ADOLESCENT ADJUSTMENT TO PARENTS

3y
FRANCIS IVAN NYE

A THESIS
Submitted t o th e School of Graduate S tudies of Michigan
S ta te College of A g ricu ltu re and Applied Science
in p a r t i a l f u lf illm e n t of the requirem ents
f o r the degree of
DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY

Department o f Sociology and Anthropology

1$50

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The w r ite r wishes to acknowledge th e a s sis ta n c e of the
guidance committee, a l l o f whom have been generous in giving
t h e i r tim e whenever a ssista n c e has been re q u e ste d .

P a rtic u la r

indebtedness i s acknowledged to Dr. Judson T. Landis, who, as
major p ro fe s so r, combined a read in ess to a s s i s t w ith freedom to
th e candidate t o develop h is own id eas; to Dr. Duane Gibson fo r
many hours o f c o n su lta tio n on s t a t i s t i c a l techniques and methods
of a n a ly s is ; and to Mr. Charles P ro cto r, who, as a paid a s s is ta n t,
co n trib u te d id e as and techniques as w ell as many hours carrying
through s t a t i s t i c a l com putations.

TABLE OF CONTENTS
CHAPTER

PAGE

I.

INTRODUCTION..................................................................................

1

II.

REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE.......................................................

6

III.

APPROACH AND METHODOLOGY.......................................................

22

IV .

LOVE AND SECURITY RELATIONSHIPS.....................................

Lj2

V.

STATUS RELATIONSHIPS................................................................

5U

V I.

SOCIALIZATION RELATIONSHIPS ...............................................

65

V II.

PARENT PERSONALITIES.................................................................

77

V III.

OUTSIDE OF FAMILY RELATIONSHIPS ......................................

87

IX .

AN OVERALL STATISTICAL VIEW BY RESIDENCE, SOCIO­
ECONOMIC LEVEL, AGE AND S E X .................................................

98

X.

THE INTER-RELATION OF BACKGROUND FACTORS.........................116

X I.

CONCLUSIONS....................................................................................... 129

APPENDIX "A ,"

THE ESSENTIAL UNITY OF FEELINGS ABOUT SELF
AND OTHERS—A HYPOTHESIS..........................................II4O

APPENDIX »B,"

THE INSTRUMENT...............................................................1?0

APPENDIX «C,»

BASIC DATA TABLES.......................................................... 160

APPENDIX »D,"

METHODOLOGICAL NOTES................................................. 197

BIBLIOGRAPHY.................................................................................................... 201

INTRODUCTION

Adolescence i s one of the v i t a l tr a n s itio n p eriods through
which each person passes in a lif e tim e .

Preceding tr a n s itio n periods

in clu d e th e f i r s t two or th re e y e a rs, during which he a ssim ila te s the
language, th e p o stu re o f u p rig h t locomotion and o th er a c t i v i t i e s which
d if f e r e n t i a t e him from o th er anim als.

Another ra p id tr a n s itio n often

occurs i f he r a th e r suddenly leaves th e fam ily f o r th e outside p lay
gang and fo r sch o o l.
d iffic u lt.

None of th ese periods need n e c e s sa rily be too

I f s o c ie ty 's ex p ectatio n s are w ell d efin ed , goals w ith in

re a c h , and in d iv id u a l a d u lts lend helping hands, th e baby, th e c h ild ,
and the adolescen t are able to s a tis f y th e ir needs fo r love and
re c o g n itio n in s o c ia lly acceptable ways.

Where t h i s s itu a tio n e x is ts

fo r p r a c tic a lly a l l th e members of a so c ie ty , nobody would th in k of
studying th e p ro c ess.
I n American s o c ie ty , th e re are many d ev iatio n s in the process
f o r stu d y .

There i s n o t, however, the same amount fo r each of th re e

t r a n s it i o n p e rio d s.
d efin ed :

At the baly sta g e , s o c ie ty 's goals are q u ite w ell

to le a rn to t a l k , walk, e a t, and elim in ate in a s o c ia liz e d

way and to keep hands o ff of o th e rs ' p ro p erty .

There i s a concensus

o f opinion t h a t th e main danger during th is p erio d i s to fo rc e th e
c h ild too f a s t .

There i s no lack of a d u lt help and guidance.

At th e childhood le v e l the c h ild must, in p a r t, le a rn to s a tis f y
h is needs o u tsid e th e fam ily among o th er ch ild ren and among teach ers
and o th er a d u lts who w ill love him or n o t love him, not on the b a s is
o f who he i s but on th e b a s is of what he does.

The o b ject i s to meet

2

h is needs w ithout in frin g in g on th e r ig h ts and d efeatin g th e needs of
o th e rs .

Again th e road i s q u ite w ell marked, although some research

and education toward p o s itiv e techniques o f meeting th e needs o f
o th ers would be u s e fu l.

Again the a d u lt world g e n e ra lly i s try in g

t o help th e in d iv id u a l become a su ccessfu l c h ild .

Only in patho­

lo g ic a l cases does anyone t r y to prevent a baby from becoming a c h ild .
In adolescence, however, the s itu a tio n i s d if f e r e n t.

There i s

no way fo r most adolescents t o become a d u lts a t th e time they are
p h y s ic a lly and m entally q u a lifie d .
economic.

The reasons are la rg e ly so cio ­

There a r e n 't enough jobs fo r a d u lts , so why give any to

adolescents?

Of course, some young people can g e t b e tte r jobs and

p lace them selves higher on th e socio-economic lad d er by f in is h in g
high school and college and ta k in g p ro fe ssio n a l work.
sm all m in o rity , however.

Such are a

This economic b a r r ie r to adulthood does

n o t appear to be li k e l y to change, and i s as tru e of one p a r t of
American s o c ie ty as an o th er.

The farm boy of f i f t e e n i s lik e ly to

have a f a th e r of about f o r ty who s t i l l has tw enty-five years to go
before he w i l l want to tu rn th e farm over to a son.

F hysical lab o r

does n o t c o n s titu te economic adulthood.
At adolescence, th en , th e problems o f tr a n s itio n to another
type o f behavior i s p re se n t, b u t i t i s immensely aggravated n o t only
by no c le a rc u t design o f s o c ie ty 's ex p ectatio n , b u t a ls o by th e f a c t
t h a t th e re i s no way a t a l l o f becoming an ad u lt.

At tw elve,

t h ir te e n , or fo u rte en th e in d iv id u a l has ceased being a c h ild e ith e r

3

p h y s ic a lly or p sy ch o lo g ica lly , b u t in ste a d of becoming an a d u lt he
e n te rs a "no man's land" of e ig h t or te n years -when he i s too old to
be a c h ild and too young to be an a d u lt.
In ■what urays can th e adolescent s a ti s f y h is b asic needs fo r lo v e
and re c o g n itio n during t h i s "■waiting" period?
ways.

He may ex cel academ ically,

b u t th e re

There are not many
are only a

few p laces,

such as being v a le d ic to ria n or on th e honor r o le , or he may be a
s t a r "h alf" on th e f o o tb a ll eleven.
n o t th e fiv e hundred.

But th e team i s the "eleven,"

Recognition i s , th en , d i f f i c u l t to a tta i n in

s o c ia lly acceptable ways, although th e re are o th er ways not accept­
ab le to th e a d u lt w orld.
The p ic tu re i s not d if f e r e n t f o r the s a tis f a c tio n of the
a d o le s c e n t's love needs.

The adolescent i s not in a p o s itio n to

meet h is needs f o r response by m arriage and establishm ent of a
fam ily o f h is own.

In f a c t , p aren ts are so f e a r f u l th a t adolescents

w i l l e n te r in to a f u l l em otional and p h y sica l re la tio n s h ip w ith a
member o f th e opposite sex, th a t they expend most of the energy which
th ey devote to ad olescents to making sure th a t they do n o t meet t h e i r
love needs in t h i s way.

The o th er major source of love fo r the

ad o lescen t i s h is own fam ily— h is p a re n ts, b ro th e rs, and s is te r s and
p o ssib ly oth er clo se r e l a t i v e s .

This acceptable and fu n c tio n a lly

sound source of love has been neglected or m isunderstood.

Parents

have f e l t "he i s a b ig boy now" and d o e s n 't need or want a ffe c tio n ,
or th ey have m erely ignored th e adolescent as long as he has k9pt out

h

o f tro u b le .
This tendency of p aren ts has been re in fo rc e d by p sy ch o lo g ists
and educators who have seen c lin ic a l cases of adults who never es­
ta b lis h e d em otional independence from p aren ts or e s ta b lis h e d i t only
a f t e r i t had wrecked or prevented t h e i r m arriag es^ /.

I t i s undoubted­

l y tru e t h a t a few p are n ts f a i l to re le a se t h e i r c h ild re n em otionally
soon enough, b ut i t i s probably tru e th a t a much g re a te r number r e ­
le a s e them to o soon, before they have s u f f ic ie n t o th er sources of
lo v e .
To be f a i r to th e p sy ch o lo g ists, some have seen the need to
equate th e a r r i v a l of economic, em otional, and m a rita l m atu rity , b u t
t h e i r su g gestion has been t h a t m arriage be moved ahead in to th e te e n s .
This could only be accomplished by changing our e n tir e economic and
s o c ia l o rd er, which i s u n lik e ly .

I t i s p o s s ib le , however, to keep

th e c h ild in te g ra te d em otionally in h is own fam ily f o r a longer p erio d
o f tim e.

This would not be a s u b s titu te f o r a ffe c tio n from th e oppo­

s i t e sex during th e d a tin g periodj r a th e r i t would supplement i t .
Research in th e f i e l d of ad o lescen t-p aren t r e la tio n s i s needed.
I f th e above suggestions are c o rre c t, then most of th e education in
p a re n t-a d o le sc e n t r e la tio n s i s going in th e wrong d ire c tio n or a t
l e a s t i s n o t poin ted a c c u ra te ly .

There a ls o needs to be a r e d iv is io n

o f th e emphasis o f c u rre n t research w ith more emphasis on adolescence.

1 / H avighurst, R .J ., Developmental Tasks and Education, U n iv ersity of
Chicago P ress, Chicago. 19U8.

5
P resen t and p a s t rese arc h has centered more on th e e a r l i e s t period
of l i f e .

TNhile few would d isp u te th a t e a r l i e s t experiences can have

in flu en c e on l a t e r l i f e , no one has e sta b lish ed th a t these are con­
t r o l l i n g or d e c is iv e .

I t i s w ell e sta b lish e d th a t the adolescent i s

extrem ely m alleable and su g g estib le during t h i s period of change.
New re la tio n s h ip s are being entered in to which make i t a period when
m aladjusted r e la tio n s w ith the group, i f not too se rio u s , may be
c o rre c te d .

But more im portant, i t i s the tr a n s itio n period in which

th e d i f f i c u l t i e s of le a rn in g new behavior which are encountered a t any
t r a n s itio n period are augmented i n our c u ltu re ty blocks to assumption
of th e a d u lt r o le .

6

CHAPTER I I

REVIEW OF LITERATURE

The p aren t-ad o lescen t a re a of in te ra c tio n i s a t the same time
extrem ely narrow and extrem ely broad.

Narrow in th e sense t h a t of

the t o t a l s o c ia l in te ra c tio n , a r e la tiv e ly small p a r t occurs between
p aren ts and ad o lescen ts.

I t i s wide in th e sense t h a t much of

s o c io lo g ic a l th eo ry developed i n other or la rg e r areas i s ap p licab le
to p a ren t-ad o le sce n t in te r a c tio n .

S p e c ific research in p a re n t-

adolescen t re la tio n s h ip s has been lim ite d in ex te n t and r a th e r elemen­
ta r y , b u t th e re i s a tremendous amount of general research which to a
degree c o n trib u te s to th e advancement of theory in the f ie ld .

Taking

th is n a tu r a l d iv isio n of re se a rc h in to account, t h i s review of l i t e r ­
atu re i s div id ed in to two s e c tio n s :

(1) th a t which d escribes

em p irica l rese arc h in t h i s p a r tic u la r a rea and (2) g eneral research
or th e o r e tic a l w ritin g which i s not based d ir e c tly on research in t h i s
f i e l d , but c o n trib u te s to p aren t-ad o lescen t th eo ry .
S p e c ific Research in Parent-A dolescent R elations

S to g d ill,

surveying s tu d ie s of c h ild re n 's a ttitu d e s toward p aren ts made before
1937, re p o rte d t h a t only tw en ty -six had used s u f f ic ie n tly ob jectiv e
measurements to be a c c u ra te ly ev alu ated .

This lim ite d number did n o t

evenly cover th e area but c lu s te re d about two asp ects of the problem—
eleven s tu d ie s being wholly or p a r tly concerned w ith th e parent
preferen ce o f th e c h ild , w hile seven centered on punishment.
S to g d ill made se v e ra l gen eral statem ents which can be summarized
as fo llo w s:

( l ) Children f e e l a high degree of dependence on t h e ir

7

p a re n ts, although th e dependence decreases -with age as does parent
id e a liz a tio n ty ch ild re n ; (2) mother i s p re fe rre d over f a th e r nor­
m ally, but delin q u en t c h ild re n chose p aren t of th e opposite sexj (3)
p a re n t p reference i s on b a sis of "value received"; (li) ch ild re n r e ­
se n t severe and u n ju st punishment; (5) o v e r - s tr ic t d is c ip lin e and
severe re lig io u s c o n tro l appear to be a sso ciated w ith l a t e r person­
a l i t y maladjustment; (6) c h ild re n who tend to disagree w ith th e ir
p a re n ts u su a lly take a l i b e r a l a ttitu d e on moral and s o c ia l problems;
(7) p a re n ta l and fam ily in flu en c es are more p o ten t than such f a c to rs
as p o s itio n of fam ily in th e neighborhood or economic s t a t u s ^ .
Rece n t stu d ie s have added to th e knowledge of th e conceptions
t h a t th e c h ild and ad o lescent have of th e ir p a re n ts.

M. H. Bro

developed th e p o in t t h a t c h ild re n th in k of th e ir p aren ts as
" i n s ti t u t i o n s ."

They need something to lean on, and as such, p aren ts
2/
must be to le r a n t and secure in t h e ir own liv e s -'.
A v e rill d iscu sses c h ild re n s ' a ttitu d e s along somewhat sim ila r
lin e s -H':
A dults have to be minded, b rib ed or teased sometimes fo r
coveted perm issions; appeased fo r freq u en t a c ts of d is ­
obedience or s e lfis h n e s s which one commits; argued and
reasoned w ith to b rin g them to see o n e's p o in t of view;
1 / S to g d ill, R.M., "Survey of Experiments of C h ild re n 's A ttitu d e s Toward
T heir P are n ts," Pedagogical Seminary, LI, (1937) pp. 293-303.
2 / Bro, M.H., "P arents Can be People," Child Study, XXIII (19h5>),
pp. 13-15.
3 / A v e rill, Lawrence A ., Adolescence, Houghton M ifflin Co., Boston,
1936.

8

taken in to a t l e a s t m arginal co n sid e ratio n when planning
any venture which i s out of the o rd in ary . I t i s not
c le a r to them t h a t a tw elv e-y ear-o ld boy i s capable of
tak in g care of h im self, of re g u la tin g h is ov*n conduct,
o f making h is own d e c isio n s, and spending h is own time
in le g itim a te and obviously valuable Trays.
Showing a counter tren d from th e p re v a le n t im pression of th e
a d o le s c e n t's demand fo r g re a te r freedom and le s s punishment, a re th e
surveys of Landis.

Landis quotes N eblett th a t c h ild re n stu d ied

thought th e punishment th ey received was necessary .

In h is own s tu d ie s

Landis found co n sid erab le c r itic is m of p a re n ta l l a x i t y .

R elaxation of

p a re n ta l c o n tro l too com pletely a t too young an age may lead to adoles­
cen ts 1 c o n tro llin g p a r e n t s ^
The above conclusions a re rein fo rced by the r e s u lts of the Student
Opinion P o ll No. 5* in which 85*000 high-school p u p ils expressed th e
degree of c o n tro l they would ex erc ise i f they were the p aren ts of s ix te e n -y ea r-o ld a d o le sc e n ts.

On th e question of giving f u l l freedom to

t h e i r boy to choose h is own hours and come and go as he p leased , only
105 voted y es, f o r f u l l freedom to choose h is own a s s o c ia te s , t h i r t y
p e r cen t s a id yesj to smoke, th irty -o n e p er cent affirm ativ e} to d rin k ,
s ix p er cen t.

To six te e n -y e a r-o ld g i r ls they would give even le s s

freedom} seven p er cent voted to l e t them have f u l l c o n tro l over hours
k ep t and places v isite d } twenty-one p er cen t voted f o r fre e choice of
asso ciates} te n p er cent and fo u r per cen t r e s p e c tiv e ly to allow freedom
to smoke or d rin k .

Only on th e su b jec t of allow ing c h ild re n to marry

ii/ Landis, Paul H., Adolescence and Youth, McGraw-Hill Book Co., New
York. 191,5.
--------------------------------

9

a person of another r e lig io u s a f f i l i a t i o n would m a jo ritie s allow
t h e i r c h ild re n f re e c h o ic e ^
C onsiderable a tte n tio n has been given i n th e l a s t decade to the
q u a litie s ad o lescen ts want in th e ir p a re n ts .

Taylor p o in ts out th a t

most p aren ts are not s a tis f a c to r y models f o r th e ir c h ild re n , th a t
what i s needed i s " d isc ip le s h ip , n o t d i s c ip l in e .” Adolescents are
quick to d e te c t la ck of d ire c tio n or i n t e r e s t in th e ir p a re n ts ' liv e s .
"When we are absorbed in th in g s we fin d r e a lly worth w hile, we are
l e s s a p t to focus upon p e tty s u p e r f i c i a l i ti e s , which are so i r r i t a t i n g
to a d o le s c e n ts " ^
follo w in g :

Fadiman l i s t s among these p e tty i r r i t a n t s the

mother read in g d a u g h te r's m ail; going through d au g h ter's

drawers? p aren ts demanding complete account of a c t i v i t i e s - ^
S to tt made a r a th e r complete stu d y of one phase of the r e la tio n ­
sh ip by asking 1,800 high-school stu d en ts "What d o n 't you lik e about
your p aren ts?"

Over one hundred t r a i t s were l i s t e d in answering? th e

la r g e s t number o f fre q u e n c ie s, 368 , were r e la te d to d is c ip lin e .

A

co n sid erab le m ajo rity were com plaints a g a in s t th e m other, the la r g e s t
s in g le item of which was sco ld in g .

Rated second were p erso n al h a b its ,

2^2, o f which alm ost th re e -fo u rth s were a g a in s t the fa th e r-sm o k in g ,
5>/ Student Opinion P o ll No. 5, " I f I Were A P aren t," S c h o la stic ,
XLIV (19M ), May. p . 36 .
6 / T aylor, K atherine W., Do Adolescents Need P aren ts, Appleton-Century
Co., New York, 1938.
7 / Fadiman, P ., "L ife With P a re n ts," Child Study, XXII (19U5) pp.108-10.

10

ta lk in g too much, drin k in g , and swearing were th e most fre q u e n t.
L isted th i r d , 213, was temperament, w ith nagging and crabbing g e ttin g
most fre q u en t m e n tio n ^

S to tt l a t e r used th ese and other research

fin d in g s to c o n stru ct a sc a le fo r the measurement of c e rta in asp ects
9/
of th e p a re n t-c h ild re la tio n s h ip -'.
Iynd and Iynd, approaching th e same problem from a p o s itiv e
angle, found t h a t th e th ings lik e d b e s t in fa th e rs were: spends tim e
w ith c h ild re n , re sp e c ts opinions of c h ild re n , and d o e sn 't nag.

Lesser

v irtu e s were: to be w ell d ressed, s o c ia lly prom inent, and have a good
c a r.

For m others, v irtu e s of f i r s t importance were: to be a good

cook and housekeeper, no nagging, and to re sp e c t t h e i r c h ild re n 's
o p in io n s.

Less im portant were: being prominent s o c ia lly , w ell d ressed ,
10/
good h o s te s s , and a college graduate—f.
Goldsmith and McClanathan, working in the same area, found sen io r
h igh-school boys opposed to t h e i r m other's working o u tsid e the home.
They wanted to share reso u rces, p le a s u re s , and p erso n al problems w ith
t h e i r fa m ilie s ; d iscu ss d ates and school stan d in g w ith the fam ily;

8 / S t o t t , L. H., "Adolescent D islik es Regarding P aren tal B ehavior,"
Pedagogical Seminary, LVII (1937), pp. 393-blU.
S j S t o t t , L. H ., "Parent-A dolescent Adjustment, I t s Measurement and
S ig n ific a n c e ," C haracter and P e rso n a lity , X (191(1) pp. lUO-fjO.
10/lynd, R. S ., and Lynd, H. M., Middletown, A Study in Contemporary
American C u ltu re, Harcourt Brace, New York, 1929.

11

sh are in r e s p o n s ib ility and d ecisio n s of th e home; and p re fe rre d not
t o be se v e rly punished fo r u n in te n tio n a l m is ta k e s ^ /
Grey asked f i f t y q u estions about problems which sometimes come
up between p a re n ts and ad o lescen ts.

Each question was answered by

"yes" or "no1.1 The l i s t was subm itted to over 1*00 ju n io r and sen io r
high-school s tu d e n ts .
Grey subdivides th e r e s u lts in to two prim ary c la s se s : problems
a r is in g from a ttitu d e s of p u p ils , and problems r e s u ltin g from be­
h a v io r.

Among problems a r is in g from stu d en t behavior were c a r-rid in g

over p a re n ta l o b je ctio n , ir r e g u la r church attendance, promiscuous
p e ttin g , f a ilu r e to do t h e i r b i t a t home, and using tobacco over
p a re n ta l o b je c tio n .
Problems caused by p a re n t behavior were in the order of th e ir
frequency: f a i l u r e to d isc u ss sex w ith c h ild re n , ir r e g u la r church
atten d an ce, denying c h ild re n use of fam ily c a r, showing p a r t i a l i t y
among c h ild re n , and f a ilu r e to provide c h ild re n an allow ance.
Concerning problems a r is in g from the a ttitu d e s of the ad o lescen ts,
Grey found in o rder of frequency: s e t fe e lin g th a t p aren ts d o n 't t r u s t
them, d e s ire f o r g re a te r p a re n ta l t r u s t , th in k in g p a re n ts '

approval of

frie n d s unnecessary, and fe e lin g th a t p aren ts do n o t understand beys
and g i r l s of teen a g e ^ {
1 1/ Goldsmith, F. S ., and McClanathan, H., "Adolescent A ttitu d e s ,"
Jo u rn al o f Home Economics, XXXIV (191*2), pp. 92-96.
1 2 / Grey, William E ., ''Some Problems of C o n flic t Between High School
P u p ils and T heir P a re n ts," unpublished m a ste r's th e s is , North
Texas S ta te Teachers C ollege, Denton, Texas, 1939.

12

Block in a study of $15 high school and ju n io r high school
stu d en ts found 7$ or more per cent in d ic a tin g t h a t serio u s d iffe re n c e s
were caused between them and th e ir paren ts by th e follow ing item s: in ­
s i s t s I e a t foods which I d is lik e but which are good fo r me, p e s te rs
me about my ta b le manners, scolds i f my marks a re n ’t as high as other
p e o p le s ', w on't l e t me use the c a r, i n s i s t s I t e l l e x actly what I
spend my money f o r, and i n s i s t s I take ngr b ro th e r or s i s t e r wherever

Riggs and Nye in a study of 268 eleventh-grade high school stu d en ts
found th e su b jec ts causing the most argument between p aren t and ch ild
were in o rder of frequency: use of fa m ily c a r, hour c h ild i s to g et
i n a t n ig h t, doing work around house and yard, lis te n in g to th e ra d io ,
e a tin g c e r ta in th in g s he d o e s n 't lik e , and spending h is money.
Of d esired changes in p a re n ts, the most fre q u e n tly mentioned
were: go out s o c ia lly w ithout me more o fte n , d iscu ss fam ily problems
w ith me, go to more games and public events w ith me, and be a member
of more clubs and o rg a n iz atio n s.
In summary of th e response of the question "What advice do you
th in k most im portant to give to p aren ts of boys and g i r l s your age?"
th ey c o n c lu d e ^ ^ :
1 3 / Block, V irg in ia L ., "C o n flicts of A dolescents w ith Their M others,"
Jo u rn al of Abnormal and S o cial Psychology, XXXII (1937),p p .193-206.
I k / Riggs, Lawrence and Nye, Ivan, "Some P arent-C hild C o n flicts from
th e C h ild 's P oint of View," unpublished study, W illiam ette Univer­
s i t y , Salem, Oregon, 19U6.

13

These s ix te e n and sev en teen -y ear-o ld s want more freedom
and r e s p o n s ib ility ; th ey want to be tr e a te d as people
and to be able to d iscu ss t h e i r problems and those of
th e fam ily w ith t h e i r p a re n ts; they f e e l th e need fo r
more knowledge* e s p e c ia lly about sex and r e la te d s u b je c ts ;
and th ey s t i l l want some re g u la tio n o f a diplom atic ty p e.
In a l a t e r study Nye analyzed th e c o rre la tio n between each of
f o r ty - s ix item s r e f le c tin g ad o lesc e n t-p a re n t behavior and a ttitu d e s
w ith th e su b je c tiv e fe e lin g of th e ad o lescen t as to th e s a t i s f a c t o r i ­
ness o f h is r e la tio n s h ip to h is p a re n ts.

Forty-tw o re la tio n s h ip s were

found to be s ig n if ic a n tly c o rre la te d (above 1% le v e l) w ith s e lf ­
f e e lin g of adjustm ent.

Those showing th e h ig h est c o rre la tio n s w ere

th e in tim a te lo v e -s e c u rity r e la tio n s h ip s ^ ^
Sowers, in an a n a ly sis of 2,000 answers to th e q u estio n of what
are im portant q u a litie s i n a p a re n t, found th e la r g e s t number, f o r ty
p e r c e n t, in d ic a te d t h a t i n t e r e s t and p a r tic ip a tio n in c h ild 's
a c t i v i t i e s was ra te d h ig h e s t.

T h irty -s ix per cent s tre s s e d more firm ­

ness and d is c ip lin e , w hile tw en ty -th ree p er cent f e l t th e need fo r
16/
more h elp , advice, and tr a in in g from th e p aren t—\
Employing th e q u estio n n aire method, Cavan stu d ied th e fam ily r e ­
la tio n s h ip s o f 13,000 w h ite, co lo red , second g en eratio n , delin q u en t
and non-delinquent c h ild re n .

She emerged w ith two conclusions:

(1) That p erso n al re la tio n s h ip s were more im portant than money,

1 5 / Nye, Ivan, "F actors In flu en cin g Y outh's Adjustment to P a re n ts,"
m a ste r's th e s i s , The S ta te College of Washington, 19 U7.
1 6 / Sowers, A lic e , "P aren t-C hild R elatio n sh ip s from th e C h ild 's View,"
d o c to ra l d is s e r ta tio n , C ornell U n iv ersity L ib rary , 1937.

m

housing, and o th er socio-economic item s and (2) th a t c i ty ch ild ren
were b e tte r ad ju sted in the fam ily than r u r a l c h i l d r e n ^ /
Nimkoff compared th e r e la tio n s h ip s of boys and g i r l s to fa th e rs
and mothers and concluded th a t both sexes were clo se r to mothers th an
to f a t h e r s ^ /
Symonds, using th e case study method and employing acceptancer e je c tio n and dom inant-subm issive dichotom ies of p a re n t-c h ild r e la ­
tio n s found accepted and dominated c h ild re n b e tte r s o c ia liz e d w ith
th e exception t h a t c h ild re n of submissive p aren ts were b e tte r able to
express th e m se lv e s ^ f
Runner, employing stu d en t d ia r ie s as a re search source, de­
lin e a te d seven zones of decreasing intim acy between th e adolescent
and o th e rs.

She termed these (1) confidante (2) in tim a te (3) fa m ilia r

(h) acquaintance (3) group a c tiv ity (6) group, p assiv e, and (7)
sp e c ta to rs h ip .

She concluded th a t adolescents w ith close a ffe c tio n a te
20/
home l i f e have fewer very close r e la tio n s w ith the peer group—
17/ Cavan, Ruth Shonle, The Adolescent in th e Family, D. AppletonCentury Company, New York, 193li.
1 8/ Nimkoff, Meyer F ., P arent-C hild R elatio n sh ip s, U n iv ersity of
Southern C a lifo rn ia P ress, Los Angeles, 1935.
1 9 / The w rite r accepts th e a c c e p ta n c e -re je c tio n dichotomy as meaningf u l l sin ce acceptance i s v i t a l to th e c h ild 's fe e lin g of being
loved and secure b u t dominance-submission has no meaning i t s e l f .
I t tak e s on meaning only as i t i s r e la te d to th e c h ild 's r e la tio n ­
sh ip s which make him f e e l secure and adequate or th e re v e rse .
See Symonds, P e rc iv a l M., The Psychology of P arent-C hild R elatio n ­
s h ip s , D. Appleton-Century Company, New York, 1939*
20/ Runner, J .R ., "S o cial D istance in A dolescent R e la tio n s," American
Journal Sociology, Vol. XLII (1937), pp. 1*28-39.

15

General Theory Possessing Relevance to Parent-A dolescent R elations
Reuter suggested t h a t th e phenomena of a se p a ra te ad olescent group w ith
needs which must be s a t i s f i e d b a s ic a lly d if f e r e n tly from e ith e r ch ild
or a d u lt i s o f re ce n t o r ig in .

The development of th is group i s roughly

p a r a lle l to t h a t of th e high school and co lleg e p o p u latio n .

Contin­

uance in school a f t e r a d u lt s iz e and s tre n g th i s a tta in e d c o n s titu te s
a s p e c ia l group—b io lo g ic a lly e s s e n tia lly a d u lt but econom ically
dependent on p a re n ts—a dependence Reuter termed " to le ra te d p a r a s it­
is m ^ /"

The in c re a se of t h i s s p e c ia l group has been phenomenal.

Numbering only a h a lf a m illio n in 1890, by 19li7 i t had in creased to
e ig h t and a h a lf m illio n .

Ylhile grade school enrollm ent was in ­

creasin g only 50 per c en t, high schools in creased 2,000 p er cent and
co lleg es 1,500 per c e n t ^ f
I t s development has coincided w ith th e disappearance of th e
f r o n t i e r , th e s a tia tio n of th e lab o r m arket, th e s p e c ia liz a tio n of
occupations and th e se p a ra tio n of home and pro d u ctio n .

Reuter terms

the in co rp o ratio n of th e "su rp lu s" adolescents in to th e school system
"a f o lk adjustm ent t o th e co n d itio n s c reated by a s o c ia l and in d u s t r ia l
development t h a t l e f t youth no u s e fu l p lace or fu n ctio n i n the c u l-

21/ R euter, E. B., "The Sociology of A dolescence," American Journal of
Sociology, Vol. U3 (1937-8), pp. lli-2 7 .
22/ Federal S e c u rity Agency, O ffice of Education, B ien n ial Survey.of
Education, February 19U7.
23/ R euter, I b id .

16

The folkways, based on a s o c ie ty in which th e adolescent group
was an econom ically u s e fu l and w ell in te g ra te d p a r t, became non­
o p erativ e and a new c u ltu re was c re a te d .

Born of a s itu a tio n

b a s ic a lly f r u s tr a tin g , th e new c u ltu re was a n ta g o n istic to ad u lt
p r a c tic e s .

Parsons d escrib es th is antagonism as tak in g two forms:

( l ) complete negativism toward a d u lt values and (2) l i t e r a l and
r a d ic a l embrace of adult id e a ls beyond t h e i r a c tu a l p ra c tic e in
2ii/
so c ie ty 1 . This new adolescent c u ltu re was a t f i r s t considered only
d ev ian t behavior on the p a r t of in d iv id u a ls .

Merton, however, la id

th e th e o r e tic a l groundwork f o r i t s co n sid eratio n as a fu n c tio n a l as­
p ect of s o c ie ty by showing th a t s o c ie tie s fo rc e in d iv id u a ls in to
25/
d ev ian t behavior p a tte rn s — .
Davis recognized as a new f a c to r in p aren t-ad o lescen t r e la tio n s
th e change i n s o c ie ty th a t i s so rap id t h a t parents have never exper­
ienced much of th e s o c ia l world th a t th e ir ch ild re n liv e

Dingel

considers i t o fte n a c o n f lic t of c u ltu re s w ith th e p aren t reared in a
r u r a l world and c h ild re n in an urban o n e ^ ^

Data from the p resen t

study in d ic a te t h a t a la rg e m in o rity of th e fa th e rs and mothers of ado­
le s c e n ts o f 19U8, p a r tic u la r ly farm p a re n ts, never atten d ed high school.
2U/ Parsons, T a lc o tt, "Aggression in the S o cial S tru c tu re of th e Western
World," P sy c h iatry , Vol. X (19h7), pp. 67-81.
25/ Merton, Robert K,, "S o cial S tru ctu re and Anomie," American
S o cio lo g ica l Review, Vol. I l l (1938), pp. 672-82.
26/ D avis, K ingsley, "The Sociology of Parent-C hild C o n flic t," American
S o cio lo g ica l Review, Vol. V (19U0), pp. 523-35.
27/ D ingel, Robert M., "P arent-C hild C o n flic t in Minnesota F a m ilies,"
American S o cio lo g ical Review, Vol. V III (19U3)> pp. U12-19.

17

In a s o c io lo g ic a l sense i t might alm ost be s a id th a t they never had
the experience of being an adolescent!
Adolescence of a g en eratio n ago v aried from th e p re se n t in the
d ire c tio n of some of th e p r e - l i t e r a t e s o c ie tie s such as Samoa, where
th e c h ild moves th ru adolescence and in to adulthood w ithout undo
s tr a in —a u s e fu l and v e il in te g ra te d member of a g re a t fam ily and
enveloped in a c lo s e -k n it community prim ary g ro u p ^ {

Many p aren ts of

the c u rre n t decade are faced w ith d ealin g w ith a s itu a tio n w ithout
much guidance.

They d id n o t experience th e s o c ia l s itu a tio n them­

se lv e s, and th e re e x is t no adequate folkw ays.
The same s o c io - in d u s tr ia l changes which occurred a t the time
th a t th e ad o lescen t group can be recognized as a d efin ab le e n t i t y , are
asso c ia te d w ith o th er changes in s o c ia l in te ra c tio n which have made
m utually s a tis f a c to r y re la tio n s h ip s between p aren ts and a d o lescen ts
more d i f f i c u l t th an p re v io u sly .

In an urbanized, s p e c ia liz e d s o c ie ty ,

w ith i n d u s tr ia l production sep arated from the home, th e ado lescen t be­
comes a l i a b i l i t y o f some magnitude.

In a s o c ie ty devoted t o socio­

economic clim bing, th is e a s ily lead s to am bivalent fe e lin g s toward
the c h ild .

The ad o lescen t i s unable to le a rn h is fu tu re occupation

and th e a tte n d a n t s o c ia l ru le s from h is f a th e r .

Indeed, he has no

assurance t h a t he w ill have a jo b , which i s a ll-im p o rta n t in most seg -

28/ Mead, M argaret, From th e South Seas, W. Morrow & Company, New York,
1939.

18

ments of American s oci e t y—

Parsons considers th a t occupational

in s e c u rity i s in h e re n t in the p re se n t system based on performance in
com petition, -with th e a d d itio n a l hazard of economic flu x u a tio n , and
success enough to meet th e needs based on ex p ectatio n i s a tta in a b le to
only a m in o rity of th e male p o p u latio n .

This com petition places r a th e r

r ig id behavior r e s t r i c t io n s of the p aren t in th e job s itu a tio n .

The

a n x ie tie s generated are lik e ly to fin d ag g ressiv e o u tle t in the fam ily .
The ro le s of th e mother changed r a d ic a lly a t the same tim e.

As

she is " re le a s e d " from household production, she concentrates her
en erg ies on th e c h ild and comes to depend f o r s ta tu s not on household
production but on th e achievement of the c h ild and husband.

In a so­

c ie ty "which p laces such high value on economic production and accumu­
l a t i o n th e c h ild can seldom achieve enough to provide s ta tu s f o r the
m oth er^ /.
Davis shows t h a t coin cident "with these changes i s th e disappear­
ance of th e g re a t fam ily and the t i g h t l y k n it neighborhood w ith the
r e s u lta n t re d u ctio n in th e s iz e of th e in d iv id u a l's prim ary group.
For fe e lin g s o f being loved and of being im portant to someone, th e
fam ily member i s more dependent on th e few who now comprise th e fam ily.
29/ Sower has shown th e wide gap between the jobs adolescents want and ~
what th e y w ill g e t. Sower, C hristopher, "A Comparative A nalysis of
th e R elatio n s Between th e A sp ira tio n s, I n te r e s t s , Problems and
Cleavages of A dolescent Youth i n the Suburban Area of F l i n t , Michi­
gan, and C ertain Aspects o f S o c ia l S tr u c tu r e ,” D octoral D isse rta ­
tio n , The Ohio S ta te U n iv ersity , 19 U7.
3 0 / Parsons, T a lc o tt, "The S o c ia l S tru c tu re of th e Fam ily,” Chapter in
Anshen, Ruth R ., The Family: I t3 Function and D estiny, Harper and
B ro th ers, New York, 19h9.

19

He p o in ts out t h a t sin ce the fam ily i s now held to g e th e r by fewer
t i e s , each of th e remaining re la tio n s h ip s i s charged w ith g re a te r in ­
t e n s i t y of emotion while th e members are more in secu re because of i t s
in s ta b ility ^ ^
Green, looking a t th e m aladjusted c h ild of today, s tr e s s e s th e
ex p ectatio n s o f th e fam ily .

In American c u ltu re a love bond between

p a re n t and c h ild i s considered e s s e n tia l, and i f such a re la tio n s h ip
i s n o t present., i t i s expected th a t n eu ro sis probably w ill r e s u l t .
He p o in ts out t h a t not a l l groups have or expect to have th a t r e la tio n ­
s h ip .

To i l l u s t r a t e , he d escrib es a group of P o lish immigrants and

t h e i r c h ild re n .

No o v ert love r e la tio n s h ip i s d isp lay ed in th is group;

in f a c t , they f ig h t b i t t e r l y and o fte n v io le n tly , but no n eu ro sis i s
e v id e n t.

He c includes t h a t neuroses are caused not by la c k of p a re n tby the d is p a r ity between what they expect find what

c h ild lo v e, bu
th e y re c e iv e ,

This la ck of a ffe c tio n , p a r tic u la r ly in m id d le-class

homes i s cause< i by com petition between values asso c ia te d w ith c h ild re n
and those asso :ia te d w ith m a te ria l goods and the hampering of th e Amer32/
ic a n id e a l of ndividualism by the r e s p o n s ib ility of c h ild re n — .
Davis and H avighurst, employing the case study approach, concluded
t h a t p a re n t-c h ild r e la tio n s were more d i f f i c u l t and f r u s tr a tin g f o r th e

3 1 / Davis, I b id .
3 2 / Green, Arnold W., "The M iddle-Class American and N eurosis,"
American S o cio lo g ic a l Review, Vol. XI (1?U6) pp. 31-U2.

20

middle than f o r th e lower c la s s fa m ilie s .

L ater d i f f i c u l t i e s are
33/
la r g e ly a ttr ib u te d to in fa n t f r u s tr a tio n s —
Havighurst and Taba, during th e p eriod th e p resen t study was in

p ro g re ss, stu d ie d p a re n t-c h ild r e la tio n s as one area of the development
of ad o lescen t p e rs o n a lity .

They developed a Family R elations ques­

tio n n a ire covering te n a re a s: mutual p a r tic ip a tio n , approval-disapproval,
r e g u la r ity in th e home, confidences shared, sharing in fam ily d e c isio n s,
c h i l d 's acceptance of home sta n d a rd s, t r u s t and f a i th in c h ild by
p a re n ts , p a re n ta l a ttitu d e toward peer a c t i v i t i e s , in te r - p a r e n ta l r e l a ­
tio n s , and sig n s o f te n sio n .

No attem pt was made to t e s t th e v a lid ity

of th e breakdown.
A p o s itiv e c o rre la tio n of .39 was found between the q u estio n n aire
sco res and th e scores assigned to th e same c h ild re n follow ing an i n t e r ­
view w ith p a re n ts .

A p o s itiv e c o rre la tio n of .lt6 was obtained between

th e q u estio n n a ire sco re and r a tin g s based on a combination of other
t e s t s and case s tu d ie s .

Also, a c o rre la tio n of .51 was found with

s o c ia l and p erso n al adjustm ent as measured by the C a lifo rn ia Personal­
i t y Inventory, In term ed iate Form^V
The review of th e l i t e r a t u r e has in d ic a te d th a t fundamental
em p irica l re se a rc h i n p are n t-ad o lescen t r e la tio n s i s only beginning.
3 3 / Davis, W. A. and H avighurst, R. J . , F ather of th e Man, Houghton
M ifflin Co., Boston, 191:7*
3 b / H avighurst, R. J . , and Taba, H ilda, Adolescent C haracter and
P e rso n a lity , John Wiley & Sons, I n c ., New York, 19ii9.

21

This f i e l d does, however, as has been in d ic a te d , possess a good
background o f th e o r e tic a l th in k in g , p a r tic u la r ly i n the w ritin g of
Parsons, D avis, Green, Mead, Runner, and Merton.

In the a rea of

d ir e c t re se a rc h , many have done p relim in ary spade work i n showing
where p aren ts and ad o lescents b eliev e c o n f lic t occurs.

With th is

background of th eo ry and spadework, S t o t t , Cavan, and Havighurst and
a s so c ia te s have made advances in c o rre la tin g p aren t-ad o lescen t r e l a ­
tio n sh ip s w ith o th er s ig n if ic a n t asp e c ts of th e s o c ia l environment.
I t i s to th e p u r s u it of th e establishm ent of th ese s ig n if ic a n t co­
re la tio n s h ip s th a t th e p re se n t study seeks to c o n trib u te .

22

CHAPTER I I I

APPROACH AND METHODOLOGY

Scope of th e P resen t Study

M argaret Mead has demonstrated th a t
_1/
ad o le sc en t-p aren t r e la tio n s are c u ltu r a lly defined . H avighurst and
Davis (among o th ers) have shown th a t in te r a c tio n a l behavior v a rie s
2/
w ith c l a s s —
The p re se n t study i s lim ite d to fa m ilie s who have c h il­
dren i n p u b lic schools; th is elim in ates most of the so -c a lle d upper
upper and lower lower c la s s f a m ilie s .

This p u b lic school group i s ,

however, th e la r g e s t i n American s o c ie ty and dominant i n American be­
havior p a tte r n s , to th e degree t h a t such p a tte rn s may be said to
3/
e x is t— .

W ithin t h i s a re a th e re a re believed to be major d iffe re n c e s

between r e la tio n s w ith p a ren ts of c h ild re n a t puberty and a t th e time
th e c h ild i s acknowledged to be an a d u lt, so age i s accepted as a
v a r ia b le .

Since in a l l s o c ie tie s th e sexes p la y d if f e r in g r o le s , sex

i s considered a second v a r i a b l e - ^

Socio-economic le v e l and r u r a l-

urban comparisons have formed the bases of innumerable s tu d ie s ;
however, i n th e p re se n t study they are employed in a somewhat s p e c ia l
1 / Mead, M argaret, From th e South Seas, W. Morrow & Company, New York,
193?.
2 / H avighurst, R .J. and Davis, A lliso n , F ather of the C hild, Houghton
M ifflin Co., Chicago, 19U8.
"i/ Regional and e th n ic fam ily d iffe re n c e s are discussed by s ix so cio lo ­
g i s t s in th e American Journal o f Sociology, Vol. L III (19U7) pp.Ill 760 .
h / For a d isc u ssio n of age and sex c a te g o rie s, see L inton, Ralph, "Age
and Sex C ate g o rie s," American S o cio lo g ical Review, Vol. VII (19t»2)
pp. 589-603.

23

sen se.

In stea d of ru ra l-u rb a n dichotomy, a four-way r u r a l breakdown

i s employed: farm , r u r a l non-farm (n o n -v illa g e ), v illa g e , and f r in g e .
Two urban ca teg o rie s are employed: small town and c it y , which make a
six-way resid en ce breakdown.

The group i s dominated by middle c la ss

but th e attem pt i s made to d is tin g u is h s ig n if ic a n t d iffe re n c e s a t
d if f e r e n t socio-economic le v e ls w ith in t h i s base.
O bjectives

(1) To d escrib e adolescent adjustm ent to p a re n ts ,

(2) To show how such adjustm ent d if f e r s by sex, age, re sid e n c e , and
socio-economic le v e l, and (3) To r e la te th e d e s c rip tio n and th e
d iffe re n c e s to th e t o t a l s o c ia l environment.
Hypotheses

A number of s p e c ific hypotheses are l i s t e d f o r

proof or d isp ro o f:
(1) Adjustment o f ad o lescents to paren ts as measured by ad o lescen t
responses w ill show higher adjustm ent scores fo r c i t i e s th an f o r farm s.
(2) That a continuous dim inution i n average scores can be d is tin q u is h e d
from la rg e towns through f rin g e , sm all towns, v illa g e , and r u r a l non­
farm (n o n -v illa g e ), to farm .
(3) That th e adjustm ent of adolescents to p aren ts as measured by ado­
le s c e n t responses w ill show higher adjustm ent scores fo r high socio­
economic than f o r low socio-economic le v e l.
(It) That th e adjustm ent of adolescents to p aren ts as measured by ado­
le s c e n t responses w ill show h ig h er adjustm ent scores f o r g i r l s than
fo r boys.

2k

(5) That the adjustm ent o f adolescents to p a re n ts as measured by ado­
le s c e n t responses w ill show higher adjustm ent scores f o r young ado­
le s c e n ts (modal age, 1 3 .5 y ears) than fo r middle adolescents (modal
age, 16.5 y e a r s ) .
D e fin itio n o f Terms

"Adolescent adjustm ent to p aren ts" i s here

d efin ed o p e ra tio n a lly as th a t which th e sc a le used in th is study
m easures.

The v a l i d i t y of th e measure i s d iscu ssed elsew here.

and "favorable" r e f e r to high adjustm ent sc o re s .
p laces w ith p o p u latio n 300-2,500.
p o p ulatio n of 2,500-10,000.

"Good"

"V illage" r e f e r s to

"Small town" r e f e r s to places w ith

"City" r e f e r s to D e tro it and Lansing.
The Sample

The sample was p u rp o sefu lly s e le c te d w ith fo u r c r i t e r i a in mind:
(1) wide geographical re p re s e n ta tio n , (2) areas which could provide
adequate sub-samples from farm to m etro p o lis, (3) areas which would
provide wide d is tr ib u tio n of occupations, and (U) areas fre e of s p e c ia l
co n trib u tin g f a c to rs n o t g e n e ra lly found in th e p o p u latio n , such as
la rg e groups of f i r s t g en eratio n immigrants or domination by & s in g le
f a ith .

The s e le c tio n of Belding, Concord, E lkton, Highland Park

(surrounded by D e tr o it) , Lansing, Lakeview C onsolidated (B a ttle Creek
f r in g e ) , Mesick, Onaway, P ickford, Rockford, Stephenson, W akefield,
Wayne, and West Branch—a l l in Michigan—met th e se c r i t e r i a .

The

sm aller towns were sampled h eavier to provide adequate samples o f farm,
non-farm, v illa g e , and frin g e c h ild re n .

In th e sm aller schools th e

25

e n tir e 8 th and 11th grades were used.

In th e la rg e r towns (Highland

Park, Lansing, Lakeview C onsolidated) about 100 stu d en ts tak in g r e ­
quired s u b je c ts were used.
The w rite r p erso n a lly adm inistered 1,1472 q u e stio n n a ire s.

Of

th e se , two were n o t completed because of i n a b i l i t y - o n e stu d en t was
d eaf and th e o th er h a d n 't learn ed to read w ell because of p ro tra c te d
illn e s s .

A t h ir d q u e stio n n aire was d isca rd ed because the g i r l was

m arried .

Eleven were elim inated because of probable in c o n siste n c ie s in

th e i r answ ers.

For example, i f a boy in d ic a te d th a t he got along

" id e a lly " w ith h is f a th e r and a t th e same tim e in d ic a te d th a t h is
f a t h e r 's punishment of him was "never" f a i r and th a t when he grew up
he wanted a p e rs o n a lity " d iffe re n t" from h is fa th e r, i t was f e l t th a t
reaso n ab le doubt e x iste d t h a t th e q u estio n n aire recorded h is tru e
a ttitu d e s .

For th e above reasons fo u rte e n q u estio n n aires were not

used, leav in g a t o t a l of 1,U56 or s li g h t l y more than 99 per cen t used
r e tu r n .
L im itatio n s o f th e Sample
n ot rep resen ted in th e sample.

Some elements of the p o p u latio n were
These are adolescents who were not in

school, adolescents who were in r e lig io u s or p riv a te schools of various
ty p es, ad olescents detain ed i n c o rre c tio n a l in s t i t u t i o n s , and adolescents
in open country sch o o ls.

I t seems probable th a t a t l e a s t th e f i r s t

th re e o f th ese groups have p a re n t-c h ild r e la tio n s t h a t would d if f e r
somewhat from those of p u b lic school c h ild re n .

26

P o ssib le Bias i n th e Sample

A ll of th ese schools except th re e

had been p a r t of a Demonstration School-Community Program f o r Home and
Family L ife Education a t th e tim e the study was made.

As the name

im p lies, t h i s program was an attem p t to introduce th e study of fam ily
liv in g in to the p u b lic sch o o ls.

Since the program was la rg e ly a t the

planning stag e when t h i s study was made, i t i s b elie v e d th a t th e pro­
gram had l i t t l e e f f e c t on the a ttitu d e s toward p aren ts which had been
b u i l t up over a p erio d o f tw elve to eighteen year s—

I f th e re was

any e f f e c t, i t may be assumed to have been about equal on r u r a l and
urban c h ild re n , on boys and g i r l s , and on d if f e r e n t socio-economic
l e v e ls , and so have in troduced only a n e g lig ib le b ia s , i f any, in to
th e se comparisons.
One a d m in istra to r p re fe rre d n o t to p a r tic ip a te .

The reason given

f o r r e f u s a l was t h a t th e f a c u lty of th e school had re c e n tly adminis­
te re d a fam ily l i f e q u estio n n aire and had aroused some i r r i t a t i o n among

_6/
some groups— .
The Instrum ent
Advantages o f th e Q uestionnaire

The p re se n t stu d y possesses ce r­

t a i n advantages o f th e use of th e q u estio n n aire th a t are not always
p re s e n t.

Since i t was adm inistered by th e w rite r to school c h ild re n

Bowers found t h a t a Home Economics course aimed d ir e c tly a t teaching
d e s ira b le fam ily re la tio n s h ip s in th re e months produced no r e lia b le
d iffe re n c e s in a ttitu d e s as compared to a c o n tro l group. Bowers,
S t e l l a M artin, "A Study of P arent-C hild R e la tio n sh ip s," D octoral
D is s e rta tio n , Ohio S ta te U n iv ersity , 1931*
6 / Name of school w ithheld so as to not involve the a d m in istra to r.

27

during school hours i t was p o ssib le to secure 100 per cent r e tu r n s .

It

was p o ssib le to a s c e rta in who f i l l e d i t out and under what circum stances,
to m otivate th e c h ild re n q u ite h ig h ly , and to observe to some e x te n t
t h e i r re a c tio n s to th e in stru m en t.

Given the in tim a te , p erso n al su b je c t

m atter o f th e study, i t was believed necessary to give the appearance
as w ell as th e r e a l i t y of p ro te c tin g th e anonymity of the respondent.
This i s b e s t achieved by an unsigned q u e stio n n a ire .

In ad d itio n to the

anonymity achieved, th e approval of th e school and p a r tic ip a tio n o f th e
group are believ ed to make the s itu a tio n appear more normal and " r ig h t,"
where to some i t would seem stran g e and wrong to d iscu ss p riv a te fam ily
r e la tio n s h ip s .
In a d d itio n to th e above s p e c ia l advantages f o r th is p a r tic u la r
stu d y , th e q u e stio n n aire possesses some advantages th a t a re p resen t f o r
most s tu d ie s .

I t i s u su a lly th e l e a s t expensive.

d iffe re n c e s were la r g e .

In th is case th e

For th e amount of money expended on tr a v e l ,

m a te ria ls , and s a la ry in ad m inistering th e q u e stio n n a ire s, only about
f i f t y in terv iew s could have been secured, which would have been to o
few fo r comparative purposes.

A second general advantage i s th a t t o a

g re a te r e x te n t i t removes the re search person as a f a c to r in flu en c in g
th e in te rv ie w .
C ritic ism s of Q uestionnaires

Some c ritic is m s are f r e e ly adm itted,

e . g ., (1) t h a t d if f e r e n t respondents may in te r p r e t the question d i f f e r ­
e n tly and (2) th a t th e response may be lim ite d to too few p o ssib le
answers.

These must be met by ex ten siv e p r e te s tin g and s im p lic ity of

wording of q u e stio n s.

In a d d itio n to th e se adm itted lim ita tio n s , some

28

s o c io lo g is ts have questioned both th e v a lid ity and r e l i a b i l i t y of
q u e stio n n a ire s.
Bain and Cuber have questioned th e r e l i a b i l i t y of q u e stio n n a ire s.
Both found se rio u s in c o n sis te n c ie s i n answers to the same questions
when rep eated a f t e r a p eriod of time had elapsed, but in each case th e
c r itic is m would apply to only c e r ta in uses of q u e stio n n a ire s.

Bain

adequately m otivated h is respondents, but he asked d i f f i c u l t openended qu estio n s such as " f a th e r 's and m other's hobbies," " fa v o rite
a u th o r," and s im ila r q u e stio n s.

S eventy-five days l a t e r th e respondent

was re q u ire d to give from a universe of answers th e same one as fo r­
m erly, which th ey were able to do in only about 75 per cent of the
items—^
Cuber d id n o t adequately m otivate h is respondents.

They were

given th e same l i s t of s ix ty questions " lif te d " from various sc a le s
and d isg u ised w ith t h i r t y " irre le v a n t" q u e stio n s.

This "nonsense" J /

q u e stio n n aire was given th re e tim es a t two week in te r v a ls .
duced answers 71.86 p er cent c o n s is te n t.

I t pro­

Suggestive of the a ttitu d e s

of th e p a r tic ip a n ts toward th e experiment i s th e group of undisclosed
s iz e who "refu sed to p a r tic ip a te or did not complete th e question­
n a ire -^ "
7 / Bain, Reed, " S ta b ility in Q uestionnaire Responses," American
Jo u rn al o f Sociology, Vol. XXXVII (1931-32), pp. 1445-53.
8/ A d jectiv e i s th e w r i t e r 's .
9 / Cuber, John F. and G erberich, John B ., "Consistency in Q uestionnaire
Responses," American S o cio lo g ical Review, Vol. XI (19li6), p p .13-15.

29

B a in 's t e s t appears to o ffe r a le g itim a te caution as to th e
absolute accuracy of answers to open-ended questions p a r tic u la r ly
those remote from th e in d iv id u a l.

C uber's c r itic is m would apply

only t o the use of q u estio n n aires where m otivation i s low and th e
co nsistency o f th e t e s t i s not apparent, as may o ften occur in
in te llig e n c e or p e rso n a lity t e s t s .
LaPiere c r i t i c i z e s the use of q u estio n n aires to measure
a ttitu d e s of people about s itu a tio n s in which they have had no
experience.

He used th e example "would you g e t up to give an

Armenian woman your s e a t on a s t r e e t c a r."

His t e s t of whether

v erb al response i s a measure of what a c tio n w ill be taken in th e
a c tu a l s itu a tio n was to p o ll h o te l keepers as to t h e i r w illin g n ess
to accomodate Chinese.

His p o ll showed alm ost none w illin g .

He

then te s te d t h i s v e rb a liz a tio n by taking two Chinese s tu d e n ts , a man
and w ife , to a la rg e number of h o te ls .
one

They were refu sed only

There are two lim ita tio n s to th e study to which LaPiere has

not a llo c a te d s u f f ic ie n t w eight.

The Chinese were stu d en ts from th e

higher c la s s , th ey were a couple, and were accompanied by a c o lleg e
p ro fe sso r.

This means th a t they were not a good sample of Chinese

g e n e ra lly .

The oth er i s a time lim ita tio n .

i n 193U.

The study was rep o rted

Presumably i t was made in 1932 or 1933.

most h o te ls were eager to make a d o lla r in any way.

During th a t p eriod
Even w ith th ese

lim ita tio n s h is c r itic is m of th e use of q u estio n n aires as a measure

10/ LaPiere, Richard T., "Attitudes VS Action," Social Forces, Vol. XIII
(193U-5), PP. 230-7.

30

of h y p o th e tic a l a ctio n s (th ose w ith which the respondent has no ex­
p erien ce) appears sound.
The above review has considered some of th e more im portant
c r itic is m s of th e use o f q u estio n n aires in p a r tic u la r s i t u a t i o n s '^
I t seems necessary to p o in t to th e lim ita tio n s of the above s tu d ie s
because th ey have o fte n been m isconstrued by s o c io lo g is ts as v a lid
c r itic is m s of a l l uses o f q u estio n n aire method.

The above c r i t i ­

cisms do n o t apply to th e p re se n t study sin ce th e se respondents were
q u a lifie d to answer th e qu estions and h ig h ly m otivated to do so .
C onstruction of th e Instrum ent
The co n ten t of th e instrum ent was derived from th re e sources:
( 1 ) id e a s , com plaints, and suggestions c o lle c te d by the w rite r as
an undergraduate w ith th e use of a s e rie s of open-ended q u estio n s,
such a s, "What advice do you th in k i s most im portant to give to
p aren ts of c h ild re n your age?"
more guidance from your p aren ts?
s im ila r q u e stio n s.

and "On what su b je c ts would you lik e
More advice?

More freedom ?," and

(2) The experience of o th er re se a rc h people in

l l / While th e r e l i a b i l i t y and v a lid ity of p e n c il and paper t e s t s have
been c r i t i c a l l y checked, to o o ften th e c li n ic a l in te rv ie w has been
u n c r i ti c a ll y accepted as a p e r fe c t in stru m en t. R ecently th is
f a lla c y has been exposed by comparing th e p re d ic tio n s of success
of c l i n i c a l p sy ch o lo g ists w ith t h e i r a c tu a l success a f te r a y e a r 's
o b serv atio n i n tr a in in g . The c li n i c a l psy ch o lo g ists in te n s iv e ly
interview ed and observed the c l in i c a l p sy ch o lo g ists f o r a week
before making th e p re d ic tio n . Under th ese fav o rab le conditions
th ey were only able to achieve a c o rre la tio n of .38 (+ . 20 ) w ith
ev alu atio n s o f s t a f f who had observed them i n tra in in g f o r a y e a r.
"The S e le c tio n o f C lin ic a l P sy c h o lo g ists," (lith o g ra p h e d ), Univer­
s i t y of Michigan, Ann Arbor, I 9 I48.

31

th e f i e l d .

(See Review o f the L ite r a tu r e .)

Items t h a t showed up as

im portant in more than one study were given p a r tic u la r a tte n tio n .
(3) Suggestions of f a c u lty members and other a d u lts in tim a te ly ac­
quainted w ith th e su b je c t on th e campuses of W illiam ette U niversity,
The S ta te College of Washington, and Michigan S ta te C ollege.
Both behavior and a ttitu d e item s were obtained from a l l th re e
so u rces.

A ttitu d e s were given some preference because i t was found

to be d i f f i c u l t to fin d behavior item s t h a t are u sefu l f o r d if f e r e n t
groups.

For example, going to movies may have s ig n ific a n c e to an

adolescent who liv e s near one or more movie th e a te rs , b u t i f th e re are
none w ith in t h i r t y m iles, in most cases, th e item would be u s e le s s .
Another example i s th e use of th e fam ily c a r.

I t i s le g itim a te f o r

ad olescents of le g a l age in fa m ilie s possessing a c a r, but not f o r
younger ad o lescen ts or f o r o ld er ones where th e re i s no c a r.

Since

a sc a le which would measure a wide segment of th e population was
d e s ire d , many behavior item s v a lid f o r s p e c ia l groups were elim in ated .
Others were combined in more gen eral behavior item s, f o r example, "use
o f th e fam ily autom obile" became "use of p a r e n t's personal p ro p e rty ,"
and "going to movies" became "going out to s o c ia l e v en ts."
A p relim in ary t e s t of th e item s to f in d whether th e re was a
s ig n if ic a n t a s so c ia tio n between the s e le c te d item s and th e adolescents
fe e lin g of s a tis f a c tio n o r d is s a tis f a c tio n w ith h is r e la tio n s t o h is
p a re n ts, elim in ated some behavior item s and some a ttitu d e iterns
12/ Njye, Ivan, "F actors In flu en cin g Y outh's Adjustment to P a re n ts,"
M aster's th e s is , The S ta te College of Washington, 19U7.

32

A choice of f iv e answers to each question was considered a
la rg e enough choice sin ce a l l item s d eal w ith very general a ttitu d e s
o r behavior and a d d itio n a l c a te g o rie s might in tro d u ce more confusion
th an a d d itio n a l p re c is io n .

I d e a lly , th ese fiv e response categ o ries

should give both extrem es, a m idpoint and two a d d itio n a l i n t e r ­
m ediate m id p o in ts.

The o r ig in a l q u estio n n aire attem pted to do th is

by usin g th e c a te g o rie s "alw ays," "almost alw ays," "sometimes,"
"seldom ," "never" whenever p o s s ib le .

The p relim in ary t e s t , however,

showed t h a t l i t t l e use was being made of th e "seldom" and "never"
1 3/ so th ey were combined and th e a d d itio n a l category
c a te g o rie s—^
"u su ally " was added.
P r e te s ts

The instrum ent was te s te d on 572 high school stu d en ts

in s ix schools o f th e S ta te of Washington, follow ing which some r e ­
v isio n s were made, as noted above, and in a d d itio n item s were sepa­
ra te d f o r f a th e r and m other.

P re te s ts were a lso made w ith th e eighth

grade i n E ast Lansing and the eig h th grade in the E v e rett school in
th e Lansing " frin g e ,"

The l a t t e r p r e te s ts rev ealed th e need f o r

using sim pler language f o r e ig h th grade s tu d e n ts .
rep laced a t stu d en t su g g estio n .

Many words were

A dditional d i f f i c u l t or ambiguous

words were lo c a te d and removed by use of word-grade le v e l t e s t ^ ^
These p r e te s ts removed most of the d i f f i c u l t words, but o ra l explana-

_____
1 J|/ Thorndike, Edward Lee, The Teachers Word Book of 30*000 Words,
Teachers C ollege, Columbia U n iv ersity , New York, 19ah.

33

tio n o f a word was o cc asio n ally necessary as w ill be discussed
f u r th e r under th e su b -to p ic " c o lle c tio n of d a ta ."
C o llectio n of Data
D ata was c o lle c te d during th e period March 20 to May 20, I 9 I48.
The w r ite r p e rso n a lly adm inistered the q u estio n n aire f o r a l l groups.
In th e schools where f a c i l i t i e s were a v a ila b le , 8th and 11th grades
f i l l e d the q u e stio n n aire s to g e th e r; otherw ise th ey f i l l e d them
during ad jo in in g p e rio d s, so th a t th e re was no opportunity f o r d is ­
cu ssio n beforehand.

In each school th e w rite r was introduced by

th e su p erin ten d en t who requested the cooperation of the s tu d e n ts .
The w r ite r read each o f the c o n tro l questions (U through 23) and the
cla ss f i l l e d them in to g e th e r.

Questions were answered as asked.

Sane tim e had t o be sp en t on th e items of resid en ce, occupation, w ith
idiom th e c h ild liv e d , and income.

When th e c la s s had fin is h e d the

c o n tro l item s they were allowed to proceed a t t h e i r own speed to com­
p le te th e remaining ite m s.
of a word was n ot c l e a r .
q u estio n s asked, but

Questions were allowed when th e meaning
No a c tu a l count was kept of th e number of

an estim ate of an average of one question per

p u p il would be r e l a t iv e ly c lo se .

Most questions were about th e con­

t r o l item s, b ut some 8 th grade stu d en ts o ccasio n ally needed help on
words i n the body of th e form a ls o .

In every school th e a ssista n c e

of one or more of th e s tu d e n ts ' teach ers (about one to tw en ty -fiv e
stu d e n ts) was secured t o a s s i s t in answering questions and to lend an
a i r o f "normalcy."

3k

A ttitu d e of A dm inistrators and Teachers

I t was a n tic ip a te d and

proved c o r re c t th a t th e a ttitu d e of th e ad m in istrato r and of th e
teach ers would be o f utm ost importance in reducing response e r r o r s ^ ^
t h a t i s , responses t h a t did not give a tru e p ic tu re of th e c h ild 's
fe e lin g , by inducing a se rio u s and cooperative a ttitu d e on th e p a rt
o f th e c h ild .

In every case, ad m in istrato rs were cooperative and in

f iv e schools they a s s is te d th e w r ite r them selves r a th e r than
assig n in g teach ers t o do th e jo b .
and co o p erativ e.

Teachers were uniform ly in te re s te d

In many cases th e stu d en t p re fe rre d to ask h is

te a c h e r th e meaning o f a word r a th e r than to ask the w r ite r .
A ttitu d e of Students
good.

Student a ttitu d e was alm ost uniform ly

O ccasionally when two of th e o ld e r g i r l s were s i t t i n g close

to g e th e r th e y would giggle over an item or two, presumably on th e
sex or fu tu r e mate ite m s.

The questions held t h e i r i n t e r e s t c lo s e ly .

The plea to a id in th e development of science; the serio u sn ess of
su p erin ten d e n ts, p r in c ip a ls , te a c h e rs, and th e w rite r; th e s iz e and
scope of th e study; and th e f a c t th a t th e y , them selves, were th e sub­
j e c t m atter appeared from every in d ic a tio n to m otivate them very
h ig h ly .
The Weighting o f Items i n th e Scale

The p relim in ary t e s t - ^ ^ ,

employing a chi square ta b le and c o e f fic ie n t o f contingency on a
1 5 / S ta u ffe r has term ed th ese e rro rs to be th e area f o r th e next
g reat advance i n resea rch methodology. S ta u ffe r, Samuel A ., i n
a guest le c tu re to th e stu d en ts a t tn e Survey Research C enter,
S p ecial Session, U n iv ersity of Michigan, Summer, 19 U8 .
1 6 / See Footnote 9«

35

v is u a l bafcis e s ta b lis h e d th e rank order of responses w ith in th e item .
For example, fo r th e item " in te r e s t i n c h ild 's a c t i v i t i e s , " th e c h il­
dren who responded th a t p a re n t was "always" in te r e s te d were most of­
te n c h ild re n who f e l t th e re la tio n s h ip w ith p aren ts was id e a l and were
th e l e a s t o ften those who considered th e r e la tio n s h ip w ith p aren ts un­
s a tis f a c to r y ,

Since th i s response was c le a r ly the b e s t in d ic a to r of

s a tis f a c to r y r e la tio n s to th e p a re n t, i t was given a weight of " 5 " .
"Almost always" was next b e s t, so was given a weight o f "I*".

The

oth er responses were given w eights of "3 ," " 2 ," and " 1 " in o rd e r.
(For weight of each item , see Appendix "B," Page 159)

As an addi­

t io n a l t e s t of th i s rank sco rin g and of the item s employed, th e c r i 17/
t e r io n of in te r n a l consistency was applied—
I t in d ic a te d th a t a l l but
one item d if f e r e n tia te d between th e h ig h e st and low est q u a r tile by a
c r i t i c a l r a t i o o f a t l e a s t 3*0.

I t a lso added proof th a t th e rank scor­

in g of responses to a p a r tic u la r item —5 jl»>3 *2 , 1—was c o rre c t by show­
in g th a t th e l a r g e s t number of stu d en ts from th e h ig h e st q u a r tile and
th e sm a llest number from th e low est q u a r tile marked t h e i r papers w ith
th e response which had been given th e weight of $, th e next h ig h e st with
U ,3 ,Ii,l.

A v a r ia tio n of th e sigma w eighting procedure was a ls o u s e d ^ {

The ranked w eights y ield ed an odd-even r e l i a b i l i t y c o e f fic ie n t of .92

1 7 / Rundquist, E.A ., and S le tto , R .F ., P e rso n a lity i n th e Depress!on7~
The u n iv e rs ity of Minnesota P ress, M inneapolis, ±yj 6 .
1 8 / Thurston, L . I . . "A Method of S calin g Psychological and Education
T e s ts ," Journal of E ducational Psychology, Vol. XVI, No. 7, O ct.,
1925.

36

(u n co rrected ) on th e e n tir e s c a le .

The sigma -weights y ie ld e d a co­

e f f i c i e n t o f .85 on 37 item sj c o rre c te d f o r seventy e ig h t item s t h i s
in c re a se d t o .93.

The d iffe re n c e between th e two methods d id not

appear to w arrant th e e x tra tim e and expense o f sigma w e ig h tin g ^ f
Com pilation o f th e Adjustment Score

For each response to an

item th e respondent receiv ed a score o f 5jk,3> 2 , or 1 ,

These were

added f o r th e t o t a l number of item s answered and divided by the
number answeredj th a t i s , i f th e respondent answered 75 of th e item s
and h is p o in ts to ta le d 250 , 25>0 was div id ed by 75 which made a score
of 3*33 which i s comparable w ith the score of th e respondent who com­
p le te d seventy-seven item s w ith 21*0 p o in ts and a score of 3 .1 2 .

From

th e se sc o re s , mean sco res f o r groups were d eriv ed and compared.
R e lia b ility

The c o r r e la tio n of th e scores of odd-even item s in

th e sc a le showed an uncorreoted r e l i a b i l i t y c o e f fic ie n t of 92.

When

sigma sco rin g was s u b s titu te d i t rose t o . 9 3 .
V a lid ity

S ix v a l i d i t y checks were made.

(1) The c r i te r i o n of in te r n a l co n sisten cy was ap p lied and a c r i t i c a l
r a t i o o f 3 .0 was found between upper and lower q u a r tile s f o r every
19/ McCormick suggests t h a t probably to o much emphasis i s being
placed on exact w eighting o f s c a le s in r e la tio n to t h e i r a c tu a l
’ a b i l i t y to measure what th ey p u rp o rt to m easure. McCormick,
Thomas C ., "Simple Percentage A nalysis o f A ttitu d e Q u estio n n a ires,"
American Journal o f Sociology, Vol. 50 (19UU-5)* pp. 390-5.

36

(uncorrected) on th e e n tir e s c a le .

The sigma -weights y ield ed a co­

e f f i c i e n t of .85 on 37 item sj co rrected f o r seventy e ig h t item s th is
in cre ased to .93.

The d iffe re n c e between the two methods did n o t

appear to w arrant th e e x tra time and expense of sigma w e ig h tin g ^ {
Com pilation o f th e Adjustment Score

For each response to an

item th e respondent receiv ed a score of 5 ,U ,3 ,2 , or 1.

These were

added f o r th e t o t a l number of item s answered and divided by th e
number answered; th a t i s , i f th e respondent answered 75 of the items
and h is p o in ts to ta le d 250 , 250 was divided by 75 which made a score
of 3*33 w h ic h i s comparable w ith the score of th e respondent who com­
p le te d seventy-seven item s w ith 2l»0 p o in ts and a score of 3 .1 2 .

From

th ese sc o re s, mean scores fo r groups were derived and compared.
R e lia b ility

The c o rre la tio n of the scores of odd-even item s in

th e sc a le showed an uncorreoted r e l i a b i l i t y c o e f fic ie n t of 92.

When

sigma sco rin g was s u b s titu te d i t rose to . 9 3 .
V a lid ity

Six v a li d i t y checks were made,

(1) The c r ite r io n of in te r n a l consistency was ap p lied and a c r i t i c a l
r a t i o of 3 .0 was found between upper and lower q u a r tile s f o r every
19 / McCormick suggests t h a t probably too much emphasis i s being
placed on exact w eighting of sca le s in r e la tio n to t h e i r a c tu a l
' a b i l i t y to measure what they p u rp o rt to measure. McCormick,
Thomas C ., "Simple Percentage A nalysis of A ttitu d e Q uestio n n aires,"
American Journal of Sociology, Vol. 50 ( 19 U4- 5 )* pp. 390-5.

37

item except one— .

This in d ic a te d th a t th e re i s le s s than one chance

i n a hundred t h a t th e item s ware drawn a t random from th e u n iv erse of
item s.
(2) C o efficien t o f contingency was computed between item s and th e
a d o le s c e n t's s e lf - f e e lin g about h is r e la tio n s h ip w ith p a re n ts .

Items

were discarded t h a t did n o t meet t h i s t e s t a t th e 1 per cent le v e l of
s ig n ific a n c e ^
(3) F acto r a n a ly sis of tw en ty -eig h t items from th e fiv e major areas
of the study (d escrib ed i n Appendix "A") corroborated what had been
suggested by th e t e s t s of contingency and in te r n a l consistency t h a t
th e t e s t measures one v a ria b le o nly.
(1*) The independent judgment of th e adolescents and ex p erts who con­
tr ib u te d th e ite m s.

A ll did so w ith the b e l ie f th a t the item which

th ey co n trib u ted was an im portant v a ria b le in ad o lescen t-p aren t ad­
ju stm en t.
(3) P o sitiv e c o rre la tio n s were found with nine of the ten areas of
th e C a lifo rn ia Mental H ealth Inventory: clo se p erso n al r e la tio n s ,
.51:6; nervous m a n ife sta tio n , .507; em otional i n s t a b i l i t y , .1i7U;
s a tis f a c to r y work and r e c re a tio n , .383; inadequacy, .277; p h y sica l
2 0 / The amount o f work req u ired o f th e adolescent by the p aren t
appears to have l i t t l e a s so c ia tio n w ith adjustm ent. I t s in ­
c lu sio n in th e sc ale has no v a lu e . I t i s p o ssib le th a t the
q u estio n was worded wrong and t h a t subsequent re se a rc h w ill fin d
some measurement value in i t .
21/ A fte r com pletion of th e a n a ly s is , th is t e s t was made a g a in st th e
group who scored lo w est, the low socio-economic group. A co­
e f f i c i e n t o f contingency of .68 was found between scores on th e
s c a le and t h e i r s e lf -e v a lu a tio n (P much le s s than .0 0 1 ).

38

d e fe c t, . 262 j im m aturity, . 22U; s o c ia l p a r tic ip a tio n , . 165 ; i n t e r 22/
perso n al s k i l l s , .158; g o als, .052 . A ll are s ig n if ic a n t except
th e l a s t .

A p o s itiv e c o rre la tio n a ls o was found w ith the Ohio S tate
23/
H ealth Report— . A p o s itiv e c o rre la tio n of .I4O was found between the

scores o f th e c h ild re n and the sco rin g of t h e ir p aren ts on the same

,

q uestions

2V
.

Mean score fo r p aren ts on a l l item s was 3*829, fo r

c h ild re n U.031; th e d iffe re n c e i s n o n -s ig n ific a n t.

This means th a t

c h ild re n and p aren ts observed th e p a ren t-ad o lescen t re la tio n s h ip in
s im ila r l i g h t .
Measures of S ig n ifican ce

C r itic a l r a t i o , chi square, and V

scores are used to measure sig n ific a n c e of d iffe re n c e s .

F u rth er ex­

p la n a tio n of c r i t i c a l r a t i o and chi square i s unnecessary because of
t h e i r v ery wide use and g eneral acceptance.

The V score was

developed in the course of th is research f o r use where chi square
o rd in a rily would be used but i s not p r a c tic a l because of the length
of time used to compute i t .

E m pirically, i t c o rre la te s .95 w ith chi

square and i s u se fu l i n t e s ti n g d iffe re n c e s which are n o t clo se to a
2 2/ The C a lifo rn ia Mental Health Inventory has received added v a li ­
d a tio n in i t s ex ten siv e use by Dr. A. R. Mangus in h is various
Ohio s tu d ie s . A p a r tic u la r ly u s e fu l fe a tu re of the C a lifo rn ia
t e s t in v a lid a tin g th e p re se n t study i s i t s d isg u ise of the
r ig h t answers.
23/ Mangus, A. R ., "Mental Health Symptoms and B eliefs Among Southern
Ohio Born R esidents of B utler County," The Ohio A g ric u ltu ra l
Experiment S ta tio n , Columbus, 19U9•
2h/ This i s comparable to the c o rre la tio n of .39 found by Havighurst
and Taba between t h e i r fam ily r e la tio n s q u estio n n aire and i n t e r ­
views w ith p a re n ts . See H avighurst, Robert J . and Taba, H ilda,
A dolescent C haracter and P e rso n a lity , John Wiley & Sons, I n c .,
New York, 19b9.

39
c u ttin g l i n e .

In th i s study ch i square i s a lso employed when d i f ­

feren ces a re clo se to th e 5 p er cent le v e l os s ig n ific a n c e .

V

in d ic a te s -vfliether th e d iffe re n c e s are near th a t c u ttin g lin e or much
la r g e r or sm a lle r.

I t a lso provides an approximate ranking of th e

s ig n ific a n c e of d iffe re n c e s between two groups.
V i s computed d ir e c tly from d iffe re n c e s i n p ercen tag es.
D ifferences o f one standard d e v ia tio n are given a weight of one,
two standard d e v ia tio n a w eight of f iv e , and th re e stan d ard devia­
tio n s a w eight of te n .

Each d iffe re n c e in a c o n s is te n t d ir e c tio n i s

given a w eight of one.

An example i s shown below ..
Table 1.

Completion of the Statem ent
"My F ath er Shows F avoritism Among His C h i l d r e n ....n

Very Often
Often
Sometimes
Seldom
Never

Farm
Per Cent

C ity
Per Cent

llj.7
13.2
18.3
17.8
36.1

7.U
8.0
10.6
Ii 4.l 1
59.6

D ifference
in Standard
D eviations
3
2
3
1
3

Plus one f o r each d i f f . in c o n siste n t d ire c tio n
T o tal V Score
X2 computed from th e same d a ta 30.56

Score
10
5
10
1
10
Jj
hi

The s ig n ific a n c e of th e V score, lik e chi square, depends upon
th e number o f degrees of freedom and may be compared only w ith o th er
V sco res from ta b le s w ith an equal number of degrees of freedom.

liO

A ll V scores in th i s study may be so compared-^.
The d a ta p e r tin e n t to th e d isc u ssio n i s th e sig n ific a n c e of
d iffe re n c e s between th e groups compared and the d ire c tio n of th ese
d iffe re n c e s .

The d a ta from which th ese d iffe re n c e s are derived may

be found i n Appendix "C .M The follow ing c h a rts w ill show: (1) the
siz e and s ig n ific a n c e of d iffe re n c e s between resid e n c e , socio­
economic, age and sex groups and (2) w hether the d iffe re n c e s between
th ese groups are p rim a rily between adolescent and f a th e r or mother
o r both.
D e tailed C onsideration of Parent-A dolescent Adjustment

The

co n sid e ratio n of p a re n t-a d o le sc e n t re la tio n s h ip s may be broken down
in to sm aller a re a s: lo v e -s e c u rity , s ta tu s , fe e lin g s about p a re n ts,
s o c ia liz a tio n , and o u tsid e of fam ily r e la tio n s h ip s .

I t i s acknow­

ledged t h a t th ese breakdowns a re a r b itr a r y to a considerable degree.
When subm itted to a committee of ex p erts , however, agreement was
achieved t h a t th e d iv isio n s were m eaningful, although some questions
might f i t in to more than one a re a , no disagreem ent was found th a t th e
f i n a l d is tr ib u tio n was s u ita b le .
25/ The V score was developed by Charles P roctor on th e suggestion
of th e w r ite r th a t an eq u iv alen t of chi square which could be
computed from s ig n ific a n c e of d iffe re n c e s of percentages was
needed. P ro cto r had th e te c h n ic a l a s sis ta n c e of Dr. Leo Katz
o f th e mathematics departm ent, Michigan S ta te C ollege, in
developing th e m athem atical j u s t i f i c a t i o n of th e sc o re . At
th e p re se n t w ritin g P ro cto r i s working on a refinem ent th a t
Trill allow h ig h er w eighting fo r d iffe re n c e s considerably above
th e 1 p e r cent le v e l, which w il l produce an even higher co rre ­
la t i o n w ith ch i square.

ia

The m athem atical v a l id ity of the a re a breakdown i s considered
i n Appendix "A" e n t i t l e d "The E s s e n tia l U nity of Feelings About S e lf
26/
and O thers
Each of th e above areas i s considered in a subsequent
chapter and d iffe re n c e s by age, sex, resid en ce and socio-economic
s ta tu s a re d iscu ssed .

26/ In b r i e f , the f a c to r a n a ly sis showed t h a t the item s of th e e n tir e
s c a le measure only one v a r ia b le . P aren t-ad o lescen t adjustm ent i s
one a re a not f iv e or any o th er number. The breakdown in t o fiv e
a reas m ust,consequently, be regarded as one o f convenience and
u t i l i t y fo r th e fo cusing of a tte n tio n on a p a r tic u la r a re a r a th e r
th a n th e tre atm e n t o f d is c r e te v a ria b le s .

U2

CHAPTER IV

LOVE AND SECURITY RELATIONSHIPS

The b a sic need of human beings fo r love has been recognized by
philosophers and r e lig io u s w r ite rs before th e form ation o f the science
of sociology; however, i t s form ation in to u s e fu l socio-psychological
concept may be c re d ite d to W. I . Thomas, s ta te d f i r s t as in tim ate
response in h is and Z n an iecki's P o lish P easant-^ and elaborated in
2/
The Unadjusted G irl . I t i s now g e n e ra lly accepted by s o c io lo g is ts .
3/
I t i s r e c e n tly been employed as a b asic concept by Mead—,
K ardiner

V, Duvall—5/, and o th e rs.

In most s o c ie tie s , in clu d in g modern American, th e adolescent i s
n o t encouraged to e n te r in to f u l l and deep em otional t i e s w ith th e
opposite se x .

As has a lread y been shown th e breakup of th e la r g e r

prim ary groups of th e g re a t fam ily and th e neighborhood have l e f t ado­
le s c e n t and p a re n ts la r g e ly dependent on each o th e r f o r s a tis f a c tio n
of a f f e c tio n a l needs.

This chapter w ill in d ic a te how the s a tis f a c tio n

o f t h i s b a sic need i s a sso ciated w ith re sid en ce, socio-economic le v e l,
and age and sex o f th e a d o le sc e n ts.
The d a ta p e rtin e n t to the d iscu ssio n i s the s ig n ific a n c e of
1 / Thomas, W. I . , and Znaniecki, F lo ria n , The P o lish Peasant in
Europe and America, R.G. Badger, Chicago, 19lb.
2 / Thomas, W. I . , The Unadjusted G irl, L i t t l e , Brown & Co., Boston,
3.923.
3 / Mead, M argaret, And Keep Your Powder Dry, W. Morrow Co., New
York, 19h2.
h / K ardiner, Abram, P sychological F ro n tie rs of S o ciety , Columbia
U n iv ersity P ress, New Yorlc, 19U5.
5 / D uvall, Evelyn, and H ill, Reuben, When You Marry, D.C. Heath &
Co., Boston, 19 U5.

d iffe re n c e s between th e groups compared and the d ire c tio n of these
d iffe re n c e s .

The d ata from which th ese d iffe re n c e s are derived may­

be found in Appendix "C."

The follow ing ta b le s w ill show (1) th e siz e

and s ig n ific a n c e of d iffe re n c e s between re sid en ce, socio-econom ic, age
and sex groups and (2) whether the d iffe re n c e s between th ese groups
are p rim a rily between ad o lescen t and f a th e r or mother or both.
Residence D ifferences
Table 2.
S ig n ifican ce of D ifferences Between Responses of Farm and C ity
A dolescents to Love and S e c u rity Item s-^/

F ather Items

V
Scores

F a v o ritis m -^

h0

Confidence c h ild ’s in t e n t .
Confidence f a t h e r 's a f f .
I n te r e s t c h ild 's a c t i v i t i e s
Can confide in f a th e r
P a re n ts' q u a rre lin g

V
Scores

Mother Items

30
29
27

I n te r e s t c h ild 's a c t i v i t i e s
Can confide in mother
F avoritism

17

Confidence c h i ld 's in te n t.*

20
20
19
Confidence m other's a f f .
P a re n ts' q u a rre lin g

* X* of d iffe re n c e i s 13.09 w ith four degrees of freedom.
A ll d iffe re n c e s favor c i t y fa m ilie s (higher a d j. s c o re s ).

6 / V i s a rough measure of s ig n ific a n c e of d iffe re n c e s . Note th a t
~ d iffe re n c e s near th e
per cent le v e l of s ig n ific a n c e are checked
by ch i square, a ls o . For th e computation of V, see Chapter I I I .
7 / The exact wording of th e question i s given in Table 3, see Page UU.

lilt

Table 3.
8/

Love and S e c u rity Items—

(In Order of Rural-Urban D ifferen ces)
Q uestionnaire
Number#__________________________________________________
U9

"My f a th e r shows fa v o ritism among h is c h i l d r e n .. . ”

58

"My mother i s in te r e s te d in what I d o ..."

78

" I f I were i n tro u b le , I could t e l l my m o th e r..."

8 I4 "My mother shows fa v o ritism among h er c h ild r e n ..."

5U "My f a th e r th in k s I t r y to do th e r ig h t t h i n g .. ."
U7 " I f e e l sure my f a th e r lik e s m e ..."
2\x "My f a th e r i s in te r e s te d in what I d o ..."
89 "My mother th in k s I t r y to do the r ig h t t h i n g .. ."

Ii3 " I f I were in tro u b le , I could t e l l my f a t h e r . . . "
82 " I f e e l sure my mother lik e s m e ..."
96 "My p are n ts q u a rre l in f ro n t of m e ..."

# R efers t o th e number o f th e q u estio n i n the o rig in a l measuring
in stru m en t (see Appendix "B").

8/ The above item s were s e le c te d by th e w r ite r from the t o t a l sc a le
as re p re s e n ta tiv e of th e love and s e c u rity r e la tio n s h ip s between
f a th e r and mother and a d o le sc e n ts. A s c ru tin y by ex p erts (Judson
T. Landis, Charles P. Loomis, C. V. M illard , George W. A ngell,
Edgar A. S chuler, Duane Gibson, Ruth Fregard, and Alba Anderson)
produced no o b je c tio n s. This procedure was checked by a f a c to r
a n a ly s is o f fiv e of th e above item s along w ith tw enty-three from
th e o th e r fo u r areas of in te r a c tio n . The r e s u lts are discussed
i n Appendix "A." More b r ie f l y th ey are discussed i n Footnote 26,
Page 111.

Ii5

That th e re are extrem ely s ig n if ic a n t d iffe re n c e s between farm
and c ity fa m ilie s in th e fe e lin g of adolescents of being loved and
secure i s in d ic a te d .

E ight of the eleven measures show s ig n if ic a n t

d iffe re n c e s and a l l are in a c o n s is te n t d ire c tio n j th a t i s , the c i t y
ad o lescen ts on the average f e e l more loved and secure in th e ir
fe e lin g s about p aren ts than do farm c h ild re n .

The amount of q u a rre l­

ing indulged in by p a re n ts according to t h e i r c h ild re n , v a rie s l i t t l e
by re sid e n ce , as does th e f e e lin g of confidence in m other's a f fe c tio n .
The r o le of both p aren ts change as farm i s compared to c ity , and
th e changes appear about eq u ally g re a t f o r mother and f o r fa th e r
r a th e r th an p rim a rily f o r one or the o th e r.

The c it y fam ily i s on

th e average more a ffe c tio n -c e n te re d , and t i e s are c lo s e r between ado­
le s c e n t and p a re n t.
A t h ir d q u estio n th a t p resen ts i t s e l f i s :

does a continuum of

in c re a sin g ly co n fid en t love and s e c u rity r e la tio n s h ip s e x is t between
farm and c i t y corresponding to th e in creased u rb an izatio n of the
po p u latio n from open country non-farm, v illa g e sm all town, and frin g e
to c i t y .

I t i s not p o ssib le to answer th is question a ffirm a tiv e ly as

f a r as love and s e c u rity re la tio n s h ip s are concerned.

Most d i f f e r ­

ences between farm and non-farm, v illa g e , town,and frin g e fa m ilie s
are n o n -s ig n ific a n t.

Fringe adolescents show th e la r g e s t number of

s ig n if ic a n t d iffe re n c e s and town adolescents the l e a s t d iffe re n c e s
from farm .

U6

Table U.
D ifferen ces From Farm, As Measured By V Scores on Love and S e c u rity
Items of Open Country, V illag e, Town, F ringe, and C ity A dolescents.
Q uestionnaire No.
Ii9
58
78
8U
5U
hi
2h
89
h3
82
96

Non-Farm
17
6
5
20
5
0
5
0
5
-10
- 8

V illage
12
7
7
18
h
6
5
0
5
17
6

Small Town Fringe
6
22
10
7
5
7
8
7
15
5
5
5
20
5
6
6
13
h
6
15
- 6
5

C ity
Uo
30
?£
27
20
20
19
17
15
10
- 5

- In d ic a te s d iffe re n c e fav o rs farm a d o le sc e n ts.
U nderline
in d ic a te s d iffe re n c e s are s ig n if ic a n t a t 5 per cent le v e l.
D ifferen ces by Socio-economic Level

Of the eleven item s used

to measure th e lo v e -s e c u rity fe e lin g s of the adolescents nine showed
s ig n if ic a n t d iffe re n c e s , a l l in th e d ire c tio n of more s e c u rity and
f e e lin g of being loved on th e p a r t of th e adolescents a t the higher
socio-econom ic le v e l .

The n o n -s ig n ific a n t d iffe re n c e s found in the

o th e r two item s—confidence in m other's a ffe c tio n and p a re n ts quar­
r e lin g —were also i n fa v o r of th e h igher socio-economic group.

9 / Computed by a ssig n in g equal w eights to education of f a th e r and
m other, church atten d an ce of f a th e r and m other, occupation,
estim ated income, mother working, and number of o rg an izatio n s
( f o r te c h n ic a l d e t a i l s , see Appendix UD")*

U7

Table 5.
S ig n ifican ce o f D ifferences Between Responses of High and Low S ocioEconomic Level Adolescents To Love and S e c u rity Item s.
F ather Items
Score
F avoritism
Uo
I n te r e s t c h ild 's a c t i v i t i e s
36
Confidence c h i l d 's in t e n t .
35
Confide in f a th e r
30
Confidence f a t h e r 's a ffe c tio n 27

Score

35

Mother Items

F avoritism

27
2U
18
------------------------------------------------------------------------5 p er cent le v e l s ig .
Confidence m other's a f f .
P a re n ts' q u a rre lin g
P a re n ts' q u a rre lin g
X* o f d iffe re n c e i s 13.78 w ith fo u r degrees of freedom.
The r o le of both p aren ts change s ig n if ic a n tly between so cio ­
economic le v e ls but t h a t of the f a th e r changes much more th an th a t of
th e mother*

The ad o lescen t a t th e higher le v e l, on the average, has

a much g re a te r fe e lin g o f being loved and secure i n h is r e la tio n s h ip
to h is f a th e r th an the c h ild a t th e lower socio-economic le v e l.

The

m other's r o le i s much more constant than the f a t h e r 's ^ f
One r e la tio n s h ip shows g re a t d iffe re n c e s fo r both f a th e rs and
mothers on both fa rm -c ity and socio-economic comparisons: fa v o ritism ;
th a t i s , th a t th e p a ren t favors one c h ild over an o th er.
are suggested as p a r t i a l ex p lan atio n s.

Two f a c to rs

A dolescents both in th e c i t y

and a t th e higher socio-economic le v e l are le s s of a m a te ria l a s s e t.

1 0 / The c lo se r re la tio n s h ip of mother (than fa th e r) to the c h ild has
been so thoroughly e s ta b lis h e d th a t i t seems unnecessary to
analyze i t h e re . Comparisons may be made on any r e la tio n s h ip by
examining th e Basic Data Tables, Appendix "C."

U8

This minimizes one b a s is f o r fa v o ritis m ,

A second probable f a c to r i s

th e g re a te r p e n e tra tio n of the p rin c ip le s of c h ild psychology in to
c i t y and higher socio-economic le v e l f a m ilie s .
Age•D ifferen ces

Six of th e eleven measures of the f e e lin g of
Table 6 .

S ig n ific an c e o f D ifferences Between The Responses of E arly and
Middle A dolescent Boys To Love and S e c u rity Items—'
F ath er Items

V
Scores

V
Scores
Mother Items
-30 F avoritism

I n te r e s t c h i l d 's a c t i v i t i e s 2$
Favoritism
-20
Confidence c h i l d 's i n t e n t ,
15>
13 Confidence c h il d 's i n t e n t .
12 Confidence m other's a f f .#
P a re n ts' q u a rre lin g
Confidence f a t h e r 's a ffe c tio n
Confide in f a th e r

P a re n ts ' q u arrelin g
Confide in mother
I n te r e s t c h ild 's a c t i v i t i e s

of d iffe re n c e i s 9,08 w ith th re e degrees of freedom,
- In d ic a te s d iffe re n c e s favor o ld er boys.
being loved and secure i n the a d o lescen t-p aren t r e la tio n show s ig ­
n i f i c a n t d iffe re n c e s between e a r ly and middle adolescence.

A ll of

th e d iffe re n c e s are in th e d ire c tio n of more s e c u rity and fe e lin g s
of being loved on th e p a r t of th e younger a d o lescen ts, except f o r
fa v o ritis m .

There d iffe re n c e s fav o r the younger boys except f o r th e
12 /
la rg e number who f e e l t h a t p aren ts "very o ften " show fa v o ritism —\
11/ The e a r ly ad o lescen t group were in th e e ig h t grade and had a modal
age of 13.5} middle adolescents were i n th e eleventh grade and had
a modal age o f 1 6 .5 .
1 2 / See Basic Data Table 1, Appendix "C."

h9

Although th e d iffe re n c e s on fa v o ritism are la rg e , t h i s leaves some
doubt as to which d ire c tio n th ey are in .
The changes in th e r o le of f a th e r and m other, as e a r ly and
middle adolescents are compared, appear about eq u al.

Three item s f o r

each show s ig n if ic a n t d iffe re n c e s and two f a i l to show such d i f f e r ­
ences .
The sample shows t h a t f o r g i r l s th e re are s ig n if ic a n t d iffe re n c e s
between e a rly and middle adolescents in th re e of th e eleven in d ic a to rs
of fe e lin g s o f being loved and secu re.

However, i t i s n o t c le a r t h a t

Table 7.
S ig n ifican ce of D ifferences Between Responses of E a rly and
Middle Adolescent G irls To Love and S e c u rity Items
V

V

F ath er Items____________ Scores Scores______________ Mother Items_____
32 Favoritism
F avoritism
-31
15 Confide in mother*
Confidence fa th e r* s a f f .
Confide in f a th e r
Confidence c h ild 's i n t e n t .
P a re n ts' q u arrelin g

I n te r e s t c h ild 's a c t i v i t i e s
Confidence c h ild 's i n t e n t .
P a re n ts' q u arrelin g
Confidence m other's a f f .

I n te r e s t c h i l d 's a c t i v i t i e s
2
* X of d iffe re n c e s i s 9.53 "with fo u r degrees of freedom.
- In d ic a te s d iffe re n c e fav o rs o ld er g i r l s .
e ith e r age group i s b e tte r ad ju sted i n th is re sp e c t th an the o th e r.
I t i s probable, however, th a t th e re la tio n s h ip of daughter to mother
changes more, on th e average, than th a t of daughter to f a th e r (note
two

s ig n if ic a n t d iffe re n c e s f o r mother, one fo r f a t h e r ) .

5o

Sex Differences

Only three items show significant differences
Table 8.

Significance of Differences Between The Responses of Early
Adolescent Boys and Girls To Love and Security Items
V
V
Father Items_________ Scores Scores____________ Mother Items
30 Confide in mother
Confide in father
-18
Confidence father's affi* 16
--------------------------------------- 5 per cent level sig.
Favoritism
Interest child's activities
Parents' quarreling
Confidence parent's affection
Confidence child's intent.
Favoritism
Interest child's activities
Confidence child's intent.
Parents' quarreling
*
of differences is 9.53 with four degrees of freedom.
- Indicates difference favors boys.
between boys and girls adjustment to parents at the onset of ado­
lescence.

Two favor the girls and one the boys.

The similarities

of boys and girls feelings of being loved and secure appear at early
adolescence greater than their differences.
At middle adolescence, however, the situation has changed radi­
cally and ten of the eleven love and security items show differences
far above the 5 per cent level of significance. All favor (higher
13/
adjustment scores) the girls except confiding in father— . These
13/ The same sex tie is significantly indicated at the earlier age also,
suggesting that confiding is a function of a common sex to a
greater degree than it is of generalized feelings of being loved
and securej that is, boys confide in fathers because they are the
same sex.

51

Table 9.
S ig n ifican ce of D ifferen ces Between The Responses of Middle
A dolescent Boys and G irls to Love and S ecu rity Items
V
V
F ath er Items______________ Scores Scores____________ Mother Items_____
Confide i n fa th e r
-37
3U I n te r e s t c h ild 's a c t i v i t i e s
33 Confidence m other's a ffe c tio n
30 Confide in mother
Confidence f a t h e r 's a f f .
28
25 F avoritism
F av o ritism
2k
I n te r e s t c h i l d 's a c t i v i t i e s 21
Confidence c h ild 's i n t e n t . 20
17 Confidence c h ild 's i n te n t.*
---------------------------------------------------------------------- 5 p er cent le v e l s ig .
P a re n ts' q u a rre lin g
P a re n ts' q u arrelin g

-

* X of d iffe re n c e s i s 10.20 with fo u r degrees of freedom.
- In d ic a te s d iffe re n c e fav o rs boys.
g r e a t d iffe re n c e s in d ic a te t h a t by middle adolescence th e boys, on
th e average, lacked fe e lin g s of being loved and accepted to a much
g re a te r degree th an did middle adolescent g i r l s .

This d iffe re n c e

i s toward both p a re n ts about eq u ally , w ith a l i t t l e more towards
th e m other.
These d iffe re n c e s were n o t p re se n t a t e a r ly adolescence.

They

took place i n a p erio d of th re e years between th e modal ages of 13.5
and 16,5 y e a rs .
Summary
(1 ) C ity ad o lescen ts on th e average have more fe e lin g of being loved
and secure than do farm a d o le sc e n ts.

D ifferences are s ig n if ic a n t on

e ig h t of eleven item s and c o n s is te n t in d ir e c tio n .

D ifferences are

52

about eq u ally g re a t i n fe e lin g s about mother and f a th e r ; th a t i s , as
farm and c i t y fa m ilie s a re compared, th e r o le of th e mother and th a t
of th e f a th e r change about e q u a lly .
(2) Open country non-farm, v illa g e , sm all town, and frin g e ad o lescen ts
appear to occupy a middle a rea between farm and c ity ad o le sc e n ts.
Open country non-farm a re , on th e average of eleven item s, c lo s e s t to
farm .

Small town are n ex t, and v illa g e and frin g e adolescents are

n e a re s t to th e c i t y .

This order must, however, be regarded as te n ta ­

t i v e sin ce many o f th e d iffe re n c e s are sm all.

A ll except frin g e are

c lo s e r to farm th a n to c i t y ad o lescen ts in t h e i r fe e lin g s of being
loved and accepted by p a re n ts .
(3) A dolescents o f th e h ig h er socio-economic le v e l have g re a te r
fe e lin g s o f being loved and accepted by p aren ts th an do those a t
lower socio-economic l e v e l s .

The d iffe re n c e s are s ig n if ic a n t on

n in e of eleven item s and a re a l l in a c o n s is te n t d ir e c tio n .

The ro le s

of both p a re n ts change but th e change i s much g re a te r f o r the f a th e r;
on e ig h t of th e nine s ig n if ic a n t item s the change i s g re a te r fo r
f a th e r and on one th e same f o r both p a re n ts .
(h) Sex d iffe re n c e s in fe e lin g of being loved and accepted a re not
g r e a t or c o n s is te n t i n e a r ly adolescence, although th e re are some
in d ic a tio n s o f b e tte r adjustm ent f o r g i r l s .
(5) Age d iffe re n c e s of boys in fe e lin g of being loved and secure are
s ig n if ic a n t and c o n s is te n t on s ix of eleven item s, a l l i n fa v o r of
younger boys except more p re v a le n t f e e lin g t h a t p aren ts show fa v o ri­
tism .

For g i r l s , some s ig n if ic a n t d iffe re n c e s are found but some

53

item s fav o r younger, some o ld er g i r l s , so th a t no g en eral ranking i s
ju s tifie d .
(6) At middle adolescence h ig h ly s ig n if ic a n t d iffe re n c e s are found
on te n o f eleven ite m s.

A ll except one (fe e lin g able to confide in

f a th e r ) in d ic a te a g re a te r fe e lin g of being loved and secure on the
p a r t o f th e middle ad o lescent g i r l s (11th g rad e).

An event or events

occurred during th e th re e year p eriod 13.5 to 16.5 y ears to change
th e fe e lin g s o f ad o lescen t boys from one of about e q u a lity -with g i r l s
i n fe e lin g s o f being loved and secure to one of d e f in ite r e la tiv e
i n f e r i o r i t y i n th e se f e e lin g s .

5U

CHAPTER V

STATUS RELATIONSHIPS

The need fo r s ta tu s has receiv ed widespread i f not u n iv e rs a l
re c o g n itio n of s o c io lo g is ts , s o c ia l p sy c h o lo g ists, and s o c ia l
a n th ro p o lo g is ts.

The endeavor to p la c e o n eself fav o rab ly in th e

s o c ia l s tr u c tu r e i n terms o f the ex p ectatio n s of th e s o c ie ty i s
u n iv e rs a lly observed.

The forms t h i s behavior ta k e s i s as d iv e rse

as the c u ltu re i t occurs i n , tak in g th e form of th e P o tla tc h among
J ./

th e Kwakiutl

2/

, an e x c e lle n t gardener in th e Trobriands—\ and

d riv in g a "fo u r hole" Buick in ste a d of a "th re e hole" Buick or a
Ford in 19k9 American s o c ie ty .

Sometimes t h i s behavior i s fra n k ly
3/
aimed a t s ta tu s o r re c o g n itio n , b u t more o fte n i t i s r a tio n a liz e d
in to a form more accep tab le t o s o c i e t y - ^
The s ta tu s s itu a tio n f o r the a d o lescen t has two main a s p e c ts:
t h a t of ach iev in g re c o g n itio n in th e p eer group and of becoming an
a d u lt i n th e fa m ily .
th e two.

There i s , of course, a close in te r a c tio n between

The a d o le s c e n t's p o s itio n among h is peers w ill depend to a

co n sid erab le e x te n t on th e freedom, p r iv ile g e s , and r e s p o n s ib ilitie s
a t home, w hile th e p a r e n ts ' p e rc e p tio n of him r e f l e c t s , i n p a r t, th e
re c o g n itio n afforded him by th e p eer group,

to th e e x ten t t h a t the

1 / Boas, Franz, Ethnology o f th e Kwakiutl, U.S. Bureau American
“ Ethnology, Washington, B .C ., 1921.
2 / Malinowski, Bronislaw, C oral Gardens and T heir Magic, American Book
Co., New York, 1935.
3 / Considered one of th e fo u r fundamental c a te g o rie s of needs by W .I.
Thomas, The Unadjusted G ir l, L i t t l e , Brown & Co., Boston, 1923.
h / Veblen, T h o rste in , Theory of a L eisure C lass, Vanguard P re ss, New
York, 1919.

55

p eer group r e f l e c t s ad u lt v a lu e s.

The p re se n t a n a ly sis i s concerned

w ith th e second of these s ta tu s needsj th a t of reco g n itio n by parents
as an ad o lescen t nearing adulthood.
This chapter w i l l analyze some s ta tu s item s to determ ine th e ex­
t e n t to which ad olescents a re given s ta tu s i s associated w ith age,
sex , re sid e n c e , and socio-economic le v e l.
Residence

Of th e tw elve item s measuring p riv ile g e s and re ­

s p o n s ib ilitie s (See Table 11, Page 56) of ad o lescen ts four a re s ig ­
n if ic a n t above th e 5 per c e n t le v e l and e ig h t are n o t.

A ll o f the

Table 10.
S ig n ific a n c e of D ifferen ces Between Responses of Farm and C ity
A dolescents to S tatu s Items
V

V

F ath er Items____________ Scores Scores_______________ Mother Items
21 Make own decisions
20 Prying
Go out by s e l f
17
13 Go out by s e lf *
---------------------------------------------------------- — 5 p er cent le v e l s i g .
Included fam ily co u n cils
Included fam ily council
Choose own c lo th es
Choose own clo th es
F ath er approves behavior
Mother re sp e c ts opinion
Prying
Mother approves behavior
Make own d ecisio n s
F ath er re sp e c ts opinions
* Y? of d iffe re n c e i s lh .5 8 with fo u r degrees of freedom.
s ig n if ic a n t d iffe re n c e s a re i n th e d ire c tio n of more ad u lt s ta tu s
accorded t o th e c i t y ad o lescen ts.

56

Table 11.
S tatu s Items
(In Order o f Rural-Urban D ifferen ces)
Q u e s tio n n a ire ^
Number
88

"My mother th in k s I have th e a b i l i t y to make my own d e c is io n s ..."

67

"My mother p rie s in to my a f f a i r s . . . "

33

"My f a th e r l e t s me go out to s o c ia l events by m y s e lf..."

68

"My mother l e t s me go out to s o c ia l events by m y s e lf ..."

93

"My

p aren ts d isc u ss fam ily problems w ith m e ..."

99

"My

p a ren ts l e t me wear whatever I want t o . . . "

36

" I f e e l th a t my f a th e r approves o f how I b e h a v e ..."

53

"My

f a th e r th in k s I have th e a b i l i t y to make my own d e c is io n s ..."

63

"My

mother re sp e c ts my o p in io n ..."

32

"My f a th e r p rie s in to my a f f a i r s . . . "

28

"M y f a th e r re s p e c ts my o p in io n ..."

71

" I f e e l th a t ray mother approves o f how I b e h a v e ..."

C ity mothers give la r g e r increased freedom and r e s p o n s ib ility to
a d o le sc e n ts.

C ity mothers d i f f e r more from farm mothers than do c ity

from farm f a th e r s .

This i s i l l u s t r a t e d by the much g re a te r change in

mothers w illin g n ess to l e t adolescents make t h e i r own d e c is io n s .

5 / I d e n tif ie s item w ith p o s itio n in th e q u e stio n n a ire , see Appendix
»B."

57

I t has been shown t h a t c ity adolescents receiv e more freedom and
s o c ia l r e s p o n s ib ility : however, do open country non-farm, v illa g e ,
town, and frin g e ad olescents receiv e p ro g re ssiv e ly in creased a d u lt­
l ik e s ta tu s ?

The open country non-farm shows l e a s t d iffe re n c e s com­

pared to farm, w ith frin g e , town, and v illa g e showing p ro g re ssiv e ly
Table 12.
D ifferen ces From Farm, As Measured By V Scores on S tatu s Items Of
Open Country, V illag e , Town, Fringe,and C ity A dolescents.
Q uestionnaire No.
88

67

33
68
93
99
36
53
63
32
28
71

Open country
5
5
3
5
-8

0
a
6
5
-a
-10
9

V illage
-5
7
8
12
9
0

-5
10
12
- 6
-a
9

Town
a
6
11
15
6
- 6
- 5
10
0
0
- 6
5

Fringe
6
6
-6
-U
0
a
-5
10
9
0
5
0

C ity
21

20
17
13
11
10

10
8
7
6
6
0

- In d ic a te s d iffe re n c e s fav o r farm ad o lescen ts.
U nderline
in d ic a te s d iffe re n c e s ig n if ic a n t a t $ per cent le v e l.
g re a te r d iffe re n c e s .

The d iffe re n c e s , however, are not la rg e and a

number of item s show sm all d iffe re n c e s i n favor o f the farm .

The

only g e n e ra liz a tio n s which appear j u s t i f i a b l e are th a t th e open
country, v illa g e , town, and frin g e ad o lescen ts, on the average, have
more freedom and s o c ia l r e s p o n s ib ility th an farm and le s s than c i ty
ad o le sc e n ts, and t h a t in th is re s p e c t they are c lo se r to the farm

58

than to th e c ity .
Socio-Economic Level

S ig n ific a n t d iffe re n c e s are found fo r
Table 13

S ig n ifican ce o f D ifferences Between Responses of High and Low
Socio-Economic Level Adolescents To S tatu s Items
V
F ath er Items____________ Scores
F ath er re sp e c ts opinon
36
F ather approves behavior 35
D iscuss fam ily problems

26

Make own d ec isio n s

2$

Go out by s e l f

16

V
Scores____________Mother Items

29
26
26

Make ovm d ecisio n s
Discuss fam ily problems
Mother re sp e c ts opinion

21
16

Go out by s e l f
Mother approves behavior*
5 p e r cen t le v e l s ig .
Prying
Choose own clo th es

Prying
Choose own c lo th e s

"*xs o f d iffe re n c e i s 9.55 w ith fo u r degrees of freedom.
a l l except two of th e tw elve item s.

At th e higher socio-economic le v e l

th e adolescent has more s o c ia l r e s p o n s ib ility and freedom and more of
th e fe e lin g th a t p a ren ts have confidence i n h is a b i l i t y to meet the
s itu a tio n s he f a c e s .
Both th e ro le o f th e fa th e r and the mother changes g r e a tly by
socio-economic le v e l in t h i s area o f in te ra c tio n , w ith fiv e item s f o r
each changing s ig n if ic a n tly .

The d iffe re n c e s in th e r o le of th e

f a th e rs i s s li g h t l y g re a te r than t h a t of th e m others.

A ll s ig n if ic a n t

d iffe re n c e s favor th e adolescent o f the h igher socio-economic le v e l
fa m ily .

Age D ifferences

S ig n ific a n t d iffe re n c e s are found between e a rly
Table 11*.

S ig n ific an c e of D ifferences Between Responses of E arly and
Middle A dolescent Boys to S tatu s Items
V
F ather Items_____________Scores
Go out by s e l f
36
Choose own clo th es

26

Make own d ecisio n s

20

V
Scores_____________Mother Items
35
26
—2JU

Go out by s e lf
Choose own clo th es
Prying

-18
Mother approves behavior*
------------------------------------------------------------------- 5 per cent le v e l s ig .
F ather re sp e c ts opinions
Prying
Make own d ecisio n s
D iscuss fam ily problems
D iscuss fam ily problems
Mother re sp e c ts opinion
F ather approves behavior

„------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

* X of d iffe re n c e s i s 11.86 w ith fo u r degrees of freedom.
- In d ic a te s d iffe re n c e fav ors younger boys.
and middle ad o lescen t boys on seven of twelve s ta tu s item s.

These

item s showing s ig n if ic a n t d iffe re n c e s may be divided in to two groups:
those which in d ic a te behavior f re e of ex p ectatio n s based on m atu rity ,
11

such a s , freedom to go out

se lfy "choose own c lo th e s" , "make

d e c is io n s ," and "be included in th e d iscu ssio n of fam ily problem s,"
and, on th e o th e r hand, those which r e f l e c t g eneral a ttitu d e s toward
th e a d o le s c e n t's behavior i n terms of what i s expected of him, such
as prying and approval of h is behavior.

On th e item s fre e of age

ex p ectatio n s th e o ld er boys rank h igher as a r e f le c tio n of g re a te r
experience and independence than younger boys, but on those which
r e f l e c t behavior in terms o f what i s expected a t th a t age le v e l, th e

60

younger boys rank h ig h e r.

To r e c a p itu la te , o ld er boys have more

freedom and r e s p o n s ib ility , but th ey have le s s of th e fe e lin g t h a t
p aren ts consider them adequate to th e s itu a tio n s t h e i r age group
en cou n ters.
Table 15.
S ig n ifican ce of D ifferences Between Responses o f E arly and
Middle A dolescent G irls To S tatu s Items
V
F ath er Items______________ Scores
Choose own c lo th es
35
Make own d ecisio n s
35
Go out by s e l f

V
Scores_____________Mother Items
35 Choose own clo th es
35 Make ownd ecisio n s
30
Go out by s e lf

28

F ath er approves behavior
Included fam ily d isc u ssio n
F ath er re sp e c ts opinions

Prying
Included fam ily d iscu ssio n
Mother approves behavior
Mother re sp e c ts opinion

Prying

Older g i r l s have more s ta tu s on f iv e of twelve item s than younger
g irls .

S ix of th e e ig h t s ig n if ic a n t item s are measures f r e e of age

e x p e c ta tio n s, in which a re a i t i s c le a r th a t th e o ld e r g i r l s have more
freedom and r e s p o n s ib ility .

From th e d iffe re n c e s observed i t does n o t

appear w arranted to conclude th a t e ith e r female age group enjoys
g re a te r fe e lin g s o f adequacy i n terras of what i s expected of them,
although such evidence as i s p re se n t favors th e o ld er g i r l s .
Both f a th e r and mother give o ld er g i r l s more freedom and respon­
s i b i l i t y to about th e same degree, and to very much th e same e x te n t
item by item .

61

Sex D ifferen ces

At the e ig h t grade le v e l only th re e of twelve

item s show s ig n if ic a n t d iffe re n c e s between the s ta tu s of boys and
Table 16.
S ig n ific an c e o f D ifferences of Responses Of E arly Adolescent
Boys and G irls to S ta tu s Items
V
F ather Items______________ Scores

V
Scores_____________ Mother Items
-35
Go out by s e lf

Go out by s e l f
-28
Choose own clo th e s
20
20
Choose own clothes
-----------------------------------------------------------------------5 p er cent le v e l s ig .
F ath er re s p e c ts opinions
Prying
Make own d ecisio n s
Make own d ecisions
F ath er approves behavior
Prying
Mother approves behavior
Mother re sp e c ts opinion
Included fam ily d isc u ssio n
Included fam ily d isc u ssio n
- In d ic a te s d iffe re n c e s favor boys.
g i r l s and th e se are o b je ctiv e behavior item s r a th e r than gen eralized
fe e lin g s of adequacy in terms of th e s itu a tio n .

The d iffe re n c e s

fav o rin g th e bqys on th e item "go out by s e lf " can be explained hy
6/
re fe re n c e to th e b asic d a ta ta b le — . I t shows no d iffe re n c e s between
th e sexes in th e number experiencing complete freedom, but a r a th e r
la rg e group o f young g i r l s who have no freedom a t a l l in th e m atter
o f going to s o c ia l events alo n e.

The g re a te r freedom th a t g i r l s f e e l

i n deciding what to wear may, although not n e c e s s a rily , be explained
by th e extremes of slo p p in ess and u n co n v en tio n ality c h a r a c te r is tic of

6 / B asic Data Table

Appendix C.

62

th e e a rly adolescent boy group.

To r e c a p itu la te , d ifferen ces i n s ta tu s

behavior and fe e lin g s a t e a rly adolescence shows very s lig h t d i f f e r ­
ences f o r boys and g i r l s .
Table 17.
S ig n ifican ce of D ifferences Between The Responses of Middle
A dolescent Boys and G irls To S tatu s Items
V
Scores

F ather Items
Go out by s e l f
F ather approves behavior

V
Scores
Mother Items
Go out by s e lf
-ho

-32
30
26
2h
21

Mother approves behavior
Mother re sp e c ts opinions
Prying

Frying
20
Choose own clothes
Choose own clo th es
20
20
F ather re sp e c ts opinions#17
------------------------------------------------------------------- 5 p er cent le v e l s ig .
Make own decisions
D iscuss fam ily problems
Discuss fam ily problems
Make own d ecisio n s
*
of d iffe re n c e i s 13.91 w ith four degrees of freedom.
- In d ic a te s d iffe re n c e s favor boys.
At th e middle ad o lescent age, d iffe re n c e s in r e s p o n s ib ilitie s
and freedom are s ig n if ic a n t in nine of twelve item s.

Two of the nine

fav o r th e boys: t h a t i s , both f a th e rs and mothers l e t them go out
more by them selves.

The d iffe re n c e s a re found both in the number who

have complete freedom and among those who have none.

On a l l other

s ig n if ic a n tly d iff e r in g item s in cluding those th a t in d ic a te g en eral­
iz e d fe e lin g s o f being thought adequate to the s itu a tio n , th e g i r l s

63

enjoy th e g re a te r s ta tu s —
F ath ers and m others, although they d i f f e r on in d iv id u a l item s,
both give g i r l s th e g re a te r fe e lin g of adequacy.
Summary
(1) C ity ad o lescen ts re c e iv e more freedom and s o c ia l r e s p o n s ib ility
from p are n ts th a n do farm a d o le sc e n ts.

They a ls o , on the average,

have more fe e lin g th a t p aren ts have confidence in them.

D ifferences

are s ig n if ic a n t fo r fo u r of twelve item s, a l l of which fav o r the
c i t y ad o le sc e n t,
(2) A dolescents of th e open country n o n -fara, v illa g e , town,and
frin g e areas i n terms of th e averages on tw elve s ta tu s item s rank
between farm and c i t y ad o lescen ts; however, a l l of these areas aver­
age c lo se r to th e farm than the c ity and on some in d iv id u a l items
rank below th e farm ad o le sc e n ts.
(3) P arents from h ig h er socio-economic le v e ls give adolescents more
freedom, s o c ia l r e s p o n s ib ilitie s , and fe e lin g s th a t p aren ts have con­
fid en ce in t h e i r adequacy th an do p aren ts a t lower socio-economic
le v e ls .

D ifferences are s ig n if ic a n t on te n of twelve item s, a l l in

favor of th e h ig h er socio-economic group.

Larger d iffe re n c e s are

observed between f a th e rs a t high and low socio-economic le v e ls than
f o r m others.
7 / In American s o c ie ty th e ad o lescen t g i r l can s t i l l achieve s ta tu s in
th e fam ily by household c o n trib u tio n and w ith the peer group by
p erso n al a ttr a c tiv e n e s s . The adolescent b o y 's tr a d itio n a l channels
of economic c o n trib u tio n and use of su p e rio r siz e and s tre n g th are
cu t o ff by a changed s o c ie ty .

6U

(ll) Middle adolescent boys are given more freedom and s o c ia l respon­
s i b i l i t y than are e a rly ad o lescent boys, but th e re i s some evidence
to suggest th a t younger boys f e e l th a t p aren ts have more confidence in
them in terms o f what i s expected of t h e i r age group.
(5) Middle ad o lescen t g i r l s a re given more freedom and s o c ia l respon­
s i b i l i t y th an e a r ly adolescent g i r l s .

F eelings o f being adequate to

th e s itu a tio n appear to n o t d i f f e r g r e a tly by age.
(6) At e a r ly adolescence only th re e of tw elve s ta tu s item s show s ig ­
n if ic a n t d iffe re n c e s between th e sexes, one favoring g i r l s and two
favoring boys.

N either can be s a id have more s ta tu s or fe e lin g s of

adequacy a t th is age.
(7) By middle adolescence g i r l s have more s ta tu s and more of them f e e l
th a t t h e i r p are n ts consider them adequate.

Nine item s show s i g n i f i ­

can t d iffe re n c e s , a l l of which favor g i r l s except two: th e e x ten t to
which f a th e r and mother allow them to go to s o c ia l events by them­
s e lv e s .

65

CHAPTER VI

SOCIALIZATION RELATIONSHIPS

A la rg e segment o f a d o lescen t-p aren t in te r a c tio n i s centered
about th e conform ation of th e adolescent to th e ex p ectatio n s of
s o c ie ty of ■what adolescent behavior should be i n gen eral and p a r tic u ­
l a r l y as to what p aren ts b eliev e i t should be in the fam ily .

Upon

whether i t i s s u c c e ss fu lly accomplished depends the life tim e a d ju s t ­
ment of th e in d iv id u a l in s o c ie ty .
The American s itu a tio n d if f e r s b a s ic a lly from one in which
community, church, sch o o l, and government s p e c if ic a lly re in fo rc e the
(o n ly one) fam ily p a tte rn —^ and from a r e la tiv e ly s t a t i c s o c ie ty in
which th e experiences of the f a th e r as an adolescent are d u p licated
by the so

_ The contemporary American p a re n t i s , r e l a t iv e ly speak­

in g , in a kind of "no man's land" i n which th e s o c ia liz a tio n p ra c tic e s
he employs d i f f e r s from those of groups he and h is c h ild re n are i n
co n tac t w ith and i n which he i s fo rced to meet s itu a tio n s which he
never experiences h im self.

This chapter w ill analyze some methods and

r e s u lts o f th e s o c ia liz a tio n process as they are a sso c ia te d w ith sex,
age, socio-econom ic, and resid en ce groups.

1 / Thomas, W. I . , and Znaneicki, F lo ria n , The P olish Peasant in
Europe and America, R. G. Badger, Chicago, 15*18.
2( Davis, K ingsley, "The Sociology of P arent-C hild C o n flic t,"
American S o c io lo g ic al Review, Vol. V, (19hO), pp. 23-25.

66

Table 18.
S o c ia liz a tio n Items
(In Order Of Rural-Urban D ifferences)
Q uestionnaire
Number____________________________________________________ ____ _____
61 "For fun, my mother and I d o ..."
6h

" I consider my m o th er's c o rre c tio n of m e ..."

80

"My mother scolds m e..."

i|2

"When my f a th e r t e l l s me to do something I u s u a ll y ..."

70

"When my mother makes me do something, she t e l l s
n e c e s s a r y ..."

55

"For fun, my f a th e r and I d o ..."

73

" I f I had a ch ild my age, I would teach him what i s r i g h t and
w ro n g ...e x a c tly what my mother ta u g h t m e ..."

33

"When my f a th e r makes me do something, he t e l l s me why i t ' s
n e c e s s a r y ..."

37

" I f I had a ch ild my age, I would teach him what i s r ig h t and
w ro n g ...e x a c tly what my f a th e r tau g h t m e ..."

30

"My f a th e r nags a t m e ..."

7h

" I th in k my mother knows vhat i s b e s t fo r m e ..."

65

"M/ mother nags at me..."

77

"When my mother t e l l s me to do something, I u s u a lly ..."

38

" I th in k my fa th e r knows what i s b e s t fo r m e ..."

29

"I consider my f a t h e r 's punishment o f m e ..."

U5

"My father scolds m e..."

me why i t ' s

67

Residence

H alf, or e ig h t, of th e s o c ia liz a tio n item s (see

Table 18) show s ig n if ic a n t d iffe re n c e s between farm and c it y fa m ilie s ,
Table 19.
S ig n ific an c e of D ifferen ces of Responses of Farm and C ity
A dolescents to S o c ia liz a tio n Items
V
F ather Items______________ Scores

A ttitu d e toward orders
Mutual a c t i v i t i e s fo r fu n

-16
15

V
Scores_______________ Mother Items
22
Mutual a c t i v i t i e s fo r fu n
18
F a ir punishment
-18
Scolding
16
Explains in s tru c tio n s
13

Explains in s tru c tio n s *

Agree moral ru le s

12
----------------5 per cent le v e l s ig .

Agree m oral ru le s
Nagging
Confidence m other's judgment
Nagging
A ttitu d e toward orders
Confidence f a t h e r 's judgment
F a ir punishment
Scolding
*
of d iffe re n c e i s 10.88 w ith four degrees of freedom.
- In d ic a te s d iffe re n c e s fav o r farm a d o lescen ts.
in d ic a tin g r e a l d iffe re n c e s i n th e p ra c tic e s employed and r e s u lts
g ain ed .

The g en eral p ic tu re i s one of more s o c ia liz a tio n by p a r t i c i ­

p a tin g to g e th e r i n amusements of both c i t y fa th e rs and mothers w ith
c h ild , more attem pts to be f a i r i n c o rre c tio n , and to ex p lain th e
"whys" o f s o c ia l r u le s .

The o th er p a r t of th e p ic tu re i s th a t mothers

scolded more w ith t h i s type of s o c ia liz a tio n and f a th e rs secured le s s
ex act obedience.

68

As to th e r e s u l t of th e pro cess, the c ity p aren ts appear to
have been somewhat more e ffe c tiv e sin ce a s ig n if ic a n tly g re a te r
number would teach t h e i r c h ild re n what i s r ig h t and wrong e x actly
th e same th a t th e i r p are n ts taught them.

The c ity group, however,

shows more v a r ia tio n than th e farm in th a t a la r g e r percen t also
e n tir e ly re p u d ia te th e p a re n ts ' te a c h in g s - ^

A p o ssib le explana­

tio n i s th a t in order to rep u d iate e n tir e ly , an a lte r n a tiv e must be
p re s e n t.

A lte rn a tiv e moral codes are p resen t in th e c ity b u t not

p re se n t or n o t recognized as such i n the farm a re a .
S o c ia liz a tio n techniques vary much more between farm and c ity
mothers than between f a th e r s .

The f a th e r ro le changes r e la tiv e ly

l i t t l e , the mother ro le r e la tiv e ly g r e a t.

The c ity mother r o le co­

in c id e s w ith th e sm aller fam ily, d eclin e of home production, and
in tro d u c tio n o f la b o r saving technology in to the home, a l l of which
allo w s, i f n o t n e c e s s ita te s , a g re a te r co n cen tratio n on th e c h ild .
The areas which are considered to bridge the gap between the
c i t y and farm, th a t i s , th e f rin g e , town v illa g e , and open country
non-farm, are found to occupy and in term ed iate p o s itio n so f a r as
s o c ia liz a tio n re la tio n s h ip s are concerned.

The d iffe re n c e s between

th e open country and town and the farm a re very sm all.

Sm allest

d iffe re n c e s are found between open country and farm with p ro g re ssiv e ly

hf Basic Data Table 19, Appendix "C."

69

Table 20.
D ifferences From Farm, As Measured By V Scores on S o c ia liz a tio n Item s,
Of Open Country, V illag e, Town, F ringe, and C ity A dolescents
Q uestionnaire No.
61
61i
80
l|2
70
55
73
35
37
30
7k
65
77
38
29
Ii5

Open Country

V illage

5
lU
0
8
-16
11
-10
k
5
-9
h
0
-7
0
-8
Ii

12
7
-5
5
-6
20
5
h
5
6
6
6
-h
0
0
0

Town

11
8
22
6
18
15
-11
0
-18
6
0
16
-10
-lU
-16
6
20
ii
-5
19
13
0
12
7
-5
10
9
6
0
10
7
5
7
12
6
6
0
0
5
-6
0
ii
6
0
7
0
5
-Ii
- In d ic a te s d iffe re n c e favors farm ad o le sc e n ts.
Underline __ in d ic a te s d iffe re n c e s ig n if ic a n t a t 5 per cent le v e l.
g re a te r d iffe re n c e s between farm and town, v illa g e , f rin g e , and
c ity .
Socio-Economic D ifferences

D ifferences in the ways the ado­

le s c e n t i s s o c ia liz e d are s ig n if ic a n t f o r seven of s ix te e n item s fo r
higher and lower socio-economic le v e ls .
th e high le v e l group.

A ll of the d iffe re n c e s favor

S o c ia liz a tio n i s accomplished more by mutual

p a r tic ip a tio n , ex p lan atio n , understanding, and confidence than a t
th e lower le v e l.

70

. Table 21.
Significance of Differences of Responses of High and Low SocioEconomic Level Adolescents To Socialization Items
V
Scores

F ather Items

Mutual a c t i v i t i e s f o r fun
Explains in s tr u c tio n s
Agree moral ru le s
Confidence f a t h e r 's judgment

31
31
27
26

F a ir punishment*

lU

V
Scores

Mother Items

35

Mutual a c t i v i t i e s f o r fun

16

F a ir punishment

p e r cent le v e l s ig .
Confidence m other's judgment
Explains in s tru c tio n s
A ttitu d e towards orders
Agree moral ru le s
Nagging
Scolding
6
'
. . . . - ...
* X of d iffe re n c e i s 18.53 w ith four degrees of freedom.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ £

A ttitu d e towards orders
Scolding
Nagging

The changing r o le of th e f a th e r i s prominent as socio-economic
le v e ls are compared.

Five of th e seven item s s ig n if ic a n tly d if f e r e n t

are f a th e r item s and most of them are la r g e r d iffe re n c e s than fo r th e
m other.

With h ig h er income, education, occupation, and s o c ia l p a r t i c i ­

p a tio n , larg e d iffe re n c e s are observed in th e f a t h e r s ' s o c ia liz a tio n
p r a c tic e s ; s im ila r and s ig n if ic a n t but le s s e r changes are found in
m others•
Age D ifferences

Tremendous d iffe re n c e s ( th ir te e n of s ix te e n

are s ig n if ic a n t) in s o c ia liz a tio n p ra c tic e s are found between e a rly
and middle ado lescen t boys, a l l of which d iffe re n c e s except scolding

71

Table 22.
Significance of Differences of Responses of Early and Middle
Adolescent Boys To Socialization Items
V
F ath er Items
Scores
Mutual a c t i v i t i e s fo r fun
he

V
Scores
o o

Confidence f a t h e r 's jud^ment31
Agree moral ru le s
30
F air punishment
30
Nagging
Scolding
Explains in s tru c tio n s
A ttitu d e toward orders#

Mother Items
Mutual a c t i v i t i e s f o r fun
Confidence m other's judg.

30

Agree moral ru le s

28
27

F air punishment
Nagging

25
-2h
15
13
•5 per cent le v e l s ig .
Explains in s tr u c tio n s
A ttitu d e toward orders
Scolding

*
o f d iffe re n c e i s 7.81 -with th re e degrees of freedom.
- In d ic a te s d iffe re n c e s favor o ld er boys.
favor the younger boys.

This " d e te rio ra tio n " takes the form of fewer

mutual a c t i v i t i e s fo r fu n , fewer explanations o f p a re n ta l r u le s , and
more resentm ent a g a in st punishment receiv ed , d e c lin e of confidence
in p a re n t, and th e s u b s titu tio n of nagging f o r scolding as a c o n tro l
d ev ice, and, f in a ll y , a widening of disagreem ent on what i s r ig h t and
wrong.
This in c re a se i n th e c o n f lic t s itu a tio n i s shared by both p a re n ts,
but th e in c re a se fo r f a th e r i s n o tic e a b ly la r g e r as e a rly adolescent
are compared w ith middle ad olescent boys.

72

Table 23.
Significance of Differences Between The Responses of Early and
Middle Adolescent Girls To Socialization Items
V
F ather Items_______________ Scores
Mutual a c t i v i t i e s fo r fun
32
Confidence f a t h e r 's judgment 31
Scolding
-21

V
Scores_____________ Mother Items

21
15

Agree moral ru le s
Confidence m other's judg.#
-----------5 per cent le v e l s ig .
Mutual a c t i v i t i e s f o r fun
Agree moral ru le s
Scolding
A ttitu d e toward orders
Nagging
F a ir punishment
Nagging
F a ir punishment
Explains in s tru c tio n s
Explains in s tr u c tio n s
A ttitu d e toward orders
g
"' ....
"
11-- 1
—
* X of d iffe re n c e i s 13.U2 w ith fo u r degrees of freedom .
- In d ic a te s d iffe re n c e s fav o r older g i r l s .
Comparison of s o c ia liz a tio n item s fo r e a rly and middle ad olescent
g i r l s shows s ig n if ic a n t d iffe re n c e s on fiv e of six te e n item s, fo u r of
which fav o r th e younger and one the o ld er g i r l s .

As the g i r l ages,

she has le s s s o c ia l p a r tic ip a tio n w ith p a re n ts, le s s confidence in
t h e i r judgment, and experiences more doubt as to the co rre c tn e ss of
t h e i r moral r u le s .
The change in s o c ia liz a tio n p ra c tic e s i s c le a r ly g re a te r f o r the
f a th e r th an f o r th e m other.

The th re e s ig n if ic a n t f a th e r item s in ­

d ic a te a "withdrawal" from th e s o c ia liz a tio n process o f the dau g h ter.
Sex D ifferences

At th e e a rly ad o lescen t p erio d , s ig n if ic a n t

d iffe re n c e s between boys and g i r l s s o c ia liz a tio n are found on fiv e
o f s ix te e n item s.

Boys do more th in g s f o r fu n with f a th e r s , consider

73

Table 2h.
Significance of Differences Between Responses of Early Adolescent
Boys and Girls To Socialization Items
V
F ath er I t e ms_______________ Scores
Mutual a c t i v i t i e s f o r fu n
Scolding
F a ir punishment
Agree moral r u le s *

V
Scores_____________ Mother Items
31 Mutual a c t i v i t i e s f o r fun

-22
15
-lit
-12

--------------5 p er cent le v e l s ig .
Nagging
A ttitu d e toward orders
Scolding
F a ir punishment
Agree moral ru le s
Confidence m other's judg.
Explains in s tr u c tio n s
* X* o f d iffe re n c e i s 9 .5 0 with fo u r degrees of freedom.
- In d ic a te s d iffe re n c e s fav or boys
Nagging
Confidence f a t h e r 's judgment
A ttitu d e toward orders
Explains in s tru c tio n s

h is punishment f a i r , and agree w ith him on moral ru le s more o fte n
than do young g i r l s j however, more in d ic a te t h a t f a th e rs scold them
than do g i r l s .
boys.

G irls do more th in g s fo r fun w ith mothers than do

Since th re e of th e fiv e s ig n if ic a n t d iffe re n c e s fav o r boys,

two fa v o r g i r l s , and only fiv e o f th e six te e n are s ig n if ic a n t a t a l l ,
i t i s apparent t h a t d iffe re n c e s a re not g re a t a t th i s age le v e l.
The ro le of th e f a th e r appears considerably more v aried by sex
of c h ild re n than th a t of th e m other.

The mother appears to p la y very

n e a rly th e same r o le as to s o c ia liz a tio n p ra c tic e s to young g i r l s as
to young boys, b u t the f a th e r , even a t th is e a r ly age plays a some­
what d if f e r e n t r o le w ith sons th an w ith dau g h ters, w ith th e b e tte r
re la tio n s h ip to th e boys.

7h

Table 25.
Significance of Differences# Between the Responses of Middle
Adolescent Boys and Girls To Socialization Items
V
Scores

F ather Items
Nagging

Uo

A ttitu d e toward orders

26

V
Scores
Mother Items
Mutual
a
c
t
i
v
i t i e s fo r fun
55
27

Confidence m other's judg.

22

A ttitu d e toward orders

F a ir punishment
21
Confidence f a t h e r ’s judgment 20
F a ir punishment
Explains in s tru c tio n s
Nagging#*
---------------------------------- -------------------------- ----------- --------5 p er cent le v e l sig ,
Mutual a c t i v i t i e s f o r fu n
Agree moral ru le s
Explains in s tr u c tio n s
Scolding
Scolding
Agree moral ru le s
17
16
15

* A ll d iffe re n c e s favor g i r l s .
##
of d iffe re n c e i s 9 .U5 w ith four degrees of freedom.
By middle adolescence, d iffe re n c e s in s o c ia liz a tio n p ra c tic e s by
sex are s ig n if ic a n t fo r te n of s ix te e n item s.
g irls .

One item

A ll of th ese favor

number of th in g s done fo r fun w ith mother

shows

th e g r e a te s t d iffe re n c e s th a t the V score i s capable of r e g is te r in g
f o r a two by fiv e ta b le .
By middle adolescence the s o c ia liz a tio n mechanisms used by p ar­
e n ts are i n f e r io r f o r boys as compared w ith g ir ls in the follow ing
re s p e c ts :

boys are nagged more by both f a th e rs and mothers, when

given in s tr u c tio n s they are le s s lik e ly to follow them, more o fte n
th ey consider punishment to be u n f a ir, have l o s t confidence in th e
judgment o f p a re n ts, and they receiv e fewer explanations from m other.

75

Summary
(1) Comparing farm and c ity fa m ilie s , d iffe re n c e s are s ig n if ic a n t on
e ig h t of s ix te e n s o c ia liz a tio n item s.

S ix of th e se favored the c ity

fa m ilie s j two, sco ld in g by mother and a ttitu d e toward f a t h e r 's in ­
s tr u c tio n s , favored th e farm group.

The g r e a te s t d iffe re n c e s were

found between farm and c ity mothers r a th e r than between farm and c ity
fa th e rs .
(2) The s o c ia liz a tio n p ra c tic e s of open country, town, v illa g e , and
frin g e a re , on th e average of s ix te e n item s, in term ed iate between
farm and c ity and v ary from farm in the above o rd e r.

D ifferences

fav o r the farm group on some in d iv id u a l item s.
(3) High socio-economic le v e l ranks h ig h er than low socio-economic
le v e l ad o lescen ts on a l l seven o f the item s showing s ig n if ic a n t d i f f e r ­
ences between th e groups.

The r o le of th e f a th e r changes more th an

th a t of th e mother as th e two groups are compared.
(I4) E arly ado lescen t boys d i f f e r s ig n if ic a n tly from middle adolescent
boys on th ir te e n o f s ix te e n s o c ia liz a tio n item s.
t h ir te e n fav o r th e younger boys.

Twelve of the

The f a th e r r o le changes more th an

th e mother as in d ic a te d by s ig n if ic a n t d iffe re n c e s on a l l ad o lescen tf a th e r r e la tio n s h ip s .
For g i r l s , the d ifferen ces are s lig h t, w ith th re e item s s i g n i f i ­
c a n tly fav o rin g younger g ir ls and two favoring o ld e r g i r l s .

Again the

r o le of th e f a th e r i s observed to change more than th a t o f the m other.
(5) At e a rly adolescence both p a re n ts tend to employ th e same p ra c -

76

ti c e s f o r boys and g i r l s .

Only fiv e item 3 show s ig n if ic a n t d i f f e r ­

ences; th re e fav o rin g boys and two fav o rin g g i r l s .

The ro le of the

mother i s observed to change le s s by sex of th e adolescent than does
th e r o le of the f a th e r .
( 6 ) By middle adolescence s ig n if ic a n t d iffe re n c e s are found in te n of
s ix te e n item s, a l l of which favor th e g i r l .

Mother re la tio n s h ip s to

middle ad o lescen ts v ary more by sex on s o c ia liz a tio n item s, on th e
average, than do f a th e r .

77

CHAPTER VII

PARENT PERSONALITIES

Basic to ad o lescen t-p aren t in te r a c tio n are th e g eneralized
fe e lin g s t h a t adolescents have about p aren ts as in d iv id u a ls .

These

fe e lin g s a re b u i l t up from the t o t a l i t y o f th e p a s t experience in
which th e c h ild conceives th a t th e parent played a p a r t.

This ex­

cludes those a ffe c tin g th e c h ild i n which th e p aren t played a p a r t,
b u t of which th e c h ild i s n o t aware, but i t includes those in which
th e p a re n t played no p a r t but th e ch ild b e lie v e s he d id .

The a ffe c ­

t iv e are a , then, i s th e t o t a l i t y of p e rtin e n t ro le s played by th e
p are n t as conceived by the c h ild .

The shaping of th e p a re n ta l ro le s

and th e ir p e rc ep tio n by th e adolescent are i n terms of the s o c ia l
systems of which p aren ts and c h ild re n are m em bers-^
This chapter w ill, by use o f some s p e c ific and some g en eralized
item s, in d ic a te th e a s so c ia tio n between th e se fe e lin g s about p aren ts
as in d iv id u a ls and age and sex o f adolescent and socio-economic le v e l
and resid en ce of th e fam ily.

Table 26 l i s t s the exact item s used to

measure.

1 / Membership in s o c ia l systems i s not id e n tic a l f o r p aren ts and
c h ild re n . P arents not only a re not members of adolescent system s,
but o fte n have never been members of an ad olescent system . For
th e th eo ry of a s o c ia l system, see Loomis, C.P. and Beegle, J.A .,
"A Typological A nalysis of S o c ia l System s," Sociometry, Vol. 9,
(191*8), pp. 11*7-91.

78

P arent P e rso n a lity Items
(In Order of Rural-Urban D ifferences)
Q uestionnaire
Number_______ ______________________________________________________
31
"Considering the amount of money my f a th e r has, I consider
t h a t he spends i t on m e ..."
26

" I consider my f a t h e r 's e d u c a tio n ..."

69

"When I ask my mother q u estio n s, she gives me honest answ ers. . . "

3h

"When I ask my f a th e r q u estio n s, he gives me honest a n s w e rs ..."

76

"My mother follow s advice which she gives m e ..."

hi

"When I'm grown up, I would lik e to have a p e r s o n a lity .. .e x a c tly
lik e my f a t h e r . . . "

60

" I consider my m other's e d u c a tio n ..."

66

"Considering th e amount of money my mother has, I consider
t h a t she spends i t on m e ..."

hO

"My f a th e r follow s advice which he gives m e ..."

97

"When I marry, I want my mate to have a p e r s o n a lity .. .e x a c tly
l i k e my p a re n t ( fa th e r , i f a g i r l answering} mother, i f a
boy a n s w e rin g )..."

72

"When I'm grown up, I would lik e to have a p e r s o n a lity .. .e x a c tly
lik e my m o th e r..."

23

"Of my f a t h e r 's frie n d s I l i k e . . . "

30

" My f a th e r l e t s me use h is personal p r o p e r ty ..."

83

"Ivfy- mother l e t s me use her p erso n al p r o p e r ty ..."

39

"Of my m other's frie n d s I l i k e . . . "

79

Residence D ifferences

C ity adolescents are le s s c r i t i c a l of

t h e i r p a re n ts ' p e r s o n a litie s than are farm a d o lescen ts.

D ifferences

Table 27.
S ig n ifican ce of D ifferences Between Responses of Farm and C ity
Adolescents To Parent P e rso n a lity Items
F ath er Items
F a th e r' s g e n e ro sity
F a th e r1s education
Honest answers
P e rso n a lity l ik e f a th e r
Follows own advice
Mate l ik e p aren t
Like f a t h e r 's frie n d s
Use f a t h e r 's p ro p erty
*

V
Scores
30
30
26
■*23
2h
-*13

V
Scores
Mother Items
30 Honest answers
26
23
23

Follows own advice
M other' s education
M other's g en ero sity

13 Mate lik e p aren t
III P erso n ality l i k e mother-**
---------------- 3 per cent le v e l s ig .
Use m other's p ro p erty
lik e m other's frie n d s

D ire ctio n not determined} see d iscu ssio n below.
of d iffe re n c e i s 9 .6 6 w ith four degrees of freedom.

are s ig n if ic a n t f o r eleven of f if t e e n item s.

A ll of th e se fav o r th e

c i t y fa m ilie s except two, d e s ire fo r p e rs o n a lity lik e f a th e r and de­
s i r e f o r a mate l ik e th e cross-sexed p a re n t.

Both item s show more

extreme d is tr ib u tio n s both of e n tire acceptance of th e p a re n t and com­
p le te r e je c tio n of the p a re n t as a model.

As noted above, th e en­

t i r e r e je c tio n of the p aren t may be more e a s ily accomplished when
accepted c o n tra stin g models are p re se n t, as i s more common in th e
c ity .

Nine of the eleven, however, c le a r ly fav o r the c i t y fam ily.
The areas considered to be interm ediate between farm and c i ty in

in te r a c tio n type, open country, v illa g e , town, and frin g e show one

80

notable d iffe re n c e from th e e x p ectatio n .

On th e b asis of the aver­

age of f i f t e e n item s, th e tovm group shows a more c r i t i c a l a ttitu d e
toward p aren ts than th e farm group.

The low p o s itio n of th e town

Table 28.
D ifferen ces From Farm, as Measured by V Scores on Parent
P e rso n a lity Item s, of Open Country, V illag e, Town,
Fringe and C ity Adolescents
Q uestionnaire No.

31
26
69
3h
76
ai
60
66
UO
97
72
25
50
85
59

Open Country
0
6
13
6
0
10
lh
0
0
*10
-5
9
5
-5
-20

V illage
20
26
6
15
7
6
2h
-a
0
5
*8
9
6
5
-5

Town
6
6
0
0
9
-5
13
0
a
-5
-5
6
-11
- ia
-25

Fr i n g e

7
25
30
5
16
17
2a
*15
5
*13
*16
3
-a
5
0

C ity
30
30
30
26
26
25
25
*25
2a
*15
ia
13
11
6
6

* D ire c tio n not determ ined, see d isc u ssio n above.
- In d ic a te s d iffe re n c e s fav o r farm a d o lescen ts.
U nderline in d ic a te s d iffe re n c e s ig n if ic a n t above 5 p er cent l e v e l.
group i s based la r g e ly on low scores on th re e item s:

number of

m o th er's frie n d s lik e d , and use of m other's and f a t h e r 's p erso n al
p ro p e rty .

Of th ese "in term ed iate" groups, then, th e tovm a c tu a lly

averages lower than farm, th e open country a l i t t l e higher than farm
b u t q u ite c lo se , and v illa g e and frin g e adolescents occupy ap p ro x i-

81

m ately a m id-point between farm and c i t y .
Socio-Economic D ifferences

A dolescents in the lower so cio ­

economic le v e l fa m ilie s are more c r i t i c a l of p aren ts th an th o se a t
th e higher le v e l.
item s.

D ifferences are s ig n if ic a n t fo r eleven of f if te e n

A ll s ig n if ic a n t d iffe re n c e s favor the adolescents from the
Table 29.

S ig n ific an c e o f D ifferen ces Between Responses of High and Low
Socio-Economic Level A dolescents to Parent P e rso n a lity Items
V
V
_ _
Mother Items
F ath er Items _____________ Scores__ Sc or es
P e rso n a lity lik e f a th e r
Ip.
F a th e r's education
hO
F a th e r's g en e ro sity
36
36
M other's education
Follows own advice
36
36
Follows own advice
30
Honest answers
Honest answers
27
2h M other's g e n e ro sity
Like f a t h e r 's frie n d s *
22
---------------------------------------------------------------------- fj per cent le v e l s ig .
Mate l ik e p a re n t
Mate lik e p aren t
Use f a t h e r 's p ro p erty
P e rso n a lity lik e mother
Like m other's frie n d s
* X2 of d iffe re n c e s i s 19.00 w ith th re e degrees of freedom.
A ll d iffe re n c e s favor high socio-economic le v e l.
h ig h er socio-economic le v e ls .

Since form al education of p aren ts i s

one of th e components of socio-economic le v e l, i t would be expected
t h a t more of th e adolescents a t th e high socio-economic le v e l would
co n sid er p a re n ts education su p e rio r; however, they a ls o more o ften
consider t h e i r p aren ts to be generous, h onest, fo llo w own advice, and
th ey d e s ire p e r s o n a litie s lik e them (fa th e r only) more o fte n .

82

As socio-economic le v e l in c re a s e s , c r itic is m o f the f a t h e r 's
p e rs o n a lity c h a r a c te r is tic s d e c lin e more th an do c r itic is m of
m other 1s .
Age D ifferences
p a r e n ts ' p e r s o n a litie s .

Older boys more th an younger a re c r i t i c a l of
D ifferences are s ig n if ic a n t f o r nine of

f i f t e e n item s, a l l of -which s ig n if ic a n t d iffe re n c e s favor younger
boys.
Table 30.
S ig n ific a n c e of D ifferen ces of Responses of E arly and Middle
A dolescent Boys To Parent P e rso n a lity Items
F ath er Items
lik e f a t h e r 's frie n d s
F a th e r 's g en ero sity
P e rso n a lity l i k e f a th e r
Follows own advice

V
Scores

V
Scores
39

Mother Iter
lik e m other's frie n d s

23
20

Mate lik e mother
Honest answers

29
26
25
19

P e rso n a lity lik e mother
17
M other's education*
Hi
-----------------------------------------------------------------------5 p er cen t le v e l s ig .
Use m other's p ro p erty
Follow own advice
F a th e r 's education
M other's g en ero sity
Use f a t h e r 's p ro p e rty
Honest answers
* X2 o f d iffe re n c e i s 12.53 w ith fo u r degrees of freedom.
Mother and f a th e r are both in c re a s in g ly c r i ti c i z e d by o ld er ado­
le s c e n t boys, and the in c re a se i s not s ig n if ic a n tly g re a te r f o r one
th an th e o th e r.

83

Table 31.
Significance of Differences Between Responses of Early And
Middle Adolescent Girls To Parent Personality Items
V
_________ Scores

F ather Items

V
Scores____________ Mother Items
-32
Use m other's p ro p erty

Use f a t h e r 's p ro p e rty
-16
P e rso n a lity l i k e fa th e r*
16
---------------------------------------------------------------------- 5 per cent le v e l s ig .
Like f a t h e r 's frie n d s
P e rso n a lity lik e mother
Mate l ik e p a re n t
M other's education
Honest answers
Follows own advice
Follows own advice
M other's g en ero sity
F a th e r 's education
Like m other's frie n d s
F a th e r 's g e n ero sity
Honest answers
*
o f d iffe re n c e i s 11.93 w ith four degrees of freedom.
- In d ic a te s d iffe re n c e s favor o ld er g i r l s .
There i s r e l a t iv e ly l i t t l e d iffe re n c e between e a rly and middle
adolescent g i r l s in t h e i r a ttitu d e s toward p a re n ts .

Three item s show

s ig n if ic a n t d iffe re n c e s , two of which fav o r th e o ld er g i r l s and one
th e younger.

S im ila r itie s between the two groups are much more marked

than d iffe re n c e s .
Sex D ifferences

At e a rly adolescence th e re are few s ig n if ic a n t

d iffe re n c e s between boys and g i r l s in t h e i r c r itic is m of p a re n ts.
Five o f f i f t e e n item s show s ig n if ic a n t d iffe re n c e s , but two of th ese
are obviously sex lin k e d , namely: use of f a t h e r 's and m other's prop­
e r ty .

This leav es only th re e item s s ig n if ic a n tly d i f f e r e n t.

Many

more young boys want wives lik e mother than do g i r l s lik e f a th e r .
Boys also le s s o fte n f e e l th a t f a th e rs do not follow th e ir own ad­
v ic e .

To r e c a p itu la te , d iffe re n c e s in c r i t i c a l fe e lin g s about p aren ts

8U

Table 32.
Significance of Differences Between Responses of EarlyAdolescent Boys and Girls To Parent Personality Items
V
F ath er Items______________ Scores
Use f a t h e r 's p ro p erty
35
Mate l ik e p aren t
Follows own advice*
P e rso n a lity lik e f a th e r
Like f a t h e r 's frie n d s
Honest answers
F a th e r 's education
F a th e r 's g e n e ro sity

V
Scores______________Mother Items

26
Use m other's p ro p erty
23
-23
Mate lik e p aren t
16
-------------------------- 5 p er cent le v e l s ig .
P e rso n a lity lik e mother
Like m other's frie n d s
M other's g e n e ro sity
M other's education
Follows own advice
Honest answers

*
o f d iffe re n c e s i s 13.05 w ith fo u r degrees of freedom.
- In d ic a te s d iffe re n c e s favor boys.
a re not g re a t between boys and g i r l s a t e a rly adolescence.
By middle adolescence boys more than g i r l s are c r i t i c a l of and
o fte n r e j e c t p a re n ts .
ite m s.

D ifferences are s ig n if ic a n t f o r te n of f if t e e n

When th e se x -lin k e d item s, use of f a t h e r 's and m other's prop­

e r ty , are su b tra c te d d iffe re n c e s are s t i l l s ig n if ic a n t fo r e ig h t
item s, seven of which favor th e g i r l .

Only i n th e acceptance of

cro ss-sex ed p a re n t as a model fo r the fu tu re mate are boys le s s
c r i t i c a l th an g i r l s .
The sex d iffe re n c e s a t middle adolescence are g re a te r fo r mother
th an f o r f a th e r ite m s.

On only one mother ite m ,th e item of education,

do d iffe re n c e s between o ld er boys and g i r l s f a l l below th e 5 per cent
le v e l o f s ig n ific a n c e .

What t h is means i n terms of m o th er-fath er

85

Table 33.
Significance of Differences Between Responses of Middle
Adolescent Boys and Girls To Parent Personality Items
V
Scores

F ather Items

F a th e r's g en ero sity
Like f a t h e r 's frie n d s
Use f a t h e r 's p ro p erty

25
19
-18

V
Scores
bh
37
35
25

Mother Items
Like m other's frien d s
Use m other's p ro p erty
Honest answers
M other's generosity

Follows own advice
16
16
P erso n ality lik e mother
Mate l i k e p aren t
Mate lik e parent*
-15
-15
---------------------------------------------------------------------- 5 p er cent le v e l s ig .
Honest answers
Mother’s education
F a th e r 's education
P e rso n a lity lik e f a th e r
Follows own advice
* X2 of d iffe re n c e i s 12.71 w ith four degrees of freedom.
- In d ic a te s d iffe re n c e s favor boys.
comparisons i s th a t boys and g i r l s both have c r i t i c a l a ttitu d e s
toward th e f a th e r but only th e boys are very c r i t i c a l toward th e
2/

mother— .
Summary
( l)

Farm more th an c ity adolescents show c r i t i c a l fe e lin g s toward

t h e i r p a re n ts .

D ifferences are s ig n if ic a n t fo r eleven of f i f t e e n item s,

a l l of which fav o r th e c ity group except two whose d ire c tio n could not
be determ ined.

D ifferences favoring th e c it y fa m ilie s are about

e q u ally g re a t f o r a d o le s c e n t-fa th e r and adolescent-m other r e la tio n s .
2 / See Basic Data Tables 22-29 , Appendix "C."

86

(2) Open country ad o lescents show s lig h tly le s s c r itic is m of p aren ts
th an do farm .

V illag e and frin g e groups f a l l about h a lf way between

farm and c i t y .

Small tovm ad o lescen ts show, on the average, a l i t t l e

more c r i t i c a l a t t i t u d e toward p aren ts than do farm a d o le sc e n ts.
(3) High as compared to low socio-economic adolescents are le s s
c r i t i c a l of p a re n ts .
te e n item s.

D ifferences are s ig n if ic a n t fo r eleven of f i f ­

A ll s ig n if ic a n t d iffe re n c e s fav o r th e h ig h er so cio ­

economic le v e l.

D ifferen ces are g re a te r between f a th e rs th an between

mothers a t th e two le v e ls .
(U) Older boys are more c r i t i c a l of p aren ts than are younger boys.
D ifferen ces are s ig n if ic a n t f o r nine of f if te e n item s, a l l of which
s ig n if ic a n t d iffe re n c e s fav o r th e younger boys.

The in c re a se of

c r itic is m w ith age i s about equal toward each p a re n t.

For g i r l s , th e

d iffe re n c e s are few, two s ig n if ic a n tly fav o rin g o ld er g i r l s and one
fav o rin g younger g i r l s .
(5) E arly ad o lescen t boys and g i r l s d i f f e r l i t t l e in fe e lin g s about
p a re n ts .

Of th e fo u r item s th a t d if f e r s ig n if ic a n tly , th re e favor

boys and one g i r l s .
( 6 ) By middle adolescence boys are much more c r i t i c a l of p aren ts than
are g i r l s .

D ifferen ces are s ig n if ic a n t fo r ten of f i f t e e n item s.

D ifferen ces a re found more o fte n on mother th an on f a th e r item s.

87

CHAPTER VIII

OUTSIDE OF FAMILY RELATIONSHIPS

As noted above, a constant in te ra c tio n flows between ad o lescen tp a ren t behavior in th e fam ily s o c ia l system and adolescent behavior
in oth er systems of which th e adolescent i s a member—1/.

G enerally

t h i s has been considered e s s e n tia lly a one-way road w ith the cumula­
tiv e events which occurred in the fam ily shaping th e p e rs o n a lity and
subsequent behavior of the in d iv id u a l in s o c ie ty .

This p ic tu re of

th e s o c ia liz a tio n of the in d iv id u a l has been p a r tic u la r ly u s e fu l in
"p rim itiv e" s o c ie tie s where th e fam ily i s o ften the b asis of p o l i t i ­
c a l, economic, r e lig io u s , r e c re a tio n a l, and ed u catio n al a c tiv ity as
w ell as th e fu n c tio n s i t performs in p resen t-d ay American s o c ie ty
(I9l}9).

This s o c ia liz a tio n fu n ctio n of th e fam ily reaches i t extreme

i n s o c ie tie s such as th e Semang where th e fam ily i s the only c le a r ly

/

2

d is c e rn ib le permanent s o c ia l u n it— .
D iffe rin g from th e above p a tte r n , American s o c ie ty of 19lj9 i s
one of in te r a c tio n between th e ro le s of the ad olescent plays in the
fam ily , in h is peer group, h is school, and elsew here.

His success

or f a i lu r e i n any of th e systems of which he i s a member i s r e fle c te d
in h is in te ra c tio n s w ith members of th e other systems—3 /.
1/
2/
“
3/

This i n t e r -

In tro d u c tio n , Chapter I4, and Chapter 6 .
Murdock, George P ., Our P rim itiv e Contemporaries, The Macmillan Co.,
------------------------------New York, 193L.
The g en eral fu n c tio n a l th eo ry th a t each customary r e la tio n s h ip in a
s o c ie ty i s r e la te d to a l l others i s accepted. The fu n c tio n a l theory
i s sp e lle d out by Bronislaw Malinowski in h is A S c ie n tif ic Theory
of C u ltu re, The U n iv ersity of North C arolina P ress, Chapel H ill, 19Uli.

88

a c tio n between th e ad o lescen t in th e fam ily system and in other
systems w ill be explored and t h e i r a s s o c ia tio n w ith age and sex of
th e adolescent and resid e n ce and socio-economic le v e l of th e fam ily
analyzed.
Residence D ifferen ces

E ight of fo u rte e n item s (see Table 35

f o r wording) show s ig n if ic a n t d iffe re n c e s between th e ways th a t c ity
and farm p aren ts prepare t h e i r c h ild re n to in te r a c t in s o c ia l systems
o u tsid e th e fa m ily .
Table 3h.
S ig n ifica n ce of D ifferences Between The Response of Farm
And C ity A dolescents To Outside of Family Items
V
F ather Items______________ Scores
Adol. continue education
F eelings about home
P a re n t's occupation
T reats ad o lescen t frie n d s

26
26
25
2h

V
Scores______________ Mother Items
26
26
25
2k
2ii

Adol. continue education
F eelings about home
P a re n t's occupation
T reats adolescent frie n d s
Help with homework

Help w ith homework*
19
----------------------------------------------------------------------- 5 per cen t le v e l s ig .
Sex inform ation
Sex inform ation
Agree r e lig io u s ly
Understands problems
Understands problems
Agree r e lig io u s ly
* X2 of d iffe re n c e i s 12,13 w ith four degrees of freedom.
A ll of th e s ig n if ic a n t d iffe re n c e s favor th e c ity f a m ilie s .

The

c i t y fam ily , a l e s s s e lf-c o n ta in e d u n it than the farm fam ily, i n t e r ­
a c ts in ways which b e tte r prepare the ad o lescen t to in te r a c t w ith
o u tsid e system s.

This o u tsid e in te r a c tio n in fav o rab le terms f o r the

ad o le sc e n t, in tu r n , may re in fo rc e h is fe e lin g s of s o li d a r it y w ith

89

Table 35.
O utside of Family Items
(In Same Order as Table 33)
Q uestionnaire
Number _____________________________________________________________
51

"My f a t h e r . . .encourages me to go to c o l le g e ..."

86

"My m o th er.. .encourages me to go to c o lle g e ..."

91;

"I f e e l .. .w i t h my ho m e...very p r o u d ..."

92

"As a jo b fo r me, I consider my p a r e n t's occupation ( f a th e r 's
occupation, i f boy answering; m other's occupation, i f g i r l
answ ering). . . "

UU

"My f a th e r t r e a ts my f r i e n d s .. ."

79

"My mother t r e a t s my f r i e n d s .. ."

39

"When I want help w ith my home work, ray f a th e r helps m e ..."

81

"My mother gives me inform ation about s e x ..."

75

"When I want help w ith my home work, ray mother helps

83

"I th in k my mother understands the problems of young people
of ray a g e ..."

I46

m e ..."

"My f a th e r gives rae inform ation about s e x ..."

62

"I agree with my mother on re lig io u s b e l i e f s . . . "

27

" I agree w ith ray f a th e r on r e lig io u s b e l i e f s . . . "

I48

" I th in k my f a th e r understands the problems of young people
my a g e ..."

90

p a re n ts .
D ifferences i n c ity and farm fa m ilie s are eq u ally la rg e fo r both
a d o le sc e n t-fa th e r and adolescent-m other r e la tio n s .
The " in between" groups of open country, v illa g e , tovm, and
frin g e fa m ilie s , on the b a s is of fo u rte e n item s, a l l f a l l between the
farm and th e c i t y .

Open country non-farm shows sm all d iffe re n c e s from
Table 36.

D ifferences From Farm, As Measured By V Scores on O utside Of Family
Item s, Of Open Country, V illag e, Tovm,
Fringe, and C ity A dolescents
Q uestionnaire No.
51
86
9h
92
bb
79
39
81
75
83
1*6
62
27
1*8

Open Country
6
7
0
-5
10
0
0
7
8
-9
9
0
-6
6

V illage
27.
26
7
-11
7
6
12
10
19
-6

Ik

0
0

u

Town
25
30
7
9
-5
-5
7
11
5
-6
5
5
0
-6

Fringe
13
27
11
-6
6
10
19
19
5
-6
0
0
0
0

. .

C ity
26
26
26
25
2b
2b
19
16
Ik
12
8
7
6
6

- In d ic a te s d iffe re n c e s fav o r farm ad o le sc e n ts.
Underline in d ic a te s d iffe re n c e s ig n if ic a n t a t 5 per cen t le v e l.
th e farm w ith town, f rin g e , and v illa g e showing g re a te r d iffe re n c e s
from farm and n earer to c ity in th a t o rd e r.

On a th e o r e tic a l con­

tinuum, th e v illa g e group would be a t approxim ately th e m id-point

91

between farm and c ity .
Socio-Economic D ifferences

Twelve of fo u rteen items show s ig ­

n i f ic a n t d iffe re n c e s j a l l of which favor the higher socio-economic
le v e l fa m ilie s .

The d iffe re n c e s in th e change of ro le s of f a th e r and

mother i s , perhaps, even more s ig n if ic a n t.

Not a sin g le f a th e r item

f a i l s to show d iffe re n c e s above th e fiv e per cent le v e l.

Some of

th e se d iffe re n c e s r e s u l t alm ost au to m atically from th e in crease in
socio-economic s ta t u s .

Such item s include th e d e s ire fo r the adoles­

cen t to continue h is education.

Fathers in th is group are b e tte r

educated, see i t s value, have funds fo r th e a d o le sc e n t’s education,
and have fewer c h ild re n to educate.

About th e same i s tru e of fe e lin g s

about a home and of a d e s ire to fo llo w f a t h e r 's occupation.

On o thers

Table 37.
S ig n ific a n c e of D ifferences of Responses of High and Low SocioEconomic Level A dolescents To Outside of Family Items
F ath er Items
Help w ith homework
P a re n t's occupation
F eelin g s about home
Agree r e lig io u s ly
Sex inform ation
Understands problems
Adol. continue education
T re ats ad o lescen t frie n d s

V
Scores
36
3h
30
30

V
Scores

Mother Items

3U
30

P a re n t's occupation
Feelings about home

29

T reats adolescent frie n d s

28
26
25
25

25 Adol. continue education
25 Agree r e lig io u s ly
Helps w ith homework*
17
-----------------------------------------------------------------------5 per cen t le v e l s ig .
Sex inform ation
Understands problems

* X2 of d iffe re n c e i s l£ .9 1 w ith four degrees of freedom.
A ll d iffe re n c e s fav o r higher socio-economic le v e l.

92

which involve more in te r a c tio n , however, such as g iv in g sex inform a­
tio n , th e treatm ent of a d o le s c e n t's f r ie n d s , understanding of y o u th 's
problems, and agreement on re lig io u s b e l ie f s , f a th e rs of th e higher
socio-economic le v e l average b e tte r in a s s is tin g adolescents to
s u c c e ssfu l p a r tic ip a tio n in o u tsid e a c t i v i t i e s .
Age D ifferences

Younger boys show b e tte r a d o lescen t-p aren t r e ­

la tio n s than old er boys w ith reg ard to o u tsid e of fam ily item s.
Table 3 8 .
S ig n ifican ce of D ifferen ces of Responses of E arly and Middle
Adolescent Boys To O utside of Family Items
V
F ather Items______________ Scores
Help w ith homework
Agree r e lig io u s ly

32
29

Understands problems
P a re n t's occupation
F eelings about home

21
1$
17

V
Scores____________Mother
Items
35
Help w ith homework-^/
22

Agree r e lig io u s ly

17
F eelings about home
12
Understands problems*
---------------------------------------------------------------------- 5 p e r cent le v e l s ig .
Sex inform ation
Sex inform ation
T reats ad o lescen t frie n d s
Adolescent co n t. education
T reats ad o lescen t frie n d s
Adolescent co n t. education
* X2 of d iffe re n c e i s 13*23 w ith four degrees of freedom.
A ll o f th e eeighj
ig h t s ig n if ic a n t d iffe re n c e s favor e a r ly over middle
adolescent boys:
yysW .

b/ I n many in stan c e s p a re n ts cannot a s s i s t older adolescents with
homework sin ce th ey have had le s s education than t h e i r c h ild re n .

93

Only th re e of fo u rte e n item s show s ig n if ic a n t d iffe re n c e s be­
tween e a r ly and middle ad o lescen t g i r l s , and two of th ese are of a
</
somewhat te c h n ic a l n a tu re—
This leaves the la rg e m a jo rity of items
w ith no s ig n if ic a n t d iffe re n c e s between e a rly and middle adolescent
g irls .
Table 39.
S ig n ific an c e of D ifferences Between Responses of E arly And
Middle Adolescent G irls to Outside of Family Items*
V
V
F ather Items______________ Scores Scores______________ Mother Items
Help w ith homework
32
Sex inform ation**
19
19
Help w ith homework
---------------------------------------------------------------------- 5 per cent le v e l s ig .
Agree r e lig io u s ly
Understands problems
Understands problems
Agree r e lig io u s ly
T reats ad o lescen t frie n d s
Sex inform ation
Adol. continue education
Adol. continue education
F eelings about home
F eelings about home
P a re n t’s occupation
T reats adolescent frie n d s
* S ig n ific a n t d iffe re n c e s favor younger g i r l s .
** X2 of d iffe re n c e i s 15.23 w ith four degrees of freedom.
Parents fu n c tio n about as w ell a t e a rly as a t middle adolescence
in r e la tio n s h ip s th a t a f f e c t the o u tsid e a c t i v i t i e s of g i r l s .

This

in d ic a te s t h a t th e d e te r io r a tio n of th e ad o lescen t-p aren t r e l a tio n ­
sh ip in th i s area of in te r a c tio n i s not tra c e a b le to age but to a
combination o f age and sex.

5 / See Footnote U.

9h

Sex D ifferen ces

Five of fo u rte e n o u tsid e of home item s show

s ig n if ic a n t d iffe re n c e s between e a r ly adolescent boys and g i r l s .

Two

favor boys and th re e favor g i r l s , so i t would appear t h a t n e ith e r are
s ig n if ic a n tly b e tte r prepared by p aren ts f o r outside in te r a c tio n than
th e o th e r.

One item , however, shows so much g re a te r d iffe re n c e s than

th e o th ers th a t i t w arrants s p e c ia l a tte n tio n ; th a t i s , a v a il a b il ity
of sex in fo rm atio n .
m other.

The d iffe re n c e s are in i t s a v a i l a b i l i t y from

Twice as many mothers make the inform ation always a v a ila b le ,

and th re e tim es as many volunteered inform ation to g i r l s .

Although

f o r f a th e rs th e d iffe re n c e s are n o t s ig n if ic a n t, those found 3how
Table I4O
S ig n ifican ce o f D ifferences o f Responses of E arly Adolescent
Boys and G irls To O utside of Family Items
F ath er Items

Help w ith homework
T reats ado lescen t frie n d s
Adol. continue education
F eeling about home
Agree r e lig io u s ly
Understands problems
P a re n t's occupation

V

V

Scores

Scores

Mother Items

55
19
19

Sex inform ation
Understands problems
T reats adolescent frie n d s

-17

Help w ith homework#
•5 per cent le v e l s ig .
Adol. continue education
Agree r e lig io u s ly
Feeling about home

-18

P a re n t's occupation

# X2 of d iffe re n c e i s l5 .3 il with fo u r degrees of freedom.
- In d ic a te s d iffe re n c e s fav o r boys.
t h a t fa th e rs more o ften made sex inform ation re a d ily a v a ila b le to

95

g i r l s than to boys

L To r e c a p itu la te , fiv e item s show s ig n if ic a n t

d iffe re n c e s between young bqys and g i r l s h a lf of th ese favor each
sex, so th a t a t t h i s age no d e f in ite ranking by sex i s j u s t i f i e d .
Mothers show g re a te r d iffe re n c e s between t h e i r in te ra c tio n w ith th e ir
young boys and g i r l s .
By middle adolescence, eleven of fo u rteen outside of fam ily
item s in d ic a te s ig n if ic a n t d iffe re n c e s fo r boys and g i r l s .

Eight of

th e se eleven favor th e g i r l s , w ith only encouragement of th e adoles­
cen t t o continue h is education and sex inform ation from f a th e r
fav o rin g th e boys.

Since an advanced education i s le s s of a vocaTable Ul.

S ig n ifican ce o f D ifferences Between Responses of Middle
A dolescent Boys and G irls To Outside of Family Items
F ath er Items
F eelin g s about home

V
Scores
26

T reats ad o lescen t frie n d s
20
20
P a re n t's occupation
-20
Sex inform ation
Adolescent co n t. education ■-19
Agree r e lig io u s ly
15

V
Scores
55
26
2h
22
22
20

-13
Help w ith homework
Undertands problems

Mother Items
Sex inform ation
Feelings about home
T reats adolescent frie n d s
Agree r e lig io u s ly
Understands problems
P a re n t's occupation

Adolescent co n t. education*
Help with homework

■>>
o f d iffe re n c e i s 12.13 w ith fo u r degrees of freedom.
- In d ic a te s d iffe re n c e s favor boys.
6 / See Basic Data Table 35, Appendix "C."

95

g i r l s than to boys

To r e c a p itu la te , fiv e item s show s ig n if ic a n t

d iffe re n c e s between young bqys and g i r l s h a lf of these fav o r each
sex, so th a t a t th i s age no d e f in ite ranking by sex i s j u s t i f i e d .
Mothers show g re a te r d iffe re n c e s between th e ir in te r a c tio n with t h e i r
young boys and g i r l s .
By middle adolescence, eleven of fourteen o u tsid e of fam ily
item s in d ic a te s ig n if ic a n t d iffe re n c e s fo r boys and g i r l s .

Eight of

th e se eleven fav o r th e g i r l s , w ith only encouragement of th e ad o les­
cen t t o continue h is education and sex inform ation from fa th e r
fav o rin g th e boys.

Since an advanced education i s le s s of a vocaTable Ul.

S ig n ifican ce of D ifferences Between Responses of Middle
A dolescent Boys and G irls To Outside of Family Items
V
F ath er Items_____________ Scores
F eelin g s about home

26

T reats ad o lescen t frie n d s
P a re n t's occupation
Sex inform ation
A dolescent co n t. education
Agree r e lig io u s ly

20
20
-20
-19
15

V
Scores______________Mother Items
55
Sex in fo rm atio n
26 F eelings about home
2k
Treats ado lescen t frie n d s
22
Agree r e lig io u s ly
22
Understands problems
20

P a re n t's

occupation

-13
Adolescent c o n t. education*
---------------------------------------------------------------------- 5 p er cent le v e l s i g .
Help w ith homework
Help w ith homework
Undertands problems
*
of d iffe re n c e i s 12.13 w ith four degrees o f freedom.
- In d ic a te s d iffe re n c e s favor boys.
6 / See Basic Data Table 35> Appendix "C."

96

tio n a l requirem ent f o r women than men and sin ce 80 per cent of older
g i r l s have sex inform ation a v a ila b le from mother, these item s are
p o ssib ly not to o im portant fo r g i r l s .

On the b asis of th e se fo u rteen

item s, th e middle ado lescent g i r l i s much b e tte r equipped th ru i n t e r ­
a c tio n w ith p aren ts f o r p a r tic ip a tio n i n o u tsid e groups.
Mothers show g e n e ra lly g re a te r d iffe re n c e s by sex in in te ra c tio n
w ith t h e i r c h ild re n in th i s a r e a .

These d iffe re n c e s stem from a de­

c lin e in ra p p o rt w ith boys as th ey mature but no corresponding
d e c lin e w ith o ld er g i r l s .
Summary
(1) In th e a re a of ad o lescen t-p aren t in te r a c tio n th a t i s d ir e c tly
a sso c ia te d w ith th e a d o le s c e n t's p a r tic ip a tio n in o th er s o c ia l
system s, the c i t y ad o lescents score h igher on a l l of the e ig h t item s
which show s ig n if ic a n t d iffe re n c e s from the farm group.
(2) Open country non-farm, town, v illa g e , and frin g e adolescents on
th e average o f fo u rte en item s occupy an interm ed iate area of i n t e r ­
a c tio n between farm and c i t y , varying from th e farm p a tte r n in the
above o rd e r.

Some in d iv id u a l r e la tio n s h ip s favor farm f a m ilie s .

(3) High socio-economic le v e l adolescents are s ig n if ic a n tly d if f e r e n t
from low socio-economic on twelve of fo u rteen outside of fam ily item s.
On a l l o f th e s ig n if ic a n t item s, the high socio-economic le v e l group
sco re h ig h e r.

The r o le of the f a th e r v a rie s more by socio-economic

le v e l th an does th a t of th e m other.

A ll f a th e r item s show s i g n i f i ­

can t d iffe re n c e s between th e two le v e ls .

91

(ii) E arly adolescent boys score h ig h er than middle adolescent boys
on a l l e ig h t of th e o u tsid e of fam ily item s which show s ig n if ic a n t
d iffe re n c e s f o r th e two age groups.

F athers and mothers shared about

eq u ally in th e lower sc o re s.
Few (th re e out o f fo u rte e n ) s ig n if ic a n t d iffe re n c e s a re found
between e a rly and middle ad olescent g i r l s .
(5) E arly ado lescen t boys and g i r l s score about equally high on o u t­
sid e of fam ily item s.
two favor boys.

Three s ig n if ic a n t d iffe re n c e s favor the g i r l s j

D ifferences are very g r e a tly in favor of g i r l s on

sex in s tr u c tio n .
(6) By middle adolescence boys d i f f e r s ig n if ic a n tly in t h e i r i n t e r ­
a c tio n w ith p aren ts on eleven of fo u rteen o u tsid e of home item s.
E ight of th e eleven item s fav o r th e g i r l s .

Mothers d if f e r in t h e i r

in te ra c tio n between sons and daughters more than do f a th e r s .

98

CHAPTER IX

AN OVERALL STATISTICAL VIEW BY RESIDENCE, SOCIO­
ECONOMIC LEVEL, AGE AND SEX

The preceding chapters (fo u r through e ig h t) have presented an
area by a re a a n a ly sis o f ad o lescen t-p aren t r e la tio n s by age and sex
of th e ad o lescen t and resid en ce and socio-economic le v e l of fam ily .
This chapter v d l l show th ese d iffe re n c e s in concentrated form which
w ill p re se n t more of an o v e r -a ll p ic tu re of ad o lescen t-p aren t i n t e r ­
a c tio n as i t i s a sso c ia te d w ith age, sex, resid en ce, and so cio ­
economic l e v e l.
T o tal Residence D ifferences

Of the t o t a l of s ix ty - e ig h t item s

used in th e s c a le , th ir ty - n in e (57 .a p er cen t) show d iffe re n c e s th a t
a re s ig n if ic a n t above th e 5 p e r cen t le v e l

L Of th is number,

th irty - s e v e n fav o r th e c ity and two the farm fa m ilie s .

Mean scores

Table 1*2.
S ig n ific an c e of D ifferences Between Responses of Farm and C ity
A dolescents On A ll A dolescent-Parent Items
In te ra c tio n Area

D iff. S ig .
Above 5%

Love and s e c u rity item s
S ta tu s item s
S o c ia liz a tio n item s
P arent p e rs o n a lity item s
O utside fam ily item s
T o tals

8
1*
8
11
8
39

Favoring c i t y
Favoring farm

37
2

D iff. Not
S ig n ific a n t

# S ig .
F. Items

# S ig .
M. Items

3
8
8
a
6
29

a
i
3
5 >5*
a
17.5*

a
3
5
5.5*
a
21.5*

16.5*

20.5*

•* .5 in d ic a te s a j o i n t m o th er-fath er item .
1 / These item s are l i s t e d and discussed in some d e t a i l in Chapters
IV -V III.

of the c ity and farm adolescents are 3.896 for the c ity and 3.732
f o r th e farm .

The d iffe re n c e in favor the c it y i s s ig n if ic a n t above

th e 1 p er cent le v e l (C.R. i s 3 .6 2 ).
G rea te st d iffe re n c e s between c it y and farm fa m ilie s are found
in the in tim ate love and s e c u rity item s, le s s on s ta tu s and s o c ia li­
z a tio n (See Table U3).
Table h3.
Items Showing S ig n ific a n t D ifferences Between Responses of Farm
And C ity A dolescents, Ranked According To Size of D ifferences

Score"My f a th e r shows fa v o ritism among h is c h ild r e n ..."
"My mother i s in te re s te d in what I d o . .. "
"Considering the amount of money my f a th e r has, I consider
t h a t he spends i t on me. . . "
"I consider my f a t h e r 's e d u c a tio n ..."
"When I ask my mother q u estio n s, she gives me honest
a n s w e rs ..."
" I f I were in tro u b le , I could t e l l ray m o th e r..."
"My mother shows fa v o ritism among h er c h ild r e n ..."
"When I ask my f a th e r q u estio n s, he gives me honest
answers. . . "
"My mother follow s advice which she gives to m e ..."
"My f a t h e r . . .encourages me to go to c o lle g e ..."
"My m o ther...encourages me to go to c o lle g e ..."
" I f e e l .. .w i t h myhom e...very p ro u d ..."
"When I'm grown up, I would lik e to have a p e r s o n a lity ...
e x a c tly l ik e myf a t h e r . . . "
"I consider my m other's e d u c a tio n ..."
"Considering the amount of money my mother has, I consider
th a t she spends i t on me. . . "
"As a job f o r me, I consider my p a r e n t's occupation
( f a t h e r 's occupation, i f boys answering} m other's occupa­
tio n , i f g i r l a n sw e rin g )..."
"My fa th e r follow s advice which he gives to m e ..."
"My f a th e r t r e a t s my f r i e n d s .. ."
"My mother t r e a ts my f r i e n d s .. ."
2 / For method of computing V score, see Chapter I I I .

hO
30
30
30
30
29
27

26
26
26
26
26
23
23
23
23
2It
2l»
2h

100

"When I want help with my home work, my mother helps me..."
"For fun, my mother and I do..."
"My mother thinks I have the ability to make my own
decisions..."
"My father thinks I try to do the right thing..•"
"I feel sure my father likes me..."
"My mother pries into my a
f
f
a
i
r
s
.
"My father is interested in what I do..."
"When I want help with my home work, my father helps me..."
"I consider my mother's correction of me..."
"Mf mother scolds me..."
"My mother thinks I try to do the right thing..•"
"My father lets me go out to social events by myself..."
"When ny father tells me to do something, I usually..."
"When my mother makes me do something, she tells me why it's
necessary..."
"For fun, ny father and I do..."
"When I marry, I want my mate to have a personality. ••
exaotly like ny parent (father, if a girl answering; mother,
if a boy answering)..."
"When I'm grown up, I would like to have a personality.•.
exactly like my mother..."
"My mother lets me go out to social events ty m y s e l f .
"If I had a child my age, I would teach him what is right
and wrong...exactly what my mother taught me..."
"When my father makes me do something, he tells me why it's
necessary..."

2h
22

21
20
20
20

19
19
18
18
17
17
16

16
1$
15

lU
13
13

12

Differences by residence are reflected quite evenly between
father-adolescent and mother-adolescent items. What differences that
are found suggest there is little more difference in the roles of
farm and city mothers than farm and city fathers.

City adolescents

indicate that city families are more affectionate, give more status
to adolescents, are more successful in socializing their children,
are less criticized by their children, and interact together better
to prepare the adolescent in outside of family relationships.
Open Country, Village, Town, and Fringe Groups

These families

101

have been considered "in between" farm and city in the type of ado­
lescent-parent interaction to be expected. All fall between farm
and city*

Open country and town adolescents show a small net number

of items favoring them over the farm-^

The same is shown by the

per cent falling in high, middle, and low adjustment quartiles*

Each

measure shows the same relative positions, with open country and town
Chart I.
The Per Cent Of City, Fringe, Town, Village, Open-Country, And
Farm Adolescents In High, Middle, and Low Adjustment Quartiles*
City
Low Adjustment

^

Quartiles 2
and 3

50#

High Adjustment
Quartue

31Jg

Fringe Village O.Coun.

Town

Farm

2Q%

2$%

26*

31#

52#

53#

52#

ltf#

28^

22#

22#

20#

^

^

* For method of computing adjustment scores, see Chapter III.

quite olose to farm, and village and fringe farther from farm and
nearer the city pattern.

The city has the largest percentage of its

adolescents in the highest adjustment quartile, with fringe and
village next, and town and open country close to farm.

2/ See Tables U, 12, 20, 28, 36 for a breakdown by interaction areaj
Chapter III for method of computing V scores*

Table lilt.
Differences* Between Responses Of Farm And Open Country, Village, Town And Fringe
Adolescents On All Adolescent-Rarent Items
Open Country
Interaction Area

Diff.
Favor

Diff.
Unfav.

Village
Diff.
Diff.
Unfav.
Favor

Town
Diff.
Diff.
Favor
Uhfav.

Fringe
Diff.
Diff.
Unfav.*
Favor

Love and Security
Items..........

2

0

2

0

1

0

k

0

Status Items.....

0

0

0

0

1

0

0

0

Socialization
Items..........

1

1

1

0

0

1

3

0

Parent Personality
Items.......... .

2

1

k

0

1

2

£

0

Outside Family
Items.......... .

_0

_0

_h

_0

_2

_0

Jx

_0

Totals

5

2

11

0

5

3

16

0

Net Favoring
Not Farm..........

3

11

2

16

* Only questions showing differences significant at the five percent level are listed. Non-significant
differences are also shown in Tables U, 12, 20, 28, and 36. There inclusion or exclusion does not
change the general picture shown above.

103

While no exhaustive tests of significance are made of these "in
between" areas, the three total measures summarized here and four of
the five interaction areas (love-security, status, socialisation, and
outside of family) show a consistent pattern of adjustment that aver­
ages between city and farm, with fringe and village closer to city
than town and open country*
The significance of the fact should not be overlooked that the
village and fringe are nearer the city pattern than the farm pattern
and that the town scores are closer to those of the farm than to the
city*

Future research in rural-urban comparisons should refrain from

the frequent practice of throwing all rural and all urban populations
together if they are to avoid covering up and nullifying the real
differences that exist*
Total Sooio-Economic Differences

Forty-eight (70*6 per cent)

of the sixty-eight items show differences between high and low socioeconomio level families.

(Table 1»5>)•
Table 1£.

Items Showing Significant Differences Between Responses Of High And
Low Socio-Economic Adolescents, Ranked According To
Sise of Differences-^
i

V
Score
"When I'm grown up, I would like to have a personality...
exactly like my father*.•"
Ml$r father shows favoritism among his children..."

Itl

1»0

U / V is a measure of probability. Higher scores indicate greater
probability that samples are not from the same universe*

loU

"I consider my father's education...n
"My father is interested in what I do..."
"My father respects my opinion..."
"Considering the amount of money my father has, I consider
that he spends it on me*.."
"My father follows advice which he gives to me..."
"I consider ny mother's e
d
u
c
a
t
i
o
n
.
"My mother follows advice which she gives to me..."
"When I want help with my home work, my father helps me..."
"My father thinks I try to do the right t
h
i
n
g
.
"My mother shows favoritism among her children..."
"I feel that my father approves of how I b e h a v e .
"For fun, my mother and I do..."
"As a job for me, I consider ay parent's occupation (father's
occupation, if boy answering; mother's occupation, if girl
answering)..."
"For fun, my father and I do..."
"When my father makes me do something he tells me why it's
necessary..."
"If I were in trouble, I could tell my father. ••"
"When I ask my mother questions, she gives me honest
answers..."
"I feel.•.with my home...very proud..."
"I agree with my father on religious beliefs..."
"My mother thinks I have the ability to make my own
decisions..."
"My mother treats my friends..."
"My father gives me information about sex..."
"I feel sure my father likes me..."
"My mother thinks I try to do the right thing. ••"
"If I had a child my age, I would teach him what is right
and wrong...exactly what my father taught me..."
"When I ask ny father questions, he gives me honest
answers..."
"My parents discuss family problems with me..."
"My mother respects my opinion..•"
"I think my father knows what is best for me..."
"I think ny father understands the problems of young people
of ny age..."
"My father thinks I have the ability to make my own
decisions..."
"My father...encourages me to go to college.,."
"My father treats my friends..."
"My mother...encourages me to go to college.•«"
"I agree with my mother on religious beliefs..."
"My mother is interested in what I do..."
"Considering the amount of money my mother has, I consider
that she spends it on me..."
"Of my father's friends I like..."

UO

36
36
36
36
36

36
36
35
35
35
35
3U
31
31
30

30
30
30
29
29

28
27
27
27
27

26
26
26

26
25
25
25
25
25
2k
2k
22

105

"Ify mother lets me go out to social events by myself..."
"If I ware in trouble, I could tell my mother..."
"Ify father lets me go out to social events by myself..."
"I feel that my mother approves of how I behave..."
"I consider my mother's correction of me..."
"I consider ny father's punishment of me..."
"Ify mother lets me use her personal p r o p e r t y

21

.

18
16
16
16
1U
13

All differences favor the high socio-economic level families.
Mean scores on all items are higher for the high socio-economic group.
The mean for the high group is 3*959, for the low group 3*658.

The

difference is highly significant (C.R. 7*02).
Table 1*6.
Significance of Differences Between Responses of High and Low SocioEconomic Level Adolescents On All Adolescent-Parent Items

Interaction Area

Diff.Sig.
Above 5%

Love & Security Items
Status Items
Socialization Items
Parent Personality It.
Outside Family Items

9
9

7
11
12
U8

Favoring High SocioEconomic

Diff.Not
Signif.

2

# Father
Items Sig.

# Mother
Items Sig.

U
2

5
U.5*
5
6
7

U
U.5*
2
.5
5

20

27.5*

20.5*

27.5*

20.5*

3
9

U8

■* .5 indicates joint mother-father item*

In all areas of interaction except status relationships the father
role changes more by socio-economic level than that of the mother.

The

higher socio-economic level family ranks higher in all areas: love and
security, status, socialization, feelings about parents personality,

106

and outside of home Items.
Total Age Differences

Significant differences have been found

between early and middle adolescent boys on forty-two (61.8 per cent)
of the sixty-eight items.

(Table 1*7) Most of the test items (36 out

of 1*2 ) indicate better adjustment for the younger boys.
Table 1*7.
Items Showing Significant* Differences Between Responses Of Early
And Middle Adolescent Boys To All Adolescent-Parent Items
V
Scores
"For fun, my father and I do...tt
’’Far fun, my mother and I do..."
"I think my mother knows what is best for me...n
"Of my mother's friends I like..."
"My father lets me go out to social events by nyself...n
"My mother lets me go out to social events by nyself..."
"When I want help with my home work, ny mother helps me..."
"When I want help with my home work, my father helps me..."
"I think ny father knows w hat is best for me..."
"My mother shows favoritism among her children..."
"If I had a child ny age, I would teach him what is right
and wrong ...exactly what my father taught me..."
"I consider my father's punishment of me..."
"If I had a child my age, I would teach him what is right
and wrong.•.exactly what my mother taught me..."
"Of ny father's friends I like..."
"I agree with ny father on religious beliefs.••"
"I consider ny mother's correction of me..."
"My mother nags at me..."
"My father is interested in what I do..."
"My parents let me wear whatever I wantto..."
"Considering the amount of money ny father has, I consider
that he spends it on me..."
"My father nags at me..."
"When I'm grown up, I would like to have a personality...
exactly like ny father..."
"My mother pries into my affairs.••"
"My father scolds me..."

1*6
1*0
1*0
39

36
35
35
32
31

30
30
30

30
29
29
28
27
26
26

26
25
25
2l*
21*

107

"Wien I marry, I want my mate to have a personality...exactly
like my parent (...mother, if a boy answering)..."
"I agree with my mother on religious beliefs..."
"I think my father understands the problems of young people
of ny age..."
"Ify father shows favoritism among his children..."
"Ity father thinks I have the ability to make ray own
decisions..."
"When I ask my mother questions, she gives me honest
answers..."
"Ify father follows advice which he gives to me..."
"As a job for me, I consider my parent's occupation
(father's occupation, if boy answering...)..."
"I feel that my mother approves of how I behave..."
"When I'm grown up, I would like to have a personality...
exactly like my mother..."
"I feel*..with my home...very proud..."
"Ify father thinks I try to do the right thing..."
"When my father makes me do something, he tells me why
it's necessary..."
"If I were in trouble, I could tell my mother..."
"I consider my mother's education..."
"Ify mother thinks I try to do the right thing..."
"When my father tells me to do something, I usually..."
"I feel sure my mother likes me..."
"I think my mother understands the problems of young people
of my age..."

23
22

21
20
20
20
15
15
18
17
17
1$
1$
1U
lU
13
13
12

12

* Above five per cent level of significance.

Differences are particularly great on the socialization items,
indicating a much greater amount of friction between parent and the
older adolescent connected with the process of control exercised by
the parent.

This increased friction is particularly apparent in the

change in relationships to the father in this three year periodj all
items show significant differences between father-young adolescent
and father-middle adolescent relations.

108

Table 1|8.
Significance of Differences Between Responses of Early and Middle
Adolescent Boys on a l l Adolescent-Parent Items

Interaction Area
Love and Security Items
Status Items
Socialization Items
Parent Personality Items
Outside Family Items
Total
Favoring Younger Boys
Favoring Older Boys

Diff. Sig.
Above 5%

Diff. Not # Mother
Signif. It. Sig.

6
6
13
8

5
6
3
6
6

h2

26

9

3
3.5*
5
5
_3.5*
20

# Father
It. Sig.

3
2.5*
8
U
U.5*
22

36
6

* Indicates joint mother-father items*

The few items which show the parent-middle adolescent relation­
ship in a more favorable view are concentrated in the status rela­
tionships and in the feeling that parents play favorites among their
children.

Probably little importance may be attached to the status

items because they indicate behavior divorced from expectation*

For

example, the question of how often the adolescent is allowed to go
to social events by himself must be placed in an age context, at
least, before it becomes significant.
For girls, the three years difference in age brings no such
differences.

Only nineteen of sixty-eight items show significant

differences and of these nineteen significant differences, about half
favor the older girls and half the younger girls. (Table U9).

109

Table 1)9.
Items Showing Significant* Differences Between Responses of Early
And Middle Adolescent Girls To All Adolescent-Parent Items
V
Scores
"Ify parents let me wear whatever I want to..."
"My father thinks I have the ability to make my own
decisions..."
"My mother thinks 1 have the ability to make my own
decisions...”
"My mother shows favoritism among her children...”
"For fun, my father and I do...”
"My mother lets me vise her personal property...”
"When I want help with my home work, my father helps me...”
"My father shows favoritism among his children...”
"I think mF father knows what is best for me...”
"My mother lets me go out to social events by myself..."
"My father lets me go out to social events by myself...”
"My father scolds me...”
"If I had a child my age, I would teach him what is right
and wrong ...exactly what my mother taught me...”
"My father gives me information about sex...”
"When I want help with ny home work, my mother helps me..."
"My father lets me use his personal property...”
"When I'm grown up, I would like to have a personality like
my father..."
"If I were in trouble, I could tell my mother..."
"I think ny mother knows what is best for me...”
* Above five per cent level significance

35

35
35
32
32

32
32
31

31
30
28
21
21
19
19

16
16
15
15

110

Table 50.
Significance Of Differences Between Responses Of Early and Middle
Adolescent Girls On A ll Adolescent-Parent Items

Interaction Area

Diff. Sig.
Above $%

Diff. Not.
Signif.

3

8

Love and Security Items
Status Items
Socialization Items
Parent Personality Items
Outside Family
Totals
Favoring Younger Oirls
Favoring Older CHrls

5
5
3
_3
2$

7

11
12
11
1*9

8
11

# Father
Items Sig.

# Mother
Items Sig,

1
2.5*

2
2.5*
2

3

2
2
io .5 *
5

1
1
“ 8.5*
3

# Indicates joint mother-father item.

The totals suggest that the father's role changes a little more
by age of daughter than does the mother's role*

Particularly, older

girls are more critical of fathers' personality.
The mean score on all items for the younger girls is 3*835 and
for older girls is 3*838.

The difference is entirely non-significant

(C.R. is .07).
To compare age differences for bcyB and for girls, it is evident
that three years introduces very great differences in boys adjustment
to parents but does not show significant consistent differences for
girls*
Total Sex Differences

At early adolescence, differences in boys

and girls adjustment to parents are quite small.

Only twenty (29.U

per cent) of sixty-eight items show significant differences between

I ll

boys and girls, favoring each equally.
Table 51.
Items Showing Significant Differences Between Responses of EarlyAdolescent Boys and Girls To All Adolescent-Parent Items
V
Scores
"Ify mother gives me information about sex..."
"%■ mother lets
mego out to social events by myself. . . 11
"Ify father lets meuse his personalproperty..."
"For fun, ny mother and I do..."
"If I were in trouble, I could tell my mother..."
"ify- father letsme go out to social events by myself..."
"Ify- mother lets me use her personal property..."
"When I marry, I want my mate to have a personality...
exactly like my parent (father, if a girl answeringj
mother, if a boy answering)..."
"For fun, ny father and I do..."
"Ity- parents let me wear whatever I want to..."
"I think ny mother understands the problems of young people
of my age..."
nUy mother treats my friends..."
"If I were in trouble, I could tell ny father..."
"When I want help with ny
homework,my father helpsme..."
"When I want help with my
homework,my mother helpsme..."
■ify- father follows advice which he gives to me..."
"l$y father scolds me..."
"I consider my father's punishment of me..."
"If I had a child ny age, I would teach him what is right
and wrong ...exactly what ny father taught me..."

55
35
35
31
30

28
26
23
22
20

19
19
18
18
17

16
15
Ill

12

Of these twenty items, half favor girls and half boys, which
indicates that although there are sane differences on individual items,
when the whole picture is considered, boys and girls are about equally
adjusted.

The mean score on all items for young boys is 3*832 and

3.838 for girls; the difference is entirely non-significant (C.R. is

.16 ).

112

Table 52.
Significance of Differences Between Responses of Early Adolescent
Boys And G irls On A ll Adolescent-Parent Items
Diff. Sig.
Above 5%

Interaction Area
Love and Security Items
Status Items
Socialization Items
Parent Personality Items
Outside Family Items

Diff.Not
Signif.

3
3
$
h

§ Mother
Items Sig,

8

2

1

9

1.5*
h
2.5*
l

1.5*
l
1.5*
k

11
11
9

20
10
10

Totals
Favoring Girls
Favoring Boys

# Father
Items Sig.

rnrnmm

■M M

U8

11
3

—

9
7

* .5 Indicates joint mother-father item.

Fathers show a few more significant differences in relations
between sons and daughters than do mothers, and a rather strong sex
link is observable in fathers being closer to sons than to daughters
and mothers closer to daughters than to sons.

3y middle adolescence the picture of no significant sex differ­
ences has changed completely and the largest differences between any
two groups are found.

Fifty of the sixty-eight items show signifi­

cant differences, of which forty-three favor girls, between middle
adolescent boys and girls.

Differences are greatest on the love-

security items but very large in status, socialization, parent per­
sonality, and outside of family relationships.
The mean score on all items of the middle adolescent boys is

3 , 69k and for girls, 3 .835; a difference significant above the one

113

Table 53.
Items Shoving Significant Differences Between Responses of Middle
Adolescent Boys and Girls To A ll Adolescent-Parent Items
V
Scores
"For fun, my mother and I do..."
"My mother gives me information aboutsex...”
"Of my mother’s friends I like*..”
"My mother lets me go out
to socialeventsby myself...”
"My father nags at me*.*”
"If I -were in trouble, I could tell ny father..."
"My mother lets me use her personal property*.•"
"When I ask ny mother questions, she gives me honest answers..."
"My mother is interested in what I do...”
"I feel sure my mother likes me..."
"My father lets me go out to socialevents by myself...”
"If I were in trouble, I could tell my mother..."
"I feel that my father approves of how I behave..."
"I feel sure that my father likes me...”
"I think my mother knows what is best for me..."
"I feel that my mother approves of how I behave..."
"When my father tells me to do something, I usually...”
"I feel...with my home...very proud..."
"My mother shows favoritism among her children..."
"Considering the amount of money my father has, I consider
that he spends it on me..."
"Considering the amount of money my mother has, I consider
that she spends it on me...”
"My father shows favoritism among his children..."
"My mother respects my opinion..."
"My mother treats my friends...”
"When my mother tells me to do something, I usually...”
"I agree with my mother on religious beliefs..."
"I think my mother understands the problems of young people
of my age..."
"My father is interested in what I do..."
"My mother pries into my affairs..."
"I consider my father's punishment of me..."
"My father thinks I try to do the right thing..."
"My father pries into my affairs..."
"My parents let me wear whatever I want to..."
"I think my father knows what is best for me..."
"My father treats my friends..."
"As a job for me, I consider my parent's occupation (father's
occupation, if boy answering; mother's occupation, if girl
answering)...”

55
55
UU
ijO
UO
37
37
35
3U
33

32
30
30
28
27
26
26
26
25
25
25
2k
2h
2k
22
22

22
21

21
21

20
20
20

20
20
20

nu

"My father gives me information about sex.* .11
"Of ray father's friends I like..."
"My father...encourages me to go to college..."
"My mother thinks I try to do the right thing..."
"My father respects my opinion..."
"I consider my mother's correction of me..."
"My father lets me use his personal property..."
n<Hhen ny mother makes me do something, she tells me why
it's necessary..."
"When I'm grown up, I would like to have a personality...
exactly like my mother..."
"My mother follows advice which she gives to me..."
"My mother nags at me..."
"When I marry, I want my mate to have a personality...
exactly like ny parent( father, if a girl answering;
mother, if a boy answering)..."
"I agree with ny father on religious beliefs..."
"My mother.•.encourages me to go to college..."

20
1$

19
17
17
17
17
16
16
16
15
15
15
13

per cent level (C.R. is 3»9k)»
There are more differences between mothers relationships to her
sons and daughters than between fathers and sons and daughters.

The

Table 5U.
Significance of Differences Between Responses of Middle
Adolescent Boys and Girls On All Adolescent-Parent Items

Interaction Area
Love and Security Items
Status Items
Socialization Items
Parent Personality Items
Outside Family Items

Diff.Sig.
Above 5%

Diff.Not
Signif.

10

1

9

3
6

10
10
11
50
1*3

5
J_

18
Totals
Favoring Girls
Favoring Boys
7
* .5 Indicates joint mother-father item.

# Father
Items Sig.

5
U.5*
U
3.5*
_5
22
17.5*

# Mother
Items Sig

5
U.5*
6
6.5*
6
28
25.5*

110

greater differences for mothers stem from their continued close re­
lationship to daughters but changed relationship to sons*

Differ­

ences for fathers are large, but fathers comparatively are not close
to either sex at middle adolescence and therefore differences between
father-son and father-daughter relationships are less.
Comparison of Differences Among Groups

Four of the six groups

of adolescents compared show significantly differing adjustments to
parents*

The greatest differences are found between sexes at the

middle adolescent period.

Differences favor the girls.

Second

highest differences are between socio-economic levels. Differences
favor the higher socio-economic level.

Third highest differences are

found between farm and city adolescents.

Differences favor the city.

Fourth highest differences are found between early and middle adoles­
cent boys.

No differences were found between the adjustment to

parents of early adolescent boys and girls or differences between
early and middle adolescent girls.

116

CHAPTER X

THE INTER-RELATION OF BACKGROUND FACTORS

In the preceding chapters the importance of sex, age, socio­
economic level and residence as factors associated with adolescentparent adjustment has been demonstrated*

In this chapter a number of

other background faotors will be related to adolescent-parent adjust­
ment and an exploration of the correlation between the background
items undertaken*
There are at least two methods of analysis of background factors*
For example, a farm sample can be abstracted to refer to a residence
or occupation only or it can be considered as a group which typically
has not only residence but also a complex of educational, inoome,
religious, mother employment, organizational, and size of family dif­
ferences, to name a partial list.

The writer has indicated his pref­

erence for the latter method by employing it throughout the body of
the study; it is believed, however, that seme additional light may be
thrown on the social environment in which the adolescent-parent inter­
action occurs by analyzing sane of the components of the social back­
ground*
As a starting point, since it has been shown that both residence
and socio-economic level are importantly associated with adolescentparent adjustment, the question is posed:

Are these two independent

variables or are they inter-related? The evidence suggests that there
is some relationship.

There is a rank order correlation of ,k0> between

117

the items significantly different for city and for high socio-economic
level.

A further indication is found in the composition of the dif­

ferent socio-economic levels.
Table 55.
Composition of High and Low Socio-Economic Groups
In The Sample

___________ Farm

Open Country

V illag e

Town

Fringe

C ity

U9

h5

hi

71

High S-E

1(9

35

Low S-E

76_______ 19_________ 30_______13______ 20______ 8

The farm families fall in the lowest socio-economic group to a
disproportionate extent, which poses the question:

Do the two vari­

ables have any association with adjustment independent of each other?
(1) If socio-economic level is held constant, do farm and city
families still vary?
(2) Is there a variation by socio-economic level exclusive of residence?
Table 56.
Comparison of Farm and City Adolescent-Parent Adjustment
With Socio-Economic Level Constant

_____
Low Quartile

High
Med. and Low
Soclo-Econ. Level
Socio-Econ. Level
City
Farm_____________ City
Farm
8

6

31

123

2 and 3 Q

2U

25

76

170

High Q

28

18

37

67

X2 is 2.29
X2 is 10.9lj with four degrees of freedom.

X2 is 8.65
P<.05.

118

With socio-economic status held constant, residence differences
are still significant, but they decline from the one per cent level
to the five per cent level of significance.

Note that most of the

farm-oity differences are at the medium and loir socio-economic levels.
It may be conoluded, therefore, that residence is correlated with
socio-economic level, but possesses significant differences not ex­
plained by it*
Table 57.
Comparison of High, Medium, and Loir Socio-Economic Level AdolescentParent Adjustment With Residence Constant
Adjust.
Level

__________
High
Medium

Lowest
Quartile..
6(12*)
Middle
Quartiles*. 25(512)
Highest
Quartiles.. 18(372)

City
Med./Low

Loir

High

87(302)

36(1*82)

8(112)

31(212)

Ui7(502)

33(1*2)

3U(1»92)

76(532)

61(202)

6(82)

28(1(02)

37(262)

X2 is 2U.98

X2 is 6,.56

Total X2 is 31.5U with six degrees of freedom.

P*Zv001

Socio-economic d iffe re n c e s are very g re a t w ith resid en ce held
constant, particularly among the farm families. It is hardly necessary
o
to r e f e r to th e X above. Socio-economic le v e l i s , th e n , a v a ria b le

i n a d d itio n t o re sid e n c e , and, ap p aren tly q u ite independent o f i t , i n
t h a t d iffe re n c e s do not dim inish g r e a tly when resid en ce i s h eld con­
s ta n t.

119

Size of Family and Adoleacent— Parent Adjustment. A great deal
has been written about the evils of small families, but the objective
research on the subject is less impressive.

Present data indicate,

moreover, that insofar as adolescent-parent relations are concerned
the small family scores highest.

Differences are very great and con-

Table 58.
Comparison Of Adjustment Scores Of Adolescents In Small
And Large Families
Low
Quartile

Middle
Quartiles

High
Quartile

No Sibling

21

66

5U

1 Sibling

52

139

89

2, 3, k Sib.

169

339

157

5 + Sib.

121

175

58

X2 is U8.66 with six degrees of freedom.

P

.001

sistent.

As the family decreases in size the adolescent-parent score

goes up.

However, it is usually assumed that there is a correlation

between size of family and socio-economic level.

The correlation is

so evident as to render any test of it superfluous-^
Since socio-economic level has previously been shown in this paper
to be olosely associated with parent-adolescent adjustment, conceivably
1/ Family size should not be overlooked in the future as a valuable
statistical indicator of socio-economic level.

120

Table 59.
Correlation Of Socio-Economic Level And Size of Family

1
2
3t k
5 «6
6 +

High
Soc-Ec Level

Medium
Soc-Ec Level

69
ll£
83
1
0

69
137
396
239
121

Child
C hildren
C hildren
C hildren
C hildren

Low
Soc-Ec Level
1
0
k
38
121

it could explain the association between size of family and adoles­
cent-parent adjustment.

To test this possibility, small and large

families will be compared at the same socio-economic level.
Table 60.
Comparison Of Adolescent-Parent Adjustment In Small and Large
Families With Socio-Economic Level Held Constant
High Soo-Ec Level
2
1
h 1+
Child Child. Child.
Low Q
2, 3 Q
High Q

9
23
27

2k
69

1(9

12
36
36

Med. & Low Soc-Ec Level
1
2
3-7
7
Child Child. Child. Child.
12
33
26

X2 is 2.81
X2 is 26.37 with ten degrees of freedom.

27
69
ia

179
3U8
Ikh

80
135
37

X2 is 23.56
P < .01

When socio-economic level is held constant differences between
small and large families are still significant.

The differences are

in the middle and low socio-economic levels rather than the upper where

121

there are only three families with more than three children.
The question— — is size of family a variable in addition to socio­
economic status?— *'may be answered that it is except for the highest
socio-economic level where there isn't any considerable percentage of
large-sized families and the question becomes academic.
To recapitulate, adolescents are better adjusted to parents in
small families than in large families.

This remains true when socio­

economic level is held constant except at the highest socio-economic
level where there are too few large families to make comparisons.
Working Mothers

The working mother has usually been considered

a handicap to the unity and general success of the family.

Less has

been written, however, of the role of the part-time employed mother.
It might be expected that if working full-time outside of the home is
Table 61.
Comparison of Adolescent-Parent Adjustment In Homes Where
Mothers Work Full-Time, Part-Time, Or Not At All
Works Outside Home
Full-time
Part-time
Not at all

Low Q

2 &3 Q

58 (29%)
33 (18%)
26h (25%)

102 (52%)
93 (51%)
515 (50%)

X^ is 10.81 with four degrees of freedom.

High Q
38 (19*)
57 (31*)
25U (25%)
.05

incompatible with family harmony and happiness, then a part-time Job
would mitigate against best parent-child relations, also.

To test

this expectation, adolescent-parent adjustment was computed for full-

122

time working mothers, part-time, and non-working mothers*
Since the families in which mothers work part-time (1-32 hour
per week) show better adolescent-parent relations, on the average,
than either families where the mother works full-time or not at all,
the supposition that working outside of the home makes for poorer
adolescent-parent relations is incorrect.

The question that is next

posed is— is this difference truly associated with part-time work
or do these families fall mostly within the higher socio-economic
level and therefore really a product of socio-economic level?
Table 62.
Differences In Adolescent-Parent Adjustment In Families Where
Mothers Work Full-Time, Part-Time, Or Not At All,
With Socio-Economic Level Held Constant
High Soc-Ec
Working
Not Work.
Low Q
2& 3 Q
High Q

8
22
15

Medium Soc-Ec
Full-time
Part-time

39
117
95

X2 approx. zero
Full-time
Low Q
2 Q
3 High Q

10
17
12

10
5U
37

1*3
69
32

None
176
355
11*9

X2 is 35-35
Low Socio-Ec
Part-time
5
9
8

None
U8
28
26

X2 is 8.32
X2 is 27*97 with ten degrees of freedom.

P^£ .01.

The analysis by socio-economic level reveals that the most sig-

123

nificant differences are in the middle socio-economic group.

This

suggests that at that particular level mothers need something besides
their children upon which to concentrate part of their attention.
The situation may include an economio component but it is not dominant;
otherwise families with fully employed mothers would rank higher than
those in which the mother is employed part-time.
To recapitulate, part-time employment outside of the home is
definitely associated with good adolescent-parent adjustment.
Broken Homes and Adolescent-Parent Relations

Broken homes are

among the most tangible family data and have often served as con­
venient hooks on which to hang not only difficulties within the family
but also most of the disliked characteristics of society.

Three ques­

tions are here asked concerning adolescent-parent adjustment and
broken homes.

(1) Do unbroken homes show signifioantly better adoles­

cent-parent adjustment than do broken homes?

(2) are the differences

Table 63.

D ifferen ces In A dolescent-P arent Adjustment In Broken
And Unbroken Homes

Unbroken
Broken
X2 is 12.7U.

Low Q

2 & 3 Q

High Q

267
90

577
133

303
53

P^.01

due primarily to the broken aspect of the heme or to the lower socioeoonomic level of broken homes?

(3) Are there significant differences

between homes broken in differing ways?

12b

There a re r e a l d iffe re n c e s In adjustm ent to p aren ts in broken
and unbroken homes, w ith , as expected, th e unbroken homes c o n trib u tin g
h ig h er average sc o re s, but are th e d iffe re n c e s asso ciated w ith the
broken home or i t s socio-economic le v e l?
Table 6b.
D ifferen ces Between Adjustment Scores Of A dolescents In Broken
And Unbroken Homes With Socio-Economic Level Constant

Low Q
Unbroken
Broken

U6
5

High Soc-Ec
High Q
2 & 3 Q

Low Q

106
7

130
18

5b
9

X2 is 2.51

X2 is 2.50

Middle
Low Q
Unbroken
"Mother” only
M-Step Father
Others

187
12
23
22

Low Soc-Ec
High Q
2& 3 Q
60
17
20
3

Soc-Ec
Level
2 & 3 Q
bio
27
31
23

High Q
191
17
10
8

X2 is 15.8b
X

is 20.85 w ith ten degrees of freedom.

P ^ .05

D ifferen ces between ad o lescen t-p aren t adjustm ent i n broken and
unbroken homes a re found to be s ig n if ic a n t w ith socio-economic le v e l
h e ld c o n sta n t.

The s ig n if ic a n t d iffe re n c e s come from the middle socio­

economic group.
Not a l l types o f broken homes a re asso ciated s im ila rly w ith ado­
le s c e n t-p a re n t adjustm ent.

The adolescents who liv e w ith a mother or

mother s u b s titu te show h ig h er average scores th an th o se liv in g w ith

125

both original parents while other broken homes show lower average
scores than unbroken homes.
Farm and City Adoles cent-Parent Adjustment §jr Age and Sex
Adolescent-parent interaction has been analyzed by residence and by
age and sex.

Does that mean that what is true for all adolescents,

for example, is equally true for farm?

From previous analysis, it

would be expected that each age-sex farm group would average lower on
a quartile group than the average of all adolescents of the same agesex group, and each city group somewhat higher.
Table 65.
Farm And City Adolescent-Parent Adjustment By Age And Sex
Farm
Older
Younger
Older
Younger
Adj. Level
Girls
Boys
Boys
Girls
Low Q
2 & 3 Q
High Q

h2 (39%)

20 (20#)

36 (la#)

h9 (1*6#)
16 (15%)

52 (51#)
30 (29#)

38 (10i#)
13 (15#)

28 (2U#)
62 (5U#)
25 (22#)

h ( 9%)
28 (59%)
15 (32#)

8 (lii#)
31 (56#)
17 (30#)

City
Low Q
2& 3 Q
High Q

10 (20#)
22 (h5%)
17 (35#)

5 (11#)
26 (56#)
15 (33#)

In general, the expectations are fulfilled, but there appears to
be a deviation in degree.

Young adolescent boys as a group have

about an average adjustment as compared with other age-sex groups.
It would be anticipated that the farm boys would average below the
entire distribution, and city boys would be expected to average higher

126

th an th e e n tir e d istrib u tio n } however, th e s iz e of the d iffe re n c e s
was n o t a n tic ip a te d *
A dolescent-P arent Adjustment At Socio-Economic Levels By Age
And Sex

The combination of th e th re e v a ria b le s produces d is tr ib u ­

tio n s about as should be a n tic ip a te d from previous a n a ly s is .

At th e

h ig h e st socio-economic le v e l, a l l age and sex groups sco re h ig h er,
on th e average, th an th e e n tir e d is tr ib u tio n of scores; a t the middle
socio-economic le v e l, o ld er boys sco re, on th e average, much lower
and o ld e r g i r l s somewhat h igher th an the e n tir e d is tr ib u tio n .

At th e

low est socio-economic le v e l, a l l age-sex groups score below th e e n tir e
d is tr ib u tio n , w ith o ld e r boys sco rin g lo w e st.

The younger g i r l s a lso

score v e ry low, b ut th e number i s so sm all i n those c e l ls th a t t h i s
may be chance.

Table 66.
A dolescent-Parent Adjustment At Socio-Economic Levels By Age And Sex

Older
Boys
Lour Q
2& 3 Q
High Q

9
36
16

High Soc-Ec Level
Older
Younger
G irls
Boys
lU
25
33

Younger
G irls

10

11

37
27

39
31

Middle Soc-Ec Level
Older
Older
Younger Younger
Boys
G irls
Boys
Q irls
73
112
U2

57
133
71

55
108
51

Low Soc-Ec Level
Older
Boys
Low Q
2& 3 Q
High Q

11

Hi
2

Older
G irls
11
20
8

Younger
Boys
20
2U
7

Younger
G irls
21
16
5

56
ll|2
61

128

SfflSarZ
(1) When residence is held constant, socio-economic levels still show
very great differences.

High socio-economic level families show the

highest average scores.

The differences are greater among farm

families hy socio-economic level than among city families.

High socio­

economic farm families average almost as high as high city families;
the differences come at the middle and low socio-economic level.
(2) When socio-economic level is held constant, although the differ­
ences are diminished, farm and city still show differences signifi­
cant above the five per cent level.
(3) Size of family is significantly associated with adolescent-parent
adjustment.

Small families score higher, on the average, than large

families. Although size of family is closely associated with socio­
economic level, it remains an important variable when socio-economic
level is held constant.
(li) Families in which mothers work part-time score higher, on the
average, than either those in which mothers work full-time or not at
all.

Differences are increased when socio-economic level is held con­

stant.
(5) Unbroken homes score higher on adolescent-parent relations than do
broken homes.

Significant differences remain with socio-economic level

held constant; the differences are concentrated in the middle socio­
economic group.

129

CHAPTER XI

CONCLUSIONS

Since chapter summaries have been presented and sinoe Chapter
VIII summarizes differences by age* sex, residence, and socio-economic
level, no summary is included here.

Conclusions from this study are

of two types: specific conclusions which deal directly with the
hypotheses stated in Chapter III and general conclusions which relate
the findings to other aspects of the social environment*
Specific Conclusions
The hypotheses tested in this study are listed below and the
evidence of proof or disproof presented (1) "Adjustment of adoles­
cents to parents as measured by adolescent responses will show higher
adjustment scores for cities than for farms."
supported*
3*732.

The hypothesis is

The mean score for the city is 3*896 and for the farm

The difference is more than three times that of the standard

deviation (C*R. is 3*62).

A second substantiation is provided in the

distribution of the farm and city adolescents into high* middle
(second and third)* and low quartiles*

Differences significant above

the one per cent level are found with the city families falling into
the higher quartiles.

Since the farm sample possessed a higher than

randomly expected number of low socio-economic families* the
hypothesis that the differences could be explained by socio-economic
level was tested.

With socio-economic level held constant quartile

differences although diminished were still found significant above

130

the five per cent level.

Of the thirty-nine individual items shoving

significant differences only two favored the farm families.

The

hypothesis is* then, supported by significant differences in mean
scores, in quartile distribution, and differences remaining when socio­
economic level is held constant.
(2) hypothesis two is stated "That a continuous diminution in
average scores can be distinguished from cities through fringe, small
towns, village, and rural non-farm (non-village,)to farm."
hypothesis is not supported as stated.

The

A relatively stable order

exists, but it is not an urban-rural continuum by size of town.

The

city shows highest scores with fringe and village next highest and
closer to the city than to the farm.
to the farm.

Conclusion:

Town and open country are closer

A continuum of adolescent-parent relation­

ships which decline in scores with increase rurality does not exist.
Some other factor enters the picture to make small town families less
well adjusted than village families in adolescent-parent relations.
It has been established, however, that fringe, town, village, and open
country adolescents do occupy an intermediate position between city
and farm in adolescent-parent adjustment.

(3) Hypothesis th re e s ta t e s "That th e adjustm ent o f adolescents to
p a re n ts as measured by ad o lescen t responses w ill show h ig h er adjustm ent
sco res f o r high socio-economic th an f o r low socio-economic le v e l
f a m ilie s ."

The hypothesis i s supported.

The mean score f o r th e high

socio-econom ic le v e l i s 3*959* f o r th e low socio-economic le v e l 3*658.

131

The d iffe re n c e i s over seven tim es th e standard d e v ia tio n (C.R. i s
7*02).

When resid en ce i s h eld co n stan t, d iffe re n c e s remain extrem ely

s ig n if ic a n t (P i s le s s th an .0 0 1 ).

A ll of th e f o rty - e ig h t in d iv id u a l

item s t h a t showed s ig n if ic a n t d iffe re n c e s favored th e higher so cio ­
economic le v e l f a m ilie s .

Conclusion:

There i s a h ig h ly s ig n if ic a n t

d iffe re n c e between ad o lescen t p a re n t adjustm ent a t d if f e r e n t so cio ­
economic l e v e l s .

The d iffe re n c e s favor th e h igher le v e l f a m ilie s .

(U) H ypothesis fo u r s ta te s nThat th e adjustm ent o f adolescents
to p a re n ts as measured by ad o lescen t responses w ill show h ig h er ad­
justm ent scores f o r g i r l s th a n f o r boys.
p a r t i a l l y supported as s ta t e d .

The hypothesis only

G irls and boys are about eq u a lly w ell

ad ju ste d a t e a r ly adolescence (modal age 1 3 .5 y e a rs ), but a t middle
adolescence (modal age 16.5) g i r l s score s ig n if ic a n tly higher than
boys.

Conclusion:

Hiddle ad o lescen t g i r l s a re s ig n if ic a n tly b e tte r

a d ju ste d t o p a re n ts th an boys o f th e same age, but e a r ly ad olescent
boys and g i r l s a re about e q u a lly w ell a d ju ste d .
(5) Hypothesis f iv e s ta te s "That th e adjustm ent of adolescents

to p a re n ts as measured by ad o lescen t responses w i ll show h ig h er ad­
justm ent sco res f o r young adolescents (modal age 13.5 y ears) th a n f o r
middle ad o lescen ts (modal age 16.5 y e a rs )."
supported as s ta t e d .

The hypothesis i s not

Advanced age i s s ig n if ic a n tly a sso c ia te d w ith

poorer adjustm ent i n boys b u t n o t in g i r l s .

132

Implications
A number of specific conclusions have been reached earlier con­
cerning adolescent-parent adjustment.

The question here posed is how

do these facts fit into current American society?
Soclo-Cultural Change

American society, particularly in the

last fifty years, has been changing with increased rapidity.

Important

in this change has been the shift from home production to production
remote from the home, primary to secondary group, changed from “work
values” to display values, autocratic and traditional family inter­
action to democratic interaction, work-centered families to affectioncentered families. As Davis is quoted earlier, the change has been so
rapid that parents and children do not and have not had the same ex­
periences-^ Why are farm families having a harder adjustment than
city parents?

Farm families are going through the process of socio­

cultural change today that city parents went through a generation or
two a g o T h e same is true of the high and low socio-economic levels.
High status in American society goes to the specialist, the welleducated, and the man with investment capital, then tends to run in
families, so that most often the high socio-economic level family has
made the transformation a generation before that of the lower socio-

1/ Davis, Kingsley, "The Sociology of Parent-Child Conflict,"
American Sociological Review, Vol. V (191*0), pp. 523-35.
2/ Sewell finds that interaction in the farm family of today is
mostly democratic. Sewell, William H., "What's Happening to the
Farm Family," a paper read at Farm Week at Ohio State University,
March, l$ h $ .

133

economic l e v e l .

R ecently another f a c to r haa been added, th a t of

s c ie n ti f i c study o f fam ily r e la tio n s h ip s , which has made i t s e l f f e l t
in upper socio-economic fa m ilie s and i n th e c i t i e s .

Again, wmnn

fa m ilie s a re a sso c ia te d w ith both upper socio-economic le v e l and c ity
fa m ilie s , and sm aller fa m ilie s a re a sso c ia te d with in tim a te , a ffe c t l o n a l , and dem ocratic p aren t-a d o le sc e n t r e l a tio n s .
be asked:

The q u estio n may

How does t h i s ex p lain th e poorer adjustm ent of o ld e r boys?

Older boys a re given more freedom, expected t o be more independent,
and exposed t o o u tsid e -o f-fa m ily s tim u li to a g re a te r e x te n t th an th e
o th er age-sex groups.

On them, th e re fo re , a re focused c o n f lic ts

which r i s e i n a changing s o c ie ty .
The Meeting o f Basic Needs

The above d isc u ssio n of so cio ­

c u ltu r a l change provides a p a r t i a l r a th e r th a n a complete expanation.
The t h e s is h ere p resen ted i s th a t human beings a l l have c e r ta in needs
in a d d itio n t o those o f a p u re ly b io lo g ic a l c h a ra c te r.

These are n o t

b io lo g ic a l as th e g en eratio n of i n s t i n c t psy ch o lo g ists b elie v e d , but
are made p o ssib le and in e v ita b le by man's b io lo g ic a l and psychologi­
c a l equipment.

W. I . Thomas once grouped th e se in to fo u r c a te g o rie s:

(1) resp o n se, (2) re c o g n itio n , (3) new experience, and (h) s e c u r i t y ^
The w r ite r sees le s s value i n th e " s e c u rity ” and ”new experience"
sin c e th ey r e f e r only to th e possession or a c q u is itio n of response
and re c o g n itio n .

Response and re c o g n itio n to g eth er c o n s titu te th e

2 / Thomas, W. I . , The Unadjusted G irl, L i t t l e , Brown & Co., Boston,
1923. Concept re c e n tly employed by Becker, Howard and H ill, Rueben,
Fam ily, M arriage,and Parenthood, D. C. Heath & C o., Boston, 19 U8.

13 k

reaction which an individual receives from the people with whom he
is in contact*

Favorable reaction from other individuals is the basic

need of humans in addition to the biological needs of the organism.
How is this need related to the facts established by this study?
Societies have a property of adjustment to change which keeps
various aspects of it in adjustment to all others-^

Today's small,

democratic, affection-centered family is an adjustment to an indus­
trial, democratic society which it in turn reinforces.

Today, in

primitive societies and extremely isolated rural sections of the
United States the individual is still encompassed in a great family
and in a primary-group type of neighborhood.

His needs for response

and recognition are met by a larger primary group which places little
stress or strain on the parent-child relation.

With the change from

an isolated rural society to an urbanized one there occurs a profound
change in the group from which the individual fills his response needs.
The great family and primary group disappear and in their place is
the small affection-centered family with mare intensive parent-child
interaction*

This adjustment came sooner and has developed further

in the city and at the higher socio-economic level.

In the rural

family and at the lower socio-economic level, the parents were reared
in the great family-primary group society and are not meeting the

U/ See Chappie, E.D. and Coon, C.S., Principles of Anthropology,
“ Henry Hoit & Co., New York, 191*2, and lialinowski, b.,
A Scientific Theory of Culture, The University of North Carolina
Press, Chapel Hill, 19ltU*

135

response needs of their children who are growing up in an urbanized
society*
Why are the response and recognition needs of the older adoles­
cent boys more often unmet than other age-sex groups-^?

This study

has shown that girls are kept affectionally integrated more closely
into the family than are boys, and their adjustment to parents and
their mental health and Juvenile delinquency rates are better*

In

American society today the practice is to allow more freedom to boys,
pay less attention to what they do, and, in general, to free them of
family emotional ties— free them several years before they can marry
and thus establish deep and satisfying emotional relations with a
mate and family of their own.

This tendency toward indifference

toward older beys and the abandonment of them emotionally has been
encouraged by psychologists and psychiatrists who stress the impor­
tance of accomplishing the "task" of emancipation from parents at an
early a g e -M

Clinical eases have established the fact that a con­

siderable number of people do not accomplish this "task" at all or
too late to lead a normal life.
part of the population.

Even so, these represent a small

The present study suggests that for every

middle adolescent boy who is too closely tied to parents emotionally

5/ Mangus finds this group more frequently in poor mental health than
girls. Mangus, A. R. and Woodward, R. H., "Mental Health Analysis
of High School Students," The Butler County Mental Health Associa­
tion, Hamilton, Ohio, 19b9*
y Havighurst, R. J., Developmental Tasks and Education, University
of Chicago Press, Chicago, 1$UB.

136

there may be more itho are not tied closely enough.

These findings

are supported by the fact that middle adolescent boys have poorer
mental health and a much higher juvenile delinquency rate as well as
poorer adjustment in the family.

If early emancipation is so bene­

ficial, why is this group ■which is the most emancipated so poorly
adjusted by all three measures?
The conclusion reached in this study is that the "task1' of ado­
lescents and parents alike is for the adolescent to achieve emotional
independence of parents at the same time that he achieves economic
independence and is ready to marry.

Too early emotional emancipation

means insufficient satisfaction of the response needs of the adolesJ j
c e n t , too late emancipation means continued dependence on parents
after most people have transferred their affections
their own.

to familiesof

This presents a little more complicated picture than that

of Havighurst, who considers the only task to be emancipation as
early as possible-^ but it appears to fit all of the facts more
closely.
Adolescence and Basic Personality

For decades the social

phenomena of adolescence was explained by psychologists in physiopsychological terms—

part of a physical maturation process.

That

dead-end explanation was constructively exploded by Margaret Mead and
7/ As shown by low adjustment scores, poorer mental health, andhigher
juvenile delinquency rates of older boys.
8/ Havighurst, Ibid.

137

o th er s o o la l a n th ro p o lo g ists.

A more f r u i t f u l explanation has more

r e c e n tly been advanced t h a t l a t e r behavior can be tra c e d back t o the
9/
b a s ic p e rs o n a lity o f th e in d iv id u a l, formed i n the f i r s t years— .
The th e o ry th a t l a t e r behavior can be tra c e d t o p re n a ta l and babyhood
10/
experiences of t o i l e t tr a in in g , feed in g , and cuddling—' i s a lo g ic a l
one f o r p sy ch o lo g ists and a l lie d groups who look to th e I n te rn a l
s tr u c tu r e o f th e in d iv id u a l f o r answers to behavior.

Since th e in ­

s t i n c t th e o ry i s u n ten ab le, th e sm a lle st p o ssib le s h i f t i s to th e
e a r l i e s t ex p erien ces.

I f i t can be m aintained th a t in f a n t experiences

a re d e te rm in is tic , th en behavior th e r e a f te r can be explained i n terms
o f th e in d iv id u a l, and i t i s p o ssib le to ignore th e com plexities of
th e s o c io lo g ic a l w orld.
The p re s e n t study does not e s ta b lis h th a t e a r ly experience has
no e f f e c t on the ad o lesce n t, but i t appears t h a t i t ' s a f fe c t i s proba b ly much le s s th an p rev io u sly b eliev ed

1V
.

E a r lie r i n the stu d y i t

has been shown t h a t th e re are no ap p reciab le sex d iffe re n c e s i n ad­
justm ent a t th e e a r ly ad o lescent p erio d (modal age 13 «f>), but i n the
group ta k en from th e same schools and communities b u t th re e y e a rs
o ld e r, th e re were very s ig n if ic a n t d iffe re n c e s between sexes.

The

d iffe re n c e s can be explained only i n terms of d i f f e r e n t i a l tre atm e n t
9 / K ardiner. Abram. The Psychological F ro n tie rs of S ociety, Columbia"
U n iv ersity P re ss, New York,
1 0 / G eleerd, E lizab eth R .. "Feeding and T o ile t T ra in in g ," Hygeia,
Vol. XXIV, January, 19 U6.
1 1 / Terman came t o a s im ila r conclusion concerning e a r ly trau m atic
— experience (sex shock) and m arriage happiness. See Terman, Lewis
M,, P sychological F acto rs in M a rita l Happiness, McGraw-Hill Book
Co., “tew Yoric, 193d.

138

of boys and girls during that three year period. Again, cities and
high socio-economic groups show very significantly better adjustment
to parents.

These are the very groups that deviated the furthest from

the behavior which is now prescribed for the cultivation of a good
basic personality^^ The writer concludes that people are basically
malleable rather than being set in any mold at the age of three or
any other age.

There is, however, sane special importance in the

early parent-child relation to the extent that patterns are formed
then and parents tend to be rather consistent in their attitudes toward
and their treatment of children throughout the childhood period.

The

parent who exploits his child at three will probably still do it when
the child is fifteen. As previous experiences teaoh the child what
to expect from others and what roles he is to play, they become par­
tially determinant factors for his future behavior, but he changes
when new expectations are perceived and when old behavior does not
13/
lead to satisfactions and new behavior does-". The parent of today
who builds a satisfying and relaxing world for his baby builds a sat­
isfying future for the child, but the evidence is that he does it
through building habitually satisfying social relationships.

12/ The group that went the farthest toward "bottle babies" rigid
schedules and a general mechanistic approach to child rearing.
13/ Margaret Mead found that the happy carefree Manus children were
converted into dour, bitter, suspicious adults at adolescence in
a short period of time. See Meaa, Margaret, From The South Seas,
W. Morrow & Co., New York, 1939.

139

Further Research
field for research.

Parent-child relatione offer a tremendous

Findings should have implications for virtually

every field of the social sciences— — in The Family, Marriage, Mental
Health, Personality, Social Control, to name a few.

The present

study could be used as a springboard for research in at least three
directions:
(1) Further testing and validation of the present findings
and standardization of the scale used.
(2) A more intensive investigation of some of the areas
covered in the present study, such as agreement on moral
codes or the parents' role in the sex training of their
children, or others.
(3) A wider study to better determine the relation between
the adjustment of adolescents to parents, their mental health
or personality, their school and peer adjustment*

xko

APPENDIX "A"
THE ESSENTIAL UNITY OF FEELINGS ABOUT SELF AND OTHERS---A HYPOTHESIS
The h y p o th esis to be s ta te d below i s based on f a c to r a n a ly sis of
tw e n ty -e ig h t item s o f th e ad o le sc e n t-p a re n t schedule.

These tw enty-

e ig h t were s e le c te d from th e fiv e areas covered by the s c a le :
fe e lin g s o f being loved and secu re, s ta tu s f e e lin g s , fe e lin g s about
s o c ia li s a t i o n in te r a c tio n s , fe e lin g s about p a re n ts, and about r e l a tio n ­
sh ip s which have t h e i r focus o u tsid e th e fa m ily .

I t was b eliev ed

p o s sib le t h a t a l l o f some o f th e se areas would show c lu s te r s of
c lo s e ly c o rre la te d item s which would show th a t th e re are s e v e ra l more
o r le s s independent s e ts o f in te ra c tio n s involved i n ad o lescen tp a re n t r e l a t io n s .

Examination and a n a ly sis of th e f a c to r a n a ly sis

t a b l e , however, f a i l to re v e a l such c lu s te r s , b u t r a th e r in d ic a te th a t
a l l measure th e same v a r ia b le .

When one f a c to r was removed by th e

c e n tro id method, r e s id u a ls were s li g h t l y i n excess of th o se expected
by chance b u t they d id n o t c lu s te r in to any second f a c to r .
The above d a ta enable the statm en t of a hypothesis which had been
p a r t i a l l y formed p re v io u sly through o b servation:

"That th e re i s an

e s s e n tia l u n ity between th e in d iv id u a l's f e e lin g s about him self as an
in d iv id u a l, o th er people as in d iv id u a ls , and h is r e la tio n s h ip to o th e r
peo p le— e i t h e r in tim a te o r im personal."

An in d iv id u a l cannot f e e l

w e ll s a t i s f i e d w ith h im self as an in d iv id u a l u n less he f e e ls s a ti s f i e d
w ith h is in te r a c tio n s w ith th e group of people w ith which he i s i n

llil

m eaningful c o n ta c t, and i s s a tis f ie d w ith them as in d iv id u a ls .

The

p o s itio n o f th e th re e components—s e l f , o th e rs, and in te ra c tio n —may
be in ter-ch an g ed i n th e above sta te m e n t.
i n tim e o r space.

The "o th e rs” are not lim ite d

In some cases th e y w ill be people who a re i n d is ­

t a n t p la c e s , have d ied o r have not y et • appeared but are expected.
As an i l l u s t r a t i o n o f t h i s u n ity , th re e scale items were s e le c te d
from as w idely varying areaB as p o ssib le and th re e from as c lo s e ly r e ­
la te d areas as p o ssib le ,e n d t h e i r in te r - c o r r e la tio n s examined.

The th re e

item s a re w idely sep arated —”1 consider my m other’s c o rre c tio n of m e ..,"
an in te r a c tio n item j "Wien I ’m grown, I would lik e t o have a p e rs o n a lity
lik e . . . , " a fe e lin g about an " o th e r," and " I f e e l sure my mother lik e s
m e ...," which i s th e n e a re st to a f e e lin g about s e l f th a t th e l i s t
a f fo r d s .

C o rrela tio n s between th e se th re e are .50, *k9> and .ij8.

For

a comparison w ith item s a l l from th e same a re a , th re e item s were s e le c ­
ted in d ic a tin g fe e lin g s about an "o th e r": "When I marry I want a m a te ..,"
"When I ’m grown up I would lik e to have a p e rs o n a lity l i k e . . . , " and
"Considering th e amount o f money ray mother h as, I consider she spends i t
on m e ...,"

The c o rre la tio n s are »lj2, .29, and .39.

No s ig n ific a n c e i s

attac h ed to th e h ig h er c o rre la tio n o f th e item s from the wider areas but
th e f a c t t h a t they are not le s s serves to i l l u s t r a t e as does th e e n tir e
f a c to r a n a ly sis ta b le th e u n ity of fe e lin g s about s e lf , fe e lin g s about
o th e rs, and fe e lin g s about in te r a c tio n w ith o th e rs .
The w r ite r co n sid ers th e p re se n t d a ta to be in s u f f ic ie n t fo r
proof o f th e above h y p o th esis, since i t was not designed to do so:

1U2

however, it would be possible to prove or disprove it by construction
of three brief scales designed to measure feelings about self, others,
and interaction with others.

The resultant scores could be subjected

to factor analysis and determination made whether there is more than
one area of social perception or whether, as the writer believes, it
is a unity.

11*3

KEY TO THE FACTOR ANALYSIS TABLES
Table
0

Q uestionnaire
#

6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
11*
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
21*
26
27
28
30
31
32
37
38
1*0
hi

59
61
62
63
61*
65
66
67
68
69
70
72
73
71*
76
77
78
79
80
82
83
81*
86
87
88
93
91*
96
97

A—Love-Security Items
B—S tatus Items
C-—S o c ia liz a tio n Items
D ~ P aren t P e rso n a lity Items
E—Outside Family Items

ilia

ITEM
INTERCORRELATIONS

Item
D
C
E
B
C
C
D
B

C

E

B

C

C

D

B

B

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

ia

.a9
.as
.36
.32
.as
.33
.39
.31
-.05
.a2
•35
.1*6
.a i
. 1*9
.ao
.13
.a i
.a i
.aa
.37
.li
.18
.a2
.09
.16
.38
.2a
.21

.as
•5k
•35
•2k
.1*3
.ao
.ao
.33
.00
.39
.1*3
•51
•k6
•5k
.a s
.30
•53
•k7
.1*9
.a a
.2a
.18
.1*9
.21
.20
.a a
.19
.17

.36
•35
•39
.31
.3 5
•33
•35
•33
.06
•35
.32
.39
.37
.38
.39
.19
.39
.27
.3a
.33
.23
.10
•35
•25
•15
.26
.21
.22

.32
.2a
.31
.a2
.31
.22
.31
.22
.12
.ao
.33
.37
.33
.3a
.33
.22
.a i
.30
.1*2
.29
.31
.05
.36
.28
.2a
.25
.ia
.18

.a s
.1*3

.33
.1*0
.33
.22
.35
.U8
.25
.50
.12
.1*2
.30
.39
.36
.a s
.39
.32
.3 9
.3 7
•k2
•k7
.21
.18
.a2
.31*
.18
.39
.37
.29

.39
.ao
.35
.31
.39
.25
.1*5
.31
.19
.ao
.37
.1*2
.38
.37
.3 a
.18

.31
.33
.33
.22
.a i
.50
.31
.50
.12
.1*3
.29
.36
.32
.ao
.39
.26
.39
.29
.39
.38
.20
.07
.38
.30
.10
.00
.26
.ia

.3 5
.3 1
.5 k
.3 5
.39
.ai

H
O.
1

6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
b ia
D 15
C 16
D 17
C 18
A 19
D 20
C 21
A 22
E 23
A 26
E 27
A 28
E 30
B 31
B 32
B 37
E 38
A ao
D ai

D

.1*6
.a2
.5 0
.a i
.53
.a a
.35
.5a
.37
.1*9
.1*3
.27
.17
.a s
.26
.21
.35
.16
.2a

.k 5

.aa
.a2
.35
.26
.13
•k5
.30
.30
.33
.15
.ia

-.05
.00
.06
.12
-.01
.12
.19
.12
.39
.22
.13
.08
.07
.03
.ia
-.03
.13
.ia
.ia
.12
.2a
.00
.16
.30
.11
.39
- .0 2
-.03

M ro£r-VjoVjjVnroU)rr'Vn.vnOsVjj|r-vnx=_€"£r-V nro^t_C"fr-^r'U)VJo£r-

C '-J O W 'O O H H V irO O M M 'O M U lO 'W N N V jJ O N O 'O V A 'O M
•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

♦

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

f

t

O M r o x r -io ir -M J O U J tr -c -v n r o t-tr -'jJ U i v n . t ’ M rovuiAi^VjaVjaxr-UJ
o o 'o c d h N V h o v n w p ' O o u i o n f u co 10 u>
' o o «ovaj i o u i v a

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

a

*

H

VA

O

H
o

o

V
jjV
jja "H rovnMN>ir'A- £r'VnVjjvnVAO>o\Vjjc-ovjjjr"'jjvn.VjjVjjvnxr-

m

V J O O C — O O 'J O N r O W H M H V n U J C M B O v O O O 'N 'O O 'O 'O H O '

->3

u> MU* m p o v a m i o t - i r - t - v n . r o irrv n o ^ O ' u j c - o v o v j j u » it*Vaju>c - c r
' o O " o no r ovovo o \ p - o o p - t o - ' a c - o w o v o u j v n - J ro coO vH

h

• • • • • •

+ • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •

to t o p - h J v o v n M to Onva.c - o *u » va v n \ n v n p * v n O P * u >p - vav*>u >v n p On—1 Va> On fO HCMO H On to H —JVAOnOnVAPTOVaJ 0 - 0 OOVa> p* OOEr'O

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

a

*

*

ro lO p " tO V o p -H V o V n P 'p * \A h J VnVnp"VAP"P"l-, VjJlA>U>p-VjdUJp-p*
u r P w H v it'O o u iP u o v v n V A p -H O N 'o r 'o r 'o tr w 'o a o
•

•

•

•

•

•

•

o

vo o '

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

I•

•

•

«

•

•

•

•

a>

h

NO

ro

M H U u u i v n f 'j J V A v n . P ’ o u » v n O " jrv n v n O 'i-, v»> c * w u i j r u v a p *
r o 'o osH vnv*) Onva O'-^j
w m u h n m o m u >' o \ r ' o p - h ' o u > h

ro
ro

5

p*'o h

o s t o - o O n —a - o t o \ A r o u > o \ a > t o v A t o N O o v o

t-* HVjj tou»V A H to p --\A V n p " io p " p " p -p “ p - \A H rop-u»\*JU> to p * p *

H

ro

v n r v > 'o 'o - j - j X ) t - o - i '0 ( x i p i o E >U ) O o r 'o c '- o ^ O 'i - > ) H

u>

to to p -to u > v a m p * p * v a v a v a v * > p -v a p * P " P * v a h v * > p * ir-p -p -v o .tr- 1 -

ro

o io P v n o ja )N H 'o o 3 0 'J H \n O N C D O )fe -io jr'O M ro 'o io c ''o t-

w

^

w

w

m

w

w

w

m

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

w

^

w

w

m

w

w

w

w

M M C 'IO I0 4T H I 0 0 \C -C 'V A W V n O \t* p V )E -H V i)V jJC 'p -M U » E 'U )
'o c - r o v A ^ o o h o n h 'o E ' o v 'o O H p - t 'V » \ h N o o v n - 'j u i 'o w c - 'j

o

>

M

ro
o

M H V i)H N U ]Q K IN > U )l\}U > V i)H U )tO V « )IO U )O M H U U > l» M U )H

-o-o o

C3

rr-

a

o

w

o

ro
-o

t?d

VJl

11*6

A

B

B

B

B

E

A

28

30

31

32

37

38

1*0

.11
.21*
.23
.31
.27
.21
.26
.20
.21*
.31
.25
.26
.26
.22
.30
.21*
.35
.29
.la
. 26
.ia
.10
•31*
.32
.17
.20
.13
.11*

.18
.18
.10
.05
.17
.18
•13
.07
.00
.21
.10
.17
.13
.16
.Hi
.09
.16
.17
.12
.n
.10
.23
.18
•08
.11
.23
.09
.12

.1|2
.1*9
.35
.36
.li8
.U2
•li5
.38
.16
.50
•li5
.50
.53
.51
.1*5
.30
.53
.57
.58
.1*8
•31*
.18
.58
•1*0
.21
.39
.17
.18

.09
.21
.25
.28
.26
.31*
.30
.30
.30
.39
.22
.27
.22
.32
.31
.23
.35
.39
.38
.27
.32
.08
.1*0
.1*0
.21
.29

.16
.20
.15
.21*
.21
.18
.30
.10
.11
.33
.ia
.11*
.39
.16
.23
.10
.31
.29
.25
.25
.17
.11
.21
.21
.ia
•26
.03
.23

•08
.16

D
la

.38
.21* .21
.l*li
.17
.26
.21
.22
.18
.25
.Hi
.16
.21*
.35
.39
.37
.29
.11*
.33
.15
.26
.00
.11*
.39 -.02 -.03
•liO
.11*
.27
.28
.08
.19
•1*0
.30
.39
.16
.39
.39
.26
.1*3
.27
.21* .23
.ia
.30
.17
.17
.22
.38
•19
.11* .15
.39
.20
.22
.ia
.21* .29
.1*2
.20
.11*
.13
.12
.09
.23
.18
.17
.39
.08
.16
.29
.26
.03
.23
.liU .38
.39
.38
.30
.38
.30
.39
.39

1U7

FIRST RESIDUALS
(Co-variances)

6

7

8

10

11

12

,10
.03
.00
—.09
.01
.05
. .08
-.02
-.02
.10
-.09
-.05
.01 -.01
.06
-.05
.02
-.15
-.02
. .03
.03
.03
. .02 . .Oil
-.01
-.03
-.03 . .05
.00
-.02
. .00
.07
.03
.05
-.0 6
-.03
.02
.05
-.01
-.05
.08
-.02
.01
-.07
.01
-.01
•Oli —.06
-.Oil
.05
—.06
—.05
-.Oil -.0 7
-.01
-.01

-.03

.05
.02
.Oli
.01
.01
-.11

9

ictor Loadings

CK
CM
f.
.600
.700
.669
.736
.671*
•1*29
.758
.653
.727
.671
.Wi5
.2 3 8

.00
.01

-.09
-.0 5
.18
-.11
.18
-.01

-.03
-.07
—.Oli

-.0 5
.03
-.02

.06
-.07
-.03
-.03
.06
-.06

.03

.08
.00

.07
-.0 3
.02
.01
-.01
-.06
-.05
-.07
.01

.06
.0 0

-.Oil
.00
-.01

.03

-.02
.05

.02
.08

-.0 5
.02
.15
.06

1

la

.10
.10
.05
.10
.01
.10
.01
.05
.05
.03 -.09
.05
.10
.00
.01
.00
.01
-.03
.02
•
Oil
.05
.00 -.02 . .05
-.111 -.05
.00 -.09 -.0 3
.00
.Oli
.00
.02
.05
.05
.02
.02
.02
.06
.06 — .01
•Oil
.01 . .Oli
-.12
.02 -.oil
.Oli -.01
-.03
.Oli -.07
.03
.02
.02 -.Oli
-.02 . .00 -.03
-.15 .*.05 -.01
•Oil . .02 -.03
.00
.02 -.03
.00
-.19 -.11
-.06 -.05 —.05
.Oli -.06
.03
•02
.03 -.Oli
.02
-.01 -.08

CM
O
.

.719
.1*82
.376
.606
.357
.379

6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
lit
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
26
27
28
30
31
32
37
38
liO

.i
H
-J

.581
.653
.526
.507
.653
.612
.583
.530
•206

-.06
-.08

I •l • l •

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

I •I

•

•

•

I •I

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

I• I • I

•

•

•

•

•

■

•

•

I• aI

•

•

*

Q O U H O b o o O Q Q O . O p O O O p O O H Q H Q O O O O
C rv -^ \jJ O f O C F > f r o o S H V d V D H C ' H W f ' H O O O O O C SV nV nPO o
•

PS
I

a

M

•

I

a

I

•

•

I I
•

I I
•

I I I
•

•

•

•

•

•

•

M O N O O H O O O O H O H O O O O M
X ) U ) 0 H V n V JT IO
a

a

a

a

I

a

a

I I I
a

a

a

a

a

a

I

a

I

a

I

a

I

a

I

a

I I

•

•

I I I
•

a

O O O H O O H H
H v m o v n fc— o

a

a

I I I

a

a

a

I

I

a

I

a

I

a

a

a

a

I

a

I

I

a

a

a

a

a

I

a

a

a

I

a

I

a

a

I

0 .0 .0

a

a

I I
a

a

f H f W f U f W f H r o ^ J HO N f V n H - J - O f U U l n w u i v oO
a

O O Q O O O O O O O O O Q O O O O O O

a

I

a

a

a

I

0 .0 .0 O

a

a

a

a

a

M O O M O O O O O O O O O Q O O O H O O . O O O . O . O Q O O
\ n u > o o c d - o t o t r - r o c o o H v n H (5 \ o - o f - c o H i-> V o r o —j Vo Vo o f O
a

a

I I I

a

a

a

a

a

a

I

a

I

a

I

a

I

a

I

a

a

a

a

a

a

I

a

I

I

a

I

a

a

a

I

a

a

a

a

a

H O . O M O Q Q O O O . O O O O O H M O O O O O O O O O O . O
r o vn. Vo r o - o O O V riV o Vo Vo r o r o f r Vo O s Q \ f r v n - J H H ■ != " £ - r o r o v n .V n
a

a

I

a

I

l

a

I

a

a

l

I I I

a

a

a

a

a

a

I I

a

a

a

a

a

l

a

l

I

a

la

a

I

a

l

a

I

a

I

a

a

a

a

a

M O O O M O a
O O O p O O O O M M O O O O O O O O O O O
f O N O v O V n O f H H O H M H ' ) O n O n -*! 4 r - ^ j j r - H \ n V o H r o r o r o
Vo

I

a

a

a

I

a

I

a

I

a

I

a

I

a

I

a

a

a

I

a

a

a

a

a

I I I

a

a

a

a

a

a

I

a

a

a

I I
a

O O O H O O O H H O O O O O H O p O O H O O p p O O O O
r o n r o r o f r - r o m h h n w v n v n v n H - J W O w i o M O \V o v n V o H O ' O '

I

a

a

a

l
I l l
a a a a a

a

a

i

a

l

a

l

a

a

a

a

l

a

a

a

l

a

a

a

i

a

l

a

l
a

a

a

a

0 p p O O O O Q 0 0 . 0 O H p O O O p p p O O O p O O O O
V o O O r o r o f - t o o vn. f " Vo r o Vo ( R u i H f ' i j v o O V o V n N O r o j r - j r - H*
a

a

a

a

I

I

a

a

I

a

a

a

a

a

a

I

a

a

I

a

a

I

a

a

I

a

a

l

a

a

I

a

a

a

a

I

I

a

a

O O O P O O O O O Q O O O I O O O O O O H O O P O P O Q H
H N f O ' W H H V n o o o H ' i v o v n r o M H H N U ' j o V-^ j o f “ t o t o

1 aI aI

a

a

a

a

a

a

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

- j o o o o r o r o r o r o H v n r o M —J H r o v n H ro v n -'jv o

h

i
a

l l
a a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

t

a

I aI aI

I a Ia
0

I

a

I

a

a

a

a

Ia

a

a

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

a

a

a

a

a

a

I

a

I

i

i a la la
0

a

0

a

0

a

0

a

0

a

0

H - 'iv n v o
a

Ia Ia
0

. 0

h c

I -l
l
I
a a a a

*\*>

a

H Q O O O M O P P O M O p O p p . O O O O p p . O p . O O O . O
O O H f 0 3 O H O O W O H O U ) ( h O V 0 H l 0 H O ' O 'V o < ^ V o —J J f Vo

O O O O g ' 8 ' 8 ' 8 r ^r Hr Hr H^O O O O H O o o o & o ^ r i H H
a

II

3

a

a

E'­
en
a2S
H

CM

«n

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

I I I I I

a

a

a

a

II

a

a

a

a

a

I I I

a

I

a

a

a

a

II

a a a

88S8SS8S8388838S8& 8888& & SS3S
•

I
oo
n

a

II
•

II

•

•

•

I

•

•

I

•

•

I

•

•

I

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

I I I I I

\ A CVI C\| < n > - ^ J O O m CM CM Q - 5 T C O p 4 < n r-4

•

•

•

a

I I I

Q \V \ O « n t^ v O < l

o• o• o • o •o •o o• t• n • c •M• o• o • o •o •o o• o• o• o• o• o • o •o •o o• o• c• M• H
B
• a
I I I
II
I I I I I
I I I
I
II
^

^
I I I

^
II

o

o

S 8 S 2 h^ ho^ o
I
I I I I I I

8 8 S « 8 S 8 ^
It
I
I

o o

0 \r lO ^ v O 'A W ^ tO ^ fN t'-O ^ W N C M 0 0

rl-a iA O

m O

r t H 5 O O O O O CMO O O H O ■O ‘O O O O © H aO aO a CM
o o o o
a a a a a
I

r-H

cn

O C M m H H C V I(^ O H in C M Q lA C M ^ H C M O 'O H « H O > A ^ l£ \C \e ti

©OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOr-tOOOOrtOOOOO
a

a

a

a

a

I I
O

<n

a

a

a

I

a

a

I

a

a

a

I

a

a

a

a

a

a

I I I I

a

a

a

a

a

I

a

a

a

I I I

I

_^CMr^C'-rH<nrH'OU'v-=r-3QOCMCMr-|C\laa'Ln\rvH^r-|-£jOJqsi-|fn

oa oa oa oa oa oa oa oa oa oa oa oa oa oa oa o
o © o o o o o o o o o o
a a a a a a a a a a a a a
I I I

I

I I I I I

I I I

I

«M<0 Q-31ACM CMlA-STrl O U\ r l Q f t J I A H S* r | Q ^ O O

r-fOOOOOOOHOOOOrHOOOOOOrHOOHOOOO
a

a

a

a

I I I

S

a

I

I I

CO
CM

I I

a

a

a

I I

a

I

a

a

a

a

a

I I I I

a

a

I

a

a

a

a

I

a

a

I

a

a

a

I

a

a

a

a

I I I

8888888888888888888888888388
i

I I I

I

I I I I I

I

l i l t

150

APPENDIX "B"

(The Instrum ent)

INFORMATION, PLEASE1
S c ie n tis ts have s p l i t th e atom, a d isco v ery which th re a te n s to d e s tro y
th e w orld. When th e se atomic s c i e n t i s t s ta lk about th e fu tu r e of
sc ie n c e, th e y emphasize t h a t science must look t o fin d in g b e tte r human
r e la tio n s i f our c i v i l i z a t i o n i s to s u rv iv e . U nfortunately, s o c ia l
s c i e n t i s t s (th o se who in v e s tig a te r e la tio n s between people) cannot p u t
a boy or g i r l and h is p a re n ts under a microscope t o see how they be­
have. We must ask q u estio n s and depend upon you t o give us th e tr u e
answ ers.
Below are some q u estio n s we need answered. Do n o t p u t your name on
your p ap er, so t h a t no one w i l l know what you p u t down. We '11 go
through th e f i r s t ones to g e th e r so t h a t you’l l se e how t o do i t .
Do not w rite i n t h i s sp ace.
1 ._____

3..

2 . _____

U.

Start here.

Check only one answer to each question.

5.

My age last birthday: 1. 11____, 2. 12___ , 3. 15
, U« 1U___ j
5. 15___ , 6. 16___ , 7. 17___ , 8. 18___ , 9. overT8___

6.

1. Boy

7.

I live: 1. on a farm
, 2. in the open country but parents are
not famers_
, 3. in a village or town of less than 2,500 population
,
town of 2,500 to 10,000 population ___, 5. 10,000
to 100,000___ , 6. over 100,000__ , 7. residential area just out­
side of city limits___

8.

Race:

9.

Either or both parents born in another country:
2. no___

, 2. girl___

1. white___ , 2. yellow

, 3. negro___ , lu Indian
1. yes

,

10. Father’s education, grade completed: 1. none
, 2. 1-h___ ,
3. 5 - 6 , U. 9- H
, 5. 12___ , 6. 1-3 years of college
,

151

7 . U y ears o f co lleg e____ , 8 . over I4. years of college____
11. Mother’s education, grade completed: 1 . none
, 2. 1-U____>
3 . 5 - 8 1 in 9 - 1 1 , 5. 12
, 6 . 1-3 years of c o l l e g e ,
7 . U y ears o f co lle g e ____, 8 . over U years of college____
1 2 . Family income f o r th e y e a r:
$3 , 0 0 0 1 3 * $3 , 000 - 6 ,0 0 0

1 . $1,500 or le s s
, 2 . $1,500, U. $6,000 or more

How su re are you o f th e amount: 5 .
s u r e , 7 . n o t a t a l l sure____

very sure

, 6 . fa irly

1 3 . Occupation o f head o f fam ily: 1 . u n s k ille d or se rv ic e work____
2 * c l e r i c a l , 3 . se m i-sk ille d la b o r (o p e ra to rs)
,
U. s k ille d la b o r (craftsm en)
, 5 . fa rra e rs _ , 6 . business
owner o r ex ecu tiv e
, 7 . p ro fessio n al
, ~B. unemployed
,
9• dom estic____
l l n My mother works f o r money: 1 . not a t a l l
, 2 . an average of
e i g h t ’hours o r le s s a weekj
, 3 . e ig h t to s ix te e n
, In s ix te e n
to th ir ty - tw o
, 5 . more th a n th ir ty - tw o
1 5 . Number o f o rg an izatio n s to which your p aren ts belong (add th e
number to which your f a th e r belongs to th e number to which your
mother b elo n g s): 1 . none
, 2 . one
, 3 # two
, In th re e
5 . fo u r
, 6 . fiv e
, 7 . s ix or more____
16 . Number of b ro th e rs and s i s t e r s : 1 . none
, In th re e
, 5 . fo u r
, 6 . f iv e

, 2 . one
, 3» two
, 7 . s ix or more____

1 7 . F a th e r’s church atten d ance: 1 . never a tte n d s
or tw ice a y e a r____ , 3 . once or tw ice a month
week____

, 2. a tte n d s once
, In alm ost every

18. Mother’s church attendance: 1 . never a tte n d s____ , 2. a tte n d s once
or tw ice a y ea r____ , 3 . once or tw ice a month___ , In alm ost every
week____
20. Are you a church member: 1 . yes
, 2. no
, 3 . i f yes'-, of
what church________________________________ _______
2 1 . Church membership o f p a re n ts: 1 . both p aren ts C ath o lics
,
2 . bo th p a re n ts P ro te s ta n ts
, 3* one a P ro te s ta n t and one a
C ath o lic
, U. both p aren ts Jewish
, 5 . p a re n ts members of
d if f e r e n t P ro te s ta n t churches
, 6 . one a member and one a non­
member
, 7 . both are not members
, 8 . don’t know
,
9 . o th e r___

,

152

22. I. l i v e w ith: 1 . both of my own parents^___ f 2 . a p aren t and a
s t e p - p a r e n t , 3 . a divorced p a re n t only
, U. a widowed
p a re n t only
, 5 . person o th er th an a p a re n t
(Check
only
i f liv in g perm anently w ith them.)
Now we'd lik e to know something about you and your f a th e r . F i r s t , do
you liv e w ith your own f a th e r or does someone e ls e tak e the p la c e of
a f a th e r? Check one of th e s e . I liv e withs 1. my own f a th e r
,
2 . s te p -fa th e r
, 3 . g ran d fath er
, U. uncle
, 5 . o ld er
b ro th e r
. 6. fo s te r f a t h e r
, 7 . o th er
, 8 . mother o r o th er
women only
( I f you check 8, you need not f i l l i n questions 2U-56.)
2l+. Ify f a th e r i s in te r e s te d i n what I do: 1 . always
, 2 . alm ost
always
, 3 • u su a lly
, U. sometimes
, £ . seldom o r never___
2$. Of my f a th e rs frie n d s I l i k e : 1 . none of them
, 2. few of
th e m
, 3 . about h a lf of them
, 1;. most of them
, 5 . a l l of
th e m
26. I consider my f a t h e r 's education: 1 . v ery poor
average
, Lu very, good
, 5 . e x c e lle n t____
27. I agree w ith ray f a th e r on r e lig io u s b e lie f s :
alm ost always
, 3 . sometimes_, U. seldom
28. Ify f a th e r re s p e c ts my opinipn:
3 . u s u a lly , U. s e l d o m ,

i . always
5* never

29. I consider my f a t h e r 's punishment
sometimes f a i r
, 3 • u s u a lly f a i r
5 . always f a i r ____
3 0 . Ify f a th e r nags a t me:
tim es
, U. seldom

, 2. poor

, 3.

1 . always
, 2.
, 5 . never________
, 2 . alm ost always

,

o f me:1 . seldom
f a i r , 2.
. U. alm ost always f a i r
,

1 . very o fte n
, 2 . o f te n
, 5 . never_____

, 3 . scane-

3 1 . Considering th e amount of money my f a th e r has, I consider th a t he
spends i t on me: 1 . very generously
, 2 . generously
, 3.
average
, li. le s s generously than average
, 5. le s s gener­
ou sly th an any p a ren ts I know____
32 . Ify f a th e r p r ie s in to my a f f a i r s : 1 . very o fte n
3 . sometimes
, U. seldom
, 5 . never___

,____ 2. o fte n _,

3 3 . Ify f a th e r l e t s me go out t o s o c ia l events by m yself: 1 . anytime I
want to
, 2 . alm ost anytime___, 3* u s u a lly
, h. sometimes
,
5 . seldom o r
never__

153

31). Wien I ask my f a th e r questions* he gives me honest answers: 1*
8e ld am____, 2 . sometimes
* 3 • u s u a lly
* I4. alm ost always
5 . always_____
35. When my f a th e r makes me do something* he t e l l s me why i t ' s
necessary : 1 . always
* 2 . alm ost always
* 3 . u s u a lly
U. sometimes
* 5 . never____

,

f

36. 1 f e e l t h a t my f a th e r approves of how I behave: 1 . seldom or
never ____ * 2 . sometimes___* 3 . u s u a lly
* I). alm ost always__ *
5 . always____
37. I f
1.
3.
5.

I had a c h ild my age* I would teach him what i s r ig h t and wrong:
e x a c tly what my f a th e r tau g h t me
* 2 . n early the same___ ,
somewhat th e same____* I). considerably d if f e r e n t
,
e n t i r e ly d if f e r e n t___ *

38. I th in k my f a th e r knows what i s b e s t fo r me: 1 ._always____ , 2.
alm ost always
* 3 . u s u a lly
* h . sometimes
* 5 . seldom or
never____
39 • When I want help w ith my home work, my f a th e r helps me: 1 . seldom
or never
* 2 . sometimes
* 3 . u su a lly
* U. alm ost always
.
5 . always____
UO. Ify- f a th e r follow s advice which he gives to me: 1 . seldom or
never____ * 2 . sometimes___* 3 • visually
* 1*. alm ost always___ ,
5 . always___
III. When I'm grown up, I would lik e to have a p e rs o n a lity : 1 . e x a c tly
l ik e my f a th e r
* 2 . considerably lik e
* 3 . somewhat l i k e
*
U. somewhat d if f e r e n t
, 5 . e n tir e ly d if f e r e n t_____
1)2. When my f a th e r t e l l s
re fu s e to do i t
*
only i f convenient
e x a c tly as to ld ____

me to do something, I u s u a lly : 1 . ig n o re or
2 . evade doing i t i f p o ssib le ___ * 3 . do i t
* 1). do i t about as I'm to ld ___ * 5 . do i t

U3• I f I were i n tro u b le , I could t e l l my f a th e r : 1 . i n any s it u a tio n
, 2 . i n most s itu a tio n s
, 3 * in sane s itu a tio n s
,
U. i n a few s itu a tio n s
, 5 . not a t a l l
hh. Ify f a th e r t r e a t s my f r ie n d s : 1 . very badly
, 2 . badly
3 . f a i r l y w e ll
, U. very w ell___ , 5. p e r f e c tly
1)5 . ify f a th e r scolds me: 1 * never
, 2 . seldom
___, 1). o fte n
, 5 . v ery o ften ____

,

, 3* sometimes

15k

1*6. Ify- father gives me information about sex: 1. refuses to discuss
it at all
i 2 . avoids discussing it
, 3 » discusses it o n l y
a little
, U. answers all questions willingly
, 5. tells me
about it even when I don*t ask___
Itf. I feel sure my father likes me: 1. always
, 2. almost al­
ways
i 3 • usually
, U. sometimes
, 5. seldom or never
1)8. I think my father understands the problems of young people of my
age: 1. none ofthem
, 2. few of them
, 3. sane of them____
U. most of them
, 5* all of them

1$. Ify f a th e r showB fa v o ritism amongh is c h ild re n :
1. never ,
2 . seldom
, 3 . sometimes
, U. often
, 5. very o fte n
( I f you a re an only c h ild , leave t h i s q u estio n o u t.)

,

50. Ify f a th e r l e t s me use h is p erso n al p ro p erty : 1 . never use a iy of
it
, 2 . seldom use any of i t
, 3 . use sane of i t some­
tim es
, li. most of i t anytime
, 5. a l l of i t anytime____
51. Ify f a th e r : 1. wants me t o q u it school now
, 2. discourages me
from going to co lleg e
, 3 . leaves d e c isio n e n tir e ly to me
,
U. encourages me to go to co lleg e
, 5. i n s i s t s I go____
52. G enerally, I g e t along w ith my f a th e r : 1 . id e a l ly
, 2 very
w ell
) 3 . f a i r l y w ell
, U*p o o rly
. 5» very p o o rly
53• Ify f a th e r th in k s I have th e a b i l i t y to make my own d e c is io n s :
1 . seldom or never
, 2. sometimes
, 3 . u s u a lly
, lu almost
always
» 5. always____
5U. Ify f a th e r th in k s I t r y to do th e ___ r ig h t th in g :
alm ost always
, 3« u s u a lly
, U. sometimes
never_____

1. always_, 2.
. 5 . seldom or

55. For fu n , my f a th e r and I do: 1 . nothing to g eth er
, 2 . a few
th in g s to g eth er
, 3* seme th in g s to g e th e r
, U. many th in g s
to g e th e r
, 5 . a g re a t many th in g s to g e th e r_____
56. Are th e re any im portant r e la tio n s h ip s w ith your f a th e r t h a t have
n ot been covered?
I f so , what?_______________________________
Now we'd like to know something about you and your mother. First, do
you live with your own mother or does someone else take the place of
a mother? Check one of these. I live with: 1. my
mother
,
2. step-mother
, 3* grandmother
,
aunt
, 5. older sister

,

155

6. foster mother
, 7. other
, 8, father or other men only
(If you check 8, you need not fill in questions 58-90.)
58. Ify mother is interested in what I do: 1. always___, 2 . almost
always
, 3* usually
, It. sometimes
, 5. seldan or never__

59. Of my mother's friends I like:
them
, 3. about half of them
of them

1. none of them___ ,2. few of
, 1*. most of them
, 5. all

60. I-consider ray mother's education: 1* very poor
, 2 . poor
3* average
, it. very good
, 5. excellent___

,

61. For fun, my mother and I do: 1. nothing together
, 2 . a few
things together___ , 3. some things together
, it. many things
to g e th e r
, 5 . a g re a t many th in g s together_
62 . I agree w ith ny mother on r e lig io u s b e lie f s : 1 . a lw a y s ____ ,
2 . alm ost always
, 3 . sometimes
, It. seldom
, 5 . never___
63 . My mother re sp e c ts ray opinion: 1 . always
. 2 . alm ost always
3 . u s u a lly
, It. seldom
, 5 . never____

,

6 U. I consider ray m other's c o rre c tio n of me: 1 . seldom f a i r ____ , 2 .
sometimes f a i r
, 3 . u s u a lly f a i r
, It. alm ost always f a i r
5 . always f a i r ____
65 . My mother nags a t me:
tim es
, h . seldom

1 . very o fte n ____, 2 . o fte n
, 5 . never

,

, 3 . some­

66 . Considering th e amount o f money ny mother has, I consider t h a t she
spends i t on me: 1 . v ery generously
. 2 ._generously____, 3 .
average^
, It. le s s generously th a n average
, 5 . le s s gener­
ou sly th an any p a re n ts I know
67 . My mother p r ie s in to
my a f f a i r s : 1 . v ery o fte n
3 . sometimes
, It. seldom
, 5 . never____

,_2 . o fte n _,

6 8 . My mother l e t s me go
out to s o c ia l events by m yself: 1 . anytime I
want to
, 2 . alm ost anytime
, 3 * u s u a lly
, It. sometimes__
5 . seldom or never____
69 . When I ask ray mother q u e stio n s, she gives me honest answers:
1 . seldom
, 2. sometimes___ , 3* u su a lly
, It. alm ost a l ­
ways
, 5 . always____

156

70. When my mother makes me do something, she t e l l s me why i t ' s neces­
sa ry : 1 . always
, 2 . almost always____, 3« u su ally
, U.
sometimes
t 5 . never____
71. I f e e l t h a t my mother approves o f how I behave: 1. seldom or
never
, 2 . sometimes
, 3 . u su a lly
, U. almost always
5 . always

,

72. When I'm grown up, I would l ik e to have a p e rs o n a lity : 1 . e x actly
lik e my mother
, 2. considerably l ik e
, 3« somewhat lik e
,
lw somewhat d if f e r e n t
, 5 . e n tir e ] y d if f e r e n t____
73* I f
1.
3.
ly

I had a c h ild my age, I would teach him what i s r ig h t and wrong:
e x a c tly what my mother tau g h t me____, 2. n e a rly the same
,
somewhat th e same
, U* considerably d if f e r e n t
, f>, e n tir e ­
d iff e r e n t

7l». I th in k ny mother knows what i s b e s t f o r me: 1 ._always____ , 2. a l­
most always
, 3* u su a lly
, I4. sometimes
, 5. seldom or
never____
7i>. When I want h elp w ith my home work, my mother helps me: 1 .
always
, 2. alm ost always
, 3 . u su a lly
, It. sometimes____,
5 . seldom o r never____
76. Ify mother fo llo w s advice which she gives to me: 1. seldom or
never
, 2. sometimes
, 3» u s u a lly
, U. alm ost alveys
5 . always
_

,

77. When my mother t e l l s me to do something, I u s u a lly : 1 . ignore or
re fu s e to do i t
,
2. evade doing i t i f p o ssib le
, 3 . do i t
only i f convenient_____ , ij. do i t about as I'm to ld
, 5. do i t
e x a c tly as to ld
78. I f I were i n tro u b le , I could t e l l my mother: 1 . i n any s itu a tio n
, 2 . i n most s itu a tio n s ___ , 3 . in some s itu a tio n s
,
U. i n a few s itu a tio n s
, 5 , not a t a l l ____
79. Ify mother t r e a t s my f r ie n d s : 1 . very badly
, 2, badly
3 . f a i r l y w ell
, 1*. very w ell
> 5 . p e r f e c tly
80. Jfy mother sco ld s me:
tim es
, U. o fte n

1 . never
, 2 . seldom
, 5 . very o fte n

1

, 3» some­

81. Ify mother gives me info rm ation about sex: 1 . re fu se s to d iscu ss
i t a t a ll
, 2. avoids d iscu ssin g i t
, 3« d iscu sses i t only
a little
, U. answers a l l q u estio n s w illin g ly
, 5 . t e l l s me
about i t even when I d o n 't ask____

157
82. I feel sure my mother likes me: 1. always
, 2. almost al­
ways
, 3. usually
, it. sometimes
V 5. seldom or never

83. I th in k my mother understands th e problems of young people of my
age: 1 , none o f th e m
, 2. few of them
, 3 . some o f them
,
it. most of them
, 5» a l l of them____
8it. Ify mother shows fa v o ritis m among
her c h ild re n :_1 . never_,
2. seldom
, 3 . sometimes
, it. o fte n
, 5* very o fte n
( I f you are an only c h ild , leave t h i s q u estio n o u t.)

,

85. Ify mother l e t s me use h er p erso n al p ro p erty : 1 . never use any of
it
, 2 . seldom use a rty of i t
, 3 • use some of i t sometimes_
it* most o f i t anytime
, 5 . a l l of i t anytime
86. Jfy m other: 1 . wants me t o q u it school now
, 2 . discourages me
from going t o co lleg e
, 3 . leaves d e c isio n e n t ir e ly to me
,
it. encourages me to go t o c o lle g e
, 5. i n s i s t s I go____
87. G enerally, I g e t along w ith my mother: 1 . id e a lly ____, 2 . very
well
, 3• fairly well
, it.
poorly
, 5 . very poorly
88. Ify mother th in k s I have th e a b i l i t y t o make myown d ecisio n s:
1. seldom or never
, 2. sometimes
, 3. usually
, it. al­
most always
, 57 always___
r ig h t th in g :_1 . always ,
, it. sometimes
, 5* seldom
_

89. Ify mother th in k s I t r y t o do th e
2 . alm ost always
, 3 . u su a lly
or never____

90. Are th e r e any im portant re la tio n s h ip s w ith your mother th a t have
n o t been covered?
I f so , what?________________________ ______

The final group of questions are about both parents, your home, family,
or friends. If you have only one parent or are an only child, there
will be a few you can't answer. Answer all you can.
92. As a job for me, I consider my parent's occupation (father's occu­
pation, if boy answering; mother's occupation, if girl answering):
1. ideal
, 2. very good
, 3« average
, it. poor
,
5 . v e ry poor
93. Ify parents discuss family problems with me: 1. all problems
2. most of them
, 3. some of them
, It. few of them
,
5 . none of them___

,

158

9h. I f e e l: 1 , d i s s a t i s f i e d w ith ny home
, 2 . n e u tra l
s a ti s f i e d
, lj. proud_____ , 5 . very proud__

, 3 . w ell

95. I work o u tsid e o f school hours w ithout pay (around house, y ard , or
farm ): 1 . a l l o f th e tim e
, 2 * most o f the tim e
5 3 . some of
th e t i m e , !u l i t t l e of th e time
, 5 . none of the time____
9 6 . My p a ren ts q u a rre l in f r o n t of me: 1 . never
, 2 . seldom
3 . sometimes
. it. o fte n ____ , 5 . very often____

,

97 • When I m arry, I want my mate to have a p e rs o n a lity : 1 . e x a c tly
lik e my p aren t ( fa th e r , i f a g i r l answering} m other, i f a boy
answering)
, 2 . v ery s im ila r to p aren t
, 3 * somewhat s im ila r
to p a re n t
_, U. somewhat d if f e r e n t from parent
, 5 . opposite
to parent
9 8 . G enerally, I
frie n d s
,
same as most
frie n d s
.

g e t along w ith my p a re n ts: 1 . b e tte r than any of my
2 . b e tte r th an most of my frie n d s
. 3 . about th e
o f ny frie n d s
, it. not as well as most o f ny
5 . not as w ell as any o f ny frie n d s ____

99* Ify p aren ts l e t mewear whatever I want t o : 1 . seldom or never .
2 . sometimes____ , 3 . u su a lly ____, it. alm ost always___ ,
5 . always

,

100. When I'm planning e ith e r work o r p lay , I lik e t o include my
b ro th e rs and s i s t e r s i n th e group: 1 . always
, 2 . alm ost a l­
ways
, 3 . u s u a lly
, It. som etim es^ , $. never
( I f your
b ro th e rs or s i s t e r s a re four y e a rs or more older or younger than
you, lea v e t h i s q u estio n o u t.)
101. I f you were moving to another community, how many of th e boys and
g i r l s t h a t you know w e ll would you lik e to have i n your new
community: 1 . a l l of them
, 2 . most of them
, 3 . sane
,
U. few
, 5 . none____
102. About hew many would t h i s be?____
103. Are th e re any you d e f in ite ly w ouldn't want in your new community:
1 . yes
f 2 . no
, 3 . i f y e s, how many_____
We've talk ed about a l o t of problems which boys and g i r l s have to ld us
are im portant between them and t h e i r p a re n ts . Do you th in k o f any th a t
you want to add t h a t h a v e n 't been included?____________________________
O ther comments:
T h a t's a l l .

Thank you I

159

S cale W eights-^/
Q uestionnaire

#
2 a ~ 5 ,a ,3 ,2 ,i
25—1, 2,3, a, 5
26—1 , 2, 3 ,5 ,a
27—5 ,a ,3 ,2 ,1
28—a ,5 ,3 ,2 ,1
29—1 ,2 ,3 ,a ,5
30—1 , 2 , 3 , a, 5
31—5, a, 3 ,2 ,1
32—1 ,2 ,3 ,a ,5
33—5 ,a ,3 ,2 ,1
3a—1 , 2 , 3 , a ,5
35—5, a, 3 , 2 ,1
36—1 ,2 ,3 ,a ,5
37—5 ,a ,3 ,2 ,1
38—5 ,a ,3 ,2 ,1
39—1 ,2 ,3 ,a ,5
ao—1 , 2 , 3 , a ,5
ai—5, a, 3 , 2 ,1
a2—1 , 2 , 3 , a, 5
a3—5 , a , 3 , 2 ,1
aa—1 , 2 , 3 , a ,5
a5—5,a,3 , 2,1
a6—1 , 2 , 3 , 5 , a
a7—5 , a , 3 , 2 ,1
as—1 , 2 , 3 , a ,5
a 9 ~ 5 , a, 3 , 2 ,1
50—1 ,2 , 3 ,a , 5
51—1 , 2 ,3 ,5 , a
52—5, a, 3 , 2 ,1
53—1 , 2,3 , a, 5
5 a - 5 ,a ,3 ,2 ,i
55—1 ,2 ,3 ,a ,5
58—5, a ,3 , 2 ,1
59—1 ,2 ,3 ,a ,5
60—1 ,2 ,3 , 5 , a
61—1 , 2 , 3 ,a ,5

Q uestionnaire
#
62—5 ,a , 3 ,2 ,1
6 3 ~ k , 5 ,3 ,2 ,1
6k—1 ,2 ,3 , Ia, 5
65—1 ,2 ,3 , U, 5
66—5 , U, 3 ,2 ,1
67—1 ,2 ,3 , a ,5
68—5, a ,3 , 2,1
69—1 ,2 ,3 , a, 5
70—5, a ,3 ,2 ,1
71—1 ,2 ,3 ,a ,5
72—5 ,a ,3 ,2 ,1
73—5 ,a ,3,2,1
7a—5 , a ,3 , 2 ,1
75—5, a, 3 , 2,1
76—1 ,2 ,3 ,a ,5
77—1 ,2 ,3 , a ,5
78—5, a, 3 ,2 ,1
79—1 ,2 ,3 ,a ,5
so—5 , a ,3 , 2,1
81—1 , 2 , 3 ,5 , a
82—5 , a ,3 , 2,1
83—1 ,2 ,3 ,a ,5
8a—5 , a ,3 , 2 ,1
85—1 ,2 , 3 ,a , 5
86—1, 2, 3 , 5 , a
87—5, a ,3 ,2 ,1
88—1 ,2 , 3 ,a , 5
89—5 ,a ,3 ,2 ,1
92—5 ,a ,3 ,2 ,1
93—5, a, 3 ,2 ,1
9a—1 , 2 , 3 , a ,5
95—1 ,2 ,3 ,a ,5
96—5 ,a ,3,2,1
97—5, a ,3 ,2 ,1
98—5 ,a ,3 ,2 ,1
99—1 ,2 ,3 ,a ,5

1 / Assigned a f t e r c o rre la tin g each item -with th e c h ild 's own
fe e lin g about h is r e la tio n s h ip to h is p aren t— checked f u r th e r
by in te r n a l c o n sisten c y .

APPENDIX "C”
BASIC DATA TABLE I
Completion Of The Statement* M^y Father (Mother) Shonre Favoritism Among His Children....*”
Analyzed By Residence* Socio-Economic Level, Age and Sex
Father
%
SaneVery Often Often times Seldom Never
FARM
nOPEN COUNTRY
n- 176
VILLAGE
n* 220
TOWN
am 165
FRINGE
n» 190
CITY
n- 2 0 2 .....
HIGH SOC-EC.
n= 307
LOW SOC-EC.
«= 168.....
11TH BOYS
if*

1 U.7

13.2

18.3

17.8

2£

9 .3

lls.8

2 0 .U h&L

8 .3

8.3

19.0

19.0

1 0 .0

12.7

16.0

13.3

6 .1

7.U

12.6

L.8

19.3

12.0

51.2

Uw9

7.8

6 .5

18.1*

21.2

U6 .1

22.0

3 9 .U

9 .7

7.1

22.1

22.7

38.3

15.8

1U.5

50^

11.7

7.8

17.9

17.3

1*5.2

8.0

10.6

7.7

6.7

1U.U

11.3

59.7

8.2

3 .6

8 .5

1U.U & £
1U.1 1*6.5

6.6

3 .0

9.8

15.1

15.8

19.1

16 . u 2U 6

15.5

11*.3

19.0

1U.3

35.1

11. u 17.9

2U.1 38.8

9 .6

5.3

19.5

2U.1

1*1.6

17.0

51.1*

6.6*

U .l* 20.5

16.1

52.7*

7.6

316

11TH GIRLS
n» 376
8TH BOYS
n- 303
8TH GIRLS
n-3U7

36.1

Mother
SomeVery Often Often times Seldom Never
ll*.8
10.8 16.9
17.2 1*0.1*
%

5.9*

6 .1 * 19.8*

15.1s 1*5 .2

18.3

10.8

12.5

16.1

1*0.9

16.5

1 2 .U 15.2

13.1

1»3.5

1U.5

12.6

13.2

1U.8

1*1*.9

lh .7

10.6

13.8

1*5.6

15.3

are compared with farms
low with high socio-economic levelj
age-sex groups compared
with 11th boys; *age-sex groups compared with 8th girls (note, 8th girls and 11th boys not
compared).
Percentages computed horizontally, "No answer” equals total subtracted from 100%.

BASIC BATA TABLE 2
Completion Of the Statement* "J§r Father (Uother)Is Interested In What I D o .....* "
Analyzed By Residence* Socio-Economic Level* Age and Sex
F ath er

Mother

%
Almost
Sane- Seldom/
Always Always U sually tim es Never

%
Almost
Some- Seldom/
Always Always U sually tim es Never

FARM
8.1
3 .2
1*9.0
23.7
15.U
n= 1;09
OPEN COUNTRY 1*8.9
25.0
17.6
8.0
.6
nw 176
TILLAGE
6.8
3.2
12.7
50.5
25.5
n - 220
TOWN
3 .0
1*9.7 2l*.9
7.2
1U.5
n* 165
FRINGE
56.0
1.6
1 9 .U 1U.7
7.9
n* 191
CITY
62.8
1.8
11.6
U.8
17.9
n* 2 0 7 . . . . . .
HIGH SOC-EC
8.1
2l*.l*
62.5
2.9
.7
n* 307
LOW SOC-EC
11.2
l*o.i 18.1* 25.0
l*.0
CT* 1 6 8 . . . . . .
11TH BOYS
3.2
2l*.l* 20.3
7.9
1*3.2
n* 316
11TH GIRLS
13.6
8.5
21.5
5l*.i
1.9
nw 376
12.2
8TH BOYS
*8.1* 21.5
6.6
1.3
n= 303
2l*.8
2.6
8TH GIRLS
11.1
5.8
5U.6
n= 3h2
For explanation of the sign ifican ce of differences see
Percentages computed h orizon tally. "No answer" equals
W

W

W

66.2

20.9

9 .0

2.9

.7

69.2

21.U

5 .5

1 .1

2.7

72.3

19.1

6 .0

2.1

.1*

66.6

25.3

l*.l

3 .5

.6

83.2

10.8

3 .7

1.1*

.5

72.3

19.1*

6.3

1.9

.0

78.5

ll*.0

U.9

1 .0

.7

67.3

16.7

10.1

5.1*

.6

61.6

25.9

9 .8

2.1

.0

79.6

2A
6 .0

2.0

.3

67.6

U il*
22.1

3.8

.0

73.6

18.0

5 .6

1.1*

.0

footnote, Table 1, Appendix "C".
to ta l subtracted from 100 per cent.

BASIC DATA TABLE 3
Completion Of The Statement; "If I were In Trouble, I Could T ell Ify Father
(M other)...," Analyzed By Residence, Socio-Economic Level, Age and Sex
%

F ather

In Any
Not At
S itu a tio n Most Some Few All
FARM

%

Mother

In Any
Not At
S itu a tio n Most Some Few A n
Wi.9
32.0 15.8 h . l
2.9

31.3
3 5 .h
I S .3
8.3 5 .1
h,09
OPEN COUNTRY
27.3
38.6
20.5
9 .7 3.U
n= 176
VILLAGE
3 5.0
3 h .5
18.6
7.7 3.6
n= 220
TOWN
3 1 .5
39.U
17.0
8 .5 3 .6
n= 165
FRINGE
33.2 12J. 10.0 5.3
n - 150
CITY
27.7 17.8 l l .U 2.5
n= 202.........
HIGH SOC-EC
U2 .0
37 I 0 iilu * *"ul?*""2 I 3
n* 305
LOW SOC-EC
21.7
38.2
21^7
9.2 8^6
n«* 151.........
11TH BOYS
*£o.*5........36.h *iil6* * *6 ^0 ***1 '.9
n» 316
11TH GIRLS
30.6
30.9* 19 .ll 12j5 6 ^
n - 376
8TH BOYS
Uo.6*
3 U.0
15.5
7.3 2 .6
on= 303
8TH GIRLS
25.U
38.5
20.7
9 .3 5 .0
n - 3H2
For explanation o f the sign ifican ce of differences see
Percentages computed h orizon tally. "No answer" equals
re*

U7.2

31.1

15.0 5 .0

1.7

52.8

27.9

12.9 5 .2

.9

50.0

3 0 .6

12.9 1*.7

1.2

50.5

29.3

12.0 1 .3

l .l i

57.2

26.0

8^

1.9

5.6

53.8 ........32!£*" *812 **lu3 **" i l o *
ltf.6

25.6

17i3 6 .5

3 .0

3 6 . 0 ........3 5.b *18[3 * *7.6***2.k
63.0

20.1* 10.3 3.3

3 .1

U0.5*

38 . 0 * 1U.9* 5.7

.6

57.5

28.1

9 .0

3.9

1.1

fo o tn o te , Table 1, Appendix "C".
t o t a l su b tracted from 100 p er cen t.

BASIC BATA TABLE 1*
Completion Of The Statement, nlfy Father (Mother) Thinks I try To Bo The Bight
T h in g...," Analyzed By Residence, Socio-Economic Level, Age And Sex
Father

Mother

%
Almost
Same- Seldom/
Always Always Usually times Never

FARM
1*2.8 26.9
18.1
n» 1*09
OPEN COUNTRY 20.5
1*6.6 23.9
n - 176
VILLAGE
16 il* 1*9.1 23.2
n= 220
TOWN
23.0
1*6.7 26.1
n= 165
21.6
2U.2
FRINGE
lil.l
n - 190
30.2
CITY
1*3.1 18.8
n3 2 0 2 . . . . . .
HIGH SOC-EC
1*3.6 19.3
31.8
n» 305
LOW SOC-EC
15.8
38.2
30.9
IP 151* *** *'
11TH BOYS
1*8.7 25.0
13.3
ri= 316
25.0
11TH GIRLS
1*5.5 21.5
n» 376
8TH BOYS
21.1
1*2.2 25.7
n - 303
8TH GIRLS
1*2.3
2l*.5
23.7
n - 31*2
For «*pi»nAtinn o f the sign ifican ce
Percentages computed h orizon tally.

%
Almost
Some- Seldom/
Always Always Usually times Never

10.0

1 .0

20.6

1*9.3

20.1

7 .5

1.2

6.2

1.7

2U.U

1*5.6

20.0

7.2

2.2

10.9

.5

39.3

1*8.9

2U.5

5.6

.9

3 .0

1 .2

27.1

1*5.3

22.1*

l*.l

0 .0

8.9

3 .2

25.5

1*6.2

22.6

3.8

1.9

5.9

2.0

33.5

1*1*.6

1&.9

5.6

1.1*

3.9

1.3

31.8

1*6.5

17.7

3 .0

.3

13.8

.7

19.0

1*1.1

25.0

13.1

.6

9 .8

1.6

20.1*

1*9.1

21.6

1*.9

2.1*

5*6

1.9

30.6*

1*5.0

18.3

l*.l*

1.3

9 .6

1 .0

22.8

1*6.2

21.2

8.2

1.2

23.9

1*7.9

21.1

’M
5.9

0 .0
.8

oif differences see footnote. Table I . Appendix "C."
"No answer" equals to ta l subtracted from 100 per cent.

BASIC TABLE 5
Completion Of The Statement, "I f e e l Sure Ify Father (Mother) Likes M e....,"
Analyzed By Residence, Socio-Economic Level, Age and Sex
Mother

Father

FARM
IS* U09
OPEN COUNTRY
n - 176
VILLA®
rt= 220
TOWN
is* 165
FRINGE
m 190
CITY
if*

%
Almost
Some- Seldom/
Altiays Always Usually times Never
66,0
7.6
20,5
3.9
1*7

%
Almost
Soane- Seldom/
Always Always Usually times Never
1 .0
3.6
68.0 18.9
8.5

69.3

15.9

8.5

U.0

1.1

62.8

26.7

5.0

a.a

1 .1

72.3

18.6

U .l

a.5

.5

73. a

21.9

3.0

1.3

0 .0

67.9

21.8

6.1

3.0

1.2

70.0

20.0

5.3

3 .5

.6

72.6

16.8

a. 2

5.3

1.1

72.6

19.7

M

3.8

1 .0

7li.7

18.3

2.5

3.0

1.0

73.5

18.6

3.3

a. 2

.5

71.5

22.0

3.9

2.3

6a.9

21 . a

5.a

7 .1

.3
1.2

60.7

26.2

9.1

2.7

.9

7h.O

17.0

3.1

a.6

1.0

70.9

21.5

5.7

1.9

0.0

73.0

18.9

3.a

3.9

.8

202............

1.6
3 .6
HIGH SOC-EC
76.8 17.7
.3
n= 305
2.0
8.0
7.2
LOW SOC-EC
^8,5 23.7
is* 151.........
.6
11TH BOYS
9.5
3.5
60.U 25.3
n* 316
2.1
5.1* U.3
11TH GIRLS
71.8
16.5
IS* 376
1.0
69.6
8TH BOYS
a.3
7.3*
17.5
n= 303
2.0
75.6 17.8
.9
8TH GIRLS
3.5
n- 3h2
For explanation of the significance-of differences see
Percentages computed horizontally. "No answer" equals

footnote, Table 1, Appendix nC."
total subtacted from 100 per cent.

BASIC DATA TABLE 6
Completion Of The Statement, "l^y Parents Quarrel In Front Of U e ....,"
Analyzed By Residence, Socio-Economic Level, Age and Sex
%

Never
30.6

Seldom

Sometimes

Often

Very Often

FARM
21.2
1*0.7
5.9
1 .5
n - U22
OPEN COUNTRY
25.2
38.6
7.6
25.7
2.9
n» 181*
VILLAGE
l*l*.6
19.8
3 .6
.9
31.1
n - 239
TOWN
26.1*
27.0
1.8
3.7
lil.l
n» 173
FRINGE
33.6
22.1*
3U.2
5.6
l*.l
xpi 210
CITY
37.6
22.1*
28.3
8.3
3.1*
n= 217..............
HIGH SOC-EC
36.2
33.2
22.1
2.0
3.9
m 307
low SOC-EC
2.1*
- 7 .1
23.2
27.1*
36.3
ns 168..............
11TH BOYS
22.8
38.0
6.9
23.1
2.7
n= 33 U
11TH GIRLS
22.2
27.7
5.3
36.5
3.3
n« 397
28.1*
8TH BOYS
1*0.8
18.0
5 .2
.3
n - 323
8TH GIRLS
2.2
32.1
35.1
l*.l*
21.3
n= 3 6 1 _______________________________________________________________
For ex p lan atio n o f th e s ig n ific a n c e of d iffe re n c e s see fo o tn o te, Table I ,
Appendix "C."
Percentages computed h o riz o n ta lly . "No answer" equals t o t a l subtraced from
100 p e r c en t.

BASIC DATA TABLE 7
Completion Of The Statement, nlfy Father (Mother) Thinks I Have The A b ility To Make
Vfy Ovm D e c i s i o n s A n a l y z e d By Residence, Socio-Economic Level, Age And Sex
F ath er
Mother
%
Almost
Some- Seldom/
%
Almost
Some- Seldom/
Always Always U sually tim es Never________Always Always U sually tim es Never
FARM
11.0
39.6
27.1
n» 1*09
OPEN C0UNTRI10.8 1*7.7 21.6
n» 176
VILLAGE
8.6
1*7.3 19.5
n - 220
TOWN
10.9
21.2
50.3
n* 165
FRINGE
9 .5
1*8.9 22.6
n - 190
CITY
16.8
1*5.5 21.3
n* 202
HIGH SOC-EC 15.7
18.1*
50.5
np 305
IOW SOC-EC 10.5
38.9
28.3
n* 1 5 1 .^
50.6
11TH BOYS 12.0
21.5
n= 316
11TH GIRLS 13.3* 51.6* 19.1**
n= 37o
1*1.6 25.1*
8TH BOYS 11.2
H= 303
8TH GIRIS
38,0
8.5
25.7

19.1

2.0

10.7

1*1.3

25.7

20.1*

1 .5

17.0

1.7

13.3

1*2.8

21.7

18.9

2.2

9.1*

1*2.9

25.8

21.0

.1*

23.6

.1*5

15.8

1 .2

9.1*

1*8.8

20.0

20.6

.6

15.3

2 .1

llt.l*

1*2.8

21.6

18.8

1.1*

33.9

2.5

16.7

1*7.1*

16.3

H*.9

2.8

1U.1i

.7

13.1*

1*9.8

18.7

15.1

2.0

25.0

.7

13.1

29.2

31.5

26.2

0 .0

13.6

1.3

U*.3

1*5.1

21.0

15.9

1.8

13.3*

2.1

16.2*

50.1*

18.5

12.9*

2.1

21.1

.7

10.1

1*0.5

26.9

21.2

.6

23.U

2.3

7.6

39.7

22.5

27.6

1.1*

33° 3 U2_____________________________________________________________________________________________

For ex p lan atio n of th e sig n ific a n c e of d iffe re n c e s see fo o tn o te , Table 1 , Appendix "C."
Percentages computed h o riz o n ta lly . "No answer" equals t o t a l su b tracted from 100 p er c e n t.

BASIC DATA TABLE 8
Completion Of The Statement, "Ify Father (Mother) Pries Into Ify A ffa ir s ,...,"
Analyzed Ely Residence, Socio-Economic Level, Age and Sex
Father
%
SomeVery
Never Seldom times Often Often

Mother
%
SomeVery
Never Seldom times Often Often
3 .2

5 .5

lt.lt

2.3

23.0

U6 .0

2lt.7

3.8

2.6

lt.2

1 .8

21.2

U7.6

21.8

5.9

3 .5

18.3

5.2

3 .1

28.2

lt0.3

20.lt

5.3

5 .0

36.1

18.8

3 .0

lt.0

5U.1

36.lt

001
.1

28.8

Ut.9

20.0

3.7.

2.2

22.lt

OPEN 0 'RY
n= 176
VILLAGE
n= 220
TOWN
n» 16^
FRINGE
n - 1$1
CITY
n» 2 0 2 ...
HIGH SOC-EC
n - 305
LOW SOC-EC
n - 152 . . .
11TH BOYS
ns 316
11TH GIRLS

27.3

lt5.lt

21.6

lt.0

1 .7

31.8

39.5

2 lt.l

2.3

26.7

lt9.1

17.6

31.lt

ltl.lt

58.1

8th IXfs

6 .6

22.5

i a . i .2 5 .8
It3.lt 23.6

M
H I

FARM

6 .1

5.1

27.5

U7.9

18.7

3 .3

2.3

25.lt

U7.6

17.9

lt.2

3 .6

36.2

37.5

19.7

3.9

2.0

25.0

39.3

26.2

8.3

.6

22.5

U6.8

2lt.lt

lt.lt

1.9

16.2

U7.2

22.6

7.3

6.1t

2h£
25.lt

ltlt.lt 17.0

2 .1

2.9

31.2* 37.9

21.0

5.1i

lt.lt

5 .0

2.3

26.9

23.1

3.U

2.2

39.9

23.1*

lt3.3

3.8
35.6 ltO.3 16.6
2.9
2lt.3 ltl.7 25.1
5.9
2.3
n= 3U2
For explanation of the sign ifican ce of differences see footnote, Table I , Appendix "Q."
Percentages computed horizon tally. "No answer" equals to ta l subtracted from 100 per cent.
s f i 303

BASIC DATA TABLE 9
Completion Of The Statement, nJfy Father (Mother) Lets Me Go Out To Social Events By
I fy s e lf....," Analyzed By Residence, Socio-Economic Level, Age and Sex
Father

Mother

%

Any Almost
_______ Time Aqy Time
FARM
15.1* 3U.6
n« 1*09
OPEN COUNTRY 15.3
38.1
n* 176
VILLAGE
1*0.0
20.0
n= 220
TOWN
15.8
37.0
n» 165
FRINGE
12.0
37.7
n= 151
CITY
22.8
1*2.6
n« 202
HIGH SOC-EC 18.0
1*1.3
n - 305
LOW SOC-EC U*.5 3li.2
n - 152
1*1*.6
11TH BOYS
29.1
n* 316
11TH GIRLS 19.9
38.3*
n» 376
8TH boys
10.9* 39.3
n= 303
8TH GIRLS
31.5
7.3
n= 3U2

%

SomeUsually times Seldom
19.8
25.1
U.9

-----------

Any Almost
SomeTime Any Time Usually times Seldom
17.0
1*.6
26.5
13.1* 37.5

22.2

18.7

5.1

13.2

22.7

13.6

2.7

29.7

12.1

29.8

20.9

15.1*

a .9

20.8

1*5.1
1*0.0

22.6

U*.o

2 .1

a.8

1U.7

1*2.9

28.8

8.2

3.5

12.6

6.8

ia .6

37.1*

28.2

15.5

3.1*

18.8

11.9

2 .5

21 .5

1*1*.8

19.6

11.2

2.8

23.6

13.8

2.6

16.3

1*7.9

21.2

12.1

1.6

22.1*

2U.3

U.6

13.7

33.3

31.5

16.7

3 .6

18.1*

6.0

1.6

28.3

1*7.5

17.7

5 .2

.9

23.9

12.5

U.5*

19.0*

1*0.8*

2l*.9

11.0*

l*.l*

26.7

19.5*

2.6

9.2

1*3.3*

28.8

1 5 . 8*

1.9*

28.3

2U.2

7.9

8.2

32.9

25.9

2i*.5

7.3

For explanation of the sign ifican ce of differences see footnote, Table 1, Appendix "C."
Percentages computed h orizon tally. "No answers" equals to ta l subtracted from 100 per cent.

BASIC DATA TABLE 10
Completion Of The Statement, "Ify Barents Discuss Family Problems With Me• . . . , "
Analyzed By Residence, Socio-Economic Level, Age and Sex
%

A ll

Most

Some

FARM
bO.l
8.3
31.3
n= L22
OPEN COUNTRY
7 .1
U2.U
35.3
np* 181;
VILLAGE
U9.0
27.2
5.U
n - 239
TOWN
9 .2
1*8.0
27.7
n= 173
FRINGE
ho .5
9 .5
30.5
n - 210
CITY
8.8
31.3
U7.5
n» 217...............
HIGH SOC-EC
11.1
19.2
2 5 .k
n» 307
LOW S0C*EC
29.2
35.7
6 .5
n» 168...............
11TH BOYS
10.1
1*6.3.
29.0
33U
11TH GIRLS
31.1
9 .5
1*6.3
n» 397
8TH BOYS
6 .6
33.5
1*3.7
n* 323
31.0
6 .8
8TH GIRLS
1 3 .7
n=» 36 I
For ex p lan atio n o f th e s ig n ific a n c e of d iffe re n c e s see
Appendix "C."
Percentages confuted h o riz o n ta lly . “No answer" equals
100 p e r cent*

Few

None

1U.2

U.o

8.7

5.U

15.1

2 .5

12.1

2 .3

lh .8

2.9

8.8

2.8

7.8

2.0

22.6

U.8

11.0

3.7

10.3

2.8

13.9

3.2

15.5

3.9

1

fo o tn o te , Table 1,
t o t a l su b tracted from

BASIC DATA TABLE 11
Completion Of The Statement; "Ify Parents Let Me Wear Whatever I want T o..
Analysed By Residence; Socio-Economic Level; Age and Sex
%

FARM
n= )|9?
OPEN COUNTRY
3U.8
n= 181*
VILLAGE
31.0
n» 239
TOWN
27.7
n - 173
FRINGE
28.1
n - 210
CITY
35.0
im 217...............................
HIGH SOC-EC
27.0
n* 307
LOW SOC-EC
36.9
n= 168
.
11TH BOYS
33.0
n - 339
11TH GIRIS
1*7.1*
n= 397
8TH BOYS
13.6*
n= 323
31.0

Almost Always
39.6

U sually
16.6

Sometimes
7.6

Seldom/Never

35.9

18.5

8.2

lpL.il

19.2

7.1

. 1*

1*2.2

17.3

10.0

.6

1*3.8

18.6

5.7

1.0

1*0.3

10.6

6.9

1*6.2

19.9

5.5

0.0

35.1

19.6

6 .5

1 .2

1*2.2

16.6

1*.6

1 .5

37.3

12 . 0*

3 . 3*

0.0

1*5.2

23.5

11*. 2*

1.9

39.1

19.1*

8.9

1.1

1.9
1.1

. 1*

For ex planation of th e s ig n ific a n c e of d iffe re n c e s see fo o tn o te , Table 1, Appendix "c"
Percentages computed h o riz o n ta lly . "No answer" equals t o t a l su b tracted from 100 p er
c e n t.

O il

Always
3 3 .U

BASIC DATA TABLE 12
Completion Of The Statement, "I Feel That My Father Approves Of How I B e h a v e ....,”
Analyzed By Residence, Socio-Economic Level, Age And Sex
F ath er

Mother

%
Almost
Some- Seldom/
Always Always U sually tim es Never
FARM
n= h09
OPEN COUNTRY
n= 176
VILLAGE
220
TOWN
n= 165
FRINGE
n - 191
CITY
rt* 202...........
HIGH SOC-EC
n= 305
LOW SOC-EC
IS- 1 5 2 . . . . . .
11TH BOYS
n - 316
l i r a GIRLS

%
Almost
Sane- Seldom/
Always Always U sually tim es Never

17.8

1*1*.7

21*.2

10.8

1.7

18.0

U7.2

22.1*

10.0

1.2

15.3

1*7.7

23.9

9.7

3.U

18.1

52.2

15.U

12.1

2.2

13.6

U7.3

28.8

10.6

l.U

12.3

57.9

18.7

10.2

.9

12.1

50.3

23.6

12.1

1.2

11.8

5 0 .6

22.9

13.5

. 6

18.3

1*1.9

22.0

15.2

2.1

16.5

2*8.1

21.1*

12.1

1.9

Hull

5U.9

20.3

8.9

1.0

18.2

2*6.2

23.1*

8.9

2.8

13.1

57.0

21.3

6.2

1 .0

15.6

52*.l

18.6

9 .1

1 .6

13.2

2.6

22.0

2*0.5

20.8

13.7

2.1*

13.9

1 .0

9 .8

52.1*

21.6

12.8

2.7

8.0

2.2*

20.0

53.8

16.7*

6.7

2.6

17.8
13.0

1*!*.3

18.1

51*. 5* 16.8*

27.2

1*8.1} 22.1
0 .0
8TH IXyS
13.6
15.5
1*3.7 28.1
12.9
1.7
23.5
n= 303
8TH GIRLS
1 .8
1*7.0 23.1
10.1
.8
2*6.1 22.8
11.1
18.3
17.5
n» 31*2_________________________________________________________________________________
For explanation of the sign ifican ce of differences see footnote, Table 1, Appendix "C.”
Percentage computed horizon tally. "No answer” equals to ta l subtracted from 100 per cent.

BASIC DATA TABLE 13
Completion Of The Statement, "Ifcr Father Respects My O pinion...
Analysed By Residence, Socio-Economic Level, Age and Sex
F ather
%
Almost
Some- Seldom/
Always Always U sually tim es Never
FARM
38.1
w» 1*09
OPEN COUNTRY i 29^5
n* 176
VILLAGE
35.0
n* 220
TOWN
37.6
n= 165
FRINGE
35.8
n - 191
CITY
39 a
n* 2 0 2 . .. .. .
HIGH SOC-EC
1*0.6
LOW*S^C-EC
n= 152
11TH BOYS
n« 316
11TH GIRLS
n= 376
8TH BOYS
n* 303
8TH girls
n= 31*2

Mother
%
Almost
Sane- Seldom/
Always Always U sually tim es Never

18.8

33.7

5.1*

2.1*

1*1 .8

26.3

27.7

2.9

.2

22.2

36.1*

9 .7

0 .0

1*6.7

25.3

20.9

5 .5

.5

22.3

33.2

8.6

0 .0

52.8

20.8

23.1*

2.1

0.0

16.1*

37.0

6.7

2.1*

1*1*.7

26.5

21*.1

3 .5

.6

19.0

1*0.0

3.2

1 .1

1*8.5

26.7

20.1*

3.9

.5

21.3

3U.2

3 .5

.5

l*l*.l*

30.2*

21.5

3.3

.5

2U.6 , 28.8

1*.6

.7

50.8

28.3

17.3

2.6

0 .0

28.3

3.7.8

U0.1

10.5

2.6

39.3

21.1*

33.9

l*.8

.6

32.6

1U.6

38.3

9 .5

1.9

L7.6

18.3

28.1

U.9

0.0

1*0.7

1S.U* 32.7

5 .1

.8

1*7.1

31.2

17.7

3 .1

.8

3U.0

21.5

36.0#

6.9

.7

2*5.5

zk .o

26.9

3.2

0 .0

36.8

26.6

27.7

5.8

1.5

Uli.8

29.0

22.6

2.3

.6

For explanation of the sign ifican ce o f differences see footnote, Table 1 , Appendix "C."
Percentage computed h orizon tally. "No answer" equals to ta l subtracted from 100 per cent.

BASIC DATA TABLE lU
Completion Of The Statement, "For Fun My Father (Mother) And I Do,..,"
Analyzed By Residence, Socio-Economic Level, Age And Sex
^
F ath er
A Great
Many Things Many Some Few Nothing
FARM
n= hO9
OPEN COUNTRY
n= 176
VILLAGE
n= 220
TOWN
n» 165
FRINGE
iff 190
CITY
n» 202 ...........
HIGH SOCIO-EC
n - 305
LOW SOCIO-EC
ns 151 . . . . . .
11TH BOYS
n= 328
11TH GIRLS
n» 390
8TH BOYS
n= 316
8TH GIRLS
n» 355

^
Mother
A Great
Many Things Mary Some Few Nothing

10.0

27.9 36.2

17.6

7.6

13.9

12.5

3 3 .5 35.8

11. u

6.2

18.2

30.0 36.8

10.5

11.5

3U.5 29.7

21.1

U.6

1U.8

3 2 .U 3 1 .U 17.5
'
35.2 31.9 lit. 8

3.3

2 i£

18.7

35.7 32.8

10.2

2.6

1 6 .Ij

7.9

17.1

33.5 32.9

12.9

3 .5

27.9 31.6

11.6

6.8

U i.6

38.8 31.1

12.6

2.9

21.3

25.2 30.2

18.3

5.0

23.8

36.9 25.7

10.3

3.3

22.3

32.8 29.2

12.1

3.3

22.8

31.5

9.8

11.0

2.3

13.2

21.0 38.2

18. U

8.6

10.1

31.0 25i7

20.2

3 .0

13.0

23.1 3U.2

20.3

8.9

6 .h

17.7 U0.6

27.1

7.9

7.U*

26.3*38.3

17.3

9.8*

21.5

la.O 25.3

8.7

3.3

26. k»

33.3 28.7

9 .6

1.3*

11.7*

36.7 36.7* 13.0*

1.9

1h.9

3U.7 33.3

12.0

U.l*

25.9

U3.U 22.3

l.li

7.1

For ex p lan atio n o f th e sig n ific a n c e o f d iffe re n c e s see fo o tn o te , Table 1, Appendix "C."
Percentages computed h o riz o n ta lly . "No answer" equals t o t a l su b tracted from 100 p e r cen t.

BASIC DATA TABLE 15
Completion Of The Statement, "I Consider Tty Father's (Mother's) Correction Of Me...,"
Analyzed By Residence, Socio-Economic Level, Age and Sex
F a th e r's Punishment

M other's C orrection

%

Always
__________ F a ir
FARM
36.6
n= hO?
OPEN COUNTRY 30.7
n= 176
VILLAGE
37.7
n= 220
TOWN
35.2
n« 165
FRINGE
ia .9
n» 191
CITY
39.6
n= 202..........
HIGH SOC-EC
hQ.3
n= 305
LOW SOC-EC
36.2
n* 152..........
11TH BOYS
28.2
ns 316
11TH GIRLS
35.6
8TH S l S

hli.2

%

Almost
Some- Seldom/
Always U sually tim es Never
31.0
19.0
8 .5
3.7

Always Almost
Some- Seldom/
F a ir Always U sually tim es Never
2U.6
37.2
25.8
9.2
1.9

31.2

23.3

8 .5

5 .7

26.9

ho.l

25.3

h i

2.7

30.9

20.5

6.8

2.3

28.5

1A.7

2 0 .h

7.2

1.7

32.7

23.0

5 .5

3 .0

27.6

38.8

2U.1

5.9

1.8

27.7

19.9

7.3

1 .6

33.5

39.8

18.0

7.3

1 .0

28.2

19.3

7.9

3 .5

?8.3

3 6 .h

16.8

6.1

2.3

32.5

20.3

3 .0

3.3

3h.8

39.1

18.6

5 .5

.3

27.0

18. U

1U.5

3.3

25.6

35.1

2 7 .h

8.3

3 .0

27.6

29.1

8.5

U.U

17. h

39.6

29.3

9 .5

3 .1

33.0

1 9 .U

8.8

2.1^

3 0 .0

h l.2

20.5

6 .h

1.8

27.1

19.5

U.3*

3.6

37.3

3 5 .U

19.3

6 .0

1 .6

8TH S itlS
9 .6
3.2
19.2
33.0
3 2 .h 3 8.6
1.7
6 .5
39.1
li}.3
n» 3U2__________________________________________________________________________________
For ex p lan atio n o f th e sig n ific a n c e of d iffe re n c e s see fo o tn o te, Table 1, Appendix /C .”
Percentages computed h o riz o n ta lly . "No answer" equals t o t a l su b tracted from 100 p er cen t.

BASIC DATA TABLE 16
Completion Of The Statement, n£$r Father (Mother) Scolds Me.
Analyzed By Residence, Socio-Economic Level, Age and Sex

FARM
n= U09
OPEN COUNTRY
n* 176
VILLAGE
n* 220
TOWN
n= 165
FRINGE
n- 190
CITY
n= 202
HIGH SOC-EC
n= 305
LOW SOC-EC
n» 151.........
11TH BOYS
n= 316
11TH GIRLS

Father

Mother

%
SomeVery
Never Seldom times Often Often

%
SomeVery
Never Seldom times Often Often

5 .6

3 7 .U U6.9

6.6

2.9

5.3

38.1

U5.1

8.5

2.7

2.8

U2.0

U3.7

8.0

2.8

3.3

38.3

U5.0

10.6

2.8

6 .8

3 6 .U U7.3

7.7

l.U

3.U

36.9

U9.U

8.2

1.7

U.2

35.8

52.7

3.7

2.U

.6

3U.1 53.5

10.0

.6

6.3

31.6

50.0

7.9

2.6

2.9

35.6

U8.1

8.2

U.3

6.U

33.2

51.0

7.9

1 .5

10.2

26.0

U5.1

13.5

U.2

3 .9

U2.6

UU.9

5.6

2.3

U.6

33.1

U8.5

9 .8

3 .0

7.9

31.6

50.0

5.9

3.3

7.7

3U.5

U5.8

10.1

1.8

5 .7

37.7

U5.6

7.9

2.5

U.6

U0.9

39.9

1 0 .U 3.U

7.U

U3.6* 1(1.5* 5 .6

1.9

6.2

37.0»- UU.7

8.7

3 .1

8.6
8TH S)YS
2.5 3U.U 52.2
1 .7* 29.7 55.8
2.3
7.9 2.5
im 303
8TH GIRLS
5 .8
3.2
33.3 50.5
5 .1 29.6 51.6
6 .7
11.3 2.3
n= 3U2
For explanation of the sign ifican ce of differences see footnote, Table 1, Appendix "C."
Percentages computed horizon tally. "No answer" equals to ta l subtracted from 100 per cent.

BASIC DATA TABLE 17
Completion Of The Statement, "When Ify Father (Mother) T ells Me To Do Something,
I U sually.. . . , " Analyzed By Residence, Socio-Economic Level, Age and Sex

FARM

F ather
% Do About Only
Evade
Ignore
E x actly
As I f Con- I f Posor
8 Told Told v en ien t s ib le
Refuse
Ui.8
51.8
1.7
.7
3.9

Mother
% Do About Only
Evade
Ignore
E xactly As
I f Con- I f Posor
As Told Told venient s ib le
Refuse
U.6
3 .6
1.2
2 7 .U 62.2

open Country
2.8
27.2
56.1
36.9
1 .1
51.7
7.U
1 .1
8.3
6.7
n= 13
VILLAC
5.0
30.0
5.0
55.5
3l».l
.5
6.U
57.5
U.7
.9
n» 220
52.8
0.0
61.2
TOWN
3 .6
.6
3U.5
25.3
9.U
2.U
h i
n* 165
FRINGE
1.6
1 .0
3 .8
1 .1
27. U 63.9
3.U
35.3. 5Ui7. 6.3
n* 190
1 .0
CITY
55.8
37.1
50.5
6.9
U.5
31.2
7.U
.9
3 .3
n= 2 0 2 ...,
HIGH SOC-EC
62.6
37.0
56. U
6.2
3.9
2.3
.3
27.9
.7
2.3
n* 30$
LOW SOC-EC
U o.l
U.6
31.0
3 .6
U.8
1.2
U8.7
3 .9
1.3
59.5
n? 168 . . . .
6U.0
11TH BOYS
2.1
7.3
18.9
29.U 57.3
5.U
.3
8.5
U.9
n= 316
2.1
0 .0
35.2
56.8
2.1#
U.8
11TH GIRIS
UU.U ! M
5.U
.5
n= 376
5.6*
1.0
62.0
2.6#
35.0
55.8
8TH BOYS
25.3
5.1
5 .7
.9
on» 303
.6
2.6
31.6
5 .8
8TH GIRLS
56.9
1 .5
5.9
U.5
39.U 50.2
n- 3U2
For explanation of the significance of differences see footnote, Table 1, Appendix "c."
Percentages conrouted horizontally. "No answer" equals to ta l subtracted from 100 ner cent.

BASIC DATA TABLE 18
Completion Of The Statement, "When Jty Father (Mother) Makes Me Do Something, He (She) T ells
Me Why I t ’s N ecessary...,w Analyzed By Residence, Socio-Economic Level, Age and Sex
F ather

FARM
n= h09
OPEN COUNTRY
n= 176
VILLAGE
n= 220
TOWN
n= 165
FRINGE
n= 191
CITY
n= 202...........
HIGH SOC-EC
n« 305
LOW SOC-EC
n= 152...........
11TH BOYS
n® 316
11TH GIRLS
n - 376
8TH BOYS

%
Almost
AlwayB Always
26.2
27.1

Some- Seldom/
U sually tim es Never
16.1
25.7
U.9

Mother
%
Almost
Some- Seldom/
Always Always U sually tim es Never

25.3

27.5

17.5

17.0

1.7

25.0

29.5

23.3

19.3

2.3

30.2

33.0

i5 .a

17.6

3.3

25.5

30.5

22.3

19.1

2.3

28.1

33.6

23.0

ia .5

.a

27.3

26.7

2U.2

18.2

3 .6

28.2

39. h

18.8

11.8

1.2

33.5

25.7

20.9

17.8

2 .1

28.2

33.0

22.8

ia .6

1.0

31.7

29.2

27.2

9.U

1 .5

39.2

30.1*

ia .9

13.1

2.3

35.1

30.8

22.6

9.2

2.0

3U.8

33.2

19.2

10.7

1 .0

23.7

20.U

29.6

21.0

5 .3

26.2

35.1

18.5

17.9

1.8

22.2

30.U

28.8

15.9

2.2

21.0

39.6

21.0

15.5

1.8

27.1

29.3

21.8

18.U

3 .5

32.6

33.8

17.7

13.6

2.1

32.7

23.8

25.7

1U.2

3 .0

29.1

32.6

22.8* 33.6

1.3

16.6
8TH S?J l S
22.2
29.2
16.3
3 .5
3U.U 32 . a 15.2
i.a
28.3
n - 31*2
For explanation of the significance of differences see footnote, Table 1, Appendix "C."
Percentages computed horizontally. "No answer" equals to ta l subtracted from 100 per cent.

BASIC DATA TABLE IS
Completion Of The Statement, "If I Had A Child My Age, I -would Teach Him What Is
Right And Wrong..
Analyzed By Residence, Socio-Economic Level, Age And Sex
Father

Mother

% Exactly
Consid- Entirely
% Exactly
Consid- EnWhat
Nearly
Seme-erably DifWhat Nearly Some- erably tireFather
the what Differ- te r Mother the
-what Differly
Taught
Same Same
ent
ent
Taught Same Same
ent
Diff.
FARM
2.0
U.6
25.7
UU.5 22.5
29.2
U9.U 16.3
U .l
.7
OPiS f& T R Y
10.2
3 0 .1
U3.U 15.U
U0.9 15.9
2.3
31.9
5 .5
3.3
m 176
VILIAGE
33.6
U2.6 19.1
0.0
29.1
U5.9 17.3
5 .5
l.U
U.3
D» 220
TOWN
23.6
3 0 .0
1.2
hi .9 18.2
2.U
U2.U 22.9
3 .5
7.3
n - 165
FRINGE
30.5
l j l.l 1U.7
8.U
3.7
37 .U 1U.6
38.3
3.9
u.u
n - 190
U0.6 18.3
5 .0
CITY
33.2
3 .0
3 7 .U
39.7 1 U.0
U.7
3.3
w* 202..........
HIGH SOC-EC
30.8
2.6
3U.5
U8.5 13.8
U3.3 16.3
3.3
U.3
1.3
n= 305
LOW SOC-EC
U2.8 25.0
29.2
.6
8.6
U.2
1?.7
U2.9 22.6
3.3
n= 152
21.0
6.1
22.2
1.8
11TH BOYS
3 .2
U7.9 22.3
U2.U 25.0
6.3
n= 316
U.o
11TH GIRLS
30.0*
23.7
7.7
U2.3 19.7*
5.1*
UU.7 19.7
2.3
n» 376
38.6*
2.2
39.6
UU.6 11.1
1.6
8TH BOYS
5 .0
•7
U0.3 lh .2
w 303
U2.0 13.8
2.8
8TH GIRLS
39.7
2.3
l.U
29.5
5.3
U7.3 15.2
n* 3U2
For explanation of the significance of differences see footnote, Table 1, Appendix "C."
Percentages computed horizontally. "No answer" equals to ta l subtracted from 100 per cent.

BASIC DATA TABLE 20
Completion Of The Statement, "Jfor Father (Mother) Nags At M e . . . . , n
Analyzed Ely Residence, Socio-Economic Level, Age And Sex
Father
Mother

FARM
n« U09
OPEN COUNTRY
n - 176
VILLAGE
n - 220
TOWN
n* 165
FRINGE
n«» 191
CITY
n - 202..........
HIGH SOC-EC
n - 305
LOW SOC-EC
n - 152..........
11TH BOYS
__ A e r»
n" 317
11TH GIRLS

%
SomeVery
Never Seldom times Often Often
2.0
3U.6 1*0.3 19.3
3.7

%
SomeVery
Never Seldom times Often Often
2l*.l

1*0.9

23.1

8 .0

3.h

38.6

3U.7

17.0

8.0

1*7 .

22.5

bh.5

20.3

9.3

2.7

38.6

35.0

19.1

2.7

3.6

26.0

39.6

26.8

U.7

2.6

1*0.0 37.6

17.0

3 .0

1.8

30.6

30.0

32.9

U.7

1.2

39.3

36.6

15.7

5.2

2.1

30.1

38.8

20.9

1».9

U.U

39.1

32.2

19.8

6.1*

2 .5

31.3

3U.6

21.9

8.U

3 .3

1*1*.3 3l*.l* 15.1

3 .0

3 .3

3 0 .0

36.2

21*.8

7.2

2.0

U.2

2.1*

3U.9

3U.9

22.1*

6.7

.7

31.5

1*1.7 19.0

29.1

37.0

21*. 7

7.6

1 .6 .

19.8

37.8

28.0

10.1

3.1*

UP.9

36.7

16.5

3 .5

2.1

26.1* 38.1

27.1

5 .1

3 .1

2.2
3.6
31.0 1*3.0 16.7* 6.3
8 ra IS ys
1.3
37.3 1*0.6* 15.8
n« 303
31.0 36.1 23.1
ia .8 33.0 16.9
5.U 3.9
8TH GIRLS
1*.7 3 .5
n- 31*2
For explanation of the significance of differences see footnote, Table 1, Appendix ”0 . ”
Percentages computed horizontally. nNo answer" equals to ta l subtracted from 100 per cent.

BASIC DATA TABLE 21
Completion Of The Statement, "I Think Ity Father (Mother) Knows What Is Best For
M e...,n Analyzed By Residence, Socio-Economic Level, Age and Sex
Father

%
Almost
Some- Seldom/
Always Always Usually times Never
16.6
3U.2
7.6
39.6
1 .5

Mother

%
Almost
Some- Seldom/
Always Always Usually times Never

FARM
1*0.9 38.1* U*.l*
5 .1
.7
n» 101
OPEN COUNTRY 3 6 .U 38.1
1U.8
10.2
6 .0
1 .1
9 .1
10.2
10.1*
1 .1
n» 182
VILLAGE
36.8
18.2
6.1*
1*7.2 36.6
0 .0
37.7
.9
U.3
11.9
n« 235
TOWN
1*0.0 19.1*
.6
.6
33.9
5 .5
36.5
1*5.9 13.5
3 .5
n- 170
FRINGE
12.1
12,6
1.0
3 9 .5
1 .1
10.5
1*6.5 31.1
36.3
7.3
n= 206
1*9.0 33.2
CITY
6.9
12.6
1*3.6 33.2
2 .5
5 .1
13.9
.5
n- 2lU «.. . . ,
1*0.0 12.5
HIGH SOC-EC
3 .0
12.1
U.2
1*3.3
1*5.3 37.1
.7
1.3
n« 305
LOW SOC-EC
18.1* 11*.5
.6
3l*.9
.7
10.1 38.7
H*.3
30.3
5.U
152 .......... .
22.6 1*5.1* 22.3
8.2
1.2
11THE BOYS
21*.1 38.3 ‘ 26.0
9 .5
1.9
n= 316
8.8
.8
11TH GIRLS
1*1*. U* 39.2* 10.3
22^5* 1*0.0 17.3*
1.3
5.U
n» 376
1.0
3 .2
8TH BOYS
50.9
36.7
8.9
53.1* 3 2 .0
8.3
5.3
.3
303
12.0
6.1*
31.8
9 .6
8TH GIRIS
1*5.0 35.6
5U.3
3.9
.9
.3
n= 3 1 * 2 __________________________________________________________________

For explanation of the significance of differences see footnote, Table 1, Appendix "C."
Percentages computed horizontally. "No answer" equals to ta l subtracted from 100 per cent.

BASIC DATA TABLE 22
Completion Of The Statement, "Considering The Amount Of Money My Father (Mother) Has,
I Consider That He (She) Spends I t On Me....," Analyzed By Residence,
Socio-Economic Level, Age And Sex

FARM
n» 1*09
OPEN COUNTRY
w» 176
VILLAGE
n» 220
TOWN
m 165
FRINGE
n=* 191
CITY
n* 202.........
HIGH SOC-EC
n* 305
LOW SOC-EC
n= 152.........
11TH BOYS
n* 316
11THE GIRLS
n - 376
8TH BOYS
n« 303
8 T H ^

Father
%
Very
Less
Qener- Gener- Aver- Than
ously ously age Average
26.1* 1*3.2
20.5
7.1

Mother
Less
Than
Any
Parent
2.0

%
Less
Very
Less
Than
Gener- GenerAver- Than Any
ously ously age
Average Parent
28.0 39.2
3 .6
26.3
1 .5

2 5 .0

27.8

39.2

5 .1

1.7

35.2

28.6

29.7

3.8

1 .1

2hk
26.7

30.9

28.2

6.1*

1.8

36.6

29.1* 28.1

1*.7

.9

28.5

38.2

1*.9

1.2

32.1*

3U.7

28.8

1.2

1.2

29.3

29.3

5.8

1.6

1*0.3

28.2

26.2

U.9

.5

1*1.1

25.7

29.2

.5

52.3

23.8

20.1

2.3

l.U

1*1.6

3 0 .5

21*.3

h i
3 .0

0.0

1*3.3

30.3

22.1

2.0

.7

16 . 1*

23.7

1*1*.1

12.5

2.6

28.6

29.8

33.3

6.0

1.8

20.0

25.3

1*3.7

8.2

2.2

27.5

28.1

37.5

U.9

1.2

32.7

26.9

32.1*

5 .1

2.1**

1*2.5

26.9

2U.6

3.3

1 .5

30.7

29.0

32.7

U.9

1.3

33.5

29.1

32.2

3 .5

.9

29.8

31.0

32.7

1*. 7

.3

38.6

29.9

27.1*

2.8

.8

For explanation of the significance of differences see footnote, Table 1, Appendix "C."
Percentages computed horizontally. "No answers" equals to ta l subtracted from 100 per cent.

BASIC DATA TABLE 23
Completion Of The Statement, ”1 Consider Jfy Father's (Mother's) E ducation..*,,”
Analyzed By Residence, Socio-Economic Level, Age And Sex
^
F ather
Very ExcelVery
Good ent
Average Poor Poor
26. U 6.3
8.1
2.7
55.9

13.6

5 7 .U

U.5

0.0

37.U

7.1

51.1

2.7

1.6

10.9

58.6

6 .U

.5

31.9

9.U

55.3

3 .0

0.0

8.5

55.2

7.3

1.2

28.8

10.6

50.0

9.U

1.2

19.9

U2.9

£•3

0.0

2^8

12.1

UU.7

3.U

0.0

2U.5

g -o

U.o

1 .5

39.7

1U.9

38.8

5 .6

.9

22.3

39.3

5.2

.7

39.1

17.9

37.1

3.9

1.0

h i

65.8

1Q.5

3.3

2U.U

hk

60.7

7 .7

1.8

11.1

51.0

7.6

2.5

32.0

8 .5

50.0

7.3

1 .5

13.6

57. U

5.6

.8

30.2

9.2

CM
•
r"*

FARM
n* h09
OPEN COUNTRY
23.9
n» 176
VILLAGE
23.2
n- 220
TOWN
27.9
n* 165
FRINGE
30.9
n» 191
CITY
. 31.0
n = 202 ...........
HIGH SOC-EC
32.5
n- 305
LOW SOC-EC
. 16 . U
n> 152 ............
11TH boys
27.9
n» 316
11TH GIRIS
2 1 .8»

^
Mother
Very ExcelVery
Good lent Average Poor Poor
8.8
6.1
53.8
1.0
29.U

12.0

UU.6

3 .5

.3

11.6

50.5

3 .7

.8

5 .6
1.0
8th S ys
30.0 1U.5
39.5
U8.5
n- 303
33.6
28.9 12.3
8TH girls
6 .U
50.5
.9
n- 3U2
For explanation of significance of differences see footnote,
Percentages computed horizontally. ”No answer” equals to ta l

6 .1

.5

Table 1, Appendix ”C."
subtracted from 100 per cent.

BASIC DATA TABLE 21*
Completion Of The Statement, "When I Ask My Father (Mother) Questions, He (She) Gives
Me Honest A nsw ers,..,” Analyzed By Residence, Socio-Economic Level, Age and Sex
Father

%
Almost
Always Always
FARM
n* U09
OPEN COUNTRY
n= 176
VILLAGE
n - 220
TOWN
n* 165
FRINGE
n - 191
CITY
nP 2 0 2 . . . . . .
HIGH SOC-EC
n® 3Q5
LOW SOC-EC
n . 152 .................
11TH BOYS
n - 316
l i r a GIRLS

Mother

Some- Seldom/
Usually times Never

% Almost
Sane- Seldom/
Always Always Usually times Never

1
a CO
g

56.5

26.2

10.8

1*.9

1.2

56.U

27.5

9 .7

U.6

1 .0

58.5

25.6

9.7

1*.5

1.1

6 2 .1

20.9

10. U

U.U

2.2

60.9

25.9

8.2

3 .6

.5

67.7

20. U

6.8

U.7

.U

61.2

2l*.9

11.5

1.2

0.0

6U.7

20.0

11.2

3 .5

.6

66.0

20.1*

h i

1*.7

1 .6

63.1

22.8

9 .7

2.U

1.9

73.3

17.3

6.9

1 .5

.5

73.3

16.8

5 .1

3.3

l.U

75.1

16.1*

5.6

1.6

.3

70.0

18.2

7.2

2.3

13 .0

50.7

31.6

10.0

U.6

2.0

55.9

26.8

10.7

5.U

.6

57.9

27.5

9 .8

U .l

.3

50.6

3 0 .8

12.5

U.3

1 .5

66.2

20.7

8.0

U.O

.5

70.5

18.5

5.9

3.8

1.3

6 0 . 1*

26. U

7.9

1.3

63.6

23.1

9.8

3 .2

.9
n* 303
68.1
1.2
7.0
U.2
21.6
1.1
8TH GIRLS
3.2
62.2
19.U
10.5
re* 31*2__________________________________________________________________________________
For explanation of the significance of differences see footnote, Table 1, Appendix ”C."
Percentages computed horizontally. "No answer" equals to ta l subtracted from 100 per cent.
3.3

BASIC DATA TABLE 25
Completion Of The Statement, "Ify Father (Mother) Follows Advice Which He(She) Gives
To Me....," Analyzed By Residence, Socio-Economic Level, Age and Sex
Father

FARM
n= h.09
OPEN COUNTRY
176
VILLAGE
n - 220
TOWN
n» 16?
FRINGE
rm ISO
CITY
n» 202..........
HIGH SCC-EC
n - 305
LOW SOC-EC
n= 102
11TH BOYS
n» 316
11TH GIRLS
n - 376
8TH BOYS
8TH S I l S
n» 3U2

Mother

%
Almost
Some- Seldom/
Always Always Usually times Never
23.5
26.9
31.5
2.7
1U.7

% Almost
Same- Seldom/
Always Always Usually times Never
21.1
39.8
25.2
10.9
1.9

21.0

33.5

2U.U

15.9

U.O

26.7

35.6

21.1

11.7

3.3

2U.1

3U.5

2U.5

15.0

1.8

3 0 .0

U l.6

17.2

9.U

.a

20.6

37.0

27.9

12.1

1.8

22.9

U0.6

21.8

13.5

•6

21.6

36.3

21.6

13.7

5.3

23.6

a i.8

20.7

9 .1

2 .a

35.1

32.7

15.0

15.0

2.5

UO.O

33.0

1U.U

10.2

.9

30.2

39.0

19.7

8.9

2.3

31.1

U3.9

16.1

7.9

.7

2 2 .U

2U.3

28.3

19.1

U.6

2U.U

29.2

28.0

1U.9

1.8

20.5

32.6

27.5

16.1

2.5

18.6

U0.2

25.9

1 3 .U

.9

21.3

35.9

22.3

16.2

3 .5

29.3

35.7

20.1

11.6

2.3

2 8 .U

35.6

2U.U

2.6

28.5

U0.2

20.3

7.3

1.3

27.U

31.2

20.1

2.6

30.7

39.2

17.2

10.U

l.U

8.3*
17.2

For explanation of the significance of differences see footnote, Table 1, Appendix "C."
Percentages computed horizontally. "No answer" equals to ta l subtracted from 100 per cent.

BASIC DATA TABLE 26
Completion Of The Statement; ”When I'm Grown Op, I Would Like A P ersonality...* n
Analyzed Ely Residence; Socio-Economic Level; Age And Sex

FARM
OPEN (totjNTRY
n - 176
VILIAOE
n= 220
TOWN
n» 165
FRINGE
n=-190
CITY
n= 202..........
HIGH SOC-EC
LOW*s2c?EC
n- 151..........
11TH BOYS
n= 316
11TH GIRIS
n= 376
8TH BOYS
n - 303
8TH GIRIS
n* 3U2

Father
%
Consid- Some- Some- EnE xactly erab ly what what t i r e l y
l ik e
lik e
lik e D iff,, D iff.
18.1
6 .6
U0.3
23.5 11.2

Mother
%
Consid- Some- Some- EnExactly erably what what tirely
Like
Like like Diff. Diff.
22.9

142.3

2U.1

6.8

3.U

19.3

39.8

22.7

10.2

7.U

19.8

UU.5

20.3

7.7

7.1

20.9

33.6

25.5

12.7

5 .5

26.0

3U.0

26.8

9.U

2.6

18.8

37.0

25 .5

11.0

7.3

17.1

U7.6

20.0

11.2

3 .5

22.1

29.5

25.3

12.6

10.0

25.7

3lu9

39.U

8.7

2 -1

26.2

29.7

18.8

10.1* 15.0

31.2
• • • • • •

37.lt
• • • • • • •

1M
• • • • • • •

7.5
• • • • • •

5.1
• • • • • • •

26.2

37.7

21.0

7 .9

6.9

2U.lt

U5.6

20.0

3.9

5.2

13.2

25.0

33.5

15.8

11.8

19.0

38.7

25.6

8.9

6 .5

1 5 .5

35 .U

2U.U 1U.9

8 .5

13.1

U3.6

25.6

9.8

6.U

1U.6*

39. li

2U.7

12.0

8.5

23.6

ho .3

22.1

8 .5

5.1

29.7*

32.0

20.8

7.9

9.2

25.6*

lil.l

20.6

6.0

5.U

22.8

35.3

23.7

10.8

7.3

32.7

36.9

18.6

7.9

3 .1

For explanation of the significance of differences see footnote, Table 1, Appendix ”C.”
Percentages computed horizontally. "No answer” equals to ta l subtracted from 100 per cent.

BASIC DATA TABLE 27
Completion Of The Statement, "When I Marry I want l$r Mate To Have A P er so n a lity ....,"
Analyzed By Residence, Socio-Economic Level, Age And Sex
%

Very
S im ilar

S im ilar

Somewhat
D iffe re n t

Opposite

.
OS

E x actly
Like P arent

186

FARM
37.8
U.6
35.5
1U.3
n= 1*22
OPEN COUNTRY
38.6
11. I*
9 .7
30.7
9.7
n* 18U
VILLAGE
9 .5
36.U
32.9
1U.3
6.9
n= 239
TOWN
29.2
38.0
9.9
16.9
U.7
n= 173
FRINGE
10.0
29.2
15.6
10.0
35. k
n- 210
CITY
18.1
11.1
7.8
23.1
39.9
n= 217................
28.0
HIGH SOC-EC
12.1
39.1
12.7
5 .5
n= 307
LOW SOC-EC
32.1
16.1
6 .5
32.7
8.9
n= 168................
i5 .6
36.2
11TH BOYS
.......... s : i .........
32.9
9.6
n» 33k
11TH GIRLS
28.2
18.6*
31.0
9 .8
9 .1
n* 397
9 .6
8TH BOYS
U3.U
27.5
2.5*
12.1
n- 323
13.0
8TH GIRLS
32.7
33.5
8.3
9.U
n- 361
For explanation of th9 significance of differences see footnote, Table 1, Appendix "C."
Percentages computed horizontally. "No answer" equals to ta l subtracted frcm 100 per cent.

BASIC DATA TABLE 28
Completion Of The Statement, "Of ISy Father's (Mother's) Friends, I l i k e . . . . , "
Analyzed By Residence, Socio-Economic Level, Age And Sex
Father
% A ll
o f Them Most Half Few None
1.0
U5.6
1*5.9 3.U 2.9

Mother
% A ll
of Them Most Half
5.8
U7.9
U3.3

Few None
2.2
.5

FARM
n« 1*09
OPEN COUNTRY
.6
36.8
36.U
55.7
5.1 2.3
52.7
5 .5 U.U
.5
n* 176
VILLAGE
1*3.6
50.2
6 .0 1.3
1*2.3 8 .6 3.2
.9
1*1.7
.u
n= 220
TOWN
38.2
58.8
52.1
.6
1*.9 1*.2 0 .0
32.9
2.9 U.7
n= 165
FRINGE
1*2.9 3 .1 1*.2 0 .0
U5.6
7.8 1.9
1*8.7
1*3.7
.5
n= 151
CITY
U.2 3 .7
5U.6
5U.0
36.5
5 .5 U.5 0 .0
36.9
.5
n= 202...........
HIGH SOC-EC
52.8
0 .0
3.9 2 .6
1*5.9
5 .5 1 .6
39.3
U5.3
.3
n* 305
LOW SOC-EC
38.2
UU.o
1*5.8 6 .0 3 .0
1.2
.7
1*9.3 5.9 U.6
ns 152 ............
3 2 .0
.6
22.6
11TH BOYS
7.0 3 .5
1.2
55.1
59.1 11.0 5.8
n« 316
U2.6*
1*5.2
.8
11TH GIRIS
.1
U2.0
50.7
U * 2.0
6.9* 1*.3
n - 376
1.0
0 .0
8TH BOYS
5U.5
1*0.0 2.0 2.3
U7.1
U8.3* 1 .6* 2.5
n» 303
1*9.6
U0 .6
U.2 l.U
0.0
8TH girls
1*1.8 3 .5 U.U 0 .0
53.9
n= 31*2
For explanation of the significance of differences see footnote, Table 1, Appendix "C."
Percentages computed horizontally. "No answer" equals to ta l subtracted from 100 per cent.

BASIC DATA TABLE 29
Completion Of The Statement, "My Father (Mother) Lets Me Use His (Her) Personal
P rop erty.,..," Analyzed By Residence, Socio-Economic Level, Age and Sex
Mother

F ath er

%
Seldom
Any

Never
Any

%
A ll
Any­
tim e

7 .8

3 .U

1 8 .0

3 6 .6

2 9 .9

7 .5

7 .0

Most Some
Any­ Some- Seldom
Any
tim e tim es

FARM

1 5 .9

Most Some
Any­ S am tim e tim es
30.8
1*1 .8

OPEN COUNTRY
n» 176
VILLAGE
n= 220
TOWN

1 3 .6

5 0 .0

2 7 .8

U .5

U .o

1 7 .2

3 7 .2

3 0 .0

9 .U

U.U

1 2 .7

U5.U

3 2 .7

6 .0

1 .8

1 U .2

3 9 .9

3 2 .6

6.U

3 .9

U 5 .5

3 2 .1

8 .5

6 .7

8 .8

UU.1

3 3 .5

U .l

5 .9

1 1 .1

1*5.3

3 1 .1

7.U

2 .6

15. U

3 9 .9

3 3 .U .

5 .8

U .3

2 3 .8

1*0.6

2 6 .7

U .o

5 .0

2 1 .9

3 8 .6

2 6 .0

5 .1

6 .0

1 8 .U

UU.9

2 9 .8

3 -9

2 .6

1 8 .0

1*1.0

2 8 .2

6 .9

2 .6

lii.5

1*2.8

3 0 .9

7 .2

3 .3

1 2 .5

3 6 .3

7 .1

8 .3

A ll
Any­
tim e

• • • •

»

3 3 .9

• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •

1 7 .1

5 1 .0

2 6 .6

3 .2

1 .9

1 2 .2

3 7 .5

28 .U

8 .5

8 .8

1 5 .7

1*1.2

3 2 .2

5 .3 *

5 .3

UU.5

2 3 .lt *

2 .6

1 .5

1 0 .8

3 8 .8

3 1 .8

5 .8

1 U .1

U0 .6

3 5 .2

5 .6

3 .9

ll.U

k

FRINGE
n= 190 .
CITY
n - 202 . . .
HIGH SOC-EC
n - 305
LOW SOC-EC
n» 151___
11TH BOYS
n= 316
11TH GTRLS
m 376
8TE (ERLS

hi

iro
1 CD

n= 165

Never
Any

8 .2 *
1 0.1 3 2 . 3 * 3 6 . U 1 0 .1**
5 .6 *
1 6 .2 * 1*6.9* 2 9 .0
8TH boys
1 .7
n - 303
For explanation of the significance of differences see footnote, Table 1, Appendix "C."
Percentages computed horizontally. "No answer" equals to ta l subtracted from 100 per cent.

BASIC DATA TABIE 30
Completion Of The Statement, "My Father (Mother). . .Encourages Me To Go To C o lleg e...,"
Analyzed By Residence, Socio-Economic Level, Age And Sex
F ather
Mother
%
Leaves D is- "Wants
%
Leaves
D is- Wants
Encou*- In - D eci- cour- Me To
Encour- I n D eci- cour- Me To
ages
s i s t s sio n
ages
Q uit
ages s i s t s
sio n ages
Quit
C ollege I Go To Me Me
Now
College I Go To Me
Me Norr
FARM
38.8
13.8
32.5
11.7 50.6
1 .5
2.9
1*1.7
2.7
1.7
n* 1*09
OPEN COUNTRY
36.9
11.1* 1*9.1*
.6
35.0
.6
1.1
1*1.1
1*1.1
1.7
n= 176
VILLA®
1*8.2
11.6
28.8
0 .0
12.7 36.1*
1.1*
.5
57.9
.9
n - 220
TOWN
57.6
.6
.6
0 .0
0 .0
9 .1 30.3
12.9
55.3
30.0
■ ■“
n= 165
FRINGE
52.6
11.1 33.7
0.0
1*8.6
11.1
37.0
.5
.5
.5
ob 190
CITY
1 .0
0 .0
1*9.0
0 .0
50.7
17.3 32.7
27.1*
19.1
.9
n= 202............
HIGH SOC-EC
1 .0
1 .0
0 .0
59.7
13.1 25.2
16.7
.3
57.7
22.9
n= 305
LOW SOC-EC
32.2
2 .6
13.8 50.0
1 .8
1*5.8
.6
.7
33.3
17.3
ism l«Jl............
1*2 .1
16.8 38 .0
10*.8
18.0
11TH BOYS
.6
3 2 .6
1 .2
1 .2
1.3
n= 316
.8
11TH GIRLS
8 .2 1*5.8
1*6 .0
0 .0
1 .6 ‘
1*1 .1
1*3.1
10.3
1.5
n= 376
1 .0
50.0
15.8* 36.0
2.0
29.8
.6
8TH BOYS
16.5
1*3.9
1.3
n - 303
1.8
•6
1*9.6
11.8
8TH GIRLS
1*7.0
.8
9.1 1*0.3
3 5 .5
1.7
n= 3U2
For explanation of the significance of differences see footnote, Table 1, Appendix "C."
Percentages computed horizontally. "No answer" equals the to ta l subracted from 100 per cent.

BASIC DATA TABIE 31
Completion Of The Statement, "I Feel...W ith Hy Home...," Analyzed By
Residence, Socio-Economic Level, Age and Sex
Very Proud
21.6

FARM
n - U22
OPEN COUNTRY
2 3 .U
n= 18U
VILLAGE
26.8
n - 239
TOWN
28.3
n* 173
FRINGE
31.0
"
n - 210
CITY
lt5.2
n» 217.............
HIGH SOC-EC
3 9 .U
n» 307
LOW SOC-EC
17.9
n» 1 6 8 . . . . . . . ..................... ..
11TH BOYS
20.7

Proud
29.2

Well S a tis f ie d
32.2

N eutral
12.1

D is s a tis fie d
lt.O

28.3

31.0

ll.li

It .9

32.2

29.3

8.6

2 .5

23.1

37.0

9.8

1.7

2U.8

28.1

10.5

5 .7

25.lt

18.14

7.8

2.8

28.0

23.8

6 .5

1.6

26.2

32.7

16.7

6 .0

28.1j

32.0

12.6

5.1t

10.1
5.0
l i r a gI rls
30.2
23.U*
30.9
n= 397
30.1
8TH BOYS
26.3
8.9
2.5
33.5
n - 323
10.0
33.2
8th curls
1.9
29.3
2U.9
n= 361
For explanation of the significance of differences see footnote, Table 1, Appendix "C."
Percentages computed horizontally. "No answer" equals to ta l subtracted from 100 per cent.

BASIC DATA TABLE 32
Completion Of The Statement, "As A Job For Me, I Consider My Parent’s Occupation
(Father’s Occupation, I f Boy Answering; Mother’s Occupation, I f Girl
A n s w e r i n g ) A n a l y z e d By Residence, Socio-Economic Level, Age And Sex
Id e a l
16.1

Very Good
U0.3

Average
37.0

Poor
3.3

Very Poor

FARM
2.U
n= U22
OPEN COUNTRY
13.2
.6
7 .5
u i.u
3 7 .U
n» 18U
TILLAGE
UU.6
15.6
30.8
2.2
6.7
n-239
TOWN
38.1
3U.1
8.7
lU .5
2.3
n* 173
U.8
FRINGE
U5.2
27.1
1U.3
U.3
n - 210
26.1
CITY
5.U
U.9
2U.7
38.9
rm 217...............
HIGH SOC-EC
22.8
27.0
3 .6
U.2
39. U
n» 307
LOW SOC-EC
28.0
1.2
U8.2
11.9
7.7
IJO 168 . . . . . . . .
37.0
3 6 .0
U.o
11.0
11TH BOYS
9 .1
n=» 33U
2.6
11TH GIRLS
U.9
33.2
37.3
19.3
n* 397
2.8
35.6
3.8
37.2
8TH BOYS
17.0
n= 323
2.0
36.1
8TH girls
U.5
38.9
16.9
_____ __________________________________ _____________________
n» 361
For ex planation o f th e sig n ific a n c e of d iffe re n c e s see fo o tn o te, Table 1,
Appendix "C."
Percentages computed h o riz o n ta lly . "No ansvrer"equals t o t a l su b tracted from
100 p e r c e n t.

BASIC DATA TABLE 33
Cemulation Of The Statement, "Ify Father (Uother) Treats Uy F rien d s...,"
Analyzed By Residence, Socio-Economic Level, Age And Sex
^
P erfe c tly
2 7 .I*

FARM
n*» 1|09
OPEN COUNTRY 29.0
n - 176
VILLAGE
32.3
n« 220
TOWN
2U.2
n* 165
FRINGE
36.3
n= 190
CITY
U5.6
n - 202 ............... 7777..
HIGH SOC-EC
1*0.6

F ather
Very F a ir ly
Well Well
58.2
11.7

Mother

%

Very
Badly Badly
.7
1 .5

P erfe c tly
31.6

Very F a ir ly
Very
Well Well Badly Badly
1.2
8.7
57.5
.7

57.1*

12.5

.6

0.0

U0.6

1*8.9

10.0

.6

0.0

56.9

9 .1

.9

.9

37.3

55.8

6.9

0.0

0.0

58.2

15.8

0.0

1.2

27.1

60.6

10.0

1.2

.6

1*8.9

12.3

1.6

0.0

37.5

52.1*

9 .1

.5

0.0

lq .6

11.9

.5

.5

53.5

38.6

7.0

0 .0

.9

**17

1*8.5

1*6.2

3.9

.7

.3

.7

29.2

59.5

10.7

0 .0

.6

**•9

30.5

58.5

7.9

2.1*

.6

.8

1*2.1*

1*8.8

7.7

.3

.8

*5U5* " i'.2

LOW*S?C-EC
2U.3
57.9
n» 151...........................
11TH BOYS
23.1
60 h
n* 316
52.1*
11TH GIRLS
3U.0

13.2

.

11.2

*

616
2.6

’

.....
1 .6

0 .0
0.0
3 2 . 0 * 57.3* 10.8
1.0
8TH IZ y s
29. 0* 56.1* 11.9
.3
n - 303
.6
.6
.3
8TH GIRLS
39.7
.3
143.1* 1*7.6 8.2
149.1 10.2
n= 3h2
For explanation of the significance of differences see footnote, Table 1, Appendix "C."
Percentages computed horizontally. "No answer" equals to ta l subtracted from 100 per cent.

BASIC DATA TABLE 3U
Completion Of The Statement, "When I Want Help With My Homework, My Father (Mother)
Helps Me...," Analyzed By Residence, Socio-Economic Level, Age And Sex
Mother

Father

%
Almost
Some- Seldom/
Always Always Usually times Never
2 6 . 1*
33.2
12*7 15.1
11.7

FARM
n* U09
OPEN COUNTRY
13.6 1U.2
n* 176
VILLAGE
22.3 17.3
n= 220
TOWN
19.U 1 6 .L
n« 165
FRINGE
23j2 13.7
n*» 150
CITY
22.3 15.8
n* 202..................................... ..
HIGH SOC-EC
22.9 18.7
n - 305
LOW SOC-EC
11*8
9 .2
n» 152.........................................
11TH BOYS
15.2
9 .8
n - 316
11TH GIRIS
16.2 13.0 kn - 376
8TH BOYS
20.1 19.5

% Almost
Some- Seldom/
Always Always Usually times Never
16. u
26.3
1 9 .7
12.3
21.3

13.1

32,9

25.6

25 .5

18.5

17.9

21.7

13.0

9*5

28.6

21. U

29.3

2 3 .U

16.3

1U.6

33 .u

9 .7

31.5

21.2

26.6

19.1

1U.5

23.7

13.3

12.1

32.1

18.9

2U.8

20.0

15.2

25.2

12.9

10.9

23.8

26.7

29.0

U .U

10.1

20.7

I k ik

’1916

32.1

19.9

13.7

20.0

13.0

32.2

3U.2

15.5

23.2

18.5

25.0

17.9

8 .* 2 ' *30\Y

*33 .*9

23.1

18.3

17.1

20.1

18.6

’i2 li* ‘26I2'
U.8
*‘

10.9

32.7

26.9*

20.2

17.6*

15.6

23.7

19.9*

13.2

2U.8*

21.8*

31.3

28.5

15.2

13.6*

Ilk
8.0

25.8
25.8
13.6
8TH SlllS
19.9 20.1
2U.7
13.1
33.3
1 3 .U
n= 3U2
For explanation of the significance of differences see footnote, Table 1, Appendix ”C."
Percentages computed horizontally. "No answer” equals to ta l subtracted from 100 per cent.

BASIC DATA TABIE 35
Completion Of The Statem ent, "Ifcr F ath er (Mother) Gives Me Inform ation About Sex.
Analyzed Ejy Residence, Socio-Economic Level, Age And Sex
F ather
Mother
T e lls
T e lls
% Answers Even Dis­
Refus­
% Answers Even Dis­
Refus­
A ll
I f I cusses Avoids es To
A ll
I f I cusses Avoids es To
Q uestions D on't Only A Discus­ Dis­
Questions D on't Only A D iscus- Dis­
W illin g ly Ask L i t t l e
sing
cuss
W illin g ly Ask L i t t l e sing
cuss
FARM
18.6
12.0
22.8 13.8
31.8
31.0
U i.o
1U.8
5.8
3.U
n* UQ9
OPEN COUNTRY
30.1
6.2 3U.1
6.8
17.0
U5.6
10.0
5 .6
21.7
13.9
n - 176
VILLAGE
8.2
30.0
1 U.6
27.0
U3.8
21 . U
5.0
32.3
7.7
3.U
n» 220
TOWN
18.2
35.2
51.2
8.2
2 .U 26.1
9 .1
16.5
15.9
5.9
n» 165
FRINGE
32.6
20.2
10.5
U.7
26.3
17.9
5 2 .U
7.7
11.5
6.3
n» 190
3U.2
50.2
15.8
CITY
10.2
7.U 23.8
1U.U
7.U
16.7
5 .1
,,r
nm 202 .........
Uo.o
HIGH SOC-EC
20.3
25.5
U7.2
iS.U
U.5
if.U
9 .5
3.9
n- 305
LOW SOC-EC
15.8
36.2
23.7
16 . U
5.3
2U.U 13.7
U2.3
11.3
6 .5
ip* 151 .........
38.8
11TH BOYS
7.6
7.0
7.6
15.6
18.2
7.0
30.5
3 6 .U
31.3
i f 328
6.1 30.0
11TH GIRLS
26. 0*
29.7*
55.5
22. U 1U.U
8.3
5.9
1.5
n» 389
12.2
8TH BOYS
6 . 6* 30.5* 17. U* 12.5*
3U.5
U .l
30.U
18.9
33.1*
n» 316
61.1 18.9
1U.0
2.6
8TH GIRLS
13.6
10.2
38. U
U .l
33.7
3.U
n- 355
For explanation of the significance of differences see footnote, Table 1, Appendix "C."
Percentages computed horizontally. "No answer" equals to ta l subtracted from 100 per cent.
•

BASIC DATA TABLE 36
Completion Of The Statement, "I Think My Father (Mother) Understands The Problems Of
Young People Of My Age...," Analyzed By Residence, Socio-Economic Level, Age And Sex
%
A ll

F ather
Most Some
2U.2
53.8

FARM
11.5
n* h09
OPEN COUNTRY
1U.8
5U.5
19.3
n» 176
VILLAGE
13.2
18.2
55.9
n» 220
TOWN
20.0
52.1
11.5
n?» 165
FRINGE
52.6
13.7
18.5
n= 150
21.8
CITY
lU.it
50.5
am 202...........
HIGH SOC-EC
16.7
17.7
55.1
305
LOW SOC-EC
11.8
UU.7
27.0
n« 151...........
11TH BOYS
11.1
U8.U 26.0
n= 316
11TH GIRLS
9 .6
52.1
2 3 .U
n= 376
56.8
8TH BOYS
16.2
16.2
na 3o3
8TH GIRLS
18.1
13.7
56.9
m 3h2
For explanation of the significance
Percentages computed horizontally*

7.3

None
2.U

^
A ll
2U.8

Mother
Most Some
55.6
12.6

Few
U.6

None
1.9

9.7

1.7

21.1

26.7

12.2

8.9

1 .1

10.0

2.3

2U.9

5 2 .U

1U.2

8.2

.u

12.1

3 .6

18.8

55.3

16.5

7.6

0.0

12.6

2.1

23.1

5U.3

12.5

7.2

• 2.U

9.9

3 .5

22^6

U5.6

13.0

5 .6

2.8

8.2

2.0

29.2

52.8

9 .5

7.2

.7

12.5

3.3

25.6

55.U

11.9

5.U

1.8

11.1

2 .5

15.2*

53.7*

18.0

9 .1

2.7

12,0

2.9

25.7*

52.7

lU.lt* h k

1.5

7.9

2.6

22.5*

57.6*

13.3

5.7

•6

8.8

2.0

32.7

50.1

9.3

6.2

l.U

Few

of differences see footnote, Table 1, Appendix nC.n
"No answer" equals to ta l subtracted from 100 per cent.

BASIC DATA TABLE 37
Completion Of The Statement, "I Agree W^th }fy Father (Mother) On Religious B e lie fs.
Analyzed By Residence, Socio-Economic le v e l, Age And Sex
F ather

FARM
n« U09
OPEN COUNTRY
n« 176
VILLA®
n= 220
TOWN
n» 165
FRINGE
n* 191
CITY
rtm 202...........
HIGH SOC-EC
n - 305
LOW SOC-EC
n= 152...........
11TH BOYS
n» 316
11TH GIRLS

Mother

%
Almost Some%
Almost Sane
Always Always tim es Seldom Haver______ Always ATwayB tim es Seldom Never
35.6
3 5 .6 21.0
1 .0
2.7
3.U
la .i
36.7 19.2
.7
3 0 .1

38.6

22.2

U.5

2.8

U0.7

38.5

17.0

1.1

1 .6

35.9

35.5

20.5

lt.6

2.7

ia .7

37.1} 19.1

.9

.1}

32.1

38.8

21.2

2.1}

2.1}

U5.3

37.1

1 2 .U

1.8

.6

37.2

33.0

19.9

2.6

3.7

U0 .8

38.3

16.5

1 .5

.5

li3.1

30.2

21.3

2.0

3 .0

1}8.6

31.3

18.2

.9

.5

1|2.2

36.1}

16.1

1 .6

2.0

U7.6

35.8

12.1}

1 .0

1.3

26.3

3U.9

29.6

U.6

3.3

3U.5

36.3

2l».U

1.8

1.8

• • • • • • • • • • • •

36.1.

29.1

1.6

3.8

30.5

1*2.7

21.3

2.1

1 .2

32. U* U0.2

19.7

3 .5

2.7

U5.3

39.2* 11}.1

.8

.3

26.6

1}1}.2 33.8 18.6
29.0 16.8
8th IXys
.9
.3
3.3
3.3
liU.9
n= 303
.8
1.1
la .2
8TH GIRLS
30.5 15.2
51.3
3U.5 17.5
3 .5
2.3
n» 3h2
For explanation of the significance of differences see footnote, Table 1, Appendix "C."
Percentages computed horizontally. "No answer" equals to ta l subtraced from 100 per cent.

197

APPENDIX "D"

METHODOLOGICAL NOTES

D eterm ination of Socio-Economic Lev el

Socio-economic le v e l i s

determ ined i n t h i s study by th e equal w eighting of estim ated income,
occupation, education o f each p a re n t, employment o u tsid e o f home by
m other, number o f o rg an izatio n s of which p aren ts a r e members, and
church attendance of each p a re n t.

This tre atm e n t borrows h e a v ily from

Kauffman, who found a very high c o rre la tio n between most of th ese
item s and th e r a tin g o f lo c a l people i n a r u r a l v i l l a g e - ^

These

c h a r a c te r is tic s were considered to in d ic a te low to high so cio ­
economic s ta tu s as fo llo w s:
Income:
(1)
(2)
(3)
(U)

$11)00 o r le s s p er y ear
$lf>00-3000 p e r year
$3000-6000 p er year
$6000 o r over p e r year

Occupation:
(1) U nskilled and serv ic e work, unemployed, dom estic
(2) C le r ic a l, se m i-sk ille d
(3) S k ille d la b o r, fanners
(U) B usiness, p ro fe s sio n a l
Education:
(1)
(2)
(3)
(U)

(Same f o r f a th e r and mother)
Less than fo u r years education
Five t o eleven years education
Twelve to f if t e e n y ears education
S ix teen or more years education

Employment
(1)
(2)
(3)
(U)

of m others:
S ixteen or more hours p er week
Eight t o s ix te e n hours p er week
One to e ig h t hours per week
No o u tsid e employment

1 / Kauffman, Harold F ., "P re stig e C lasses I n A New York R ural Comm um ty," AES Memoir 260, C ornell U n iv ersity , Ith a c a , March 19un.

is^

Figure 1.
CARD SORTING PROCEDURE FOR DETERMINATION OF SOCIO-ECONOMIC LEVEL

Income

Occupation

F a th e r's
Education

M other's
Education

Mother
Employed

Membership i n
O rganizations

F a th e r'8
Churoh A tt.

M other's
Church A tt.

Low

Low
Medium

High
Medium

High

199

O rganizational membership:
(1) None or one o rg an izatio n
(2) Two o r th re e o rganizations
(3) Four or f iv e org an izatio n s .
CU) S ix or more org an izatio n s
Church atten d an ce: (Same fo r f a th e r and mother)
(1) Never atte n d s
(2) A ttends once or tw ice a year
(3) Attends once o r tw ice amonth
(U) Attends alm ost every week
This d eterm in atio n of socio-economic le v e l i s e m p iric a lly e ffe c ­
tiv e .

I t produces d iffe re n c e s i n mean scores between th e low and

high group which have a c r i t i c a l r a t i o of over 7 .0 .

The w rite r doubts

t h a t any com plicated and tim e consuming judge system w ill b e t te r t h i s
f ig u r e .

T h e o re tic a lly , i t assumes t h a t th e re i s a c o rre la tio n between

th e s e le c tiv e experiences t h a t are a sso c ia te d w ith high (or low) i n ­
come, education le v e l, p a r tic ip a tio n in o rg a n iz a tio n s, and the other
c r i t e r i a l i s t e d and' a ttitu d e s and experiences i n th e fam ily.
Since t h i s stu d y has been concerned only in c id e n ta lly w ith d e te r­
m ination o f socio-economic le v e l, a number of refinem ents might be
made in th e above procedure.

The C r ite ria n of In te rn a l C onsistency

might be a p p lie d to th e e ig h t item s, which might r e s u l t in a change in
th e assigned p o s itio n of a s o c ia l c h a r a c te r is tic .

I t appears to th e

w r ite r q u ite p o s sib le th a t farm ing as an occupation i s given to o high
a r a tin g f o r socio-economic le v e l .

Other item s might be added.

Size

o f fam ily i s one which would c e r ta in ly improve th e e f f ic ie n c y of the
t e s t (See Table $7, page 1 18).

200

Except where otherw ise in d ic a te d , a l l comparisons between high
and low socio-economic s ta tu s omit the two middle groups shown in
F igure I .

Where low, m iddle, and high groups are compared, middle

r e f e r s to th e two middle groups i n F igure I .

201
BIBLIOGRAPHY

A verill, Laurence A., Adolescence, Boston, 1938.
Bain, Reed, "An A ttitu d e On A ttitu d e R esearch,"
Sociology, Vol. XXXIII (1927), p. 9h6.

American Journal of

Bain, Reed, " S ta b ility i n Q uestionnaire Responses," American Journal
o f Sociology, Vol. XXXVII (1931), pp. Uh5-$3.
Becker, Howard, and H ill, Rueben, Family, M arriage, and Parenthood,
D. C. Heath & Co., Boston, 19ZT5^
Bernard, J e s s ie , "The Neighborhood Behavior o f School C hildren i n
R elatio n To Age And Socio-Economic S ta tu s ," American S o cio lo g ic a l Review, Vol. IV (1939), pp. 692-62.
Block, V irg in ia L, "C o n flicts o f Adolescents With T heir M others,"
Journal o f Abnormal And S o c ia l Psychology, Vol. XXXII (1937).
Boas, Franz, Ethnology o f th e Kwakiutl, U.S. Bureau of American
Ethnology, Washington, 1921.
Bowers, S t e l l a M artin,"A Study Of P arent-C hild R e la tio n s ," d o c to ra l
d is s e r ta tio n , The Ohio S ta te U n iv ersity , Columbus, Ohio, 1931.
Bro, M. H., "Parents Can Be People,"
November, pp. 13-19.

Child Study, Vol. XXIII (1 9 l£ ),

Burgess, E.W., "The Fam ily And S o c ia l R esearch,"
Vol. XXVI (19U7), p p . 1-6.

S o cial F orces,

Burgess, E.W., "The Fam ily In A Changing S o c ie ty ," American Journal
o f Sociology, Vol. U I I (191:7-1:8), pp. l£7-22.
Burgess, E.W., and C o ttr e ll, L .S ., P re d ic tin g Success Or F a ilu re In
M arriage, P re n tic e -H a ll, I n c ., New York, 1939.
Cavan, Ruth Shonle, The A dolescent In The Family,
Century C o., New York, 193 ii.

D. Appleton-

Cavan, Ruth Shonle, "Regional Family P a tte rn s : The Middle W estern
Fam ily," American Jo u rnal of Sociology, Vol. U I I (191:7-1:8),
pp. 1:30 - 2 .
Chappie, E.D ., "Measuring Human R e la tio n s,"
Provincetown, 191:0.

The Journal P re ss,

Chappie, E.D., and Coon, C .S ., P rin c ip le s o f Anthropology, Henry Holt
& Co., New York, 19U2.

202

Cuber, John F ., "Consistency I n Q uestionnaire Responses*” American
S o cio lo g ica l Review* Vol. XI (191*6), pp. 13-15.
Cuber, John F ., "A Method Of Studying Moral Judgments R elatin g To
The Fam ily,” American Journal Of Sociology, Vol. XLVII (191*1-2).
pp. 12-23.
Davis, A lliso n , ‘‘American S ta tu s Systems And The S o c ia liz a tio n Of The
C h ild ,” American S o cio lo g ical Review, Vol. VI (19i*l) pp. 31*5-51*.
D avis, K ingsley, "Extreme S o c ia l I s o la tio n Of A C h ild ,"
Jo u rn al Of Sociology, Vol. 1*5 (1939), pp. 55U-65.

American

D avis, W.A., and H avighurst, R .J ., F ather Of The Man," Houghton
M ifflin Co., Boston, 19l*7•
D avis, K ingsley, "The Sociology of P arent-C hild C o n flic ts ,"
(19140), pp. 523-3$.

Vol. V

D inkel, Robert M., "P arent-C hild C o n flic t In Minnesota F am ilies,"
American S o cio lo g ica l Review, Vol. V III (19l*3), pp. 1*12-19.
D uvall, E.M., "Conceptions o f Parenthood,"
Sociology, Vol. LEI (191*6-7).

American Journal Of

D uvall, E.M., and H ill, Reuben, When You Marry, D. C. Heath & Co.,
Boston, 191*2.
Fadiraan, P ., " l i f e With P a re n ts,"
June, pp. 108-10.

Child Study, Vol. XXII (191*5),

F a r is , E ., "A ttitu d es And B ehavior," American Journal Of Sociology,
Vol. XXXIV (193U), pp. 271-281.
F ed eral S e c u rity Agency, O ffice of Education, B iennial Survey. Of
Education, February, 191*7.
F i t e , Maiy D ., "Aggressive Behavior In Young C hildren And C h ild re n 's
A ttitu d e s Toward A ggression," G enetic Psychology Monographs.
Frank, Lawrence K ., Adolescence, F o rty -th ird Yearbook, P a rt I of th e
N ational S o ciety f o r the Study of Education, Chicago, 19l*l*.
F ra z ie r, E. F ran k lin , "The Negro Family i n the United S ta te s ,"
American Jo u rn al of Sociology, Vol. L III (191*7-1*8), pp. 1*35-8.
G eleerd, E liz a b e th R ., "Feeding And T o ile t T ra in in g ,"
XXIV, January, 191*6.

Hygeia, Vol.

203

G lick, Paul C ., "Family Trends i n th e United S ta te s , 1890-I9h0,"
American S o c io lo g ic al Review, Vol. VII, 505-15.
Goldsmith, F .S ., and H. McClanathan, "A dolescent A ttitu d e s ," Journal
o f Home Economics, Vol. XXXIV (19h2), February, pp. 92-6.
Gordon, M.M., "The Concept o f th e Sub-Culture and I t s A p p licatio n s,"
S o cial Forces, V ol. XXVI (19h7), pp. h0-h2.
Green, Arnold W., "The Middle Class American and N eurosis,"
S o cio lo g ical Review, V ol. XI (19U6), February.

American

Grey, W illiam E ., "Some Problems of C o n flic t Between High School
P u p ils andTheir P a re n ts," m a ste r's th e s is , North Texas S ta te
T eachers' C ollege, Denton, Texas, 1939•
Harwood, E dith R., "A Study of th e A ttitu d e o f Mothers and Daughters
Toward S o cial Problem s," unpublished m a s te r'3 th e s is , Colorado
S ta te College, F o rt C o llin s, Colorado, August, 1937.
H avighurst, Robert J . , Developmental Tasks and Education,
of Chicago P ress, Chicago, 19 U8.

U n iv ersity

H avighurst, Robert J . , and D avis, A lliso n , F ath er of the C hild,
Houghton M ifflin Co., Chicago, 19U8 .
H avighurst, Robert J . , and Taba, H ilda, Adolescent C haracter and
P e rso n a lity , John Wiley & Sons, I n c ., New York, 19h9.
Hayner, Norman S ., "Chinese Family L ife in America,"
S o cio lo g ical Review, Vol. I I (1937), p . 630.

American

K ardiner, Abram, P sychological F ro n tie rs of S o ciety , Columbia
U n iv e rsity P ress, New York, 19U5•
Kauffman, Howard F ., " P re stig e C lasses i n a New York R ural Community,"
AES Memoir 260, C ornell U n iv ersity , Ith a c a , March, 19hit.
Landis, Judson T ., and Landis, Mary G ., B uilding A S uccessful M arriage,
P re n tic e -H a ll, I n c ., New York, 19u 8 .
Landis, Paul H ., Adolescence and Youth, McGraw-Hill Book C o., New
York, lSh$.
L andis, Paul H., S o o ial P o lic ie s in th e Making, D.C. Heath & Co.,
Boston, 19U7.
L aP iere, R .T ., "A ttitu d es VS A ctions,"
(193h)j pp. 230-7.

S o cial Forces,

Vol. X III

201*

L inton, Ralph, "Age and Sex C a te g o rie s,” American S o cio lo g ical Review,
Vol. VII (19l*2), pp. 589-603.
Loomis, C .P .,a n d Beegle, J .A ., "A Typological A nalysis o f S o cial
System s,” Sooiometry, Vol. Ix (191*8), pp. 11*7-91.
Iynd, R.S. and Iynd, H.M., M iddleton, A Study i n Contemporary American
C u ltu re, H arcourt, Bruce & Co., New York, 1929.
Malinowski, Bronislaw, Coral Gardena and T heir Magic,
Co., New York, 19351

American Book

Malinowski, Bronislaw, A S c ie n tif ic Theory of C ulture, The U niversity
of North C arolina P ress, Chapel H ill, 191*1*.
Mangus, A .R ., ”Mental H ealth Symptoms and B e lie fs Among Southern Ohio
R esidents of B u tler County,” The Ohio A g ric u ltu ra l Experiment
S ta tio n , Columbus, 191*9.
Mangus, A.R., and Woodward, R.H., "Mental H ealth A nalysis of High
School S tu d en ts," The B u tler County Mental Health A ssociation,
Hamilton, Ohio, 191*9.
McCormick, Thomas C ., "Simple Percentage A nalysis of A ttitu d e
Q u estio n n a ires," American Journal of Sociology, Vol. L. (19l*l*-5),
pp. 390-5.
Mead, M argaret, "The American Family As An A nthropologist Sees I t , "
American Journal o f Sociology, Vol. U I I (191*8-9), pp. 1(53-9.
Mead, M argaret, And Keep Your Powder Dry, W. Morrow Co., New York, 191*2.
Mead, M argaret, B alinese C haracter,
New York, 19l*2.

The New York Academy o f Sciences,

Mead, M argaret, From The South Seas,

W. Morrow & Co., New York, 1939.

Mead, M argaret, Growing Up In New Guinea,
1930.

W. Morrow & Co., New York,

Merton, Robert K., "S o cial S tru c tu re and Anomie,"
i c a l Review, Vol. I l l (1938), pp. 672-82.

American Sociolog-

Murdock, George P ., Our P rim itiv e Contemporaries, The MacMillan Co.,
New York, 1931*.
Nimkoff, Meyer, "The C h ild ’s Preference f o r F ath er or Mother,"
American S o cio lo g ica l Review, Vol. VII (19l*2), pp. 517-21*.

205

Nirakoff, Meyer F ., P arent-C hild R e latio n sh ip s, U n iv ersity of Southern
C a lifo rn ia P re ss, Los Angeles, 1935.
Ifye, Ivan, "F actors In flu en cin g Y outh's Adjustment To P a re n ts,"
m a ster’s th e s i s , The S ta te College of Washington, 19l*7.
Parsons, T a lc o tt, "Aggression i n th e S o cial S tru c tu re of The Western
W orld," P sy ch iatry , Vol. X (19hl), pp. 167-81.
Parsons, T a lc o tt, "The S o c ia l S tru c tu re of the Fam ily," i n Anshen,
Ruth R ., The Family, I t s Function and D estiny, Harper &
B rothers, New York, 191*9.
R euter, E. B ., "The Sociology of Adolescence,"
Sociology, Vol. XLIII (1937), pp. l*ll*-27.

American Journal Of

Riggs, Lawrence and Nye, Ivan, "Some P arent-C hild C o n flic ts From The
C h ild ’s P oint o f View," unpublished study, W illam ette Univer­
s i t y , Salem, Oregon, 191*6.
Rundquist, E.A ., and S le tto , R .F ., P e rso n a lity In The Depression,
The U n iv ersity o f Minnesota P ress, M inneapolis, 193°.
Runner, J .R ., "S o cial D istance i n A dolescent R e la tio n s," American
Journal Of Sociology, Vol. XLIII (1937), pp. 1*28-39.
Sew ell, W illiam H., "W hat's Happening to th e Farm Fam ily," Depart­
ment o f R ural Sociology, U n iv ersity of W isconsin, 19l*9.
Sew ell, W illiam H., "The C onstruction and S tan d ard iz atio n of a Scale
f o r th e Measurement o f th e Socio-Economic S ta tu s of Oklahoma
Farm F a m ilie s ," S tillw a te r, Oklahoma AES Technical B u lle tin 9,
A p ril, 19l*0.
Sowers, A lice, "P arent-C hild R elationships from th e C h ild 's View,"
unpublished d o cto ral d is s e r ta tio n , C ornell U n iv e rsity L ibrary,
1937.
S to g d ill, R.M., "Survey o f Experiments of C h ild re n 's A ttitu d e s Toward
Their P a re n ts," Pedagogical Seminary, I I , pp. 293-303.
S t o t t , L.H ., "Adolescent D islik e s Regarding P aren tal Behavior,"
Pedagogical Seminary, LVII (1937), pp. 393-1*11*.
S t o t t , L.H ., "Some Environmental F actors i n R elatio n To The Person­
a l i t y Adjustment of R ural C h ild ren ," Rural Sociology, Vol. X
(191*7), pp. 395-1*03.

206

S tudent Opinion P o ll # 5, " I f I Were A P aren t,"
(lPljli), May, p . 36.

S c h o la stic , XLIV

Symonds, P.M., The Psychology of P arent-C hild R elatio n sh ip s,
A ppleton-Century Co., New York, 1939.

D.

Symonds, P.M., The Dynamics o f P arent-C hild R elatio n sh ip s, T eachers1
C ollege, Columbia U n iv ersity , New York, 19^9.
T aylor, K atherine W., Do A dolescents Need P arents,
Co., New York, 193$»

Appleton-Century

Terman, Lends M., P sychological Factors i n M arital Happiness, McGrawH ill Book Co., New York, 193#.
Thomas, W .I., The Unadjusted G irl,

L i t t l e , Brown & Co., Boston, 1923*

Thomas, W .I. and Thomas, D .S ., The Child I n America,
York, 1928, p . 1*35.

A.A. Knopf, New

Thomas, W .I. and ZnanLecki, F lo ria n , The P o lish Peasant in Europe and
America, R.G. Badger, Chicago, 1918.
Thorndike, Edward Lee, The Teachers Work Book of 30,000 Words,
Teachers C ollege, Columbia U n iv ersity , New York, 19hh.
Thurstone, L .L ., "A Method o f S caling P sychological and Educational
T e s ts ," Jo u rn al of E ducational Psychology, Vol. XVI, No. 7,
October 1925.
Veblen, T h o rstein , Theory o f A L eisure C lass, Vanguard P ress, New
York, 1919.
W inter, Helen, "In flu en ce o f P a re n ta l A ttitu d e s on the S o cial A djust­
ment o f th e In d iv id u a l," American S o cio lo g ical Review, Vol. I I
(1937), P. 756.