate position once. This information along with information about the rest of the categories will be used in summarizing equality in the work situation and in determining an overall classification for the work situation. Work Situation Equality: Summary Observation schedule and self-report data on equality for each work role category were reported and categories were classified using Operational definitions of equality and dominance. Five categories were labeled equality: Caring and Healing; Evangelism; Supportive Growth and Religious Education; Ecumenical Work; and Administration. One cate- gory was classified as partial equality-female dominance: Corporate Experience. 155 During the 100 hours of observation, based upon all work related categories combined including the Other Work Related category, Rob was observed in the superordinate role a total of three times and Ann was observed in the super- ordinate role a total of three times. Although some restric- tion setting existed in the work Situation, Since Ann and Rob seemed to restrict each other with equal frequency, the overall work situation would be labeled equality. Both Ann and Rob reported that they do not think that they do very much restriction setting with each other in the work Situation. Based upon their philOSOphy of leadership and their desire to share leadership with each other and with congregation members, it is not surprising that Ann and Rob do so little restriction setting. For Ann and Rob, being a leader does not mean having power over others in the sense of being super and subordinates. They consider themselves equals with each other and with members. However, Ann and Rob reported that they tend to do some restriction setting when they are under stress. However, they also attempt to avoid putting themselves under great stress and have learned techniques in stress management. Classification of Work Situation Using Revised Christensen Model Work differentiation, equality, and role change information is summarized in Figure 14. Figure 14 also illustrates the section of the revised Christensen model within which each work related category falls. 156 ROLE BEHAVIOR CATEGORY DIFFERENTIATION EQUALITY Hf SYMBOL Fm Corporate Partially Partial Equality- Experience Differentiated Female Dominance Pm Caring and Partially Equality Healing Differentiated Evangelism Partially Equality Differentiated pm Supportive Growth Partially Equality and Religious Differentiated Education Ecumenical Partially Equality Fm Work Differentiated Administration Partially Equality Differentiated Total Number of Categories Within Which Mf and Fm: O 3 Figure 14. Work Differentiation, Equality, and Role Change by Category. Legend: Black indicates extent of activities shared by male and female within a category. White indicates extent of activities done only or primarily by the female within a category. Barred white indicates extent of activities done only or primarily by the male within a category. Mf indicates the male taking on traditionally female activities within a category. Fm indicates the female taking on traditionally male activities within a category. 157 Five individual work related categories fall within section H of the revised Christensen model. Of these five categories, two are considered partially differentiated because some activities were performed by both Spouses and some by Rob alone and some by Ann alone. Three categories were considered partially differentiated because some activities were performed by both spouses and some were per- formed only by Rob. One individual category fell within section K of the model. This category, Corporate Experience, was considered partially equal with some female dominance. This category was also considered partially differentiated because some activities were performed by both spouses and some were only performed by Ann. Based upon work differentiation, equality, and role change information combined, over all, the Mead's work situation as a whole best fits within section H of the‘ revised Christensen model. This overall description is symbolized in Figure 15 and this symbol illustrates the primary pattern of work role activity. Fm3 = In three categories in the work situation, the female is taking over traditionally = I Fm3 male tasks H equality, some role overlap Figure 15. WOrk Role Pattern Symbolized. 158 Shared Goals of Spouses The focus of this section is on the Mead's Shared goals. Spouses' family related goals and work related goals are reported. RESEARCH QUESTION #10--What are the major themes or shared goals of the spouses? This section is based upon observation schedule information, self-report data, and Spouses response to Cantril's (1963) ”Self Anchoring Scale Questions" (see Appendix B). Ann and Rob do not necessarily distinguish between work related goals and family related goals. As a matter of fact, one of their goals has been to integrate work and family life. Several years ago, before they began job- sharing, Ann and Rob agreed that they would work toward developing a job-sharing lifestyle so that prime time daily would involve their relationship. In addition, they realized that they both wanted to participate in parenting and in professional paid work without having to rely on full time childcare. These goals have been actualized in their present lifestyle. This conclusion is supported by family situation observation schedule data (see Table 12 . Both spouses were most frequently observed parenting and interacting with each other. In addition, spouses interated with each other and with their child with similar frequencies. The third most frequently observed category for both spouses was food 159 Table 12.--Family Situation Observation Frequencies From Most Frequently Observed to Least Frequently Observed. Rob Ann Parenting 359 377 Spouse Interaction 323 323 Food Preparation and Cleanup 258 221 Socializing with Friends, Neighbors, Kin 50 93 Sp. House, Upkeep/Repair 54 11 Care of Clothing 41 43 Housecare and Cleaning 44 35 Entertainment 45 34 Current Events 40 9 Care of Yard and Car 32 16 Athletics 32 3 Record Keeping 4 21 Other Recreation 6 8 Marketing 1 8 Packing for Trips l 10 160 participation in household work. The next most frequently observed category was socializing with friends, neighbors, and kin. This supports some of Spouses' future goals which will be discussed later in this section. The direction of role change in this family incorpo- rates Rob taking on traditionally female roles in the family situation and Ann taking on traditionally male roles in the family situation. In addition, Ann has taken on tradition- ally male roles in the work situation. Thus, in this family extensive changes have been made by both the male and female in traditional role behavior at work and at home. This reflects their goal of integration of work and family roles for each of them. In the future, Ann and Rob think they might like to live in an intentional religious community setting, such as a commune. Within this setting they imagine having closely knit relationships with other families and they imagine lots of cooperation and sharing between families, such as Sharing of childrearing. They are not sure if somthing like this would come about within a particular congregation, or if it would come about by connecting with other families from Similar religions with Similar visions. Ann and Rob have also discussed the possibility of a group of families related to the church working and living together with an outward focus or social concern. This group of families might make a living by doing family 161 reconciliation, by running a wholistic health center, or by promoting solar energy and living in a solar home. Rob said he would even consider working part time at a hospital as an orderly if necessary, to bring in money for an outreach activity. Thus, making a contribution to the community seems to be an important goal for both Ann and Rob along with establishing close ties with other families and living what they preach. During the next five years, Ann and Rob wish to continue Sharing homelife and work. They agree that they want to continue working part-time although they do not feel they have to continue sharing their present job in order to do this. Ann is Open to doing part time work in other fields such as education. Ann wondered if in the future Rob would be willing to let go of the ministry and to job share with her in the field of education. Ann and Rob do wish to continue developing their professional careers. Ann is particularly interested in alternative education and in starting an alternative school for young children. Ann imagines that such an alternative school might be good for Jason, since he is growing up in an unusual family and might not be too comfortable in the public school setting. Rob is interested in pastoral coun- seling and plans to become certified in pastoral counseling at full member level within the next year. In the future, Ann would like to work toward more balance of leisure and work. She would like more time to 162 be creative. This is supported by observation schedule data since Ann was not observed behaving within the category of Hobbies and Avocations. Rob would like to do more recre- ational activities in the future and develOp an exercise program. Rob's involvement in the category Athletics, is primarily as a Spectator of athletic events. Ann and Rob hope to continue making conscious decisions about their lives even if it means being uncon- ventional. They do not want to get drawn into what they term "conventional suburbia." They do not give much priority to Obtaining material possessions as future goals. Though they agree that it might be nice to have a small cabin on a beach to use as a retreat, this is not a dominant goal or theme. Ann and Rob have considered buying a home. However, at the time of this study, it was not a goal of theirs in the near future. Rob and Ann share the goal of moving toward more shared leadership with their congregation members. In the future, they envision caring and teaching being carried on by clusters of members and they also envision church members Sharing responsibility for larger celebrations. As a result the position of church pastor might become a half time job only. Neither Ann or Rob value moving up professionally for the sake of moving up. PeOple and settings are more important to them than money and status. They do not intend 163 to jump from a small church to bigger and bigger churches in the future. The fact that they are willing to accept the financial loss due to job sharing as Opposed to full time dual careers supports this stated goal. When asked to plot where they stood on Cantril's aSpiration ladder (see Figure 16) in terms of their work situation and family situation considered separately, both Ann and Rob without consulting each other or seeing each other's rating, rated their present family situation as a 6 and their work Situation as a 7. This rating confirms their earlier observation that Sharing within the work situation is working out somewhat better than sharing in the home Situation. Ann and Rob both aspire to reach rung 8 in the work situation in the next five years. Ann aspires to reach rung 7 in the home situation and Rob aspires to reach rung 8 in the home situation. Both agree that rung 10 is always unobtainable. Family Reactions to Being Studied Ann and Rob agreed that being studied and observed was a positive experience for them. They felt flattered and admitted they had become more aware that they are pioneers and are on the frontier of a new family and work structure. They asked Jason how he liked the researcher coming and observing. Jason stated "I like it!" Spouses also reported that as a result of being observed, they tended to be more aware of how they Spent their time. In addition, they 164 ROB ANN Figure 16. Spouses' Ratings on Ten Step Ladders. H refers to Home and Family Situation W refers to Work Situation 1 refers to spouse rating at the present time 2 refers to spouse rating expected in the future fl ‘ A“ 1 Best Possible Life Best Possible Life J J 1 I0 J _) :3 1 9 l 82 "2 E5 w2 w1 7 ”2 "4 .L e . )I 5 4 ) ) CS 2 I .1 _) WOrst Possible Life Worst Possible Life h _ \L 165 thought that they might have been slightly more productive as a result of being studied. When asked if they thought they were behaving normally when the researcher was present, they stated that they were. They did, however, state that their expression of physical affection for each other was more restricted than usual. When Spouses talked to others about being in this study and about being observed for 100 hours, many others commented that it must have been really hard for them to adjust to this. Spouses reported replying that it did not really seem to bother them. They were actually surprised at how comfortable they were with being observed so much. Researcher's Reaction to Personal Involvement in the Family Studied This researcher was impressed with the high level of interpersonal relationship skills possessed by members of this family. Although this study was not designed to code, quantify and analyze such Skills, they became apparent during the course of the observations. Family members were sensitive to each other's needs and to the needs of those outside the family. When conflicts of needs arose, they were resolved COOperatively so that one person's needs did not predominate. For example, during an interview this researcher conducted with spouses, their son Jason (age 3 1/2) was in a nearby room watching Sesame Street on tele- vision. Jason stated to his parents and to the researcher that he could not hear Sesame Street because we were talking 166 so loud. Ann responded to Jason by stating that there was a problem since Jason wanted to watch Sesame Street and the adults wanted to talk. Rob asked Jason if he had any ideas on how this problem could be solved so that we would all get what we wanted. Ann helped Jason think of some possible solutions such as turning up the volume on the T.V. or the adults moving to the other room. Jason suggested that he could close the door to the television room so he could hear and we could talk. The adults agreed this was a good solution and the solution was implemented effectively. Jason is being socialized at an early age to consider his own needs and the needs of others in relationships. Ann and Rob are modeling these skills in their family inter— actions and in interactions with others. This researcher was also impressed with the high level of self esteem family members seemed to have and with the sense of pride and joy family members had in their relationships. This researcher was surprised at the large quantity of time family members spent in high quality interaction with each other and with nonfamily members. This family seemed to have attained a high quality of life despite what most peOple would consider low possession and use of material goods. This high quality seemed to stem from the quality of their relationships. CHAPTER V SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND IMPLICATIONS Summary The purpose of this study was to examine and describe the sex role structure of a ministerial job-sharing family along with the family's past history, future goals, methods of organization, and physical environment. The aim was to discover information useful to persons interested in work- sharing families. Christensen's conceptual framework for analysis of sex role differentiation and equality was the basis of this study. Christensen separates the dimensions equality and role differentiation and claims that equality can be achieved and at the same time a level of sex role differentiation can be maintained. Christensen's model allows for varying the equality and differentiation factors at the same time. Imig (1977) Operationalized Christensen's framework using participant observer methodology to study the role structure of a dual-career family. An additional purpose of this study was to refine Imig's conceptualization and methodology for more precise Observation and measurement of sex role differentiation and equality, and, to add the dimension of role change direction to Christensen's framework. 167 168 Another aim was to discover information about the relation- ship between differentiation and equality in the job-sharing family structure studied in order to determine what changes in family structure might foster the attainment of greater equality between the sexes. The job-sharing family selected for this study included a husband and wife and one male child aged 3. Ann and Rob Mead share one full-time job as church pastor and also Share homemaking responsibilities. The following research questions guided this study: How do spouses organize to perform family related tasks and work related tasks? What are the levels of role differentiation in the family situation? In how many and in which categories of the family Situation is the male assuming traditionally female tasks? In how many and in which categories of the family Situation is the female assuming tradition— ally male tasks? How is role differentiation determined in the family Situation? What are the levels of equality in the family Situation? What are levels of role differentiation in the work situation? In how many and in which categories of the work Situation is the male assuming traditionally female 169 tasks? In how many and in which categories of the work situation is the female assuming traditionally male tasks? 8. How is role differentiation determined in the work Situation? 9. What are the levels of equality in the work Situa- tion? 10. What are the major themes or shared goals of the spouses? The methodology used was participant observation. A set of categories was develOped for use in classifying family situation behavior and another set was obtained for classifying work Situation behavior of Spouses. An observa- tion schedu1e designed to provide quantifiable data on equality and differentiation in reference to specific cate- gories was develOped and tested for interrater agreement in this study. The family was observed for a total of 100 hours covering a two week span of time in the summer of 1979 and a six week span of time in the fall of 1979. Additional data on equality, role differentiation, family history, goals, methods of organization, and physical environment were ob- tained by means of interviews with spouses and by recording self-report data during observations. Family situation and work situation categories were classified based upon traditional sex role division of labor. This classification system was used to determine direction of sex role change in the Mead family. Spouses were considered 170 active collaborators in the research process and findings were presented to them for review periodically. Their reactions to findings were recorded by the researcher and were considered self-report data. Sex role differentiation refers to the distribution of role behavior based upon sex. Level of differentiation for each family behavior category and each work behavior category was determined by combining self-report or inter- view data, observation schedule data on the percentage one spouse performed within the category in contrast to the other spouse, and a content analysis of written observation schedule data on specific spouse behavior within categories. A total description of role differentiation was determined for the work Situation and the family situation. Equality refers to the absence of restrictions placed on valued positions and implies the absence of super and subordinate positions. Level of equality for each family behavior and each work behavior category was determined by combining self-report or interview data with observation schedule data showing the percentage one Spouse was observed in the superordinate position within a category in contrast to the other spouse. Permission granting and seeking and commanding and obeying behavior between Spouses was con- sidered evidence of inequality or super and subordinate spouse positions. A total description Of equality was deter- mined for the family situation and for the work situation. 171 Based upon Christensen's model, an overall pattern of level of equality and role differentiation was determined for the family situation. An overall pattern was also deter- mined for the work situation of the Mead family. A summary of findings related to research question #1 indicates that the Meads use a complex system of organizing to accomplish family and work related tasks. They take turns daily working at church and at home. Sunday and Monday are their days off. Each week usually involves so many excep- tions to this general pattern that spouses often confer daily on how they will organize to perform church and family work. The Meads meet weekly at a Specified time to discuss, plan, and organize their church work. They agree that they are more satisfied with their church work organization than they are with their family work organization. Research question #2 was directed at levels of role differentiation in the family situation. Most activities within the family situation were performed by both Spouses. The primary role pattern observed in the family situation was the undifferentiated pattern. Seven family situation categories were considered undifferentiated (food prepara- tion and cleanup, parenting and childcare, housecare and cleaning, spouse interaction, community service, entertain- ment, other recreation). Over 80 percent of spouse behavior observed in the family situation fell within these seven categories. Since a small number of activities within the rest of the family situation categories were only performed 172 by one Spouse, these categories were considered partially differentiated (care of clothing, care of yard, car, and garden, marketing, record keeping, special household upkeep and repair, socializing with friends, neighbors, and kin, packing for trips, current events, athletics). The direction of sex role change in the family situation was the focus of research question #3. Rob assumed traditionally female tasks in six categories of the family situation (food preparation and cleanup, parenting and child- care, housecare and cleaning, marketing, care of clothing, packing for trips) and Ann assumed traditionally male tasks in one category in the family Situation (care of yard, car, and garden). Ann and Rob both took on tasks traditionally belonging to the Opposite sex spouse in the family situation. Rob's involvement in the family Situation categories illus- trates a major change in traditional male family role behavior. Research question #4 deals with how role differentia- tion is determined in the family Situation. The small amount of role differentiation that did exist in the Mead family situation was determined on the basis of Skill, interest, circumstances, efficiency, personal values, and traditional sex role norms. Levels of equality in the family Situation was the focus of research question #5. Thirteen categories in the family situation were considered to reflect equality (food preparation and cleanup, parenting and childcare, housecare and cleaning, Spouse interaction, care of clothing, 173 socializing with friends, neighbors, and kin, packing for trips, personal hygiene, community service, athletics, enter- tainment, and other recreation). One category in the family situation was considered to reflect partial equality with some male dominance (care of yard, car, and garden). Three family situation categories were considered partially equal with some female dominance (marketing, record keeping, Special household upkeep and repair). The overall family Situation was classified as one of equality with some very slight female dominance in three categories and some very slight male dominance in one category. The focus of research question #6 was level of role differentiation in the work situation. Since all Six work role categories were partially differentiated (corporate experience, caring and healing, evangelism, supportive growth and religious education, ecumenical work, administration), the overall role pattern in the work situation was considered partially differentiated. However, there was also consid- erable role overlap in the work categories. The direction of sex role change in the work Situ- ation was the focus of research question #7. Ann assumed traditionally male tasks in three categories of the work situation (corporate experience, evangelism, ecumenical work). This illustrates that in the work situation Ann has made a major change in traditional female role behavior. Research question #8 deals with how role differenti- ation was determined in the work situation. Skill, education, 174 interest, circumstances, efficiency, personal values, expec- tations Of others, and traditional sex role nomms determined role differentiation in the work Situation. Level of equality in the work situation was the focus of research question #9. Five categories in the work Situa- tion were labeled equality (caring and healing, evangelism, supportive growth and religious education, ecumenical work, administration). One category was labeled partial equality with some female dominance (corporate experience). The over- all work situation was considered to be one of equality Since only a small amount of restriction setting occurred. Self- report data verified this conclusion. Research question #9 was concerned with the major themes or Shared goals of the spouses. Spouse goals included: to continue integrating work and family life, to live in an intentional close knit religious community with an outward focus or social concern, to continue a work-Sharing life- style, to develop professionally, to have more leisure time, and to move toward Shared leadership with congregation members. Conclusions Based upon Christensen's framework, the overall role pattern of the Mead family situation was considered undiffer- entiated and equal. The overall role pattern of the Mead work situation was considered partially differentiated and equal. The role structure of this job-sharing couple 175 incorporated major changes in traditional male and female sex role behavior. Gronseth claims that an essential takeover of tasks traditionally assigned to the Opposite sex is necessary though not sufficient for increasing equality. In this study of a job-sharing family, several individual behavior categories incorporated partial role differentiation and equality. In addition, the overall work situation of the family was classified as partial differentiation with equality. This information tends to support Christensen's claim that equality can be increased and some sex role differentiation can be maintained. Findings from this study suggest that increases in role overlap are probably corre- lated positively with increases in equality and that a cer- tain level of sex role differentiation does not preclude equality. Christensen does agree that inequality often does occur with differentiation, but in contrast to Gronseth, Christensen believes that it does not have to. Christensen's separation of equality and differentiation proved to be valuable in examining and describing the role structure of this family since levels of equality and differentiation varied in the work and family categories. The role patterns discovered in the Mead family reflect three social changes predicted by Christensen. The first is the movement toward greater equality between the sexes. The work role pattern and the family role pattern of spouses in this study were described as ones of equality. 176 The second prediction is the expansion of role overlap or increased undifferentiation. The Mead family role pattern was considered undifferentiated which indicated that both spouses were performing most activities related to the family and home. In the Mead family, differentiation has broken down and the separate worlds of male and female have merged. The Meads' work role pattern was considered parti- ally differentiated with considerable role overlap. This also illustrates the breakdown of differentiation and the merging of male and female worlds Since the position of parish minister is a traditionally male position. Christen- sen's third prediction is a decline Of cultural ascription to make room for greater individual choice in relation to activities participated in by men and women. Cultural ascription played a relatively minor role in determining spouse behavior in this study of a job-sharing clergy couple. Individual choices usually determined the behavior of Spouses. Spouses were aware of deviating from cultural ascritions of sex role behavior. They valued making their own conscious choices. The observation schedule designed by the researcher to collect quantifiable data on equality and role differ- entiation and the expansion of the Operational definitions of equality and differentiation to incorporate this data, allowed for more precise observation and measurement of the role patterns of the Mead family. The participation observer methodology used in this study provided a more accurate 177 description of role differentiation and equality than either the observation or interview method could have provided if used alone. For example, observation schedule data showed that the female did the majority of the marketing. However, based upon interviews, the researcher discovered that the male did the majority of the marketing. Also, when Spouses were presented observation schedule data on the husband's performance of housework, both Spouses were surprised at how much he actually did. Thus, Spouses' perceptions are not always accurate. In addition, interviews uncovered the fact that the husband sometimes seeks the permission of the wife to make certain purchases. This evidence related to inequality was not observed during the 100 hours. Thus, the combination of observation and interview or self-report data made a valuable contribution to the description of role differentiation and equality. The use of a formal observation schedule and the development of a collaborative relationship between the researcher and the family were combined successfully in this participant observer study. The Meads understood the pur- poses of this research study and COOperated with the researcher in many different ways. For example, the cate- gory personal hygiene was added to the observation schedule as a result of a discussion with Ann Mead. In addition, when spouses moved from room to room in their home during the observations, they often told the researcher where they were going and what they intended to do. Also, spouses pointed 178 out that data would be biased if observations were not set up to cover an equal amount of days Ann and Rob stayed in the home. This reflects Whyte's (1979) contention that sub- jects can actually help the researcher correct mistakes in the use of techniques if they are included as active collabo- rators. This active collaboration did not seem to result in less objectivity. This is illustrated by the high inter- rater agreement obtained when the researcher and another trained observer used the observation schedule to observe the Mead family for an evening at the close of the study. The Meads chose the job-sharing lifestyle in order to achieve greater balance between work and home for both of them. They created their own role structures for per- forming family and church related activities. In addition, the Meads reported valuing the worksharing lifestyle and stated that they intended to continue it in spite of some difficulties they have in working out satisfactory family role structure. The Meads believed this study was bene- ficial to them Since it depicted the structures they had evolved and served as a catalyst for assessing their role structures. This study of a job-Sharing family suggests that it is possible for husbands to participate equally in child- rearing and homemaking activities and still maintain a rewarding professional career. The same is true for wives. 179 Implications for Theogy In Christensen's (1975) conceptual framework on equality and role differentiation as Operationalized in this study, equality was considered to be the absence of restriction setting of spouses upon each other. In the work role interview used in this study, Spouses had difficulty assessing their work role behavior using the dimensions of equality incorporated in this study. This could mean that spouses did little restriction setting with each other, or that spouses were not conscious of such restriction setting, or that other determinents of equality were more familiar to them. An additional indicator of equality is differences in total time Spouses spend working (combined family and church work). This would be an indicator only if the Spouse Spending more time doing work did not freely choose to do so. This indicator was familiar to the Meads and was reflected in decisions they made based upon the need to balance the workload between them. Other indicators of equality based upon observation of verbal and non—verbal Spouse interaction should be incorporated in the determination of levels of equality to provide more valid assessments of equality. Christensen contends that a certain level of role differentiation in social systems is probably necessary in order to avoid unmanageable ambiguity and inefficiency. The findings in this study suggest that Christensen may be correct in this assumption. Spouses in this study main- tained more role differentiation in their work Situation 180 than they did in their family situation. This work role differentiation was considered necessary by Spouses in order to maintain a separate sense of self-identity. Spouses also reported that their organization to accomplish church work was working better than their organization to accomplish family related work. This may be the result of too much undifferentiation in family roles. Work roles were concluded to be partially differentiated whereas family roles were concluded to be undifferentiated. Various theories suggest that role differentiation in the family is influenced by a variety of factors. Skill, interest, efficiency, personal values, educational back— ground, and traditional sex role norms were all considered by the Meads as bases for determining role differentiation in their family. Although spouses indicated that Skill, interest, efficiency, personal values, and educational backgrounds served as bases for determining role differ- entiation in certain categories, this does not necessarily mean that traditional sex role norms did not influence role differentiation. Traditional sex role norms often influence the skills, interests, personal values and educational backgrounds of individuals. For example, Ann is Skilled and interested in sewing clothes. Traditional sex role norms probably influenced Ann's interest and Skill in this area. The Meads agree that in some ways they are quite traditional. It is difficult to determine to what extent differentiation is based upon an individual's free 181 choice and to what extent it is based upon cultural ascription. Another factor which may influence role differenti- ation in the family is the value stance of important refer- ence groups of Spouses. Spouses in this study belong to a religious denomination which supports the trend in religions toward greater equality and less hierarchy in church and family life. Implications for Methodology Future researchers who replicate or build on the methodology employed in this study would be advised to make additions to the behavioral indicators of equality, to eXpand the data gathering methods, and to prepare observers for the impact of family behavior on observer's initial reactions. Additional indicators of equality/inequality based upon observation of verbal and nonverbal Spouse interaction should be added to the observation schedule used in this study in order to more validly assess levels Of equality. Since the coding system implemented in this study was easy to manage and produced high interrater agreement, this expansion suggested is considered possible. Future studies should also include time logs on Spouse behavior in order to determine differences in total work time of spouses. For further research on families with children the methodology used in this study should be 182 adapted to incorporate data on role behavior and equality of children. Researchers intending to observe work-Sharing or job-Sharing families should also make sure that observa- tions cover at least two consecutive days so that major misconceptions about role patterns will be avoided. For example, in the Mead family on days when it was the hus— band's day to work at church, the family structure appeared to be very traditional. On days when it is the wife's turn to work at church, the family role structure appeared to be radically untraditional. Participant observer methodology was used in this study of a job-sharing family partially because this family structure is so new. This researcher is aware of having experienced a certain level of "culture shock" during initial observations of this family because the daily pat- terns and role behavior Of Spouses were SO unique. Implications for Families Information provided in this study of a job-Sharing family could be useful for couples considering job-Sharing or work-sharing lifestyles. Spouses in this study held certain values which fostered their satisfaction with this lifestyle. The Meads highly valued quality relationships, professional develOpment, leisure and community roles. They placed less emphasis on collecting material goods and moving up for the sake of moving up. The Meads' satisfac- tion with this lifestyle may also be dependent upon the 183 fact that they live in an urban community where there are other nontraditional family lifestyles. The job-sharing lifestyle in contrast to other types of work-sharing family patterns probably requires greater COOperative effort by spouses in order to create a family role structure as well as a work role structure. However, the job-sharing lifestyle probably allows Spouses greater flexibility than other work-sharing patterns Since Spouses create, adapt, and maintain both role structures. Certain spouse characteristics and Skills appear to be necessary for successful job-sharing. They include: flexibility, organizational skill, tolerance of ambiguity, and good inter— personal communication skills. The job-sharing family form is not likely to be the predominant type in the future Since it requires Spouses to have similar career interests and abilities and Since it would require major changes in work institutions. How- ever, the findings of this in-depth study suggest that several factors may be necessary for achieving equality in job-sharing, work-Sharing, and various other family forms. These factors include: 1. Spouses need to Spend quality time with each other and with their children. 2. Spouses need to value spending time working on their relationship and developing their communication Skills. These Skills include clear self—expression, 184 listening, constructive confrontation, and equali- tarian conflict resolution. 3. Spouses need to have relatively high self esteem and need to be aware of the influences Of their family of origin on their present relationships and self-esteem. 4. Spouses need to have knowledge of child develOpment and need to teach their children communication Skills necessary for attaining and maintaining satisfying equalitarian relationships. Imig's (1977) study of a dual-career family suggests that full-time dual career families may tend to Operate as relatively closed systems since there is Often barely enough time and energy for spouses to maintain work and family roles. Imig also had difficulty finding a dual-career family willing to cooperate in her study and many spouses she contacted were divorcing. In this research study, the first work-sharing family contacted was willing to COOperate. Work-Sharing families may operate as more Open systems in contrast to full-time dual-career families and as a result of this increased openness, they may be more viable family forms. Imig used Christensen's conceptual framework to analyze the role structure of a dual-career family. Imig concluded that the family role structure was partially dif- ferentiated with considerable role overlap and incorporated partial equality with female dominance. In this study of a job-Sharing family, Christensen's framework was also used to 185 analyze family role structure. This study differs from Imig's study in that more precise means of analyzing the role structure were used. The job-sharing family role structure in this study was classified as undifferentiated and equal. It is possible that job-sharing or work-sharing family structure fosters greater equality and greater role overlap than dual-career family structure. More needs to be known about the relationship between equality and differentiation, and family structure. Implications for Socialization and Education In this study of a job-Sharing family, the past socialization of spouses seemed to affect their role structure. Rob Mead was taught by his mother to cook, clean, wash and iron so that he could take care of himself. Rob's mother pointed out that Rob's father knew how to do these things and therefore Rob Should also. Ann's mother encouraged her to develop a career so that security was not totally based upon marriage. This type of socialization may have encouraged greater equality and greater role over- lap in the Meads' role structures. More information is needed concerning types of socialization processes which result in greater equality between the sexes as practiced in various family forms. Information obtained on work-Sharing families and other equalitarian families could provide a basis for pro- grams on communication Skills, changing sex roles, sexual 186 equality, and sexual identity in elementary, middle, and high schools and in schools serving adults. Such programs could facilitate greater equality between the sexes and could foster the development of more satisfying family life- styles. Implications for Institutionalized Religion Information gathered from this study could be use— ful to religious institutions interested in learning more about job-Sharing in the ministry and could be useful to couples involved in or considering job-sharing in the ministry since the couple in this study shared a ministerial position. There is a trend in institutionalized religion toward less hierarchy and more Shared leadership and toward greater equality in marriage and family life. This trend is reflected in the family role structure and work role structure of the job-sharing family described in this study. Spouses in this study reported the goal of decreasing hier- archy and increasing shared leadership in their congregation. Ministerial job-sharing families such as this one model equalitarian values related to church family structures. Suggestions for Further Research 1. This study with suggested modifications Of the frame- work should be replicated in order to discover behavior patterns across job-Sharing families. 2. This methodology and conceptual framework should be used to examine role patterns in other variant 187 family forms and in the traditional family form in order to determine similarities and differences. The components of this study which specifically relate to determining levels of equality and role differentiation should be used to survey and observe larger samples of particular family forms in order to assess the effect of such forms on equality and role differentiation. Important Questions Lacking Research Tools for Investigation What are the crucial determinants of varying levels of equality and role differentiation in families? What effect will sex role changes have on family forms, communication, and interaction between and among families and family members? What effect will sex role changes have on systems that support families and individual family members? How can socialization patterns be modified to foster greater equality, increased role overlap, and decreased cultural ascription as a determinant of sex role behavior? APPENDICES APPENDIX A SUMMARIZED RAW DATA 189 Table l4.--Summarized Raw Data for Family and Work for Summer Observa- tion Hours. Total Hours: 22 hours 25 minutes M F E) G; Mv Fv Food Prep. & Cleanup 80 44 3 6 x Parenting 114 98 l 3 Housecare & Cleaning 10 ll 1 l Spouse Interaction 98 98 Care of Clothing 4 5 Care of Yard & Car 3 0 2 x Marketing 0 Record Keeping 3 l7 3 Sp. House. Upkeep/Repair 45 ll 3 Soc. w Frnds., Neigh., Kin 10 24 x x Formal Religious Service Couns./Home Visits, Par. Education for Parish Social Activities, Par. Administrative/Clerical Conferences, Prof. Enrich. Ecumenical ReSponSibility Building & Grounds Comm. Counseling, NonPar. Community Service (VOl.) Current Events 8 1 Athletics Hobbies, Avocations Games Entertainment 3 2 x x Other Recreation Other WOrk Related 9 31 l x x Legend: M a Male; F a Female, ®= Male in superordinate position; @= Female in superOrdinate position; n = frequency of instances observed; Mv = Verbal evidence of male performing within a category; Fv = Verbal evidence of female performing within a category; x = categories within which verbal evidence of spouse performance was noted during observations. APPENDIX B SELF-ANCHORING SCALE QUESTIONS (CANTRIL, 1963) APPENDIX B SELF-ANCHORING SCALE QUESTIONS (CANTRIL, 1963) All of us want certain things out of life. When you think about what really matters in your own life, what are your wishes and hopes for the future? In other words, if you imagine your future in the best possible light, what would your life look like then, if you are to be happy? Take your time in answering; such things aren't easily put into words. (What are your hopes for the future? What would your life have to be like for you to be completely happy? What is missing for you to be happy? Use also if necessary, the words, "dreams" and "desires.") Anything else? Now, taking the other side of the picture, what are your fears and worries about the future? In other words, if you imagine your future in the worst possible light, what would your life look like then? Again, take your time answering. (What would make you unhappy? Stress the words, "fears" and "worries.") Anything else? Here is a picture of a ladder. Suppose we say that the tOp of the ladder (pointing) represents the best possible life for you, and the bottom (pointing) represents the worst possible life for you. Where on the ladder (moving finger rapidly up and down the ladder) do you feel you personally stand at the present time? Rung . Why do you think that this is where you are? What makes you feel that you are on rung ? And where do you think you will be on the ladder ten years from now? Rung . What are you doing now that will help you to reach rung ? NOTE: The questions were used twice. Once they were used with the focus on family life. The second time they were used the focus was on work or church life. 191 192 r F Ten Step (Rung) RUNG NUMBER Ladder IC) 1 Best 1 Possible Life 9 F 8 T 7 11 6 f 5 f 4 j 3 1 2 J[ I 7) Worst . Possible Life \u BIBLIOGRAPHY BIBLIOGRAPHY Arkin, W. & Dobrofsky, L. R. "Job Sharing." In R. RapOport & R. RapOport (Eds.), WorkingyCouples. New York: Harper ColOphon Books, 1978. Barnett, J. K. & Hedges, J. N. "Working women and the division of household tasks." Monthly Labor Review, April 1972, 9—14. Barry, W. A. "Marriage research and conflict: An integra- tive review." Psychological Bulletin, 1970, 1;, 41—54. Barton, A. H. & Lazarsfeld, P. F. "Qualitative support of theory." In G. J. McCall & J. L. Simmons (Eds.), Issues in Participant Observation: A Text and Reader. Reading, Mass.: Addison-Wesley Publishing Co., 1969. Bernard, J. The Future of the Family. New York: World Publishing, 1972. Biddle, B. J. & Thomas, E. J. (Eds.). Role Theory: Concepts and Research. New York: John Wiley & Sons Inc., 1966. Blau, P. M. "Parameters of social structure." American Sociolqgical Review, October 1974, p. 616. Blood, R. & Wolfe, D. Husbands and Wives. New York: Free Press, 1960. Broderick, C. (Ed.). A Decade of Family Research and Action. Minnespolis: National Council on Family Relations, 1971. Bryson, R. B.; Bryson, J. B.; Licht, M. H.; & Licht, B. G. "The professional pair--husband and wife psycholo- gists." American Psychologist, January 1976, 10-16. 193 194 Bulmer, M. "Some neglected problems of sociological re- search." British Journal of Sociology, June 1974, 32' 244-251. Campbell, D. "Factors relevant to the validity of experi- ments in social settings." Psychological Bulletin, 1957, LIV, 297-312. Cantril, H. "A study of aspirations." Scientific American, February 1963, CCVII, 41-45. Christensen, H. T. "Are sex roles necessary?" Institute for the Study of Social Change, Department of AnthrOpOlogy, Purdue University, Institute Monograph Series No, 5, 1975. Cogswell, B. "Variant family forms and lifestyles: Rejection of the traditional nuclear family." The Family Coordinator, 1975. Daly, M. "Women and the Catholic church." In R. Morgan (Ed.), Sisterhood is powerful. New York: Vintage, 1970. Dickson, P. The Future of the Workplace. New York: Wey- bright & Talley, 1975. Emmerich, W. "Family role concepts of children ages Six to nine." In B. J. Biddle & E. J. Thomas (Eds.), Role Theory: Concepts and Research. New York: John Wiley & Co., 1966. Farrell, W. The Liberated Man: Beyond Masculinity: Freeing Men and Their Relationships With Women. New York:. Random House, 1974. Friedrichs, J. & Ludtke, H. Participant Observation: Theory and Practice. Lexington, Mass.: Saxon House/ Lexington Books, 1975. Fichter, J. H. & Kolb, W. L. "Ethical limitations on sociological reporting." American Sociological Review, October 1973, aa, 96-97. Giele, J. Z. WOmen and the Future: Changing Sex Rolea in Modern America. New York: The Free Press, 1978. Glaser, B. & Strauss, A. "Theoretical sampling." In N. K. Densin (Ed.), Sociology Methods. Aldine Publishing Co., 1970. 195 Goodrich, W.; Ryder, R. G.; & Raush, N. L. ”Patterns of newlywed marriage." Journal of Marriage and Family, 1968, 2Q, 383-391. Gronseth, E. "Work-Sharing families' adaptations of pioneer- ing families with husband and wife in part-time employment." Acta Sociologica, 1975, lg, (2-3), 202-221. Hayghe, H. "Marital and family characteristics of the labor force, March 1977." Monthly Labor Review, 1978, 101, (2), 51-54. Heiss, J. W. "Degree of intimacy and male-female inter- action." Sociometry, 1962, 22! 197-208. Herron, B. "Report says sexism hurts clergy couples." Bread. Iowa: Wayland, 1975. Hewitt, E. C. & Hiatt, S. R. Women Priests: Yes or No? New York: Seabury Press, 1973. Hochschild, A. R. "A review of sex role research." American Journal of Sociology, January 1973, 1a, (4), 1011-1029. Holmstrom, L. L. The Two Career Family. Cambridge, Mass.: Schenkman Publishing Co., 1973. Howell, J. T. Hard Living on Clay St.: Portraits oftBlue Collar Families. New York: Anchor Books, 1973. Imig, G. L. "Levels of family role differentiation and equality in a dual-career family: A participant observation." Doctoral dissertation, Michigan State University, 1977. Jahoda, J.; Deutsch, M.; & Cook, S. W. Research Methods in Social Relations With Especial Reference to Prejudice. Part One:_Basic Processes. New York: The Dryden Press, 1955. Kanter, R. M. "Work and family in the United States: A critical review and agenda for research and policy." Social Science_§rontiers. New York: Russell Sage Foundation, 1977. Kantor, D. & Lehr, W. Inside the Family. Washington: Jossey-BaSS Publishers, 1975. Komarovsky, M. Blue Collar Marriage. New York: Random House, 1967. 196 Kung, H. "Feminism: A new reformation." New York Times Magazine, 1976, 23 May, 34-35. Kutner, B.; Wilkins, C.; and Yarrow, P. R. "Verbal attitudes and overt behavior involving racial prejudice. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 1952, 21, 649-652. La Piere, R. T. "Attitudes vs. actions." Social Forces, 1934, la, 239-237. Laws, J. L. "A feminist review of marital adjustment litera- ture: The rape of the Locke. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 1971, a;. Leik, R. K. "Instrumentality in family interaction." Sociometry, 1963, ea, 131-145. Leed, J. B. (Ed.). Part-time Careers in Seattle. Seattle: Focus on Part-time Careers, Inc., 1976. Lein, L. et a1. Final Report: Work and Family Life. National Institute of Education Project No. 3-3094. Cambridge, Mass.: Center for Study of Public Policy, 1974. Lewis, 0. Five Families. New York: Basic Books, 1958. Lewis, 0. La vida. New York: Random House, 1966. Lindemann, E. C. Social Discovery. New York: 1924. Linn, L. S. "Verbal attitudes and overt behavior: A study of racial discrimination." Social Forces, 1965, 2;, 353-364. Linton, R. The Study of Man: An Introduction. New York: Appleton-Century Co., 1963. Mc Call, G. J. & Simmons, J. L. (Eds.). Issues in Partici- pant Observation: A Text and Reader. Reading, Mass.: Addison-Wesley Publishing Co., 1969. Mo Intire, W. G.; Nass, G.; & Dreyer, A. "A cross cultural comparison of adolescent perception of parental roles." Jougnal of Marriage and the Family, November, 1972, 735-740. Mead, G. Mind, Self, and Society. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1934. Meier, G. S. Job Sharing. A New Pattern forguality of Work and Life. Kalamazoo, Mich.: W. E. Upjohn Insti- tue for Employment Research, 1978. 197 Millman, M. "Observations on sex role research." Journal of Marriage and the Family, 1971, aa, 772-775. Nollen, S. D.; Eddy, B. B.; & Martin, V. H. Permanent Part- time Employment: The Manager's Perspective. U.S. Department of Commerce. Springfield, VA.: National Technical Information Service, 1977. (PB 268 390) Nye, F. I. & Gecas, V. "Family role analysis: The Washing- ton family role inventory." Washington State Uni- versity, College of Agriculture Research Center, Technical Bulletin 82, 1976. Parsons, T. & Bales, R. I. FamilyISOcialization and Inter- action process. Glencoe, 111.: The Free Press, 1955. The Personnel Administrator. Alternate Work Patterns, 1979, 23, (10). Perrucci, C. C.; Potter, H. R.; & Rhoads, D. L. "Deter— minants of male family-role performance." In Bryson, J. B. & Bryson, R. (Eds.), Dual Careag Couples. New York: Human Sciences Press, 1978. Petras, J. W. Sex: Male/Gender: Masculine. Selected Readings in Male Sexuality. Port Washington, N.Y.: Alfred Publishing Co., Inc., 1975. Pleck, E. "Sex roles in transition: The historical perspec- tive." In D. G. Mc Guigan (Ed.), New Research on WOmen and Sex Roles. Ann Arbor, Mich.: The Center for the Continuing Education of Women, 1976. Pleck, J. H. "The work family role system." Social Problems, 23, (4), 417-425. Pleck, J. H. "Men's family work: Three perspectives and some new data." The Family Coordinator, 1979, ea, (4), 481-488. Presbyterian Panel. "Sexism in the church: Presbyterian vieWpoints concerning the role of women in society and in the church." New York: United Presbyterian Church, U.S.A., 1975. RapOport, R. & RapOport, R. Dual-Career Families. Baltimore, Mary.: Penguin Books, 1971. RapOport, et al. Dual-Careerygamilies Re-examined. New York: Harper & Row, 1976. 198 Robinson, J. How Americans Use Time: A Social-Psychological Analysis. New York: Praeger, 1977. Rossi, A. S. "Sex equality: The beginnings of ideology." In I. L. Reiss (Ed.), Readings on the Family System. New York: Rinehart and Winston, 1972. Rossi, A. "Changing roles in sex and marriage." In H. T. Christensen, Institute for the Study of Social Change, Department of Sociology and Anthropology: Purdue University, Institute Monograph Series No. 5, 1975. Rowe, M. "That parents may work and love and children may thrive." In N. Talbot (Ed.), Raising Children in Modern America. Boston: Little Brown, 1976. Russell, L. M. Human Liberation in a Feminist Perspective-- A Theology. Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1974. Safilios-Rothschild, C. "Dual linkages between the occupa- tional world and family system: A macrosociological analysis." Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society, December 1975. "Saving the family." Newsweek, May 15, 1978, XCI (20). Scanzoni, J. Opportunity and the Family. New York: Free Press, 1970. Swensen, C. H. Introduction to Interpersonal Relations. Glencoe, 111.: Scott Foresman & Co., 1973. Sykes, R. E. "Toward a theory of observer effect in sys- tematic field observation." Human Organization, 1978, £1, (2), 148-156. Tharp, R. G. "Psychological patterning in marriage." Psychological Bulletin, 1963, 99, 97-117. Veroff, J. & Feld, S. Marriage and Work in America. Van Nostrand Reinhold, 1970. Walker, K. E. & Woods, M. E. Time Use: A Measure of House- hold Production of Family Goods afid’Services. Washington, D.C.: AHEA, 1976. White, B. L. Experience and Environment: Major Influences on the Development of the Young Child. Vol. 2. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, 1978. Whyte, W. F. Street Corner Socieuy. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1961. 199 Whyte, W. P. "On making the most of participant observa- tion." The American Sociologist, 1979, as, 56-66. Wilmot, P. a Young M. The Symmetrical Family. New York: Pantheon, 1974. "Women and holy orders." Report of a commission appointed by the archbishops of Canterbury and York. London: Church Information Office, 1966. Zelditch, M. "Role differentiation in the nuclear family: A comparative study." In T. Parsons & R. F. Bales, Family Socialization and Interaction Process. Glencoe, 111.: Free Press, 1955.