Citation
Occupational role salience of college women

Material Information

Title:
Occupational role salience of college women perceptions of parental influences
Creator:
Funderburk, Jamie R., 1957-
Publication Date:
Language:
English
Physical Description:
viii, 177 leaves : ; 28 cm.

Subjects

Subjects / Keywords:
Daughters ( jstor )
Employment ( jstor )
Fathers ( jstor )
Gender roles ( jstor )
Marital satisfaction ( jstor )
Mathematical variables ( jstor )
Mothers ( jstor )
Parents ( jstor )
Prestige ( jstor )
Women ( jstor )
College students -- Attitudes ( lcsh )
Counselor Education thesis Ph.D
Dissertations, Academic -- Counselor Education -- UF
Family ( lcsh )
Parent and child ( lcsh )
Vocational interests -- Psychological aspects ( lcsh )
Genre:
bibliography ( marcgt )
non-fiction ( marcgt )

Notes

Thesis:
Thesis (Ph.D.)--University of Florida, 1987.
Bibliography:
Bibliography: leaves 153-168.
General Note:
Typescript.
General Note:
Vita.
Statement of Responsibility:
by Jamie R. Funderburk.

Record Information

Source Institution:
University of Florida
Holding Location:
University of Florida
Rights Management:
Copyright [name of dissertation author]. Permission granted to the University of Florida to digitize, archive and distribute this item for non-profit research and educational purposes. Any reuse of this item in excess of fair use or other copyright exemptions requires permission of the copyright holder.
Resource Identifier:
030337649 ( ALEPH )
16767049 ( OCLC )

Downloads

This item has the following downloads:


Full Text













OCCUPATIONAL ROLE SALIENCE OF COLLEGE WOMEN:
PERCEPTIONS OF PARENTAL INFLUENCES









By


JAMIE R. FUNDERBURK


A DISSERTATION PRESENTED TO THE GRADUATE SCHOOL
OF THE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA IN
PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS
FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY


UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA


1987



































Copyright 1987

by

Jamie R. Funderburk





























Dedicated to my husband, Ted, and my mother, Eleanor,
in loving appreciation of their support and encouragement.














ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

I would like to acknowledge the following individuals:

my doctoral chairperson, Dr. Ellen Amatea, for her

availability, invaluable guidance, and support throughout

every stage of doctoral training and dissertation

preparation; my doctoral committee members including Dr.

James Archer, Dr. Harry Grater, and Dr. Robert Jester for

their support and guidance; Neal, at Computer Systems

Resources, for his instruction and assistance in word

processing; Dr. Peggy Fong for her recommendations on the

dissertation proposal; Drs. Jaquie Resnick and Barbara

Probert for their support and availability; Astrid Hastay for

her support and generous help in coding data; and Drs. John

Dixon and Robert Jester for their assistance in data analyses

and statistical interpretation.

I especially wish to acknowledge my parents, James and

Eleanor, for raising me to value education, perseverance, and

excellence, and for always supporting my efforts. I would

also like to acknowledge my sisters, Susan, Anne, and Lois

and my brother, Robert, for their academic excellence and the

competitive spirit they instilled in me. Finally I would

like to acknowledge my husband, Ted, for his patient

endurance, encouragement, editing suggestions, and support

throughout my doctoral training and dissertation preparation.














TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS . . . . . . . . .. iv

ABSTRACT . . . . . . . . . . . vii

CHAPTERS

I INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . 1

Scope of the Problem . . . . . . 3
Theoretical Framework . . . . .. 12
Need . . . . . . . . . .. 15
Purpose . . . . . . . . .. 17
Research Questions ................... 18
Significance of the Study ...'.......... . 20
Definition of Terms . . . . . .. 22
Organization of the Study . . . . .. 25

II REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE . . . .. .26

Sociological Context . . . . . .. 27
Developmental Context . . . . . .. 30
Psychological Context . . . . . .. 38
Past Socialization Influences . . . .. 42
Summary . . . . . . . . . .. 58

III METHODOLOGY . . . . . . . .. 62

Design . . . . . . . . . .. 63
Population and-Sample . . . . . .. 64
Sampling Procedure . . . . . . .. 65
Instrumentation/Variables . . . . .. 66
Data Collection Procedures . . . . .. 79
Data Analyses . . . . . . . .. 81
Methodological Limitations . . . . .. 82

IV RESULTS . . . . . . . . .. 86

Descriptive Statistics . . . . . .. 86
Intercorrelations Among Variables . . .. 97
Results of the Regression Analyses . . .. 108
Summary . . . . . . . . .. 121









V DISCUSSION . . . . . . . . 123

The Total Sample . . . . . . .. 123
The Employed Mothers Subsample . . . .. 131
The Nonemployed Mothers Subsample . . .. 133
Overview of Significant Findings . . .. 143
Limitations . . . . . . . . .. 146
Recommendations for Future Research . . .. 150
Summary . . . . . . . . . .. 152

REFERENCES . . . . . . . . . .. 153

APPENDICES

A DEMOGRAPHIC QUESTIONNAIRE . . . .. 169
B INSTRUCTIONS TO SUBJECTS . . . . .. 176

BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH . . . . . . . .. 177














Abstract of Dissertation Presented to the Graduate School
of the University of Florida in Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy


OCCUPATIONAL ROLE SALIENCE OF COLLEGE WOMEN:
PERCEPTIONS OF PARENTAL INFLUENCES

By

Jamie R. Funderburk

May 1987




Chairperson: Dr. Ellen S. Amatea
Major Department: Counselor Education



Although most contemporary college women plan to combine

family and occupational roles, they have varying levels of

occupational role salience. In this study social learning

theory was used to examine parental influences on

occupational role salience of college women. Three aspects

of parental modeling influence were examined: parental role

status, parental role status consequences, and parent-

daughter relationship quality. Self-report data were

collected on 214 freshmen and sophomore college women at the

University of Florida. A series of regression analyses was

conducted to examine maternal and paternal influences both

separately and in combination for the total sample and for

subsamples of women with employed and nonemployed mothers.

vii









For the total sample of college women, higher

occupational role salience was related to higher paternal

occupational prestige level, lower paternal educational

level, and greater extent of maternal employment (p <.01).

Paternal educational and occupational prestige levels were

also significant influences on occupational role salience for

the subsample of women with nonemployed mothers (p <.05).

Additional parental influences found to increase occupational

role salience for the subsample of women with nonemployed

mothers included maternal marital dissatisfaction, paternal

life dissatisfaction, maternal life satisfaction, lack of

paternal support for maternal nonemployed role status, and

equal or higher maternal educational level than paternal (p

<.05). No combination of parental influences explained

variation in occupational role salience for the subsample of

women with employed mothers. These nonsignificant results

were attributed to a design limitation which may have

violated linearity assumptions by grouping all daughters of

employed mothers together regardless of maternal employment

extent.

Results of this study are consistent with previous

research, and modestly support a social learning theory model

of women's vocational development. The importance of

examining the combined influences of mothers and fathers on

women's occupational role expectations is indicated.


viii















CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION


A person participates in a complex
society as a many-faceted actor,
an incumbent of many roles, carrier
of many labels, performer of different
sets of behavior, subject to multiple
kinds of expectations. (Angrist, 1969, p. 219)


The life choices available to American women have become

increasingly complex (Hoffman, 1977; Oppenheimer, 1982).

Recent changes in the form and function of the family, the

status of women, and the economy have been accompanied by

increased labor force participation of women (Kammerman &

Hayes, 1982; Kurdek & Siesky, 1981; Leslie, 1982). Whether

for economic or other reasons, most American women now

combine marital, parental, and occupational roles. Due to

their educational and economic advantages, college women in

particular now have a greater variety of life role choices

and combinations available to them.

Research findings on college women's life plans reflect

these changing preferences and patterns (Cummings, 1977;

Empey, 1958; Matthews & Tiedeman, 1964; Parelius, 1975; Rand

& Miller, 1972; Zuckerman, 1980). In 1958, Empey found that

80% of a sample of female high school seniors and college

undergraduates preferred marriage over a career. By 1964,









2

preferences were changing and Matthews and Tiedeman found

young women ages 11 to 26 were experiencing conflict between

career and marriage plans. In 1972 (Rand & Miller), 1975

(Parelius), and 1977 (Cummings), findings of studies

consistently reported that the majority of college women

planned to combine a family and a career. Finally,

Zuckerman, in a 1980 study of female undergraduates, found

the overwhelming majority of women were interested in

marriage and childbearing, but neither of these was perceived

to be a deterrent to pursuing a career.

Although the majority of today's college women aspire to

combine career and family roles, they appear to demonstrate

differing expectations regarding their involvement in the

occupational role. For example, Regan and Roland (1985)

reported five different patterns of life role salience for

women graduating from college in 1980. Nineteen percent of

these women were committed solely to family involvement, 34%

were primarily committed to family roles but also committed

to occupational involvement, 16% were primarily committed to

the occupational role but also family committed, 8% were

solely committed to occupational involvement, and 23% were

committed to life roles other than family or occupation such

as leisure or religious involvements.

Due to the distinctiveness of the occupational role

development process for women, a number of researchers have

proposed and investigated specific factors which account for









3

variations in women's occupational role salience and

behavior. Almquist and Angrist (1971) found variations in

college women's occupational aspiration levels as a function

of role model influences, sorority membership, and self-

perceptions of academic ability. Altman and Grossman (1977),

Baruch (1972), and Kahn (1982) found variations in

occupational role salience of college women to be related to

maternal employment status and maternal role satisfaction.

Other studies have related occupational role salience of

college women to such factors as personality traits (Yuen,

Tinsley, & Tinsley, 1980), sex role attitudes and orientation

(Illfelder, 1980; Parsons, Frieze, & Ruble, 1978; Yanico,

1981), parental identification (Oliyer, 1975; Ridgeway,

1978), and career-related self-efficacy (Hackett & Betz,

1981).

Researchers have raised a number of questions in their

efforts to determine why such differences exist in women's

occupational role salience. Are there certain factors which

best account for variations in college women's occupational

role salience? What processes shape these different levels

of women's expected occupational role involvement? Are women

who differ in occupational role salience socialized

differently?

Scope of the Problem

Because traditional vocational development theories were

developed and validated primarily on male populations, they









4

have not been considered useful in explaining and predicting

women's occupational choices and aspirations (Holland, 1963,

1973; Super, 1953, 1963; Tiedeman & O'Hara, 1963). Those

theories have tended to focus on factors influencing an

individual's occupational choice rather than examining

factors accounting for variation in occupational role

salience. In addition, those theories have focused on

individual trait factors, such as interests, abilities, self-

concept and values, which influence occupational choice.

Recent researchers (e.g., Fitzgerald & Crites, 1980;

Osipow, 1973, 1975; Patterson, 1973; & Vetter, 1973) have

contended that traditional theories lack power in explaining

the occupational role development process for women for

several reasons. First, it has been proposed that, for

women, expectations about the occupational role include not

only what occupation they will choose, but even more

basically, whether they choose to work outside the home at

all, and if so, to what extent (Kriger, 1972). Second,

factors impacting on occupational role expectations of women

cannot be examined without acknowledging the impact of sexual

discrimination in the workplace as an environmental

constraint which has been documented as limiting opportunity

in the form of lower pay, lower status jobs, and slower

advancement for women (Astin, 1984; Hauser & Featherman,

1977; Levitin, Quinn, & Staines, 1973; Treiman & Terrell,

1975). Thus, for women, the opportunity to match interests









5

and abilities with an occupational choice may not occur.

Third, researchers have found that occupational role

expectations for women are relative to their marital and

parental role expectations and status, and need to be

considered within this multiple role context (Astin & Mynt,

1971; Berson, 1978; Furumoto & Scarborough, 1986;

Schulenberg, Vondracek, & Crouter, 1984). Finally, many

researchers have found occupational role expectations of

women to be related to their sex role attitudes and

orientation (Bielby, 1978; Fassinger, 1985; Fitzgerald &

Crites, 1980; Hackett & Betz, 1981; Illfelder, 1980; Parsons

et al., 1978; Tittle, 1977; Yanico, 1981). Therefore,

women's occupational role expectations may be as closely tied

to past sex role socialization influences as they are to

current interests and abilities, situational variables, or

environmental opportunity. Given these special

considerations when examining women's occupational

development, researchers assert that it is first necessary to

address whether the occupational role is salient for an

individual woman, and then examine the process and content of

occupational role salience formation as well as the process

and content of a specific occupational choice.

Occupational or career role salience emerged as a

concept in the late 1960s and the 1970s in response to two

separate movements. First, vocational development theorists

examining the career decision-making process in male










6

populations realized that little consideration was given to

the extent to which people differ in levels of work

commitment or importance. As stated by Osipow (1968),

"Seldom is any consideration given to the likelihood that a

given individual may have negative attitudes toward work" (p.

247). In the 1970s, the second movement emerged in response

to changes in female labor force participation and the status

of women in society. These changes led to questioning by

psychologists and sociologists of the factors influencing

varying life role patterns of women. Super (1980),

representing the first movement, defined occupational role

salience as the relative amount of affective, behavioral, and

cognitive energy placed on the occupational or work role.

Amatea, Cross, Clark & Bobby (1986), representing the second

movement, defined occupational role salience as the relative

value or importance ascribed by an individual to the

occupational role. Occupational role salience is defined in

this study as an individual's personal valuing of and

commitment to the occupational role relative to other life

roles.

Clearly, a distinction needs to be made between studies

which attempt to predict and explain occupational and

familial role aspirations or salience, and those attempting

to predict or explain specific career choices or actual

occupational involvement patterns. The two are not

synonymous for women (Tittle, 1977). The "structure of












opportunity" in the world of work may limit a woman's

occupational choice options without influencing the salience

of the occupational role for her. In contrast, occupational

role salience may be more influenced by family socialization

than specific occupational choices, which may be more

dependent on current opportunity and status variables. In

addition, family socialization influences might be expected

to be greater during a stage in which the daughter has

recently been involved with the family. Therefore, studies

of younger women may be of most interest when examining

socialization influences on occupational role salience. In

this study, the general level of occupational role salience

of college women was examined.

In addition to distinguishing between studies examining

occupational role salience and occupational choice

influences, it is important to differentiate studies of

occupational role salience of women at different

developmental stages. A woman's occupational role

expectations and behaviors are assumed to vary across time

(Beedle, Jordan-Viola, Eunice, & Cross, 1979; Matthews &

Tiedeman, 1964; Zuckerman, 1980) as a function of her age and

her relative participation in specific roles across the life

span (Nevill, 1984). Therefore, it is important to specify

the developmental stage of the population under study. In

this study, occupational role salience of freshmen and

sophomore college women was examined.









8

Although occupational role salience evolves over time as

a girl matures into a woman, it is relatively stable for a

woman at a particular developmental stage, and it can be used

to detect differences among women within that stage.

The factors proposed to influence women's valuing of and

commitment to the occupational role can be grouped into three

broad spheres: individual trait and status influences,

socialization influences, and structure of opportunity

influences. Most studies of occupational role salience of

women have examined the first two spheres of influence:

trait and status factors or socialization influences. Only

recently have studies examined these two spheres of influence

conjointly (Fassinger, 1985; Hesse-Biber & Gosselin, 1982;

Rosen & Aneshensel, 1978; Stephan & Corder, 1984, 1985;

Yanico, 1981).

Studies on the impact of current status on occupational

role salience of women have examined the influence of age

(Beedle et al., 1979; Matthews & Tiedeman, 1964; Rand &

Miller, 1972; Zuckerman, 1980), marital status (Astin & Mynt,

1971; Berson, 1978; Bielby, 1978; Mueller & Campbell, 1977)

and educational attainment (Astin & Mynt, 1971; Yuen et al.,

1980).

Studies of personal traits or characteristics related to

women's occupational role salience and involvement have

explored the impact of traits such as race (Malson, 1983;

Noel, 1979; Thomas & Neal, 1978), sex role attitudes











(Illfelder, 1980; Parsons et al., 1978; Tittle, 1977; Yanico,

1981), sex role orientation (Clarey & Sanford, 1982; Marshall

& Wijting, 1980; Rand, 1968; Yanico, 1981), achievement

motivation (Kriger, 1972; Marshall & Wijting, 1980; Rand,

1968), abilities (Fassinger, 1985; Rand, 1968; Rosen &

Aneshensel, 1978); and personality (Yuen et al., 1980).

Relatedly, studies of socialization influences on

women's occupational role expectations and behavior have

examined the impact of school teachers and counselors

(Almquist & Angrist, 1971; Hesse-Biber & Gosselin, 1982;

Lemkau, 1981), friends (Hesse-Biber & Gosselin, 1982; Tangri,

1972), and family members (Altman & Grossman, 1977; Baruch,

1972; Burlin, 1976; Fassinger, 1985; McBroom, 1981; Ridgeway,

1978; Stephan & Corder, 1985; Tangri, 1972).

Because the family is considered to be the most

influential socializing agent during childhood (Lidz, 1968),

shaping personality as it translates and demonstrates

cultural roles and rules to the individual, studies of family

socialization influences on occupational role salience of

women have been numerous (Auster & Auster, 1981). These

studies have examined the influence of a variety of different

types of family variables.

Examining the influence of family socialization on sex

role development and occupational role expectations of women,

researchers have investigated family structural variables,









10

family status variables, and parent-daughter relationship

variables. Family structural variables examined have

included intactness of family (Coleman & Ganong, 1984;

Ganong, Coleman, & Brown, 1981; Kulka & Weingarten, 1979),

size of family (Auster & Auster, 1981; Rosen & Aneshensel,

1978), and birth order and sex of siblings (Auster & Auster,

1981; Rosen & Aneshensel, 1978; Seegmiller, 1980). Family

status variables explored have included parental occupational

and educational status (Allred, 1982/1983; Auster & Auster,

1981; Burlin, 1976; DeFronzo & Boudreauu, 1979; Gold &

Andres, 1978; Smith & Self, 1980; Tangri, 1972; Vanfossen,

1977), parental satisfaction with role status (Altman &

Grossman, 1977; Baruch, 1972; Kahn, 1982; Mullins, 1980),

parental attitudes about roles (Meyer, 1980; Mussen &

Rutherford, 1963; Oliver, 1975; Smith & Self, 1980), and

family socioeconomic status (Albrecht, 1976; Bielby, 1978;

Douvan & Adelson, 1966; Hauser, 1971; Rosen & Aneshensel,

1978; Tangri, 1972).

Although there have been numerous studies examining the

role of family structural and status influences in women's

occupational role expectation development, few studies have

explored family interaction or interpersonal relationship

variables. One of the few parent-daughter relationship

variables which has been explored and found to be related to

women's occupational role salience and innovation (i.e.,

choice of a non-sex-stereotypic occupation) has been parental









11

support for and encouragement of daughter's occupational

aspirations (Auster & Auster, 1981; Kutner & Brogan, 1985;

Standley & Soule, 1974; Tenzer, 1977).

Although few studies have related such parent-daughter

relationship information to women's occupational role

salience, a number of studies have examined parent-daughter

relationship variables in relation to daughter's sex role

socialization and development. These studies have

implications for women's occupational role development as

well, and have examined the quality of the parent-child

relationship in the following areas: warmth and overall

level of goodness (Altman & Grossman, 1977; De Fronzo &

Boudreau, 1979; Kelly & Worell, 1976; McBroom, 1981),

parental identification (Ridgeway, 1978; Tangri, 1972), level

of paternal involvement in child-rearing (Baruch & Barnett,

1981; De Fronzo & Boudreau, 1979; Lamb & Bronson, 1980),

intellectual and achievement encouragement (Baumrind, 1970;

De Fronzo & Boudreau, 1979; Kelly & Worell, 1976), parental

discipline style (Baumrind, 1967, 1975; Kelly & Worell,

1976), and independence encouragement (Baumrind, 1967; De

Fronzo & Boudreau, 1979; Kelly & Worell, 1976).

Most of these studies of parental socialization

influences do not provide an explicit theoretical framework

to explain variation in sex role development and occupational

role salience of women. There have been some investigators

in this area, however, who have proposed underlying









12

theoretical frameworks for their studies. Two different

theoretical traditions are represented. A psychodynamic

perspective has proposed that parental identification, often

measured as perceived similarity to mother or father,

influences daughter's sex role development and subsequent

occupational role expectations and involvement (Hartley,

1966; Mussen, 1969; Ridgeway, 1978; Tangri, 1972). An

underlying assumption of these studies has been that mothers

did not work. Therefore, occupational role salience in

daughters was hypothesized to reflect a masculine sex role

orientation related to paternal identification. As mothers

became increasingly involved in the work force, a second

theoretical tradition, social learning theory, emerged. From

this theoretical perspective, mothers and fathers were both

viewed as potential role models of occupational role

salience. Many of the more recent studies examining parental

role model influences on occupational role salience of women

have been based on this social learning theory perspective

(Kahn, 1982; Mullins, 1980).

Theoretical Framework

In this study, parental influences on women's

occupational role salience were examined using a social

learning theory framework. Social learning theory views the

acquisition of sex-typed characteristics and role

expectations in terms of both direct and imitative learning

experiences. Parents are viewed as both role models and









13

direct reinforcing agents for their children (Kelly & Worell,

1976), and their influence is related to both the power of

parents as role models and the nature of the relationship

between each parent and the child. Research on the behavior

of children in response to adult role models has indicated

that the likelihood of imitation increases with the closeness

of the relationship between the child and the model (Bandura,

1977; Mussen & Distler, 1959). In addition, it is assumed

that parents' power as occupational role models is increased

when they are perceived as being reinforced or rewarded for

their occupational behavior. Such rewards might include

having high status (in terms of both extrafamilial factors

such as education and occupational attainment and

intrafamilial factors such as the greater educational or

occupational attainment of one spouse), demonstrating

satisfaction with their roles, and appearing supported for

engaging in their roles. Therefore, in examining the impact

of parental role model influences on college women's current

role expectations from a social learning perspective three

sets of variables are suggested: parental role

characteristics, consequences for parents of their role

involvements, and the quality of parent-child relationships.

From a social learning theory perspective, high

occupational role salience is hypothesized to result from

several distinctively different combinations of these

factors. For example, a young woman who reports having high









14

occupational role salience might be expected to report having

a mother who is employed and perceived to be supported for

and satisfied with her role, and to report a warm and

involved relationship with her mother. Conversely, a woman

with high occupational role salience might have a nonworking

mother who she perceives as neither satisfied with nor

supported for her role, and whose behavior the woman wants to

avoid. Furthermore, high occupational role salience might be

reported by a daughter who has an occupationally successful

father with whom she is close and whom she wants to imitate.

Several studies appear to support the relationships

hypothesized by social learning theory. College women whose

mothers worked outside the home were reported more likely

than college women with homemaking mothers to follow a career

(Almquist & Angrist, 1971; Altman & Grossman, 1977;

Banducci, 1967; Baruch, 1972; Parsons et al., 1978; Tangri,

1972). In addition, some researchers have found daughters'

levels of occupational role salience to be related to

identifying with or imitating their fathers rather than their

mothers (Ridgeway, 1978; Standley & Soule, 1974; Tangri,

1972). However, the greatest support for the theory is found

in the results of research examining the nature of the

parents' role involvements and the consequences of those

involvements for parents. Results from these studies

indicate that the power of maternal employment status in

explaining variation in occupational role aspirations in









15

daughters is mediated by maternal perceived satisfaction with

and reinforcement for role status (Baruch, 1972; Kahn, 1982;

Macke & Morgan, 1978; Mullins, 1980), maternal occupational

prestige level (Treiman & Terrell, 1975), maternal

educational attainment (Burlin, 1976; Mulvey, 1963; Rosen &

Aneshensel, 1978), maternal occupational innovation (Tangri,

1972), family power structure in the form of relative

occupational and educational status of parents (Vanfossen,

1977), and paternal support for maternal occupational status

(Carew, 1978/1979; Lamb & Bronson, 1980; Smith, 1981). Thus,

parental socialization influences on occupational role

salience of college women have been examined in terms of the

relative power of mothers and fathers as role models for

their daughters, as a function of their relative occupational

and educational status, support for and satisfaction with

their roles, and the quality of the parent-child

relationship.

Need

Although previous researchers have examined parental

influences on occupational role development of women, no

researcher to date has attempted to comprehensively control

for daughter status factors while examining parental

influences. Because such status variables (e.g., age, race,

educational level, major choice and marital status) obviously

contribute to occupational role salience, there is a need to

control for these influences. An attempt was made to control









16
for many of these factors in this study by limiting the

sample to single freshmen and sophomore college women, ages

17-20, from intact families. In addition, descriptive

information was collected on subject's major choice,

Scholastic Aptitude Test (SAT) performance level, minority

status, and U.S. citizenship.

Although past research has been conducted utilizing

social learning theory propositions to examine parental

influences on women's occupational role salience, few

researchers to date have examined the collective impact of

mothers and fathers in shaping such expectations. Because

both parents are hypothesized to have a part in shaping

daughter's role expectations, in this study the collective

impact of mothers and fathers as role models on the

occupational role salience of their daughters was examined in

terms of three aspects of presumed influence: parental role

characteristics, parental role consequences, and quality of

the parent-child relationship. In order to have a more

comprehensive assessment of parental role status

consequences, this study also incorporated parental general

life role satisfaction and marital role satisfaction. Most

previous researchers exploring the impact of certain parental

role consequences on daughters' occupational expectations

have limited their studies to examining only maternal and

paternal occupational role satisfaction and paternal support

for maternal employment.









17

Because previous researchers had not included an

examination of the parent-daughter relationship as a

component of role model power, there was a need to examine

the contributing influence of the quality of the parent-

daughter relationship on both mothers and fathers as role

models. In this study the parent-daughter relationship was

examined in terms of the degree of dissatisfaction the

daughter had with the amount of control or freedom and

affection that the father and mother gave her, and how

involved they were with her. Thus, the power of parents as

role models was assessed by their actual role status, their

role status consequences (i.e., level of satisfaction or

support), and the quality of the parent-daughter

relationship.

Purpose
The purpose of this study was to evaluate the extent to

which variation in occupational role salience of freshmen and

sophomore college women was accounted for by three types of

paternal and maternal role modeling influences. These

college women were single, ages 17-20, and members of intact

families.

Information was collected from these women on three

types of parental role modeling factors: parental role

status and characteristics, parental role status

consequences, and the quality of the parent-daughter

relationship. These reported parental attributes were then











related to the student's reported level of occupational role

salience. This phenomenological perspective was believed to

be more accurate in exploring influences on daughter's

occupational role salience than were objective, behavioral

measures of parental role status, or parental reports of

their role satisfaction or the quality of the parent-daughter

relationship.

Data from the total sample, and then from subsamples of

women with employed mothers and women with nonemployed

mothers, were examined to assess the contribution of each of

the parental attribute variables in explaining variation in

occupational role salience. The extent of maternal

employment and all paternal role attributes were examined for

the entire sample of women. The remaining maternal role

attributes were not examined for the total sample due to

their presumed nonlinear relationship with daughter's

occupational role salience as a function of maternal

employment status. Subsamples of women with employed mothers

and women with nonemployed mothers were then created to

examine the contribution of maternal role model influences.

Data from these two subsamples were examined with maternal

and paternal variables evaluated first separately and then in

combination.

Research Questions

The following set of research questions, subdivided by

the variables involved, was addressed in this study:









19

1. To what extent can variation in occupational role

salience among women with employed and women with nonemployed

mothers be accounted for by variations in the extent of

maternal employment, paternal role status, perceived paternal

role status consequences, and the perceived quality of the

father-daughter relationship?

2. To what extent can variation in occupational role

salience among women with employed mothers be accounted for

by variations in maternal role status, perceived maternal

role status consequences, and the perceived quality of the

mother-daughter relationship?

3. To what extent can variation in occupational role

salience among women with nonemployed mothers be accounted

for by variations in maternal role status, perceived maternal

role status consequences, and the perceived quality of the

mother-daughter relationship?

4. To what extent can variation in occupational role

salience among women with employed mothers be accounted for

by variations in paternal role status, perceived paternal

role status consequences, and the perceived quality of the

father-daughter relationship?

5. To what extent can variation in occupational role

salience among women with nonemployed mothers be accounted

for by variations in paternal role status, perceived paternal

role status consequences, and the perceived quality of the

father-daughter relationship?









20

6. To what extent can variation in occupational role

salience among women with employed mothers be accounted for

by variations in maternal and paternal role status, perceived

maternal and paternal role status consequences, and the

perceived quality of the mother-daughter and father-daughter

relationship?

7. To what extent can variation in occupational role

salience among women with nonemployed mothers be accounted

for by variations in maternal and paternal role status,

perceived maternal and paternal role status consequences, and

the perceived quality of the mother-daughter and father-

daughter relationship?

Significance of the Study

The results of this study have implications for theory

and for practice. It has become clear that the vocational

development process is not identical for men and women, yet

established theories of occupational development have

primarily used male populations in research validating their

constructs. Recently, models of vocational development for

women have been suggested. Rather than focusing primarily on

individual trait factors, such as attributes, aptitudes, and

interests, as do many male-oriented vocational development

theories, these theories suggest that sex role socialization

influences and the structure of opportunity in the world of

work are additional important determinants of occupational

role salience for women (Astin, 1984).












If the combined influence of mothers and fathers as role

models and reinforcing agents on daughters' occupational role

salience was tested more directly and more clearly

understood, then knowledge of this parental influence would

contribute to emerging theories on vocational development for

women. Thus, the results of this study contributed to the

formulation and refinement of a vocational development model

which applies to women, but which might also be applicable to

men due to the universality of social learning theory

principles.

Although many researchers have examined family

socialization influences on women's occupational role

expectations, in this study these influences were

operationalized in order to test a social learning theory

perspective of occupational role development in women.

Therefore the results of this study contributed to the body

of knowledge about social learning theory. The results of

this study also have implications for practice. A key area

of concern for counselors in a college setting is the optimal

career role exploration and development of students. By

increasing understanding of the combined influences of

perceived parental role status, parental role satisfaction

and support, and parent-child relationship variables on

occupational role expectations of college women, the results

of this study could sensitize counselors to relevant issues

for female clients who present problems of career indecision









22

and confusion. In addition, the results of this study could

aid counselors involved in proactive career development

activities by explicating and normalizing the vocational

development process for women.

Finally, if the parental role status, role satisfaction

and support, and parent-child relationship variables

impacting occupational role expectations of college women

could be identified, then parents could become more aware of

their socialization influence on their daughters. They would

consequently have greater ability to consciously nurture and

model whatever life role expectations they felt important for

their children's later success and happiness.

Definition of Terms

In order to facilitate understanding of the terminology

used in this study, the key terms and concepts are defined

below.

Maternal employment extent is defined on a continuum as

the number of hours worked per week and number of years

worked by a mother from the time her daughter was born until

her daughter was 18 or left for college..

Maternal employment status is defined dichotomously as

the mother's employed or nonemployed status. A mother who

has never worked from the time her daughter was born until

her daughter achieved 18 years of age or left for college is

defined as nonemployed. All other mothers are defined as

employed, regardless of employment extent during that time.









23

Occupational prestige level is defined as the relative

standing of an occupation or the amount of power and

influence of an occupational position, and the amount of

resources society places at the disposal of incumbents

(Hodge, Siegel, & Rossi, 1966).

Occupational role expectations is defined as the

changeable set of perceptions, internalized beliefs, and

standards held by individuals which determine how personally

relevant or valued the occupational role is to them, what

they perceive their involvement in that role to be, and how

they believe that role should be performed (Amatea et al.,

1986).

Occupational role innovation is defined as the

membership of an individual in an occupation comprised of

less than 30% same sex individuals, a sex-atypical

occupational choice (Tangri, 1972).

Occupational role salience is defined in this study as

an individual's personal valuing of and commitment to the

occupational role relative to other life roles (Amatea et

al., 1986).

Parent-Daughter relationship quality is defined in this

study as the daughter's perceived dissatisfaction with the

amount of maternal or paternal control, inclusion, and

affection expressed toward her as a child (Schutz, 1958).

Parental role status is defined as maternal or paternal

educational and occupational level and parental marital









24

status. Maternal occupational status is defined in this

study in terms of the extent, degree of innovation, and

prestige level of employment. Paternal occupational role

status is defined as the innovation and prestige level of

employment.

Perceived parental role status consequences is defined

from a social learning theory perspective as the perceived

consequences of engaging in a particular role for a parent in

terms of rewards and punishments. Parental role status

consequence are defined in this study as the degree of

support received for and satisfaction resulting from a

particular role for a given parent.

Reinforcing agent is defined from a social learning

theory perspective as an individual who provides rewards or

reinforcement to another, thus increasing the probability of

recurrence of the behavior that the recipient was engaged in

immediately prior to reinforcement.

Role model is defined from a social learning theory

perspective as an individual whose behavior is observed by a

learner and whose behavior is therefore either imitated or

avoided by the learner.

Role satisfaction is defined as the liking and enjoyment

of a role by the role occupant, or the pleasurable emotional

state resulting from participation in a role (Hopkins, 1983).

Sex role is defined as the complex of behaviors

considered characteristic of or appropriate to persons











occupying a particular gender status, and the attributed

expectations concerning those behaviors (Hartley, 1961).

Socialization is defined as the direct and indirect

developmental process by which a society teaches its members

to fit in, acquainting them with its norms, values, and

expectations (Goldberg, 1983).

Socioeconomic status is defined as the relative position

of a family in the class structure of a society as indicated

by paternal occupational prestige level (Duncan, 1961).

Organization of the Study

The remainder of this study consists of four chapters

and two appendices. Chapter II presents a review and

analysis of related literature. In chapter III, the

methodology used in the study is described, including the

population and sample, sampling procedures, variables and

instrumentation, and data collection and analyses. Chapter

IV provides a presentation of the results of the study. The

final chapter is devoted to a discussion of the results,

consequent interpretations, and recommendations.
















CHAPTER II
REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE


The life choices available to women in America are

becoming increasingly complex. As access to and

participation in occupational roles increases for women,

there is increased pressure on women to decide on their

relative involvement in work, marriage, and parenthood. Due

to their developmental stage and educational and economic

advantages, college women in particular have a wide variety

of life role options available to them. Many factors appear

to influence college women's life role preferences and

expectations and the level of occupational role salience

resulting from them.

The purpose of this chapter is to provide a review and

analysis of the literature examining the factors which

influence college women's occupational role expectations.

Research and theory on sociological, developmental, and

psychological context factors are presented in the first

three sections. In the fourth section, research assessing

the influence of past socialization factors is discussed and

a presentation of social learning theory as applied to

women's role salience is provided. A summary of this review

is then presented in the final section.









27

Sociological Context

Factors in the sociological context which have been

proposed as influences on women's occupational role

expectations are current social and cultural norms, social

trends, and social standards. This normative context

surrounds women, shaping their identities, perceptions,

values, beliefs, expectations, and behavior.

Such sociological norms, values, and beliefs and changes

in those norms, values, and beliefs impact on the

occupational role salience of college women in two ways:

indirectly through increased opportunity for occupational

roles for women in society and directly through influencing

the environment in which socialization occurs.

Kurdek and Siesky (1981) have described sociological

changes in the form and function of the family, marriage,

parental roles, labor force composition, and the status of

women. In exploring the changes in family functions many

sociologists have contended that the traditional educational,

religious, economic, and welfare functions of the family have

for the most part been transferred to larger institutions,

thus leaving the family with the primary function of

psychological socialization (Kurdek & Siesky, 1981; Leslie,

1982; Ogburn, 1938; Parson, 1965). These writers have

proposed that this decrease and change in family functions

allows family members increased role options and flexibility

which were not always possible in the past.









28
One example of the impact of these changing family forms

and social values is the change in parents as role models of

a more androgynous lifestyle. Of particular interest is the

change in mothers' roles related to the changing status of

women. Blau (1984) pointed out that there has been an

increasing participation of women in the work force,

including married women and mothers. In 1890, 17% of the

labor force was female compared to 25.2% in 1940 and 42.7% in

1982. Married women comprised 30% of the female labor force

in 1940 and 54% in 1960. Most notable, however, is the large

increase in the labor force participation rate of married

women with preschool-age children from 18.6% in 1960 to 47.8%

in 1981. This increase in female labor force participation

has been variously attributed to a decrease in sex

discrimination (Kurdek & Siesky, 1981), a decrease in family

size due to overpopulation (Hoffman, 1977), and to economic

recession (Hoffman, 1977).

Related to the increase in employment for women is the

increase, over the last three decades, in the rate of

divorce. Glick (1979) reported that 77% of divorced mothers

with children are likely to be employed. Currently 4 out of

every 10 marriages end in divorce (Bane, 1976; Espenshade,

1979; Glick, 1979; Hetherington, Cox, & Cox, 1979). A direct

result of the increased divorce rate has been an increase in

the number of female-headed households with children from

4.51 million in 1960 to 8.24 million in 1978 (Espenshade,









29
1979). In 1974, 14% of all households were headed by females

(Bane 1976). Glick (1979) predicted that by 1990 close to

one-third of all children might be expected to experience a

parents' divorce before they reach the age of 18. Levinger

and Moles (1979) reported a decrease in the emotional, legal,

religious, and social barriers to divorce. This change in

family form may have an impact on the occupational role

expectations of women exposed to divorce and/or single parent

families during their childhood.

From a somewhat different perspective, it has been

proposed that the women's liberation movement gaining power

in the 1960s played a significant role in increasing

awareness of women's status and changing women's role

expectations, perceptions, and behavior (Freeman, 1984).

The movement advocated equalization of relationships with

men, both marital and nonmarital (Friedan, 1963). Data in

support of the success of this movement indicated college

enrollment of women doubled from 1968-1980, from 3 million to

6 million (Weitzman, 1984). Further, women accounted for 4%

of law students in 1960 and 34% in 1980, 6% of medical

students in 1960 and 26% in 1980. The women's movement, and

the National Organization for Women formed soon after in

1966, gave voice and visibility to women's increasing

dissatisfaction with traditional roles and their desire for

increasing independence, sharing of childrearing, and









30

opportunity and participation in the labor force (Blau, 1984;

Freeman, 1984; Leslie, 1982).

These above mentioned changes in the form and

functioning of the family, marriage, female labor force

participation, and the status of women, along with the shift

in social values and role definitions accompanying these

changes have undoubtedly had an impact on the occupational

role expectations of women. Specifically, it has been

hypothesized by sociologists that these changes have resulted

in changes in perceptions, definitions, attitudes, and

enactment of occupational, marital, and parental roles of men

and women (Kurdek & Siesky, 1981; Leslie, 1982). This in

turn has resulted in a significant alteration in the nature

of models and relationships children are exposed to and

ultimately changes the role expectations, preferences, and

options of the next generation (Hoffman, 1977). Although

proposed as a salient influence, limited research

manipulation of this overriding sociological context has been

possible. In this study, this context is hypothesized to act

as a constant.

Developmental Context

The developmental context includes those factors which

impact on a woman and her expectations and behavior as a

result of her developmental stage in the life cycle.

Research and theory describing normative patterns of human

development have suggested that certain factors influence









31
individuals both internally, in terms of their biological,

psychological, and cognitive development, and externally, in

terms of socially defined developmental tasks prescribed at

different stages of the life cycle.

A woman in her first two years at college is defined as

being in the developmental stage of late adolescence, moving

toward young adulthood. In addition, her choice of college,

rather than work and/or marriage, places her in a specific

category within the general developmental stage of late

adolescence. Theories of adolescent development, and

research on college students' personality and career

development have suggested factors of importance in college

women's occupational role expectations.

Two well-established theories of human development based

on male populations have examined adolescence from a

sociological and a psychological perspective (Erikson, 1950,

1968; Havighurst, 1951; Havighurst & Taba, 1949).

Havighurst's sociological theory of development views the

stage of adolescence in terms of a number of tasks the

individual must master in order to attain adult status in the

culture. Developmental tasks he described in late

adolescence included developing an appropriate sex role,

achieving emotional and economic independence from parents

and other adults, selecting and preparing for a vocation,

achieving appropriate relationships with peers, and preparing

for an adult lifestyle which might or might not include









32

marriage and family (Havighurst, 1951; Havighurst & Taba,

1949). As might be expected, this ordering of developmental

tasks appears to be more applicable to males than females.

Erikson proposed a psychodynamic theory of human

development describing a progression through eight distinct

stages (Erikson, 1950, 1968; LeFrancois, 1976). Each stage

is characterized by the resolution of a conflict or an

intrapsychic crisis. The resolution of crises at earlier

stages impact on the conflict resolution at later stages.

The developmental tasks and potential crises believed to be

focal during the late adolescent years and early adult years

are identity formation versus role diffusion, and intimacy

versus isolation. Clearly from this psychodynamic

developmental perspective, a college woman's status relative

to these two important psychological developmental tasks

would have important implications for her occupational role

expectations.

Theorists in cognitive psychology have provided further

explanation of women's development. Kohlberg (1966, 1969)

believed developmental cognitive changes affect the way

children assimilate information about the sexes, and

therefore these changes have implications for sex role

development. Tavris and Offir (1977) described this

perspective:

It assumes children and adults try to maintain
a coherent and balanced picture of themselves
and the world, in which beliefs, actions, and
values are congruent. The knowledge that gender









33

is permanent motivates the child to discover how
to be a competent or "proper" girl or boy.
As a consequence, he or she finds male or female
activities rewarding. Reinforcements and models
help show children how well they are doing,
but essentially they socialize themselves. (p. 167)

Carol Gilligan, a cognitive psychologist focusing on

female development, described women as speaking "in a

difference voice" than men, not only in terms of the

decisions they make but even in how they make decisions

(Baruch, Barnett, & Rivers, 1983; Gilligan, 1979). Gilligan

argued that women are most concerned with caretaking,

responsibility to others, and relationships. She contended

that for women to be more successful in the occupational

world, with the first step being that of increasing their

occupational role salience, women needed to decrease their

constant attentiveness to others and tendency to always see

both sides. She further suggested that women must learn to

perceive their own needs as primary, to start nurturing

themselves, and to stop subordinating their individual

achievement.

In sum, the developmental context of college freshmen

and sophomores is one of change and transition as they

attempt to implement a cohesive and successful identity,

individuate from the family, develop intimate relationships,

and choose an occupation. For college women today in

particular, there are social pressures to succeed not only

vocationally and academically, but as women in intimate

interpersonal relationships as well. Occupational role









34
salience of college women appears to be an important factor

to understand, given its influence on the role choices and

future role behavior of this population.

It appears that the pressure to decide on future goals

may be so great for the college student that the individual

begins to feel that there is no time for a genuine

exploration of life role possibilities. Major life decisions

such as occupational choice may be made initially on the

basis of personality and family influences without the

advantage of realistic knowledge or experience. This

conceptualization was supported by the finding that many

college students view life with relative passivity (Katz,

1968). Katz found many students to be strongly influenced by

their parents' wishes and aspirations, and the prevailing

fashions and opportunities in society at the time. For many

college students there appears to be no clear cut decision-

making process regarding career, marriage, and family roles.

Madison (1969) suggested three phases which are

descriptive of the developmental pattern of changes in both

men and women during the college years: initial

organization, erosion of the initial organization, and re-

synthesis. These three phases can be applied to any

dimension of significance to the college student (e.g.,

career choice, life role perceptions and choices,

relationships). During the initial organization phase

students make decisions about matters of significance largely









35

based on their personality and family influences to the

neglect of realistic knowledge. The erosion of the initial

organization occurs when the student begins to encounter the

realities of a given situation and subsequent awareness of

more realistic alternatives and possibilities. There are

obvious similarities between Madison's description of

individual changes in the college years and the exploration

stage of Super's career development theory (Super, 1953), as

both theorists described movement toward greater realism over

time.

Several investigators have noted developmental changes

in personality and attitudes about occupational, marital, and

parental roles among women at various educational levels.

Zuckerman (1980), for example, surveyed 118 women enrolled as

students at a liberal arts college. She explored the

contributions of demographic background, self esteem, and

enrollment in women's studies courses in explaining differing

educational, occupational, and marital/motherhood plans.

Using regression analysis she found that age was a

significant predictor of realism of goals, with older

students becoming more realistic.

Harmon (1971) studied the childhood and adolescent

career and life plans reported by 1,188 women entering a

midwestern university. She found that their choices followed

the process suggested by Super (1953), with a preadolescent

fantasy period and an adolescent period of tentative choices









36

which showed considerable choice range, followed by a

narrowing of their choices by the time these women were

freshmen in college.

Interestingly, several researchers have reported females

score higher on measures of career maturity than males at all

age levels above the seventh grade (Harmon & Krueger, 1981;

Jones, Hansen, & Putnam, 1976). These researchers have also

noted, however, that females subsequently make their career

choices from a more limited range of fields than their male

counterparts (U.S. Department of Labor, 1975), and that these

choices are unrealistically low in terms of their aptitudes

and interests. This is not surprising when considering that

in the occupational prestige hierarchy the majority of

female-dominated occupations are overrepresented in the

middle and upper-middle range of the distribution (Marini,

1978). The above findings suggest that both sex role

socialization and constraints on occupational opportunities

may be operating to limit career choices of females despite

adequate knowledge of the career planning process.

Rand and Miller (1972) explored differences in attitudes

and plans about education, marriage, and occupation in a

cross-sectional study of 180 women in junior high, high

school, and college. Their results indicated that although

there was a desire across all age groups to marry, an

increase in liberalness with age was evidenced by increased









37

occupational role salience and more liberal sex role

attitudes in college women.

Angrist (1969), in a four-year longitudinal study of 188

female freshmen, explored changes in occupational role

aspirations. Attrition after four years left 108 seniors,

with complete questionnaire data on 87 students. She found

that 70% of these 87 subjects had changed their career choice

by their sophomore year, and although only 30% were career

salient as freshmen, by their senior year 43% were career

salient.

The results of these studies suggest several important

considerations when examining occupational role expectations

of college women. First, it appears important to distinguish

among the following concepts: occupational role salience,

occupational role choice, and career maturity for women. A

college female is likely to have greater career maturity than

a college male in terms of career decision-making skills, yet

she may not have high occupational role salience as a result

of traditional sex role socialization. Furthermore, she will

probably select a career from a more restricted range of

choices due to discrimination in the workplace, the lower

prestige level of female-dominated professions, and

traditional sex role socialization. A second consideration

is the need to control for both age and year of college when

exploring occupational role salience in women, given the

trend towards both increased salience and realism with age.









38

Third, it appears that the occupational role salience of

women in their first two years at college may be more

influenced by family socialization and personality factors

than for college juniors and seniors, who may be more

affected by a realistic assessment of their current

opportunities and abilities.

Psychological Context

Most researchers of young women's occupational role

expectations and choices have examined the impact of

psychological context factors because these factors have been

assumed to have the greatest power in explaining differences

in women's occupational role expectations. In contrast,

sociological and developmental context factors have been

assumed to exert a constant influence across a similar age

cohort.

Psychological factors hypothesized as influencing

college women's occupational role expectations include

current attributes, attitudes, and status; and past

socialization influences. Research examining the influence

of current attributes, attitudes, and status is presented

first. This is followed by presentation of research and

theory examining past socialization influences. Finally, an

analysis of the application of social learning theory to

women's occupational role development is presented.

Personal attributes and attitudes found to be related to

occupational role expectations of young women include sex









39

role values and attitudes (Fassinger, 1985; Illfelder, 1980;

Parsons et al.,1978; Stephan & Corder, 1985; Tittle, 1977;

Yanico, 1981), sex role orientation (Marshall & Wijting,

1980; Rand, 1968; Yanico, 1981), race (Malson, 1983; Noel,

1979; Thomas & Neal, 1978; Tittle, 1977), marital role status

and expectations (Astin & Mynt, 1971; Mueller & Campbell,

1977; Yuen et al., 1980), achievement motivation and

orientation (Fassinger, 1985; Kriger, 1972; Marshall &

Wijting, 1980; Rand, 1968), fear of success (Illfelder,

1980), personality (Rand, 1968; Yuen et al., 1980), academic

achievement and ability level (Almquist & Angrist, 1971;

Astin & Mynt, 1971; Fassinger, 1985; Rand, 1968; Rosen &

Aneshensel, 1978), and educational attainment level (Astin &

Mynt, 1971; Yuen et al., 1980).

The results of these studies can be summarized as

follows. A positive relationship has been found between

college women's liberal, nontraditional sex role attitudes

and occupational role aspirations (Parsons et al., 1978) and

occupational salience (Fassinger, 1985; Illfelder, 1980;

Stephan & Corder, 1985; Yanico, 1981). Similarly, college

women's occupational role salience has been positively

related to both masculine and androgynous sex role

orientation and identity (Marshall & Wijting, 1980; Rand,

1968; Yanico, 1981).

Achievement motivation and orientation have also been

positively related to occupational role salience in young









40

women (Fassinger, 1985; Kriger, 1972; Marshall & Wijting,

1980; Rand, 1968), as has actual academic achievement and

ability (Almquist & Angrist, 1971; Astin & Mynt, 1971;

Fassinger, 1985; Rand, 1968; Rosen & Aneshensel, 1978), and

educational attainment (Astin & Mynt, 1971; Yuen et al.,

1980). Rosen & Aneshensel (1978), however, found mental

ability and academic achievement less predictive of

occupational role expectations for adolescent women than for

adolescent men. This conclusion was confirmed by Marini

(1978) in her review of the research on sex differences in

the determination of adolescent aspirations. These

researchers attribute this lesser influence of abilities on

female occupational aspirations to the impact of traditional

sex role socialization.

Rand (1968) and Yuen, Tinsley, and Tinsley (1980) found

career-oriented women to have higher needs for autonomy and

dominance, while homemaker-oriented women had higher needs

for altruism, nurturance, and sociability. Similarly,

Illfelder (1980) found that fear of success and traditional

sex role attitudes, in combination, successfully predicted

low occupational role salience among college women.

The results of studies on variation in women's

occupational role expectations relative to race can be

summarized as follows. In the past married black women have

often worked for economic reasons. Occupational and family

roles have traditionally been occupied conjointly by black









41

women, and these roles have not been viewed as mutually

exclusive (Malson, 1983; Noel, 1979; Thomas & Neal, 1978;

Tittle, 1977). The results of research on the impact of race

on occupational role salience of women indicate that black

women are less likely to feel compelled to choose either

family or work commitment. Because these results do not

indicate a difference by race in absolute level of

occupational role salience for single women, the effect of

race was not controlled for in the present study. Instead,

efforts were made to select a sample in which the racial

composition was representative of the student population

being examined.

The impact of marital status on occupational role

salience of women has also been examined. Astin and Mynt

(1971), Mueller and Campbell (1977), and Yuen, Tinsley, and

Tinsley (1980) have reported marriage decreases occupational

role salience and achievement of women, although this was

less true for black women.

The results of this research suggest that current status

factors (i.e., educational level, academic achievement and

ability level, and marital status) are significantly related

to occupational role salience of women and therefore need to

be controlled for in a study of the influences of parental

socialization on the occupational role salience of women. In

this study several of these factors were controlled for by

limiting the sample to college freshmen and sophomore women,









42

ages 17-20, who were never married. In addition, information

was collected on ability/aptitude level as measured by

student SAT scores in order to more accurately describe the

sample. Literature on the impact of race on occupational

role salience of women indicates that black women are less

likely to feel compelled to choose either family or work

commitment. In addition, for economic reasons, a married

black woman is less likely to have the luxury of choosing not

to be involved in an occupation. The absolute level of

occupational role salience for single women, however, does

not appear to vary by race. Therefore, the present study did

not control for the effect of race. The racial composition

of the obtained sample, however, is described.

Current trait and attitude factors found to be related

to occupational role salience of women include sex role

attitude and orientation; achievement orientation; needs for

dominance, autonomy, altruism, nurturance, and sociability;

and fear of success. Variations in these attributes are

considered to result in part from variations in family

socialization. In the present study it was hypothesized that

the parental role attributes examined would indirectly tap

some of the influence of these trait and attitude variables

on women's occupational role salience.

Past Socialization Influences

Researchers examining the impact of past socialization

influences on women's occupational role expectations have









43

focused primarily on familial influences. In these studies

the influence of the family of origin in shaping women's sex

role and occupational role expectations has been examined in

terms of both family status and structure and the quality of

the parent-daughter relationship. In the following sections

research on family status and structural factors, and parent-

daughter relationship factors is presented, followed by

analysis of their influence on women's occupational role

salience from a social learning theory perspective.

Family Structure and Status Influences

Family socioeconomic status is often used as a measure

of family status within the broader social context.

Researchers assessing the impact of family status have

generally measured family socioeconomic status by assessing

one or more of the following variables: paternal and

maternal educational attainment, and paternal occupational

status and income. Clearly lacking in these calculations of

socioeconomic status has been a consideration of maternal

occupational factors (Acker, 1978). As a result of this

omission, Haug (1973) suggested that nearly one-third of all

family socioeconomic status estimates were inaccurate. This

may account for the mixed findings regarding family

socioeconomic status influences on role expectations and

attitudes depicted in the following studies.

Several researchers have found a slightly negative

relationship between female occupational orientation and











background socioeconomic status (Bielby, 1978; Douvan &

Adelson, 1966; Tangri, 1972). In a study of the impact of

maternal employment on daughters' occupational role salience

in which socioeconomic status was controlled for, and a

national probability sample of female college graduates was

used, Bielby (1978) found that female college graduates from

less economically privileged homes had higher occupational

role salience. However, this finding did not account for

much of the variance.

Conversely, several investigators have found a positive

relationship between family socioeconomic status and

occupational and educational aspirations of daughters (Astin,

1975; Rosen & Aneshensel, 1978). Although socioeconomic

status was not directly correlated with occupational role

salience, Astin (1975) found that among those who attend

college those with higher socioeconomic backgrounds had

higher college admission scores and greater educational

opportunity, both of which have been correlated with

occupational role salience in women (Almquist & Angrist,

1971; Astin & Mynt, 1971; Fassinger, 1985). Similarly, Rosen

and Aneshensel (1978), in a path analytic model that focused

on how sex membership influences the educational and

occupational expectations process, sampled one-third of the

students attending all the junior and senior high schools

(grades 7-12) in three upstate New York cities. They found

occupational role expectations to be higher for females from









45

higher socioeconomic families than for females from lower

socioeconomic families. In addition, family socioeconomic

status, family size, and mother's educational and

occupational status had greater total effects on female than

on male occupational expectations. These researchers thus

proposed that in a large family a child's sex influences how

parents distribute family financial resources and whose needs

they accord priority. They proposed that preference would be

given in such families to male siblings. Hauser (1971),

however, reported that males from larger families had lower

educational and occupational aspirations than males from

smaller families, and that only the educational aspirations

of females were adversely affected by membership in large

families.

Rosen and Aneshensel (1978) also reported that mothers'

status attainment had a greater impact on daughters'

occupational expectations than fathers' on sons'. However,

they interpreted this finding as being related to the reality

that females have fewer high status educational and

occupational role models available to them. In addition,

these investigators noted that intervening psychological and

achievement-related factors like academic achievement, mental

ability, and self-assessment, were also related to

occupational expectations but to a much lesser extent for

females than males.









46

Albrecht (1976) studied the relationship between social

class and occupational stereotyping of adult males and

females. Using a random sampling of 2,227 households in

Utah, he found education, but not income level, to be

strongly related to such stereotyping and concluded that the

females and males in educationally disadvantaged families

have dual blocks to occupational attainment in the form of

both limited training and attitudinal barriers which rule out

many occupations as viable choices.

Still other researchers have found no correlation

between occupational orientation in females and family

socioeconomic status (Almquist & Angrist, 1970; Lipmen-Blumen

& Leavitt, 1976). It may be that global measurement of

family socioeconomic status, due to its failure to

differentiate variations among families in levels of maternal

occupational status, family size, or sex of siblings, is too

gross a measure of family status to accurately predict the

occupational role salience of college women.

The effect of maternal employment on general attitudes

towards women's roles has been well documented in the

research literature. Maternal employment has consistently

been associated with acceptance of a wider range of sex-

appropriate behaviors and more egalitarian and less sex-role

stereotypic ideologies among daughters of all ages (Baruch,

1972; Douvan, 1963; Douvan & Adelson, 1966; Eyde, 1962;

Hartley, 1960, 1961; Meier, 1972; Vogel, Broverman,









47

Broverman, Clarkson, & Rosenkrantz, 1970). Vogel, Broverman,

Broverman, Clarkson, and Rosenkrantz (1970) studied the

relationship between the sex role perceptions held by male

and female college students and their mothers' employment.

Results indicated female students with employed mothers

perceived the differences between men and women to be the

smallest, followed by male students with employed mothers,

while students with unemployed mothers perceived the greatest

differences between men and women. In addition, the effect

of maternal employment was to raise the estimation of one's

own sex. Meier (1972) also found a significant relationship

between female college students' favoring of social equality

for women and maternal employment. Further, the most liberal

sex role ideology was held by the daughters of women in high

status occupations.

Looking at the social status of the family in terms of

relative parental power, Vanfossen (1977) found that the

pattern of parental dominance was a crucial intervening

variable between maternal educational and occupational

history and sex role values of daughters. Vanfossen found

that father dominance, measured by his greater educational

and occupational attainment, depressed the relationship

between maternal employment and egalitarian sex role values

in daughters, while mother dominance heightened the

relationship between maternal employment and egalitarian sex

role values in daughters.









48

Several researchers examining maternal educational

attainment have reported a relationship between maternal

educational level and role modeling of daughters. Smith and

Self (1980), exploring the relationship between the sex role

attitudes of female college students and their mothers,

measured the attitudes of 74 mother-daughter pairs. They

found that mothers with a college education had the greatest

degree of attitudinal similarity to their daughters

regardless of whether their attitudes were liberal or not.

Focusing on the effects of maternal employment on

occupational role salience, the results of one study of

elementary school children (Hartley, 1966) and four studies

of adolescent girls (Banducci, 1967; Dellas, Gaier, &

Emihovich, 1979; Peterson, 1958/1959; Smith, 1969) indicated

daughters of working mothers were more likely than daughters

of nonworking mothers to view work as something they wanted

to do when they were mothers. Douvan (1963) found that

adolescent daughters of employed mothers were more likely to

name their mothers as the person they most admired. In

studies investigating occupational aspirations at the college

level, Almquist and Angrist (1971) found higher occupational

role salience among daughters with working mothers, and

Almquist and Angrist (1970), Baruch (1972), and Tangri (1972)

found that college daughters of working mothers more often

chose occupations in nontraditional career fields.











In exploring the impact of the perceived consequences of

maternal employment on the occupational role salience of a

sample of 86 college females, Baruch (1972) found that if a

subject's mother worked but also experienced negative

personal consequences (i.e., lack of paternal support or role

conflict) because of her career, the subject was less likely

to be career role salient. Similarly, Mullins (1980) in a

random sampling of 299 college women explored the

relationship between perceived parental role satisfaction and

daughters' personal aspirations and sex role attitudes. She

found that both perceived maternal dissatisfaction with the

role of mother and housewife and paternal job dissatisfaction

were related to liberal sex role attitudes and occupational

role salience. Carew (1978/1979), exploring the relationship

between maternal role satisfaction and paternal support for

maternal employment for mothers who were reentering the work

force, found paternal support for maternal employment to be a

crucial factor in the mother's occupational role

satisfaction. The findings of these studies indicate that,

in addition to imitation of employed mothers, avoidance of

dissatisfied employed and nonemployed mothers appears to be a

factor influencing the occupational role salience of

daughters, and that maternal occupational satisfaction is

related to paternal support for maternal employment.

Mullins' findings also suggest that paternal role status and









50

satisfaction may be a significant but rarely explored

influence on occupational role salience of daughters.

This review of the research literature on family status

and structure suggests that daughters whose mothers are

employed may aspire, like their mothers, to combine work and

family life as adults more than do daughters whose mothers

are not employed. Such employment plans appear, however, to

depend on the mother's role satisfaction, the mother's

occupational and educational status, paternal support for

maternal employment, and relative parental power in terms of

educational and occupational attainment. In addition,

paternal occupational role satisfaction also emerges as a

variable differentiating levels of occupational role salience

in daughters. Thus maternal educational and employment

status and maternal role satisfaction and support, as well as

paternal employment satisfaction, appear to be significant

variables to consider in examining the influence of family

socialization on women's occupational role salience.

The results from these studies on family status and

structure influences on occupational role salience and sex

role attitudes of daughters can be explained in terms of

social learning theory. In the following section both the

concepts of social learning theory and the existing research

relating social learning theory to women's occupational role

salience are reviewed.











Social Learning Theory

Social learning theory views sex-typed characteristics

and role expectations as a function of both direct and

imitative learning experiences (Bandura, 1977). Parents are

viewed as both role models and direct reinforcing agents for

their children (Kelly & Worell, 1976). The likelihood of

imitation of a model is mediated by both the model's power

and the nature of the relationship between the model and the

learner. The power of a role model is increased if he or she

is rewarded (Bandura, 1977) or if there is a close

relationship between model and learner (Mussen & Distler,

1959).

Examining the results of the previously mentioned

studies from a social learning theory perspective, the

increasing incidence of maternal employment would be

described as reflecting a shift in female role model status.

Subsequent maternal employment satisfaction, paternal support

for maternal employment, and absolute and relative maternal

occupational and educational status would be considered to

affect the power of employed mothers as role models for their

daughters. In addition, from this theoretical perspective,

the finding that paternal occupational satisfaction is

related to daughter's occupational role salience would

indicate a paternal role modeling influence as well. Viewing

fathers as well as mothers as potential role models is









52
congruent with social learning theory as it does not purport

that modeling can occur only between same sex individuals.

Kahn (1982) in an innovative and complex descriptive

study based on social learning theory, explored the

reflections by 114 junior and senior college women on the

messages derived about life role choices by observing their

mothers' lives and the subsequent meaning they placed upon

that experience in terms of their own future role

preferences. The women were placed into one of three groups

according to their own lifestyle preferences for the future:

traditional (family-committed), careerist (career-committed),

and employed mother (equal family and career commitment).

Based on open-ended written descriptions of their mothers,

information on maternal employment, and responses to the

question of what they had learned from their mothers' lives

as well as 90-minute semi-structured interviews designed to

uncover in greater detail participants' responses to their

mothers as models of role options, the following results were

obtained. It appeared that mothers were avoided as well as

imitated as life role models. Specifically, many

"careerists" perceived their mothers' traditional marriages

as precluding other attainments and thus chose to avoid this.

Conversely, more imitation rather than avoidance was found in

the traditional group, with high socioeconomic status

emerging as a key variable underlying the attractiveness of

this group's mothers as role models of family commitment,









53

with work, if at all, being secondary and due to choice

rather than necessity. Finally, the employed mother group of

women who described equal commitment to both future career

and family were characterized by two extremes: imitation of

well-educated, happily employed mothers in egalitarian

marriages or avoidance of either uneducated, unhappily

employed mothers perceived as having limited horizons or

unhappily unemployed mothers perceived as having wasted

potential. The design of this study allowed for exploration

of myriad family status and structural variables as they

mediated maternal role model influence on life role choices

of young women. Intriguing implications for social learning

theory were indicated in the finding that avoidance may be as

powerful as imitation of role models in explaining the

learning process and subsequent expectations and preferences.

However, two limitations to this study were evident. One

limitation was the neglect of paternal role factors and the

other limitation was the lack of information on qualitative

aspects of the mother-daughter or father-daughter

relationship.

Parent-Daughter Relationship Influences

Investigators of parent-daughter relationship factors

and daughter's development have examined parental influences

in the following areas relevant to women's occupational role

expectations: daughter's occupational role innovation (sex-

atypical occupational choice), daughter's occupational role









54

salience, and daughter's sex role orientation and attitudes.

Almquist and Angrist (1970) have found occupational role

innovation to be related to occupational role salience in

college women, and thus provide a rationale for reviewing

literature on parental relationship influences on

occupational role innovation of women.

Tangri (1972), examining determinants of occupational

role innovation among 200 college women, found role

innovators reported warmer feelings toward their mothers but

felt more similar to their fathers, and reported autonomous

relationships with both parents. Conversely, Standley and

Soule (1974), sampling 151 women in a variety of male-

dominated professions, found that twice as many of these

women felt they were their father's favorite than their

mother's favorite. In data collected by Kutner and Brogan

(1985) on female medical students, fathers were perceived as

more supportive than mothers. Tenzer (1977), studying women

in innovative professions (i.e., lawyers, physicians,

managers), found that fathers, but not mothers, stressed

instrumental values and behaviors rather than expressive

values and behaviors more than did the fathers of women in

traditional professions (i.e., social workers, nurses).

Ridgeway (1978) examined parental identification and

occupational role salience in 457 college women. She found

parental identification, measured as perceived similarity to

parents, to mediate the impact of maternal employment status









55

and maternal sex role ideology. Occupational role salience

among mother-identified women was related to maternal

employment and more liberal sex role ideology in both

parents. For father-identified women occupational role

salience was related to less extensive maternal employment

and greater traditionality of maternal sex role ideology.

Altman and Grossman (1977) found daughters' perceptions of

maternal "goodness" to be predictive of lower occupational

role salience among college women whose mothers did not work.

McBroom (1981) found that university women who rejected

traditional sex role stereotypes for women reported having

poorer relationships with their fathers. This relationship

reached greatest significance for women from lower class

families, and was interpreted as a possible function of the

greater traditionality of the working class fathers.

Kelly and Worell (1976) and De Fronzo and Boudreau

(1979), examining antecedents and correlates of androgyny in

college students, found. maternal employment, paternal

involvement in domestic activities, parental warmth, and

parental encouragement of achievement and self-reliance were

related to greater masculinity and androgyny in daughters.

As cited earlier, occupational role salience has been related

to masculinity and androgyny in women. Kagan and Moss

(1962), in a longitudinal study, found that level of maternal

protectiveness during the first three years of life was

negatively related to achievement behavior in adult women.









56

Hoffman (1972) described this relationship as an absence of

"smother love" for high achieving adult women. Kriger (1972)

found that high achievement-oriented women tended to focus

their needs in the workplace, which implies that higher

achievement-oriented women have higher occupational role

salience. Baruch and Barnett (1981), examining sex role

stereotyping in preschool children, found fathers who

participated in childcare tasks independently (rather than

jointly with their wives) had daughters who did less sex role

stereotyping.

The results of these studies on parent-daughter

relationships and role development, role expectations, and

role behavior of daughters are mixed and difficult to sort

out. This lack of consistent results may be due to the

varying populations and dependent variables examined and

differing methodologies used. However, several tentative

conclusions can be drawn from the findings. First, it

appears that the greater the degree of parental warmth toward

and involvement with the daughter, the greater the power of

the parent as role model. For example, poor relations with

traditional fathers predicted nontraditional sex role

attitudes in university women, and positive relations with

traditional nonworking mothers predicted low occupational

role salience in college women. In addition, high paternal

involvement in childcare activities predicted low sex role

stereotyping in preschool daughters. The results of these









57

studies are consistent with the social learning theory

postulate that the power of a role model increases with the

closeness of the relationship between the model and the

learner. Second, these results suggest that warm and

supportive relationships with parents who encourage

achievement and autonomy, and who are role models of these

traits themselves (e.g., maternal employment), are related to

women's nontraditional sex role orientation and

nontraditional occupational role choice.

This point of view is supported in more general studies

on the effects of parenting. Lamb, Chase-Lansdale, and Owen

(1978) have proposed that good parenting across all

developmental stages for a child requires sensitivity in

interpreting the child's signals and underlying needs and

responding appropriately. For example, if parents are

sensitive to their infant, the baby will come to trust in

their reliability and predictability and consequently will

develop a secure attachment to them (Ainsworth, Bell, &

Stayton, 1974). This secure attachment in turn results in

the child's greater willingness to interact with other

people, subsequent greater exposure to social experiences,

and greater social sophistication (Lamb, Owen, & Chase-

Lansdale, 1980). Lamb (1978), using social learning theory

to elaborate on the importance of parental sensitivity to

their children's needs and subsequent attachments has argued,

"The warmth that characterizes attachments increases both the










58

salience of attachment figures as models and the reinforcing

potency of their attempts to encourage or discourage

behavior" (p. 38).

Lamb and Bronson (1980) proposed that the sensitivity

level of parents toward their children is related to each

parent's level of role satisfaction and role support. Thus

the quality of the parent-child relationship mediates the

impact of parents as role models to their daughters, and the

quality of the parent-child relationship is in turn mediated

by the role satisfaction and support of parents.

These theoretical and empirical considerations of

parental socialization influences on sex role development and

occupational role salience of daughters indicate that parents

who are perceived by their daughters as affectionate,

sensitive, and involved, and who are perceived as satisfied

with and supported for their roles, would have the greatest

salience as role models.

Summary

A literature review was conducted on the following broad

spheres of influence pertaining to college women's

occupational role salience: the sociological context, the

developmental context, and the psychological context.

Sociological theorists have proposed that changes in the

status of women, female labor force participation, and the

form and function of the family have resulted in an increase

in women's occupational role salience across generations.









59

Because these sociological influences are considered constant

at a given point in time, they were not examined in the

present study.

Human development theorists have described late

adolescence as a time of rapid change as identity is

developed and life role decisions are made. The beginning

college years are proposed as a critical time for role

choices with family exerting a strong influence. Examining

changes in role expectations, research on women's

occupational role development has indicated increasing

occupational role salience during the college years. Given

these developmental considerations, in this study the sample

was limited to college freshmen and sophomores ages 17-20.

In this literature review, the psychological context

factors influencing occupational role salience of women were

divided into two broad categories: individual trait

influences such as attributes, attitudes, and current status;

and socialization influences such as family status,

structural, and relationship factors.

Researchers examining individual trait influences found

occupational role salience of women to vary as a function of

sex role attitudes and orientation, achievement motivation,

academic ability, educational level, and marital status.

These status and personality factors were partially

controlled for in the present study by limiting the sample to

single college freshmen and sophomores. In addition,










60

descriptive statistics on Scholastic Aptitude Test (SAT)

scores were reported for subjects. The findings of several

studies examining family socialization and individual trait

factors in combination have suggested sex role socialization

is a more important determinant of occupational role salience

in women than academic ability or achievement level.

Researchers examining family socialization influences on

occupational role salience of women have reported the

following family status and structural variables to be

significant: socioeconomic status; parental educational

level; maternal employment status, satisfaction, and support;

and paternal employment satisfaction. In addition,

researchers of parent-daughter relationship influences on

women's role preferences have indicated that the power of

parents as role models improves with the degree of closeness,

warm feelings, and time spent between parent and child.

The results of these studies of family socialization

influences on occupational role salience and sex role

development of women conform well to a social learning model.

From this perspective parents are viewed as role models and

reinforcers for their children. In addition, the power of

parents as role models is mediated by the consequences to

them of their role involvements and the quality of the

relationship between parent and child.

In sum, a review of the literature suggests that at a

given point in time within a particular age group,










61

psychological factors are most powerful in explaining

variation in occupational role salience of women. These

psychological factors clearly point to parental socialization

as wielding an influence on occupational role salience of

daughters. Such influence has been operationalized in terms

of parental role characteristics and qualitative aspects of

the parent-daughter relationships.

Social learning theory has been suggested as a useful

model for conceptualizing the distinctive nature of parental

socialization influences on occupational role salience of

college women. Two critical areas of influence are suggested

by this theoretical perspective: the quality of the parents

as role models and the power of parents as role models.

These influences were examined in the present study for both

mothers and fathers of college women.















CHAPTER III
METHODOLOGY



It has been suggested that parental figures exert a

powerful role modeling influence in shaping women's

occupational role expectations. This study examined the role

modeling influence of mothers and fathers of college women.

Three facets of parental influence were examined:

(a) parental role status, (b) parental role status

consequences, and (c) parent-daughter relationship quality.

The purpose of this study was to determine whether these

facets of parental influence could be used to explain

daughters' occupational role salience. A limited number of

facets of maternal and paternal influence were first examined

for the sample as a whole. Then the sample was divided in

terms of mothers' employment status and aspects of the

mothers' role influence and fathers' role influence were

examined separately for these two subsamples. Finally,

mothers' and fathers' role influences were jointly examined

for the subsamples of daughters with employed and those with

nonemployed mothers.

In this chapter the research design and methodology are

described. The chapter consists of seven sections: the

research design, the population and sample, sampling









63

procedure, instrumentation, data collection procedures, data

analysis, and limitations of the study.

Design

Due to the inability to control for the parental

attribute variables examined in this study, an ex post facto,

descriptive design was used. Three aspects of parental

influence were examined using three sets of variables to

predict the dependent variable, occupational role salience of

college women. The first set described aspects of the

parents' actual role status: (a) absolute and relative

prestige level of maternal (if employed) and paternal

employment, (b) absolute and relative level of maternal and

paternal educational attainment, (c) extent of maternal

employment, and (d) maternal (if employed) and paternal

employment innovation.

The second set of variables examined the consequences of

parental role status: (a) perceived maternal and paternal

life satisfaction, (b) perceived maternal and paternal

marital relationship satisfaction, (c) perceived maternal and

paternal occupational role status satisfaction, and (d)

perceived maternal and paternal support for their spouses'

occupational role status.

The parent-daughter relationship was examined as the

third parental influence. This relationship was examined in

terms of the daughter's perceived dissatisfaction with the

amount of control, affection, and inclusion expressed. This









64

variable was gauged both for the mother-daughter and father-

daughter relationship. The dependent variable, occupational

role salience, involved the daughter's perceptions of the

reward value of and her degree of commitment to the

occupational role.

Population and Sample

The population base was all female college students

enrolled as freshmen or sophomores at the University of

Florida who were ages 17-20, were from intact families, and

who had never been married. Married, divorced, or widowed

students; students younger than 17 or older than 20; or

students with divorced, deceased, or widowed parents were

excluded due to the potential confounding impacts of age,

family structure, and marital status on occupational role

salience of women.

The University of Florida, with an enrollment of over

36,000 undergraduate and graduate students, 20 colleges, 140

departments, and 114 undergraduate majors, is among the 10

largest universities in the nation (University of Florida

Office of Academic Affairs, 1985). It has a residential

campus and has traditionally been characterized as a

conservative southern university. Fall 1984 enrollment

statistics showed over 15,000 female students enrolled at the

university, comprising 43% of the total graduate and

undergraduate student enrollment. There were over 12,000

freshmen and sophomore students enrolled, comprising 34% of










65

the total enrollment. Foreign students accounted for 4% of

the student body, representing 102 countries. Minority

students accounted for approximately 10% of the enrollment.

Non-Florida residents accounted for another 4% of all

students enrolled, representing every state in the nation.

The vast majority of students enrolled at the university,

92%, were Florida residents, with students representing every

county in Florida. From 1981 through 1984 the attrition rate

for freshmen not returning to the university for their second

semester was approximately 5% of each class (University of

Florida Office of Academic Affairs, 1985).

The desired minimum sample size for this study was 200-

250 students. To insure that the sample was representative

of the population base, the composition of the sample

included approximately 4% foreign students and 10% minority

students.

Sampling Procedure

The sample was obtained through use of the Psychology

Student Subject Pool at the University of Florida. This

subject pool consists of all students registered in

introductory psychology courses. These students were

required to participate as subjects in a specified number of

hours of empirical research. Previous use of the subject

pool (Funderburk, 1983) revealed a wide variety of majors.

Both traditional and nontraditional major choices as well as

many undecided students were represented in the subject pool.










66
Younger college students ages 17-19 were overrepresented in

the subject pool.

Two methods for obtaining a sample from the subject pool

were used: testing of entire psychology classes and sign-up

of eligible subjects for small group testing. Testing of

entire classes of students occurred in five introductory

psychology classes during the summer and fall terms of 1986.

As a result of this procedure, 158 out of approximately 500

students tested met the sampling criteria and were selected

for inclusion in this study.

In addition to testing entire classes, sign-up of

psychology student subjects for small group testing was also

employed during fall term 1986. Using small group testing,

data were collected on an additional 56 students who met the

sampling criteria, for a total obtained sample size of 214

students.

Instrumentation/ Variables

Three instruments were used in the study: a

questionnaire designed by the experimenter to obtain

information regarding subject's demographic status, parent

role status, and parent role satisfaction and support

(Appendix A); the parental behavior subscales of the Life

Interpersonal History Enquiry (LIPHE); and the occupational

role subscales of the Life Role Salience Scales (LRSS).











Demographic Information

Information was obtained on the following variables by

means of a demographic questionnaire in order to both limit

and accurately describe the obtained sample: subject's age,

minority status, Scholastic Aptitude Test (SAT) score, U.S.

citizenship, socioeconomic status, marital status, major,

year of college, and intactness of family (Appendix A).

Parental Role Status

Parental role status, representing the first cluster of

independent variables, was also assessed in the demographic

questionnaire (Appendix A). This set of variables consisted

of the following: maternal and paternal educational status,

maternal and paternal relative educational status, maternal

(if employed) and paternal occupational prestige level,

maternal (if employed) and paternal relative occupational

prestige level, extent of maternal employment, and maternal

(if employed) and paternal occupational role innovation.

Parental educational status. Parental educational

status was assessed by means of Items 16, 17, 27, and 28

(Appendix A) in which respondents were asked to indicate the

highest grade level of schooling completed and highest degree

earned by each parent. Scores ranged from 0 (no formal

education) through 20 (Ph.D. or M.D.). Parents' relative

educational status was then assessed as the difference

between the educational level score of the mother and the

father. Difference scores ranged from 0 (no difference in









68

educational status) through 40 (extreme difference in

educational status) on a continuous scale. If the mother's

education was greater than the father's, the difference score

was calculated by adding the difference to 20; if the

father's education was greater than the mother's, the

difference score was calculated by subtracting the difference

from 20.

Parental occupational prestige. Parental employment

prestige level was measured by means of a series of questions

(Items 11-15, 31-35; Appendix A). These questions were

similar to those used by the United States Bureau of the

Census to assign occupational codes to individuals (United

States Department of Commerce, 1983b). For the purposes of

this study, these questions were reworded from requesting

information on one's own occupation to requesting information

on one's parent's occupation. With knowledge of parental

occupational code, a parental occupational prestige score was

then assigned using the continuous scale (0-100) of the

Duncan Socioeconomic Index (SEI) developed by Duncan (1961).

Paternal and maternal prestige level relative to each

other was then assessed as the difference between maternal

(if employed) and paternal occupational prestige scores.

These difference scores ranged from 0-200. If the mother's

occupational prestige score was greater than the father's,

the difference score was derived by adding the difference to

100. If the father's occupational prestige score was greater










69

than the mother's, then the difference score was calculated

by subtracting the difference from 100.

In addition, family socioeconomic status was derived

from paternal rating on the Duncan socioeconomic index.

Regrettably, the Duncan SEI does not take into consideration

maternal occupational status in calculating family SES.

Despite its inaccuracy due to omission of maternal

occupational information, the Duncan SEI was used as an

indicator of family SES in order to be comparable with other

studies.

Extent of maternal employment. In addition to parental

occupational prestige level, maternal employment was assessed

by Item 30 (Appendix A) in terms of both the length of

employment (in number of years) and the extent of employment

for any given year (2=full time, l=part ti me, 0=not

employed). These additional data on maternal employment were

needed due to the great variation in employment patterns of

mothers. The number of years employed from the time the

daughter was born until she was age 18 or left for college

was computed and then multiplied by the extent of employment

for each year. This resulted in a continuous score for

extent of maternal employment ranging from 0 (mother never

worked from the time daughter was born until she was age 18

or left for college) through 36 (mother worked full time from

the time the daughter was born until she was age 18 or left

for college).










70

Parental occupation innovation. Innovation of maternal

(if employed) and paternal occupation was determined by

assessing the extent to which the parent was employed in an

occupational field containing a minority of same-sex

incumbents. This occupational innovation index was

calculated by using the 1980 Census data on "Detailed

Occupations of the Civilian Labor Force by Sex" (United

States Department of Commerce, 1983a). Innovative or sex-

atypical occupations were considered to be those fields with

less then 30% same sex incumbents; traditional occupations

were those with more than 70% same sex incumbents.

Occupational innovation scores ranged on a continuous scale

from 0%-100% for both mothers (if employed) and fathers.

Parental Role Status Consequences

Parental role status consequences represented the second

cluster of independent variables assessed by means of the

demographic questionnaire. Included in this cluster were

perceived maternal and paternal marital relationship

satisfaction, perceived maternal and paternal global life

satisfaction, perceived maternal (if employed) and paternal

employment satisfaction, perceived maternal (if not employed)

nonemployed status satisfaction, perceived paternal support

for maternal (if employed) employment status, perceived

paternal support for maternal (if not employed) nonemployed

status, and perceived maternal support for paternal

employment status.










71

Subjects were requested to share their perceptions of

their parents' levels of occupational and global life

satisfaction and their perceptions of each parent's support

for the other's occupational role. These measures were, by

necessity, relatively uni-dimensional and simplistic, as the

subjects obviously did not have the same wealth of

information about these issues as did their parents.

However, the format of these measures paralleled that used in

previous research in this area (Altman & Grossman, 1977;

Colangelo, Rosenthal, & Dettman, 1984; Yarrow, Scott,

deLeeuw, & Heinig, 1962).

Parental marital relationship satisfaction. Given the

daughter's first-hand exposure to parental marital

relationship satisfaction, several dimensions of this

construct were assessed which had been used previously in the

literature (Booth, Johnson, White, & Edwards, 1984).

Marital satisfaction dimensions assessed by means of Items

20-23 and 42-45 of the demographic questionnaire (Appendix A)

were level of marital happiness, level of marital

satisfaction, amount of understanding received from spouse,

and extent of parental consideration of divorce. Levels of

each dimension were assessed by a five-point Likert-type

scale for both mothers and fathers. Scores on daughters'

perceptions of maternal and paternal marital relationship

satisfaction ranged on a continuous scale from 0-16 with









72

higher scores indicating greater perceived parental marital

relationship satisfaction.

Parental life satisfaction. Assessment of daughters'

perceptions of maternal and paternal global life satisfaction

was done by means of one Likert scale item for each parent

(Items 26 and 46, Appendix A). Responses ranged from 0-4.

Low scores indicated disagreement and high scores indicated

agreement with the statement, "In terms of how I see my

mother(father) now, I would say she(he) is basically happy

with the way she(he) leads her(his) life".

Parental occupational role status satisfaction.

Daughters' perceptions of maternal and paternal occupational

role status satisfaction were assessed by means of three

Likert scale items with responses ranging from 0-4. Two

questions examined the occupational satisfaction of fathers

and employed mothers by assessing the daughter's perceptions

of each parent's job satisfaction and job enjoyment (Items

18, 19, 37, and 38, Appendix A). The third question measured

perceived maternal happiness with her degree of involvement

in employment outside of the home, thus including nonemployed

as well as employed mothers in this assessment (Item 41,

Appendix A).

Daughters were also asked to characterize their mother's

work involvement and satisfaction (Item 39, Appendix A).

Four categories were available: (a) mother who worked and

preferred not to work, (b) mother who worked and preferred to










73

work, (c) mother who did not work and preferred to work, and

(d) mother who did not work and preferred not to work. The

daughters' placement of their mother in these categories was

scored as follows. Both employed and nonemployed mothers who

were perceived as satisfied (categories b and d) were scored

as 1, and both employed and nonemployed mothers who were

perceived as not satisfied (categories a and c) were scored

as 0.

Examining the scale values of occupational role status

satisfaction scores for fathers, employed mothers, and for

nonemployed mothers indicated the following overall scale

ranges for each group. Fathers' occupational role

satisfaction scores ranged on a continuum from 0-8 with

higher scores indicating greater paternal job satisfaction.

Employed mothers' occupational role satisfaction scores

ranged on a continuum from 0-13 with higher scores indicating

greater maternal occupational role status satisfaction.

Nonemployed mothers' satisfaction with their nonemployed

status ranged on a continuum from 0-5 with higher scores

indicating greater satisfaction with their nonemployed

status.

Parental occupational role status support. Maternal

support of paternal occupational status was assessed by a

single item using a five-point Likert-type scale (Item 25,

Appendix A). Scores ranged from 0-4 with higher scores









74

indicating greater maternal support for paternal occupational

status.

Previous research has indicated two aspects of paternal

support for maternal employment: attitudinal support and

behavioral support in the form of participation in domestic

activities. Both of these aspects were included as items in

this study with a five-point Likert-type item developed for

each area (Items 24 and 36, Appendix A). In addition, a

single five-point scale Likert-type item designed to assess

paternal support for level of maternal employment involvement

was used to measure paternal support for nonemployed as well

as employed mothers (Item 40, Appendix A). Scores on

paternal support for employed mothers ranged from 0-12 with

higher scores indicating greater paternal support of maternal

employment. Scores on paternal support for nonemployed

mothers ranged from 0-4 with higher scores indicating greater

paternal support of maternal nonemployed status.

The Parent-Daughter Relationship

The parent-daughter relationship variable, representing

the third facet of parental influence, was measured by three

scales of the Life Interpersonal History Enquiry (LIPHE).

These scales were used to assess the daughter's perceived

dissatisfaction with the mother-daughter and father-daughter

relationship in terms of the amount of control, affection,

and inclusion expressed.









75

The LIPIIE is a version of the Fundamental Interpersonal

Relationship Orientation (FIRO) scales developed by Schutz

(1958). The LIPHE was selected for use in this study because

it was designed to measure the relationship between parent

and child from the point of view of the child after the child

has become an adult. The rationale for using a current

subjective assessment of past parent-child interactions in

this study was threefold. First, the daughter's

phenomenological perspective may be the most relevant in

assessing past parental influences on current occupational

role salience given that the daughter's occupational role

salience was being self-reported from a phenomenological

perspective as well. Second, it can be argued that to the

extent individuals define situations to be real, they are

real in their consequences. Third, it can be argued that

parent-child relationships and parents as role models during

childhood have a more profound impact on personality

development, attitudes, and expectations than those same

relationships and role model influences in adult life due to

the greater dependency of the child and concomitant greater

power of the parent during childhood (Bandura, 1977; Lamb,

1978; Lamb, Owen, & Chase-Lansdale, 1980).

Each item in the LIPHE is stated in Guttman scale form.

The degree of dissatisfaction, if any, with what individuals

recall of their mothers' or fathers' behaviors or feelings is

rated on a six-point scale. Each relationship is measured in










76

terms of the dimensions of control, affection, and inclusion.

The LIPHE consists of 54 items for each parent for a combined

total of 108 items. The LIPHE has six scales comprised of

nine items each on which the subjects rate each parent.

Scale scores range from 0-45 indicating the degree of

dissatisfaction with perceived parental behavior and

feelings. The following parent-daughter relationship areas

are assessed: inclusion behavior, control behavior, inclusion

feelings, control feelings, affection, and parental

disapproval. For this study, only the inclusion behavior,

control behavior, and affection scales were included due to

their focus on overt parental behaviors rather than

daughter's feelings about those behaviors.

The inclusion behavior scale measures the amount of

parental attention the daughter believes that she received.

A high score indicates dissatisfaction with the amount of

attention received from the given parent. The control

behavior scale measures the degree to which the daughter

feels her parent allowed and encouraged her to develop her

independence and personal abilities. A high score indicates

dissatisfaction due to a lack of freedom allowed by a given

parent, and a lack of encouragement of abilities. The

affection scale measures the daughter's dissatisfaction with

the amount and quality of love she received from her parents.

Because parental behavior and feelings are difficult to

distinguish in this area, they are included in one scale. A










77

high score indicates feeling unloved by the given parent. In

this study daughters' perceptions of both mothers and fathers

were assessed on these three scales.

The coefficients of internal consistency for all the

scales of the LIPHE are .93 or above. This reproducibility

measure, the appropriate reliability measure for a Guttman-

type scale, indicates that 93% of all item responses are

predictable from knowledge of the scale scores. All scales

have relatively high intercorrelations, indicating non-

independence of scales. Factor analysis extracted two

factors from the LIPHE: one factor included all scales

involving mother and the other factor included all scales

involving father. This indicates that overall level of

dissatisfaction with the relationship with mother or father

are the two most clearly differentiated constructs (Schutz,

1978).

Daughter's Occupational Role Salience

The dependent variable, daughter's occupational role

salience, was measured by the two occupational role subscales

of the Life Role Salience Scales (LRSS). The LRSS were

designed to assess personal expectations concerning

occupational, marital and parental roles for individuals both

prior to and during enactment of these roles (Amatea et al.,

1986). The LRSS has been normed on undergraduate male and

female college students, academic women, and married couples

who are parents. Therefore the scale appeared to be










78

appropriate to use with college freshmen and sophomores. The

scales measure two aspects of the salience of each role: the

reward value attributed to the role as assessed by its

importance for self definition and/or personal satisfaction

and the level of commitment of personal time and energy

resources to assure success in the role or to develop the

role. Factor analysis of the scales has revealed six

distinct constructs: marital role value, marital role

commitment, parental role value, parental role commitment,

occupational role value, and occupational role commitment.

These six constructs are measured by six scales consisting of

five items each, for a total of 30 items. Items are rated on

a five-point scale with low scores reflecting disagreement

and high scores agreement with the attitudinal dimension.

Scores for each scale range from 0-20. In this study only

the occupational role value and commitment scales were used.

These two scales were combined for a total of 10 items with

an overall occupational role salience score on a continuous

scale ranging from 0-40.

Internal consistency estimates of the occupational role

value and commitment scales revealed alpha coefficients of

.84 and .83 respectively. Factor analysis revealed item

factor loadings ranged from .68 to .78 for the occupational

role value scale and .66 to .79 for the occupational role

commitment scale (Amatea et al., 1986).










79

Data Collection Procedures

By means of the large group testing procedure, the

instruments were administered during class time to five

entire classes of introductory psychology students at the

beginning of summer and fall semesters. Several other

experimenters' instruments were also given at this time and

the order of administration of instruments was varied across

classes. Students were required to complete all the

inventories in order to receive the hour of credit from their

instructor as subjects in empirical research. Students were

given written instructions on the nature of the study and the

procedures for completing the inventories (Appendix B). They

were encouraged to read the instructions carefully prior to

beginning to answer questions. Computerized answer sheets

were used for questions 1-64 (LRSS and LIPHE). Subjects were

instructed to write directly on the demographic

questionnaire. Subjects were not required to sign an

informed consent form. Subjects were encouraged to raise

their hands if they had questions. Using this data

collection method, 158 out of approximately 500 students

tested met the criteria for inclusion in this study.

After the large group testing occurred during the 1986

summer and fall semesters, a sign-up sampling procedure was

used until the minimum sample size of 200-250 was obtained.

A brief description of the study was posted in the lobby of

the psychology building for interested students to sign-up.









80

The experimental participation sign-up sheet contained the

following information: title of the study, description of

the study, times and location of the study, and specific

requirements for participation. The brief description of the

study read, "You will arrive at the time and place designated

on the sign-up sheet. You will complete a questionnaire which

is approximately 25 minutes long". Special requirements

listed on the sign-up sheet read, "Bring a #2 lead pencil.

Females only, ages 17-20, whose parents are still married to

each other. Students in M W F 3rd, 6th, 7th, and 8th period

psychology classes only". Students were excluded from this

study if they had already been tested in class or if they

failed to meet the necessary criteria. In addition, subjects

who had a deceased parent or who had themselves been married

previously were eliminated from the sample after data

collection.

A room was reserved in the psychology building for

administration of inventories. Up to 15 subjects

participated in each of these sign-up administrations. When

the subjects arrived at the designated place and time they

signed a subject credit slip to be turned in to their

instructors. They were then informed of the purposes and

procedures of the study verbally and in writing (Appendix B).

Subjects were not required to sign an informed consent form.

Subjects were then instructed to read each question carefully

and informed that completion time for the questionnaires was










81

about 25 minutes. All subjects were informed that they could

leave when they were finished. Data on 56 additional

subjects was obtained using this procedure for a total sample

size of 214.

Data Analyses

Separate regression analyses were performed to address

each of the seven proposed research questions. Prior to

conducting the regression analyses, intercorrelations between

the dependent and all independent variables and among the

independent variables were calculated for the total sample

and for the employed and nonemployed mothers subsamples.

The regression analyses corresponding to the seven

proposed research questions were as follows. First, the

impact on daughter's occupational role salience of maternal

employment extent and all the paternal role attribute

variables were examined jointly for the total sample.

Second, all the maternal role attribute variables were

examined separately for the subsample of subjects with

employed mothers. Third, all the maternal role attribute

variables were examined separately for subjects with

nonemployed mothers. Parallel analyses were also conducted

to address the fourth and fifth research questions which

examined the influence of paternal role attribute variables

separately on the employed mothers subsample and then on the

nonemployed mothers subsample. Finally, analyses

corresponding to the sixth and seventh research questions









82

examining the combined influence of paternal and maternal

role attribute variables for subjects in the employed mothers

subsample and the nonemployed mothers subsamples were

conducted.

Each full model regression equation was tested for

significance with the alpha level set at .10. In addition,

all possible subset solutions were generated for each

regression equation from which one or two subset models were

selected and tested for significance in post hoc analyses.

Criteria for selection of subset models during post hoc

analyses included (a) examining the amount of variation in

the dependent variable accounted for by the model relative to

other models with equal numbers of variables, (b) examining

the increment in amount of variation in the dependent

variable accounted for relative to models with fewer

variables, and (c) the model's correspondence to the

theoretical framework proposed for this study.

Descriptive statistics were calculated on demographic

data collected such as subject's age, parental SES, major,

minority status, U.S. citizenship, and year at college and

were used to describe the sample.

Methodological Limitations

This descriptive study had several methodological

limitations. These limitations concerned the following:

population, sample and sampling procedures, design, and

instrumentation.










83

In terms of population limitations, this study purported

to explain the parental role model and parent-daughter

relationship influences accounting for variations in

occupational role salience in lower division college women

who attended the University of Florida, were ages 17-20, from

intact families, and who had never been married. The

generalizability of this study is thus limited to lower

division college females attending one university in Florida,

who are ages 17-20, from intact families, and who have never

been married.

Since subjects with divorced parents were not included,

it could be speculated that the extremes of parental marital

dissatisfaction were not included in this study thus limiting

the diversity of parental role models examined. It is

believed, however, that the majority of these sample and

population limitations were necessary for economic reasons,

convenience (e.g., limiting the sample to the University of

Florida), or in order to control for the potential impact of

confounding variables such as age, educational attainment,

family structure, and current marital status on women's

occupational role salience.

In addition, there may have been sample bias resulting

from selection of subjects from a psychology student subject

pool. However, this subject pool had been shown to encompass

a wide variety of majors, and the majority of lower division

college students have not yet officially selected an upper










84
division college major. Furthermore, there may have been

sample bias in the sign-up sheet subsample of 56 subjects

because participants were self-selected.

The ex post facto design used in this study required

subjects to report their current perceptions of their

parents' role status and role status satisfaction as well as

their perceptions of their relationship with each parent when

the subjects were children. It was assumed that the

subjects' current subjective perceptions and assessments of

parents (i.e., a phenomenological perspective) would be more

powerful in predicting their current attitudes, beliefs, and

values about the occupational role than would more objective

measures of parental role status, parental role status

satisfaction, and parent-daughter relationship quality.

Nevertheless, parental influences might be measured more

objectively through parental self-report or direct

observation of parent-child relationship quality because the

subjects' self-report of conditions in their families may not

have a high correspondence with objective reality.

This was an ex post facto descriptive study which relied

on two established instruments to measure the psychological

variables of subjects' occupational role salience and parent-

daughter relationship satisfaction. In addition, the study

relied on a demographic questionnaire designed by the

experimenter to assess perceived parental role status and

role satisfaction. Obviously, the accuracy and validity of










85

measurement of the independent and dependent variables was

dependent on the reliability and validity of these

instruments. Therefore measurement error of the instruments

might have impacted on the validity, reliability, and

significance of the results. In addition, because the three

instruments were in a self-report format, social desirability

response set errors were possible. For example, subject's

response bias in reporting parental satisfaction and support

variables or parent-daughter relationship satisfaction could

effect the reliability, validity and significance of the

results.















CHAPTER IV
RESULTS




To examine whether certain parental role modeling

influences explained variation in daughter's occupational

role salience, data from 214 freshmen and sophomore college

women were collected and analyzed. In this chapter the

results of the data analyses are presented in three sections.

First, descriptive statistics on the total sample of college

women and on the subsamples of women whose mothers were

employed or nonemployed are presented. Then, correlations

between and among the dependent variable and independent

variables are reported for the total sample and for the

employed and the nonemployed mothers subsamples. Finally,

results of the regression analyses and corresponding post hoc

analyses are reported for each proposed research question.

Descriptive Statistics

The Total Sample

The total sample consisted of 214 college women. The

sample was composed of 178 (83%) freshmen and 36 (17%)

sophomores, as might be expected of students taking an

introductory psychology course. Table 1 presents a frequency

distribution of the variables used to describe the students

in this study: age, year at college, minority status, major,

86









87

and United States citizenship. Twenty-seven women (13%) were

minority students and eight women (4%) were foreign students.

These proportions are consistent with the frequencies with

which these categories are found in the general population of

students at the University of Florida. The age distribution

of the sample was as follows: 60 students (28%) were age 17,

115 (54%) were age 18, 28 (13%) were age 19, and 11 (5%) were

age 20.

Interestingly, a diversity of major choices was

represented in the obtained sample: 51 women (24%) were

undecided regarding their major, 38 women (18%) had selected

a traditional major, 73 women (34%) had selected a neutral

major, and 52 women (24%) had selected a nontraditional

major. Nontraditional major choices were those in which less

than 30% of the individuals currently working in that field

were women. Traditional major choices were those in which

more than 70% of the individuals currently working in that

field were women. Neutral major choices were those in which

30%-70% of the individuals currently working in that field

were women. The students' Scholastic Aptitude Test (SAT)

scores ranged from 730-1394 with a mean score of 1048 and

standard deviation of 118. Because the mean and standard

deviation were calculated for SAT scores, rather than

frequency distribution, this sample descriptor variable is

not presented in Table 1. These SAT scores were within the

expected range for college students.









88

Table 1: Frequency Distributions of Descriptive Variables
for the Total Sample and the Employed and Nonemployed
Mothers Subsamples


Total Sample
N=214

Age %_

17 28

18 54

19 13

20 5

100
UF

Freshmen 83

Sophomore 17

100
Minority

Nonminority 87

Minority 1-3

100
Major

Undecided 24

Traditional 18

Neutral 34

Nontraditional 24

100
us
USi
US citizen 96

Foreign 4
student


Employed Mothers
Subsample n=150

L.

25

58

13

4

100


Nonemployed Mothers
Subsample n=64
z

34

44

14

8

100


78

22

100


92

8

100









89

Descriptive statistics for the independent variables

(i.e., parental role attributes) and the dependent variable

(i.e., daughter's occupational role salience) were also

calculated and are reported in Table 2. The mean level of

occupational role salience for the college women in the total

sample was 27.2, with a standard deviation of 5.5 indicating

a wide distribution of scores on the dependent variable. The

majority of women "neither agreed or disagreed" or "agreed"

that the occupational role is important to them.

For the total sample of 214 college women, 64 of these

women (30%) had mothers who were nonemployed and 150 of these

women (70%) had mothers who were employed. The extent of

maternal employment was defined in this study on a continuum

from mothers who worked part time for one year or more, to

mothers who worked full time for up to 18 years from the time

the daughter was born until she was age 18 or went to

college. A nonemployed mother was defined in this study as a

mother who never worked from the time the daughter was born

until she was age 18 or went to college. The extent of

maternal employment in the obtained sample ranged from

mothers who never worked to mothers who worked full time from

the time the subjects were born until they were 18-years-old

or went to college. The mean extent of maternal employment

was u years IULI time or 12 years part time.

mie mean paternal euucationa ievel was i./ years, Ltie

equiva.enL o0 a uacelors uegree, WILit a range oL irom u-zu









90

Table 2: Descriptive Statistics for Dependent and Independent
Variables for the Total Sample and the Employed and
Nonemployed Mothers Subsamples

Total Employed Nonemployed
N = 214 n = 150 n = 64

Variable and
Variable Scale M SD M SD M SD

Salience
(0-40) 27.2 5.5 27.9 5.1 25.6 6.0

Maternal
employment extent
(0-36) 11.6 11.3 16.6 10.0 _____

Maternal
education level
(1-20) 14.5 2.4 14.7 2.6 13.9 2.0

Paternal
education level
(1-20) 15.7 3.2 15.6 3.2 15.9 3.1

Parent's relative
education level
(1-40) 18.7 3.2 19.0 3.2 17.9 2.8

Maternal occupation
prestige level
(1-100) ________ 57.9 14.2 _____

Paternal occupation
prestige level
(1-100) 69.9 18.5 68.5 17.8 73.4 19.8

Parent's relative
prestige level
(1-200) _______ 89.1 18.0 _____

Maternal occupation
innovation
(1-100) _______ 68.7 25.5 _____

Paternal occupation
innovation
(1-100) 82.3 15.7 80.0 16.7 84.2 12.7

Maternal occupation
satisfaction
(0-13) _______ 9.9 2.7 _____











Table 2 continued


Variable and
Variable Scale

Paternal occupation
satisfaction
(0-8)


Total Employed
N = 214 n = 150

M SD M SD


6.1 1.8


Maternal nonemployed
role satisfaction
(0-5) _____

Paternal support of
maternal employment
(0-12) _____

Maternal support of
paternal employment
(0-4) 3.6 .7


Paternal
maternal
(0-4)


6.1 1.7


9.0 2.3



3.6 .7


Nonemployed
n = 64

M SD


6.1 1.8



4.0 1.1


3.6 .6


support of
nonemployment


Maternal life
satisfaction
(0-4)

Paternal life
Satisfaction
(0-4)

Maternal marital
satisfaction
(0-16)

Paternal marital
satisfaction
(0-16)

Mother-daughter
relationship
dissatisfaction
(0-135)

Father-daughter
relationship
dissatisfaction
(0-135)


3.2 .9



3.2 .9



12.3 4.1



13.0 3.3




48.8 28.7




47.4 27.3


_____ 3.4 1.0



3.2 .9 3.1 1.0



3.2 .9 3.3 .8



12.2 4.0 12.4 4.2



12.9 3.4 13.3 3.2




50.1 29.8 46.0 25.9




47.0 27.6 48.6 26.6









92

years and standard deviation of 3.2 years. The mean maternal

educational level was 14.5 years, the equivalent of an

associates degree or two years of college with a range of

from 1-20 years, and standard deviation of 2.4 years.

On a scale from 1-100, the mean prestige level of

paternal occupation was 69.9, with a range from 7 to 96, and

standard deviation of 18.5. This indicates that the majority

of the obtained sample came from a middle to upper-middle

class background. The mean level of paternal occupational

innovation was 82.3% with a standard deviation of 15.7%.

This indicates a majority of fathers were in sex role

traditional occupations (those occupations composed of

greater than 70% males) or neutral occupations (those

occupations composed of 30%-70% males). Table 2 also

presents the means and standard deviations for the maternal

and paternal role attribute variables assessing parental role

satisfaction, parental role support, and parent-daughter

relationship quality for the total sample and for the

subsamples of college women with employed mothers and

nonemployed mothers separately.

The Employed Mothers Subsample

In addition to examining characteristics of the sample

as a whole, the characteristics of the subsample of women

whose mothers were employed were examined and are also

reported in Tables 1 and 2.




Full Text
132
these nonsignificant results. The working mothers subsample
was composed of a wide range of maternal employment extent
with a mean of 8.3 years full-time employment (or 16.6 years
part-time), and a standard deviation of 10 years. The
majority of mothers in this sample worked between 3.3 years
full time (6.6 years part time) and 13.3 years full time,
from the time the daughter was born until she was age 18 or
left for college.
In analyzing the employed mothers subsample in terms of
extent of maternal employment it becomes clear that many of
the college women included in this subsample had mothers who
were not employed for a majority of the daughter's life.
Therefore they may not have been perceived as role models of
occupational involvement.
Given the diversity of maternal employment extent within
the subsample defined as having working mothers, it appears
linearity assumptions for the regression model were violated.
Therefore the parental role support and satisfaction
variables also examined for this subsample impacted
occupational role salience of daughters in a nonadditive way,
thus violating assumptions regarding additive relationships
between independent variables as well. In other words, a
significant portion of the employed mothers subsample might
have been more similar to the nonemployed mothers subsample
due to their low level of employment involvement. Therefore,
they should not have been included in the employed mothers


50
satisfaction may be a significant but rarely explored
influence on occupational role salience of daughters.
This review of the research literature on family status
and structure suggests that daughters whose mothers are
employed may aspire, like their mothers, to combine work and
family life as adults more than do daughters whose mothers
are not employed. Such employment plans appear, however, to
depend on the mothers role satisfaction, the mothers
occupational and educational status, paternal support for
maternal employment, and relative parental power in terms of
educational and occupational attainment. In addition,
paternal occupational role satisfaction also emerges as a
variable differentiating levels of occupational role salience
in daughters. Thus maternal educational and employment
status and maternal role satisfaction and support, as well as
paternal employment satisfaction, appear to be significant
variables to consider in examining the influence of family
socialization on women's occupational role salience.
The results from these studies on family status and
structure influences on occupational role salience and sex
role attitudes of daughters can be explained in terms of
social learning theory. In the following section both the
concepts of social learning theory and the existing research
relating social learning theory to women's occupational role
salience are reviewed.


145
The most powerful results of this study were obtained
for the subsample of daughters with noneraployed mothers.
In examining these results the most refined and significant
trends are suggested. For this group of women, likelihood of
imitation or avoidance of their nonworking mothers or their
working fathers was related to several maternal and paternal
role status consequences. Higher occupational role salience
for daughters of nonworking mothers is characterized by lower
maternal marital satisfaction, lower paternal life
satisfaction, lower paternal support for maternal nonemployed
status, equal or greater maternal education relative to
father, higher paternal occupational prestige particularly in
combination with lower paternal educational level, and higher
maternal general life satisfaction. One pattern is suggested
in which nonworking mothers might be perceived by their
daughters as educated and competent, but having wasted
potential and few rewards for their current nonemployed role
and marital role choices. In a second possible pattern,
these daughters may be responding to achievement-oriented
fathers who have prestigious occupations despite lower levels
of education.
Results of regression analyses for the total sample and
the noneraployed mothers subsample suggest that both mothers
and fathers may be role models of occupational behavior and
salience. In addition, the results of this study underline
the importance of assessing the combined influence of


11
support for and encouragement of daughter's occupational
aspirations (Auster & Auster, 1981; Kutner & Brogan, 1985;
Standley & Soule, 1974; Tenzer, 1977).
Although few studies have related such parent-daughter
relationship information to women's occupational role
salience, a number of studies have examined parent-daughter
relationship variables in relation to daughter's sex role
socialization and development. These studies have
implications for women's occupational role development as
well, and have examined the quality of the parent-child
relationship in the following areas: warmth and overall
level of goodness (Altman & Grossman, 1977; De Fronzo &
Boudreau, 1979; Kelly & Worell, 1976; McBroom, 1981),
parental identification (Ridgeway, 1978; Tangri, 1972), level
of paternal involvement in child-rearing (Baruch & Barnett,
1981; De Fronzo & Boudreau, 1979; Lamb & Bronson, 1980),
intellectual and achievement encouragement (Baumrind, 1970;
De Fronzo & Boudreau, 1979; Kelly & Worell, 1976), parental
discipline style (Baumrind, 1967, 1975; Kelly & Worell,
1976), and independence encouragement (Baumrind, 1967; De
Fronzo & Boudreau, 1979; Kelly & Worell, 1976).
Most of these studies of parental socialization
influences do not provide an explicit theoretical framework
to explain variation in sex role development and occupational
role salience of women. There have been some investigators
in this area, however, who have proposed underlying


97
Intercorrelations Among Variables
Three types of intercorrelations among variables were
computed for the total sample: correlations of the dependent
with independent variables, correlations among independent
variables, and correlations of the dependent variable with
descriptor variables. In addition, intercorrelations of the
dependent with independent variables and among the
independent variables were computed for the employed and
noneraployed mothers subsamples.
Correlations for the Total Sample
Correlations between the dependent variable,
occupational role salience, and nine independent variables
were examined for the total sample of 214 women. The nine
independent variables examined included the following
maternal and paternal role attribute variables: the extent
of maternal employment, the father-daughter relationship
variable, and all paternal role status and paternal role
status consequence variables. The only maternal role
attribute variable examined in this analysis was the extent
of maternal employment. This was because it was hypothesized
that the other nine maternal role attribute variables would
impact on occupational role salience of college females in a
nonlinear fashion as a function of maternal employment
status. Therefore, correlations of the other maternal role
attribute variables with the dependent variable were
calculated for the employed and nonemployed mothers


CHAPTER V
DISCUSSION
In this chapter the results of the regression analyses
are discussed in terms of the seven research questions.
Paternal and maternal role modeling influences on
occupational role salience of college women were examined for
a total sample of 214 college freshmen and sophomores, and
then for subsamples of the women divided by mother's
employment status. One hundred-fifty subjects fell in the
employed mothers subsaraple group while 64 subjects were in
the noneraployed mothers subsample group. The findings for
the total sample are discussed first, followed by discussion
of the results from analyses of data from the employed
mothers subsample. Finally the results of analyses for the
nonemployed mothers subsample are discussed. Limitations of
the study and recommendations for future research are then
presented followed by a summary of the key findings.
The Total Sample
The best subset model of parental attribute variables
for the total sample of college women accounted for only 6%
of the variance in the women's occupational role salience
scores (p_ <.01). This model included only three of the
original nine variables examined. Prior to discussing the
123


2
preferences were changing and Matthews and Tiedeman found
young women ages 11 to 26 were experiencing conflict between
career and marriage plans. In 1972 (Rand & Miller), 1975
(Parelius), and 1977 (Cummings), findings of studies
consistently reported that the majority of college women
planned to combine a family and a career. Finally,
Zuckerman, in a 1980 study of female undergraduates, found
the overwhelming majority of women were interested in
marriage and childbearing, but neither of these was perceived
to be a deterrent to pursuing a career.
Although the majority of today's college women aspire to
combine career and family roles, they appear to demonstrate
differing expectations regarding their involvement in the
occupational role. For example, Regan and Roland (1985)
reported five different patterns of life role salience for
women graduating from college in 1980. Nineteen percent of
these women were committed solely to family involvement, 34%
were primarily committed to family roles but also committed
to occupational involvement, 16% were primarily committed to
the occupational role but also family committed, 8% were
solely committed to occupational involvement, and 23% were
committed to life roles other than family or occupation such
as leisure or religious involvements.
Due to the distinctiveness of the occupational role
development process for women, a number of researchers have
proposed and investigated specific factors which account for


4
have not been considered useful in explaining and predicting
womens occupational choices and aspirations (Holland, 1963,
1973; Super, 1953, 1963; Tiedeman & OHara, 1963). Those
theories have tended to focus on factors influencing an
individuals occupational choice rather than examining
factors accounting for variation in occupational role
salience. In addition, those theories have focused on
individual trait factors, such as interests, abilities, self-
concept and values, which influence occupational choice.
Recent researchers (e.g., Fitzgerald & Crites, 1980;
Osipow, 1973, 1975; Patterson, 1973; & Vetter, 1973) have
contended that traditional theories lack power in explaining
the occupational role development process for women for
several reasons. First, it has been proposed that, for
women, expectations about the occupational role include not
only what occupation they will choose, but even more
basically, whether they choose to work outside the home at
all, and if so, to what extent (Kriger, 1972). Second,
factors impacting on occupational role expectations of women
cannot be examined without acknowledging the impact of sexual
discrimination in the workplace as an environmental
constraint which has been documented as limiting opportunity
in the form of lower pay, lower status jobs, and slower
advancement for women (Astin, 1984; Hauser & Featherraan,
1977; Levitin, Quinn, & Staines, 1973; Treiman & Terrell,
1975). Thus, for women, the opportunity to match interests


77
high score indicates feeling unloved by the given parent. In
this study daughters' perceptions of both mothers and fathers
were assessed on these three scales.
The coefficients of internal consistency for all the
scales of the LIPHE are .93 or above. This reproducibility
measure, the appropriate reliability measure for a Guttman-
type scale, indicates that 93% of all item responses are
predictable from knowledge of the scale scores. All scales
have relatively high intercorre1 ations, indicating non
independence of scales. Factor analysis extracted two
factors from the LIPHE: one factor included all scales
involving mother and the other factor included all scales
involving father. This indicates that overall level of
dissatisfaction with the relationship with mother or father
are the two most clearly differentiated constructs (Schtz,
1978).
Daughter's Occupational Role Salience
The dependent variable, daughter's occupational role
salience, was measured by the two occupational role subscales
of the Life Role Salience Scales (LRSS). The LRSS were
designed to assess personal expectations concerning
occupational, marital and parental roles for individuals both
prior to and during enactment of these roles (Araatea et al.,
1986). The LRSS has been normed on undergraduate male and
female college students, academic women, and married couples
who are parents. Therefore the scale appeared to be


37
occupational role salience and more liberal sex role
attitudes in college women.
Angrist (1969), in a four-year longitudinal study of 188
female freshmen, explored changes in occupational role
aspirations. Attrition after four years left 108 seniors,
with complete questionnaire data on 87 students. She found
that 70% of these 87 subjects had changed their career choice
by their sophomore year, and although only 30% were career
salient as freshmen, by their senior year 43% were career
salient.
The results of these studies suggest several important
considerations when examining occupational role expectations
of college women. First, it appears important to distinguish
among the following concepts: occupational role salience,
occupational role choice, and career maturity for women. A
college female is likely to have greater career maturity than
a college male in terras of career decision-making skills, yet
she may not have high occupational role salience as a result
of traditional sex role socialization. Furthermore, she will
probably select a career from a more restricted range of
choices due to discrimination in the workplace, the lower
prestige level of female-dominated professions, and
traditional sex role socialization. A second consideration
is the need to control for both age and year of college when
exploring occupational role salience in women, given the
trend towards both increased salience and realism with age.


99
Table 3: Significant Intercorrelations Among Dependent,
Independent, and Descriptor Variables for the Total
Sample
Dependent With
Independent Variables
N
r
Occupational role salience with
Extent of
maternal employment
214
.20***
Parental
relative educational level
213
.17***
Paternal
educational level
213
-.n*
Independent With Independent Variables
Paternal educational level with
Paternal occupational prestige level
213
.66****
Paternal job support
213
.32****
Paternal marital satisfaction
213
.29****
Paternal life satisfaction
213
.28****
Paternal occupational prestige level with
Paternal job support
214
.27****
Paternal life satisfaction
214
.25****
Parental relative educational level
213
_.40****
Paternal job satisfaction with
Paternal job support
214
, 24****
Paternal marital satisfaction
214
.23****
Paternal life satisfaction
214
, 61****
Paternal job support with
Paternal marital satisfaction
214
.41****
Paternal life satisfaction
214
. 45****
Paternal marital satisfaction with
Father-daughter relation dissatisfaction
214
_.36****
Paternal life satisfaction
214
.61****
Paternal life satisfaction with
Father-daughter relation dissatisfaction
214
-.30****
Dependent With Descriptor Variables
Occupational role salience with
Undecided major choice 214 -.22****
*
<.10. ** p_ <.05. *** g_ < 01.
****
£_ <.001.


136
it is possible that its contribution is due to chance
fluctuations of this variable within the obtained sample.
This explanation seems particularly plausible given that
maternal life satisfaction was assessed by means of one item
with a five-point scale (0-4). The mean score on this scale
for this sample was 3.1 with the majority of scores in the
restricted range between 2.1 and 4.0. This indicates a
response bias of subjects either agreeing that mother is
satisfied, or neither agreeing nor disagreeing.
Another possible explanation for the inclusion of
maternal life satisfaction in the model is that it may point
to a different pattern of maternal influence on daughters
than that described by the other two maternal variables in
the model. Perhaps for a small percentage of college women,
a nonworking mother with high general life satisfaction
represents a role model of self-confidence and self-esteem
which serves to elevate the daughters self-efficacy
regarding the occupational role and therefore increases her
occupational role salience. It appears nonworking mothers
life satisfaction may be tapping a significant factor
influencing daughters role expectations. In this study,
however, it was too global a measure of maternal role status
consequences to clearly explain variation in occupational
role salience of daughters.
The three variables in the original regression equation
for daughters with nonemployed mothers which did not


66
Younger college students ages 17-19 were overrepresented in
the subject pool.
Two methods for obtaining a sample from the subject pool
were used: testing of entire psychology classes and sign-up
of eligible subjects for small group testing. Testing of
entire classes of students occurred in five introductory
psychology classes during the summer and fall terms of 1986.
As a result of this procedure, 158 out of approximately 500
students tested met the sampling criteria and were selected
for inclusion in this study.
In addition to testing entire classes, sign-up of
psychology student subjects for small group testing was also
employed during fall term 1986. Using small group testing,
data were collected on an additional 56 students who met the
sampling criteria, for a total obtained sample size of 214
students.
Instrumentation/ Variables
Three instruments were used in the study: a
questionnaire designed by the experimenter to obtain
information regarding subject's demographic status, parent
role status, and parent role satisfaction and support
(Appendix A); the parental behavior subscales of the Life
Interpersonal History Enquiry (LIPHE); and the occupational
role subscales of the Life Role Salience Scales (LRSS).


144
these variables to explaining variation in occupational role
salience was relatively small in this study, several trends
are suggested from the results of the total sample and
nonemployed mothers subsamples. These trends point to
several distinct patterns of family influence which provide
alternative explanations for a given level of occupational
role salience in women as well as differentiate between women
with varying levels of occupational role salience.
The results of analyses for the total sample indicate
one trend consistent with previous findings in which the
greater the number of years and hours that a mother works the
higher the daughter's occupational role salience. A second
trend suggested by the results of the total sample analyses
is that high paternal occupational prestige, possibly
combined with lower paternal educational level, is related to
higher occupational role salience in daughters, regardless of
mothers employment status. In this family pattern fathers
may be role models of high achievement and high occupational
commitment for their daughters. Combining these two trends a
family pattern emerges inwhich college women whose mothers
work extensively and whose fathers have high occupational
prestige, particularly given their father's relatively low
educational attainment, are likely to have high occupational
role salience. In this family pattern, both parents are role
models of occupational involvement and commitment.


21
If the combined influence of mothers and fathers as role
models and reinforcing agents on daughters' occupational role
salience was tested more directly and more clearly
understood, then knowledge of this parental influence would
contribute to emerging theories on vocational development for
women. Thus, the results of this study contributed to the
formulation and refinement of a vocational development model
which applies to women, but which might also be applicable to
men due to the universality of social learning theory
principles.
Although many researchers have examined family
socialization influences on women's occupational role
expectations, in this study these influences were
operationalized in order to test a social learning theory
perspective of occupational role development in women.
Therefore the results of this study contributed to the body
of knowledge about social learning theory. The results of
this study also have implications for practice. A key area
of concern for counselors in a college setting is the optimal
career role exploration and development of students. By
increasing understanding of the combined influences of
perceived parental role status, parental role satisfaction
and support, and parent-child relationship variables on
occupational role expectations of college women, the results
of this study could sensitize counselors to relevant issues
for female clients who present problems of career indecision


161
Kurdek, L. A. & Siesky, A. E. (1981). An integrative
perspective on childrens divorce adjustment. American
Psychologist, 36, 856-866.
Kutner, N. D., & Brogan, D. R. (1985). The decision to
enter medicine: Motivations, parental support, and
discouragements for women. In A. S. Rossi (Ed.), Gender
and life course. New York: Aldine.
Lamb, M. E. (1976). The role of the father in child
development. New York: Wiley.
Lamb, M. E. (1978). Social and personality development. New
York: Holt-Rinehart, & Winston.
Lamb, M. E., & Baumrind D. ( 1978). Socialization and
personality development in the preschool years. In M. E.
Lamb (Ed.), Social and personality development. New
York: Holt-Rinehart, & Winston.
Lamb, M. E., & Bronson, S. K. (1980). Fathers in the context
of family influence: Past, present, and future. School
Psychology Review, 9_, 336-353.
Lamb, M. E., Chase-Lansdale, L. & Owen, M. T. (1978). The
changing american family and its implications for infant
social development: The sample case of maternal
employment. In M. Lewis & L. A. Rosenblura (Eds.), The
child and its family (pp. 267-291). New York: Plenum
Press.
Lamb, M. E., Owen, M. T., & Chase-Lansdale, L. (1980). The
working mother in the intact family: A process model. In
R. Abidin (Ed.), Handbook of intervention and parent
education (pp. 59-81). Springfield, II: Thomas.
LeFrancois, G. R. (1976). Adolescents. Belmont: Wadsworth.
Lemkau, J. P. (1981). Increasing occupational role
innovation: Intervention implications of two survey
studies. (Report No. 143). Paper presented at the Annual
Convention of the American Psychological Association.
(ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 182 465).
Leslie, G. R. (1982). The family in social context. Oxford:
Oxford University Press.
Levinger, G. A., & Moles, 0. (1979). Divorce and separation.
New York: Basic Books.
Levitin, T. E., Quinn, R. P., & Staines, G. L. (1973). A
woman is 58% of a man. Psychology Today, 6_, 89-92.


93
This subsample of women with employed mothers consisted of
150 subjects and included 22 minority students (15%) and 6
foreign students (4%). This subsaraple was composed of 128
(85%) freshmen and 22 (15%) sophomores. The age distribution
of students in this sample was as follows: 38 (25%) were 17
years of age, 87 (58%) were 18 years, 19 (13%) were 19 years,
and 6 (4%) were 20 years of age. Frequencies of major
choices included 29 (19%) undecided, 28 (19%) traditional
choice, 54 (36%) neutral choice, and 39 (26%) nontraditional
choice.
Descriptive statistics on the dependent variable and
independent variables were also computed for this subsample
of women with employed mothers and are reported in Table 2.
The mean level of occupational role salience for this
subsample was 27.9, with a standard deviation of 5.1
indicating the majority of women "neither agreed nor
disagreed" or "agreed" that the occupational role was
important to them. The mean maternal educational level was
14.7 years, with a range of from 1-20 years, and standard
deviation of 2.6.
The mean on the extent of maternal employment for this
subsample of women with working mothers was 8.3 years full
time or 16.6 years part time from the time the subjects were
born until they were 18-years-old or went to college. The
standard deviation of maternal employment extent was 10
years. This indicates a wide variation in the extent of


133
subsample due to the probable nonlinearity of subsequent
maternal and paternal role satisfaction and role support, and
parent-relationship variables with occupational role salience
of daughters. The greater significance of results for the
nonemployed mothers subsample despite its relatively smaller
sample size (n_ = 64) supports this hypothesis due to the
homogeneity of that group in terms of maternal employment
status.
Other possible reasons for the nonsignificant results of
regression analyses conducted on the employed mothers
subsample are similar to those mentioned previously for the
total sample analyses: restricted response range, subject
social desirability response bias, and measurement error
related to limited scale values for some variables and
subjective assessment of other variables.
The Nonemployed Mothers Subsample
The three regression analyses addressing the third,
fifth, and seventh research questions were designed to
examine the impact of maternal and paternal role attribute
variables separately and in combination on occupational role
salience for college women whose mothers never worked when
they were growing-up. The three full model regression
analyses designed to examine the maternal and paternal
variables first separately, and then in combination, were not
statistically significant. However, subset models were
selected which were statistically significant and accounted


APPENDIX B
INSTRUCTIONS TO PARTICIPANTS
Description of the Study
The aim of this study is to explore the way in which you
view the occupational role. To participate in this research
you will need to complete three questionnaires. The first
questionnaire (the LRSS) asks you to express your opinions
and ideas about the occupational role. The second
questionnaire (the LIPHE) asks you to express your opinions
about certain aspects of your childhood relationship with
your mother and father. The third questionnaire asks for
demographic information about yourself and your parents, and
your opinions about your parents satisfaction with certain
life roles.
No one outside of this research project will have access
to any of your materials. All materials are number coded
(instead of using your name) to assure anonymity. So please
do not put your name, social-security number, or any
identifying information on your questionnaires.
No individual results will be shared. However, group
results will be shared with participants on request.
Participation is voluntary.
Important Instructions
Please use the answer shee t provided to record your
responses to the first two questionnaires (LRSS and LIPHE),
items # 1-64. For the third questionnaire, the demographic
questionnaire, record your answers directly on the typed
questionnaire.
THANK YOU
176


UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA


70
Parental occupation innovation. Innovation of maternal
(if employed) and paternal occupation was determined by
assessing the extent to which the parent was employed in an
occupational field containing a minority of same-sex
incumbents. This occupational innovation index was
calculated by using the 1980 Census data on "Detailed
Occupations of the Civilian Labor Force by Sex" (United
States Department of Commerce, 1983a). Innovative or sex-
atypical occupations were considered to be those fields with
less then 30% same sex incumbents; traditional occupations
were those with more than 70% same sex incumbents.
Occupational innovation scores ranged on a continuous scale
from 0%-100% for both mothers (if employed) and fathers.
Parental Role Status Consequences
Parental role status consequences represented the second
cluster of independent variables assessed by means of the
demographic questionnaire. Included in this cluster were
perceived maternal and paternal marital relationship
satisfaction, perceived maternal and paternal global life
satisfaction, perceived maternal (if employed) and paternal
employment satisfaction, perceived maternal (if not employed)
nonemployed status satisfaction, perceived paternal support
for maternal (if employed) employment status, perceived
paternal support for maternal (if not employed) nonemployed
status, and perceived maternal support for paternal
employment status.


49
In exploring the impact of the perceived consequences of
maternal employment on the occupational role salience of a
sample of 86 college females, Baruch (1972) found that if a
subject's mother worked but also experienced negative
personal consequences (i.e., lack of paternal support or role
conflict) because of her career, the subject was less likely
to be career role salient. Similarly, Mullins (1980) in a
random sampling of 299 college women explored the
relationship between perceived parental role satisfaction and
daughters' personal aspirations and sex role attitudes. She
found that both perceived maternal dissatisfaction with the
role of mother and housewife and paternal job dissatisfaction
were related to liberal sex role .attitudes and occupational
role salience. Carew (1978/1979), exploring the relationship
between maternal role satisfaction and paternal support for
maternal employment for mothers who were reentering the work
force, found paternal support for maternal employment to be a
crucial factor in the mother's occupational role
satisfaction. The findings of these studies indicate that,
in addition to imitation of employed mothers, avoidance of
dissatisfied employed and nonemployed mothers appears to be a
factor influencing the occupational role salience of
daughters, and that maternal occupational satisfaction is
related to paternal support for maternal employment.
Mullins' findings also suggest that paternal role status and


APPENDIX A
DEMOGRAPHIC QUESTIONNAIRE
Please write directly on this form. Sex: male female
I. Age 2. Major 3. Race
4. UF classification 5. US Citizenship yes no
6. What were your total SAT scores for entering UF?
7. What is your marital status?
single divorced married widowed
8. Are your parents still married to each other? yes no
9. Who was the breadwinner(s) in your family while you were
growing up?
Father Mother Both
10. Taking everything into consideration, in general, what
social class best describes your family:
lower class lower middle class middle class
upper middle class upper class
Paternal Background
Please answer the following questions about your fathers
work (if he has had several different jobs pick the one that
you remember the most about, or that stands out in your
mind) .
II. Who does your father work for?
(Name of company, business organization, or other employer)
12.What kind of business or industry is this?
(describe the activity at the location where employed)
(For example: Hospital, newspaper publishing, mail order
house, auto engine manufacturing, breakfast cereal
manufacturing)
169


100
Correlations among the independent variables for the
total sample were also computed and are reported in Table 3.
Due to the number of comparisons involved in examining
intercorrelations among the independent variables, the alpha
level for significance was set at .001. Intercorrelations
among the nine independent variables examined for the total
sample yielded 15 significant correlations (g_ <.001) among
the paternal role attribute variables. As can be seen in
Table 3 significant intercorrelations ranged from .18-,66
with the majority of correlations among the paternal role
status variables ranging between .20 and .40. Paternal
educational level was positively correlated with paternal
occupational prestige level (r_ =.66), maternal support for
paternal occupational status (r_ =.32), paternal marital
satisfaction (r_ =.29), and paternal life satisfaction (r_
=.28). In addition to paternal educational level, paternal
occupational prestige level was also correlated with maternal
support for paternal occupational status (r_ =.27) and
paternal life satisfaction (r_ =.25). Furthermore, paternal
job satisfaction was correlated with maternal support for
paternal occupational status (r_ =.24), paternal marital
satisfaction (r_ =.23), and paternal life satisfaction (r_
=.61). Maternal support for paternal occupational status was
also correlated with paternal marital satisfaction (r_ =.41),
and paternal life satisfaction (r_=.45).


173
Please answer the following questions about your
mother's work (if she has had several different jobs pick the
one that you remember the most about, or that stands out most
in your mind):
31.Who does your mother work for?
(Name of company, business organization, or other employer)
32.What kind of business or industry is this?
(describe the activity at the location where employed)
(For example: Hospital, newspaper publishing, mail order
house, auto engine manufacturing, breakfast cereal
33.What kind of work does your mother do?
(for example: registered nurse, personnel manager, supervisor
of order department, gasoline engine assembler, grinder
operator)
34.What are your mother's most important work activities or
duties?
(for example: patient care, directing hiring policies,
supervising order clerks, assembling engines, operating
grinding mill)
35.Is she:
a n employee of a Private company, business, or
individual for wages, salary, or commissions?
a Government employee (federal, state, county, or local
government)?
Self-employed in Own business, professional practice,
or farm
own business not incorporated (or farm)
own business incorporated
working Without Pay in a family business or farm?


For the total sample of college women, higher
occupational role salience was related to higher paternal
occupational prestige level, lower paternal educational
level, and greater extent of maternal employment (p <.01).
Paternal educational and occupational prestige levels were
also significant influences on occupational role salience for
the subsample of women with nonemployed mothers (p <.05).
Additional parental influences found to increase occupational
role salience for the subsample of women with nonemployed
mothers included maternal marital dissatisfaction, paternal
life dissatisfaction, maternal life satisfaction, lack of
paternal support for maternal nonemployed role status, and
equal or higher maternal educational level than paternal (p
<.05). No combination of parental influences explained
variation in occupational role salience for the subsample of
women with employed mothers. These nonsignificant results
were attributed to a design limitation which may have
violated linearity assumptions by grouping all daughters of
employed mothers together regardless of maternal employment
extent.
Results of this study are consistent with previous
research, and modestly support a social learning theory model
of womens vocational development. The importance of
examining the combined influences of mothers and fathers on
womens occupational role expectations is indicated.
viii


71
Subjects were requested to share their perceptions of
their parents levels of occupational and global life
satisfaction and their perceptions of each parents support
for the others occupational role. These measures were, by
necessity, relatively uni-dimensional and simplistic, as the
subjects obviously did not have the same wealth of
information about these issues as did their parents.
However, the format of these measures paralleled that used in
previous research in this area (Altman & Grossman, 1977;
Colangelo, Rosenthal, & Dettraan, 1984; Yarrow, Scott,
deLeeuw, & Heinig, 1962).
Parental marital relationship satisfaction. Given the
daughters first-hand exposure to parental marital
relationship satisfaction, several dimensions of this
construct were assessed which had been used previously in the
literature (Booth, Johnson, White, & Edwards, 1984).
Marital satisfaction dimensions assessed by means of Items
20-23 and 42-45 of the demographic questionnaire (Appendix A)
were level of marital happiness, level of marital
satisfaction, amount of understanding received from spouse,
and extent of parental consideration of divorce. Levels of
each dimension were assessed by a five-point Likert-type
scale for both mothers and fathers. Scores on daughters'
perceptions of maternal and paternal marital relationship
satisfaction ranged on a continuous scale from 0-16 with


114
The R-square for the full model was .00 (2. >.10),
indicating that none of the variation in occupational role
salience of college women with employed mothers was accounted
for by paternal role variables. A post hoc analysis was
conducted of all possible subsets of variables in the
regression equation. A three-variable and a five-variable
model were selected and tested for significance. These two
subset models are presented in Table 7. The R-square for the
five-variable model, occupational role salience = paternal
educational level + paternal occupational role support +
paternal occupational prestige + paternal marital
satisfaction + father-daughter relationship satisfaction, was
.01 (£_ >.10). The R-square for the three-variable model
selected, occupational role salience = paternal occupational
role support + paternal marital satisfaction + father-
daughter relationship dissatisfaction, was .01 (g_>.10).
The Employed Mothers Subsample: Maternal and Paternal Variables
This regression analysis examined the combined impact of
maternal and paternal variables on occupational role salience
of college women with employed mothers and corresponds to the
sixth research question: To what extent can variation in
occupational role salience be accounted for by variations in
maternal and paternal role status, perceived maternal and
paternal role status consequences, and the perceived quality
of the mother-daughter and father-daughter relationship?


92
years and standard deviation of 3.2 years. The mean maternal
educational level was 14.5 years, the equivalent of an
associates degree or two years of college with a range of
from 1-20 years, and standard deviation of 2.4 years.
On a scale from 1-100, the mean prestige level of
paternal occupation was 69.9, with a range from 7 to 96, and
standard deviation of 18.5. This indicates that the majority
of the obtained sample came from a middle to upper-middle
class background. The mean level of paternal occupational
innovation was 82.3% with a standard deviation of 15.7%.
This indicates a majority of fathers were in sex role
traditional occupations (those occupations composed of
greater than 70% males) or neutral occupations (those
occupations composed of 30%-70% males). Table 2 also
presents the means and standard deviations for the maternal
and paternal role attribute variables assessing parental role
satisfaction, parental role support, and parent-daughter
relationship quality for the total sample and for the
subsamples of college women with employed mothers and
noneraployed mothers separately.
The Employed Mothers Subsample
In addition to examining characteristics of the sample
as a whole, the characteristics of the subsample of women
whose mothers were employed were examined and are also
reported in Tables 1 and 2.


91
Table 2 continued
Variable and
Variable Scale
Total
N = 214
M SJ)
Employed
n = 150
M SD
Nonernployed
n_ = 64
M SD
Paternal occupation
satisfaction
(0-8)
6.1
1.8
6.1
1.7
6.1
1.8
Maternal nonernployed
role satisfaction
(0-5)
4.0
1.1
Paternal support of
maternal employment
(0-12)
9.0
2.3
Maternal support of
paternal employment
(0-4)
3.6
.7
3.6
.7
3.6
.6
Paternal support of
maternal nonemployment
(0-4)
3.4
1.0
Maternal life
satisfaction
(0-4)
3.2
.9
3.2
.9
3.1
1.0
Paternal life
Satisfaction
(0-4)
3.2
.9
3.2
.9
3.3
.8
Maternal marital
satisfaction
(0-16)
12.3
4.1
12.2
4.0
12.4
4.2
Paternal marital
satisfaction
(0-16)
13.0
3.3
12.9
3.4
13.3
3.2
Mother-daughter
relationship
dissatisfaction
(0-135)
48.8
28.7
50.1
29.8
46.0
25.9
Father-daughter
relationship
dissatisfaction
(0-135)
47.4
27.3
47.0
27.6
48.6
26.6


146
maternal and paternal role attributes in order to understand
the family context in which daughter's occupational role
expectations develop.
Despite the intriguing trends and patterns suggested by
the findings for the total sample and the nonemployed mothers
subsample, these regression models only accounted for from
6%-14% of the variation in occupational role salience of the
college women in this study.
Limitations
The general methodological and conceptual limitations of
this study based on analysis of both significant and
nonsignificant findings for the seven research questions are
presented in this section.
The population examined in this study was limited to
female college freshmen and sophomores, ages 17-20, at the
University of Florida, who were single and from intact
families of origin. Therefore generalization of the results
of this study is limited to lower division college women in
this age group, and excludes students with divorced or
deceased parents, or students who are themselves married or
divorced. In addition, since the majority of students at the
University of Florida are residents of Florida,
generalizability is limited to this geographical region of
the United States. Future studies might be conducted at
other colleges and include upper division college women, male
college students, students with divorced or deceased parents,


166
Seegniiller, B. R. ( 1980). Sex-role differentiation in
preschoolers: Effects of maternal employment. The
Journal of Psychology, 104, 185-189.
Smith, E. J. (1981). The working mother: A critique of the
research. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 19, 191-211.
Smith, H. C. (1969). An investigation of the attitudes of
adolescent girls toward combining marriage, motherhood
and a career. Dissertation Abstracts International, 29
(11), 3883A. (University Microfilms No. 69-80,89)
Smith, M. D., & Self, G. D. (1980). The congruence between
mothers' and daughters' sex-role attitudes: A research
note. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 42, 105-109.
Standley, K., & Soule, B. (1974). Women in male-dominated
professions.: Contrasts in their personal and vocational
histories. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 4_, 245-258.
Stephan, C. W., & Corder, J. (1984). Females* combination of
work and family roles: Adolescents' aspirations. Journal
of Marriage and the Family, 46, 391-402.
Stephan, C. W., & Corder, J. (1985). The effects of dual
career families on adolescents' sex-role attitudes, work
and family plans, and choices of important others.
Journal of Marriage and The Family, 47, 921-929.
Super, D. E. (1953). Theory of vocational development.
American Psychologist, 8_, 185-190.
Super, D. E. (1963). Career development: Self concept theory.
New York: College Entrance Examination Board.
Super, D. E. (1980, September). The relative importance of
work. Paper presented at the world seminar of the
International Association of Educational and Vocational
Guidance on Employment Counseling, Ottawa, Canada.
Tangri, S. S. (1972). Determinants of occupational role
innovation among college women. Journal of Social
Issues, 28, 177-199.
Tavris, T. & Offir, C. (1977). The longest war: Sex
differences in perspective. New York: Harcourt, Brace,
& Jovanovich.


V DISCUSSION
123
The Total Sample 123
The Employed Mothers Subsample 131
The Nonemployed Mothers Subsample 133
Overview of Significant Findings 143
Limitations 146
Recommendations for Future Research 150
Summary 152
REFERENCES 153
APPENDICES
A DEMOGRAPHIC QUESTIONNAIRE 169
B INSTRUCTIONS TO SUBJECTS 176
BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH 177
vi


94
maternal employment. Many mothers in this subsaraple of women
defined as having been employed actually worked less than
eight years full time. This finding posed problems for
analyses of the employed mothers subsaraple and is discussed
further in later sections.
On a scale from 1-100, the mean maternal occupational
prestige level was 57.9, with a range from 15 to 92, and
standard deviation of 14.2. This indicates that the majority
of maternal occupational prestige scores were in the upper
second quartile and third quartile, with few scores in the
top 25% prestige level. Maternal occupational innovation
ranged from 2%-97%, with a mean of 68.7% and a standard
deviation of 25.5%. This indicates that the majority of
working mothers were in sex role traditional occupations
(i.e., those occupations which are composed of more than 70%
women) or in neutral occupations (i.e., those occupations
which are composed of 30%-70% women).
The mean paternal educational level in this subsaraple
was 15.6 years, the equivalent of a bachelor's degree. The
mean paternal occupational prestige level was 68.5. The
paternal occupational innovation scores in this subsaraple of
women ranged from 19%-99% with a mean of 80% and standard
deviation of 16.7% indicating that the majority of fathers
were in traditional male-dominated professions, or
professions with approximately equal numbers of males and
females.


12
theoretical frameworks for their studies. Two different
theoretical traditions are represented. A psychodynamic
perspective has proposed that parental identification, often
measured as perceived similarity to mother or father,
influences daughters sex role development and subsequent
occupational role expectations and involvement (Hartley,
1966; Mussen, 1969; Ridgeway, 1978; Tangri, 1972). An
underlying assumption of these studies has been that mothers
did not work. Therefore, occupational role salience in
daughters was hypothesized to reflect a masculine sex role
orientation related to paternal identification. As mothers
became increasingly involved in the work force, a second
theoretical tradition, social learning theory, emerged. From
this theoretical perspective, mothers and fathers were both
viewed as potential role models of occupational role
salience. Many of the more recent studies examining parental
role model influences on occupational role salience of women
have been based on this social learning theory perspective
(Kahn, 1982; Mullins, 1980).
Theoretical Framework
In this study, parental influences on women's
occupational role salience were examined using a social
learning theory framework. Social learning theory views the
acquisition of sex-typed characteristics and role
expectations in terms of both direct and imitative learning
experiences. Parents are viewed as both role models and


52
congruent with social learning theory as it does not purport
that modeling can occur only between same sex individuals.
Kahn (1982) in an innovative and complex descriptive
study based on social learning theory, explored the
reflections by 114 junior and senior college women on the
messages derived about life role choices by observing their
mothers lives and the subsequent meaning they placed upon
that experience in terms of their own future role
preferences. The women were placed into one of three groups
according to their own lifestyle preferences for the future:
traditional (family-committed), careerist (career-committed),
and employed mother (equal family and career commitment).
Based on open-ended written descriptions of their mothers,
information on maternal employment, and responses to the
question of what they had learned from their mothers' lives
as well as 90-minute semi-structured interviews designed to
uncover in greater detail participants' responses to their
mothers as models of role options, the following results were
obtained. It appeared that mothers were avoided as well as
imitated as life role models. Specifically, many
"careerists" perceived their mothers' traditional marriages
as precluding other attainments and thus chose to avoid this.
Conversely, more imitation rather than avoidance was found in
the traditional group, with high socioeconomic status
emerging as a key variable underlying the attractiveness of
this group's mothers as role models of family commitment,


140
Another possible explanation which is consistent with
previous research is that occupational role salience of
college women increases with socioeconomic status, with
paternal occupational prestige being a measure of such status
in families where mothers are not employed (Astin, 1975;
Rosen & Aneshensel, 1978). Perhaps these contradictory
results regarding paternal educational and occupational
prestige level indicate two different patterns of paternal
role model influence. One pattern involving avoidance and
the other imitation. In one family pattern less educated and
less satisfied fathers lead to greater occupational role
salience in daughters who want to avoid the paths their
nonworking mothers have taken. In the second family pattern
fathers with high occupational prestige are positive role
models for high occupational role salience in daughters with
nonworking mothers. Daughters of nonworking mothers appear
to assess the occupational role in the context of paternal as
well as maternal role status and satisfaction variables, and
may either imitate or avoid these role models.
The Nonemployed Mother Subsample: Maternal and Paternal
Variables
The full 13-variable regression equation examining the
amount of variance in occupational role salience of daughters
with nonemployed mothers accounted for by both maternal and
paternal role attribute variables was not statistically
significant. However, both a four-variable and a five-
variable model were selected from generation of all possible


147
or same age nonstudents in order to examine and compare the
parental socialization influences on occupational role
expectations of these differing populations.
Several of the maternal and paternal role satisfaction
and support variables had limited scale values. These
variables were assessed by only one or two items using five-
point Likert scales, and therefore may have been inadequate
in measuring the underlying constructs they represented, or
in detecting differences among subjects. Given the time
constraints of subjects and the number of different
independent variables examined, it was not possible to assess
these parental roles status consequence variables more
elaborately in this study. Future studies might be designed
to do this.
Several high intercorre1 ations among the independent
variables were noted which may have led to exclusion of
potentially significant variables from the regression models
during stepwise selection. Future studies might use factor
analysis or principal components analysis prior to
constructing regression models to combine highly
intercorre1 ated independent variables into unified
constructs.
This study used social learning theory to examine
parental socialization influences on college womens
occupational role salience. Other possible influences such
as subjects' interests, abilities, attitudes, or personality


17
Because previous researchers had not included an
examination of the parent-daughter relationship as a
component of role model power, there was a need to examine
the contributing influence of the quality of the parent-
daughter relationship on both mothers and fathers as role
models. In this study the parent-daughter relationship was
examined in terms of the degree of dissatisfaction the
daughter had with the amount of control or freedom and
affection that the father and mother gave her, and how
involved they were with her. Thus, the power of parents as
role models was assessed by their actual role status, their
role status consequences (i.e., level of satisfaction or
support), and the quality of the parent-daughter
relationship.
Purpose
The purpose of this study was to evaluate the extent to
which variation in occupational role salience of freshmen and
sophomore college women was accounted for by three types of
paternal and maternal role modeling influences. These
college women were single, ages 17-20, and members of intact
families.
Information was collected from these women on three
types of parental role modeling factors: parental role
status and characteristics, parental role status
consequences, and the quality of the parent-daughter
relationship. These reported parental attributes were then


45
higher socioeconomic families than for females from lower
socioeconomic families. In addition, family socioeconomic
status, family size, and mother's educational and
occupational status had greater total effects on female than
on male occupational expectations. These researchers thus
proposed that in a large family a child's sex influences how
parents distribute family financial resources and whose needs
they accord priority. They proposed that preference would be
given in such families to male siblings. Hauser (1971),
however, reported that males from larger families had lower
educational and occupational aspirations than males from
smaller families, and that only the educational aspirations
of females were adversely affected by membership in large
families.
Rosen and Aneshensel (1978) also reported that mothers'
status attainment had a greater impact on daughters'
occupational expectations than fathers' on sons'. However,
they interpreted this finding as being related to the reality
that females have fewer high status educational and
occupational role models available to them. In addition,
these investigators noted that intervening psychological and
achievement-related factors like academic achievement, mental
ability, and self-assessment, were also related to
occupational expectations but to a much lesser extent for
females than males.


59
Because these sociological influences are considered constant
at a given point in time, they were not examined in the
present study.
Human development theorists have described late
adolescence as a time of rapid change as identity is
developed and life role decisions are made. The beginning
college years are proposed as a critical time for role
choices with family exerting a strong influence. Examining
changes in role expectations, research on women's
occupational role development has indicated increasing
occupational role salience during the college years. Given
these developmental considerations, in this study the sample
was limited to college freshmen and sophomores ages 17-20.
In this literature review, the psychological context
factors influencing occupational role salience of women were
divided into two broad categories: individual trait
influences such as attributes, attitudes, and current status;
and socialization influences such as family status,
structural, and relationship factors.
Researchers examining individual trait influences found
occupational role salience of women to vary as a function of
sex role attitudes and orientation, achievement motivation,
academic ability, educational level, and marital status.
These status and personality factors were partially
controlled for in the present study by limiting the sample to
single college freshmen and sophomores. In addition,


158
Gold, D., & Andres, D. (1978). Comparisons of adolescent
children with employed and non-employed mothers.
Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 24, 243-254.
Goldberg, M. P. (1983). Sex role socialization and work
roles: The experience of women. (Report No. S0014470).
Menlo Park, CA: A Report of the Project on Educational
Requirements for Industrial Democracy.(ERIC Document
Reproduction Service No. ED 225 899).
Hackett, G., & Betz, N. E. (1981). A self-efficacy approach
to the career development of women. Journal of
Vocational Behavior, 18, 326-339.
Hall, G. S.
(1904).
Adolescence.
New York: Appleton.
Hall, G. S.
(1905).
Adolescence,
two. New York: Appleton
Harmon, L. W. (1970). Anatomy of career commitment in women.
Journal of Counseling Psychology, 17, 77-80.
Harmon L. W. (1971). The child and adolescent career plans of
college women. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 1_, 45-46.
Harmon, L. W., & Krueger, D. W. (1981). Sex differences in
self-assessment of high school pupils. Guidelines for
Pupil Services, 13, 36-44.
Hartley, R. E. (1960). Childrens concepts of male and female
roles. Merri 1 l-Palmer Quarterly, 6_, 83-91.
Hartley, R. E. (1961). Current patterns in sex-roles:
Childrens perspectives. Journal of the National
Association of Women's Deans & Counselors, 25, 3-13.
Hartley, R. E.(1966). A developmental view of females' sex-
role identification. In B. J. Biddle & J. Thomas (Eds.),
Role theory: Concepts and research (pp. 354-361). New
York: Wiley.
Haug, M. (1973). Social class measurement and womens
occupational roles. Social Forces. 52, 86-98.
Hauser, R. M. (1971). Socioeconomic background and
educational performance. Washington, DC: American
Sociological Association Monograph.
Hauser, R. M., & Featherman, D. L. (1977). The process of
social stratification: Trends and analysis. New York:
Academic Press.


60
descriptive statistics on Scholastic Aptitude Test (SAT)
scores were reported for subjects. The findings of several
studies examining family socialization and individual trait
factors in combination have suggested sex role socialization
is a more important determinant of occupational role salience
in women than academic ability or achievement level.
Researchers examining family socialization influences on
occupational role salience of women have reported the
following family status and structural variables to be
significant: socioeconomic status; parental educational
level; maternal employment status, satisfaction, and support;
and paternal employment satisfaction. In addition,
researchers of parent-daughter relationship influences on
women's role preferences have indicated that the power of
parents as role models improves with the degree of closeness,
warm feelings, and time spent between parent and child.
The results of these studies of family socialization
influences on occupational role salience and sex role
development of women conform well to a social learning model.
From this perspective parents are viewed as role models and
reinforcers for their children. In addition, the power of
parents as role models is mediated by the consequences to
them of their role involvements and the quality of the
relationship between parent and child.
In sum, a review of the literature suggests that at a
given point in time within a particular age group,


35
based on their personality and family influences to the
neglect of realistic knowledge. The erosion of the initial
organization occurs when the student begins to encounter the
realities of a given situation and subsequent awareness of
more realistic alternatives and possibilities. There are
obvious similarities between Madisons description of
individual changes in the college years and the exploration
stage of Supers career development theory (Super, 1953), as
both theorists described movement toward greater realism over
time.
Several investigators have noted developmental changes
in personality and attitudes about occupational, marital, and
parental roles among women at various educational levels.
Zuckerraan (1980), for example, surveyed 118 women enrolled as
students at a liberal arts college. She explored the
contributions of demographic background, self esteem, and
enrollment in women's studies courses in explaining differing
educational, occupational, and mar i tal/motherhood plans.
Using regression analysis she found that age was a
significant predictor of realism of goals, with older
students becoming more realistic.
Harmon (1971) studied the childhood and adolescent
career and life plans reported by 1,188 women entering a
midwestern university. She found that their choices followed
the process suggested by Super (1953), with a preadolescent
fantasy period and an adolescent period of tentative choices


64
variable was gauged both for the mother-daughter and father-
daughter relationship. The dependent variable, occupational
role salience, involved the daughter's perceptions of the
reward value of and her degree of commitment to the
occupational role.
Population and Sample
The population base was all female college students
enrolled as freshmen or sophomores at the University of
Florida who were ages 17-20, were from intact families, and
who had never been married. Married, divorced, or widowed
students; students younger than 17 or older than 20; or
students with divorced, deceased, or widowed parents were
excluded due to the potential confounding impacts of age,
family structure, and marital status on occupational role
salience of women.
The University of Florida, with an enrollment of over
36,000 undergraduate and graduate students, 20 colleges, 140
departments, and 114 undergraduate majors, is among the 10
largest universities in the nation (University of Florida
Office of Academic Affairs, 1985). It has a residential
campus and has traditionally been characterized as a
conservative southern university. Fall 1984 enrollment
statistics showed over 15,000 female students enrolled at the
university, comprising 43% of the total graduate and
undergraduate student enrollment. There were over 12,000
freshmen and sophomore students enrolled, comprising 34% of


80
The experimental participation sign-up sheet contained the
following information: title of the study, description of
the study, times and location of the study, and specific
requirements for participation. The brief description of the
study read, "You will arrive at the time and place designated
on the sign-up sheet. You will complete a questionnaire which
is approximately 25 minutes long". Special requirements
listed on the sign-up sheet read, "Bring a #2 lead pencil.
Females only, ages 17-20, whose parents are still married to
each other. Students in M W F 3rd, 6th, 7th, and 8th period
psychology classes only". Students were excluded from this
study if they had already been tested in class or if they
failed to meet the necessary criteria. In addition, subjects
who had a deceased parent or who had themselves been married
previously were eliminated from the sample after data
collection.
A room was reserved in the psychology building for
administration of inventories. Up to 15 subjects
participated in each of these sign-up administrations. When
the subjects arrived at the designated place and time they
signed a subject credit slip to be turned in to their
instructors. They were then informed of the purposes and
procedures of the study verbally and in writing (Appendix B) .
Subjects were not required to sign an informed consent form.
Subjects were then instructed to read each question carefully
and informed that completion time for the questionnaires was


74
indicating greater maternal support for paternal occupational
status.
Previous research has indicated two aspects of paternal
support for maternal employment: attitudinal support and
behavioral support in the form of participation in domestic
activities. Both of these aspects were included as items in
this study with a five-point Likert-type item developed for
each area (Items 24 and 36, Appendix A). In addition, a
single five-point scale Likert-type item designed to assess
paternal support for level of maternal employment involvement
was used to measure paternal support for noneraployed as well
as employed mothers (Item 40, Appendix A). Scores on
paternal support for employed mothers ranged from 0-12 with
higher scores indicating greater paternal support of maternal
employment. Scores on paternal support for noneraployed
mothers ranged from 0-4 with higher scores indicating greater
paternal support of maternal noneraployed status.
The Parent-Daughter Relationship
The parent-daughter relationship variable, representing
the third facet of parental influence, was measured by three
scales of the Life Interpersonal History Enquiry (LIPHE).
These scales were used to assess the daughters perceived
dissatisfaction with the mother-daughter and father-daughter
relationship in terras of the amount of control, affection,
and inclusion expressed.


ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
I would like to acknowledge the following individuals:
my doctoral chairperson, Dr. Ellen Amatea, for her
availability, invaluable guidance, and support throughout
every stage of doctoral training and dissertation
preparation; my doctoral committee members including Dr.
James Archer, Dr. Harry Grater, and Dr. Robert Jester for
their support and guidance; Neal, at Computer Systems
Resources, for his instruction and assistance in word
processing; Dr. Peggy Fong for her recommendations on the
dissertation proposal; Drs. Jaquie Resnick and Barbara
Probert for their support and availability; Astrid Hastay for
her support and generous help in coding data; and Drs. John
Dixon and Robert Jester for their assistance in data analyses
and statistical interpretation.
I especially wish to acknowledge my parents, James and
Eleanor, for raising me to value education, perseverance, and
excellence, and for always supporting my efforts. I would
also like to acknowledge my sisters, Susan, Anne, and Lois
and my brother, Robert, for their academic excellence and the
competitive spirit they instilled in me. Finally I would
like to acknowledge my husband, Ted, for his patient
endurance, encouragement, editing suggestions, and support
throughout my doctoral training and dissertation preparation.
iv


89
Descriptive statistics for the independent variables
(i.e., parental role attributes) and the dependent variable
(i.e., daughter's occupational role salience) were also
calculated and are reported in Table 2. The mean level of
occupational role salience for the college women in the total
sample was 27.2, with a standard deviation of 5.5 indicating
a wide distribution of scores on the dependent variable. The
majority of women "neither agreed or disagreed" or "agreed"
that the occupational role is important to them.
For the total sample of 214 college women, 64 of these
women (30%) had mothers who were noneraployed and 150 of these
women (70%) had mothers who were employed. The extent of
maternal employment was defined in this study on a continuum
from mothers who worked part time for one year or more, to
mothers who worked full time for up to 18 years from the time
the daughter was born until she was age 18 or went to
college. A noneraployed mother was defined in this study as a
mother who never worked from the time the daughter was born
until she was age 18 or went to college. The extent of
maternal employment in the obtained sample ranged from
mothers who never worked to mothers who worked full time from
the time the subjects were born until they were 18-years-old
or went to college. The mean extent of maternal employment
was o years run time or 12 years part time.
me mean parernai euucationai revei was id,/ years, cue
equivaienu oi a uacueiors uegree, witu a range o irom


121
following five-variable model for the nonemployed mothers
subsaraple, maternal marital satisfaction + parental relative
educational level + paternal occupational prestige + maternal
life satisfaction + maternal nonemployed role support, was
.14 (p_ <.05). The R-square for the following four-variable
model, maternal marital satisfaction + parental relative
educational level + paternal occupational prestige + maternal
life satisfaction, was .13 (g. <.05).
Summary
In this chapter the results of the data analyses were
presented. First, descriptive statistics were presented on
the total sample of 214 college women, and the subsaraples of
150 women with employed mothers and 64 women with nonemployed
mothers. These descriptive statistics indicated that the
composition of all three samples was representative of the
general population of lower division students at the
University of Florida in terras of minority status, U.S.
citizenship, major choice, and age.
Descriptive statistics were also calculated and
presented on the dependent variable, occupational role
salience, and the parental role attribute variables. These
means and standard deviations indicated a wide distribution
of scores on the dependent variable but some restricted
ranges of scores for several independent variables examined.
Further, the descriptive statistics on the independent
variable assessing the extent of maternal employment for the


73
work, (c) mother who did not work and preferred to work, and
(d) mother who did not work and preferred not to work. The
daughters' placement of their mother in these categories was
scored as follows. Both employed and noneraployed mothers who
were perceived as satisfied (categories b and d) were scored
as 1, and both employed and nonemployed mothers who were
perceived as not satisfied (categories a and c) were scored
as 0.
Examining the scale values of occupational role status
satisfaction scores for fathers, employed mothers, and for
noneraployed mothers indicated the following overall scale
ranges for each group. Fathers' occupational role
satisfaction sc.ores ranged on a continuum from 0-8 with
higher scores indicating greater paternal job satisfaction.
Employed mothers' occupational role satisfaction scores
ranged on a continuum from 0-13 with higher scores indicating
greater maternal occupational role status satisfaction.
Noneraployed mothers' satisfaction with their nonemployed
status ranged on a continuum from 0-5 with higher scores
indicating greater satisfaction with their nonemployed
status.
Parental occupational role status support. Maternal
support of paternal occupational status was assessed by a
single item using a five-point Likert-type scale (Item 25,
Appendix A). Scores ranged from 0-4 with higher scores



PAGE 1

2&&83$7,21$/ 52/( 6$/,(1&( 2) &2//(*( :20(1 3(5&(37,216 2) 3$5(17$/ ,1)/8(1&(6 %\ -$0,( 5 )81'(5%85. $ ',66(57$7,21 35(6(17(' 72 7+( *5$'8$7( 6&+22/ 2) 7+( 81,9(56,7< 2) )/25,'$ ,1 3$57,$/ )8/),//0(17 2) 7+( 5(48,5(0(176 )25 7+( '(*5(( 2) '2&725 2) 3+,/2623+< 81,9(56,7< 2) )/25,'$

PAGE 2

&RS\ULJKW E\ -DPLH 5 )XQGHUEXUN

PAGE 3

'HGLFDWHG WR P\ KXVEDQG 7HG DQG P\ PRWKHU (OHDQRU LQ ORYLQJ DSSUHFLDWLRQ RI WKHLU VXSSRUW DQG HQFRXUDJHPHQW

PAGE 4

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

PAGE 5

7$%/( 2) &217(176 $&.12:/('*0(176 LY $%675$&7 YLL &+$37(56 ,,1752'8&7,21 6FRSH RI WKH 3UREOHP 7KHRUHWLFDO )UDPHZRUN 1HHG 3XUSRVH 5HVHDUFK 4XHVWLRQV 6LJQLILFDQFH RI WKH 6WXG\ 'HILQLWLRQ RI 7HUPV 2UJDQL]DWLRQ RI WKH 6WXG\ ,,5(9,(: 2) 5(/$7(' /,7(5$785( 6RFLRORJLFDO &RQWH[W 'HYHORSPHQWDO &RQWH[W 3V\FKRORJLFDO &RQWH[W 3DVW 6RFLDOL]DWLRQ ,QIOXHQFHV 6XPPDU\ ,,,0(7+2'2/2*< 'HVLJQ 3RSXODWLRQ DQG6DPSOH 6DPSOLQJ 3URFHGXUH ,QVWUXPHQWDWLRQ9DULDEOHV 'DWD &ROOHFWLRQ 3URFHGXUHV 'DWD $QDO\VHV 0HWKRGRORJLFDO /LPLWDWLRQV ,95(68/76 'HVFULSWLYH 6WDWLVWLFV ,QWHUFRUUHODWLRQV $PRQJ 9DULDEOHV 5HVXOWV RI WKH 5HJUHVVLRQ $QDO\VHV 6XPPDU\ Y

PAGE 6

9 ',6&866,21 7KH 7RWDO 6DPSOH 7KH (PSOR\HG 0RWKHUV 6XEVDPSOH 7KH 1RQHPSOR\HG 0RWKHUV 6XEVDPSOH 2YHUYLHZ RI 6LJQLILFDQW )LQGLQJV /LPLWDWLRQV 5HFRPPHQGDWLRQV IRU )XWXUH 5HVHDUFK 6XPPDU\ 5()(5(1&(6 $33(1',&(6 $ '(02*5$3+,& 48(67,211$,5( % ,16758&7,216 72 68%-(&76 %,2*5$3+,&$/ 6.(7&+ YL

PAGE 7

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

PAGE 8

)RU WKH WRWDO VDPSOH RI FROOHJH ZRPHQ KLJKHU RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH VDOLHQFH ZDV UHODWHG WR KLJKHU SDWHUQDO RFFXSDWLRQDO SUHVWLJH OHYHO ORZHU SDWHUQDO HGXFDWLRQDO OHYHO DQG JUHDWHU H[WHQW RI PDWHUQDO HPSOR\PHQW S f 3DWHUQDO HGXFDWLRQDO DQG RFFXSDWLRQDO SUHVWLJH OHYHOV ZHUH DOVR VLJQLILFDQW LQIOXHQFHV RQ RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH VDOLHQFH IRU WKH VXEVDPSOH RI ZRPHQ ZLWK QRQHPSOR\HG PRWKHUV S f $GGLWLRQDO SDUHQWDO LQIOXHQFHV IRXQG WR LQFUHDVH RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH VDOLHQFH IRU WKH VXEVDPSOH RI ZRPHQ ZLWK QRQHPSOR\HG PRWKHUV LQFOXGHG PDWHUQDO PDULWDO GLVVDWLVIDFWLRQ SDWHUQDO OLIH GLVVDWLVIDFWLRQ PDWHUQDO OLIH VDWLVIDFWLRQ ODFN RI SDWHUQDO VXSSRUW IRU PDWHUQDO QRQHPSOR\HG UROH VWDWXV DQG HTXDO RU KLJKHU PDWHUQDO HGXFDWLRQDO OHYHO WKDQ SDWHUQDO S f 1R FRPELQDWLRQ RI SDUHQWDO LQIOXHQFHV H[SODLQHG YDULDWLRQ LQ RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH VDOLHQFH IRU WKH VXEVDPSOH RI ZRPHQ ZLWK HPSOR\HG PRWKHUV 7KHVH QRQVLJQLILFDQW UHVXOWV ZHUH DWWULEXWHG WR D GHVLJQ OLPLWDWLRQ ZKLFK PD\ KDYH YLRODWHG OLQHDULW\ DVVXPSWLRQV E\ JURXSLQJ DOO GDXJKWHUV RI HPSOR\HG PRWKHUV WRJHWKHU UHJDUGOHVV RI PDWHUQDO HPSOR\PHQW H[WHQW 5HVXOWV RI WKLV VWXG\ DUH FRQVLVWHQW ZLWK SUHYLRXV UHVHDUFK DQG PRGHVWO\ VXSSRUW D VRFLDO OHDUQLQJ WKHRU\ PRGHO RI ZRPHQfV YRFDWLRQDO GHYHORSPHQW 7KH LPSRUWDQFH RI H[DPLQLQJ WKH FRPELQHG LQIOXHQFHV RI PRWKHUV DQG IDWKHUV RQ ZRPHQfV RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH H[SHFWDWLRQV LV LQGLFDWHG YLLL

PAGE 9

&+$37(5 ,1752'8&7,21 $ SHUVRQ SDUWLFLSDWHV LQ D FRPSOH[ VRFLHW\ DV D PDQ\IDFHWHG DFWRU DQ LQFXPEHQW RI PDQ\ UROHV FDUULHU RI PDQ\ ODEHOV SHUIRUPHU RI GLIIHUHQW VHWV RI EHKDYLRU VXEMHFW WR PXOWLSOH NLQGV RI H[SHFWDWLRQV $QJULVW S f 7KH OLIH FKRLFHV DYDLODEOH WR $PHULFDQ ZRPHQ KDYH EHFRPH LQFUHDVLQJO\ FRPSOH[ +RIIPDQ 2SSHQKHLPHU f 5HFHQW FKDQJHV LQ WKH IRUP DQG IXQFWLRQ RI WKH IDPLO\ WKH VWDWXV RI ZRPHQ DQG WKH HFRQRP\ KDYH EHHQ DFFRPSDQLHG E\ LQFUHDVHG ODERU IRUFH SDUWLFLSDWLRQ RI ZRPHQ .DPPHUPDQ t +D\HV .XUGHN t 6LHVN\ /HVOLH f :KHWKHU IRU HFRQRPLF RU RWKHU UHDVRQV PRVW $PHULFDQ ZRPHQ QRZ FRPELQH PDULWDO SDUHQWDO DQG RFFXSDWLRQDO UROHV 'XH WR WKHLU HGXFDWLRQDO DQG HFRQRPLF DGYDQWDJHV FROOHJH ZRPHQ LQ SDUWLFXODU QRZ KDYH D JUHDWHU YDULHW\ RI OLIH UROH FKRLFHV DQG FRPELQDWLRQV DYDLODEOH WR WKHP 5HVHDUFK ILQGLQJV RQ FROOHJH ZRPHQfV OLIH SODQV UHIOHFW WKHVH FKDQJLQJ SUHIHUHQFHV DQG SDWWHUQV &XPPLQJV (PSH\ 0DWWKHZV t 7LHGHPDQ 3DUHOLXV 5DQG t 0LOOHU =XFNHUPDQ f ,Q (PSH\ IRXQG WKDW b RI D VDPSOH RI IHPDOH KLJK VFKRRO VHQLRUV DQG FROOHJH XQGHUJUDGXDWHV SUHIHUUHG PDUULDJH RYHU D FDUHHU %\

PAGE 10

SUHIHUHQFHV ZHUH FKDQJLQJ DQG 0DWWKHZV DQG 7LHGHPDQ IRXQG \RXQJ ZRPHQ DJHV WR ZHUH H[SHULHQFLQJ FRQIOLFW EHWZHHQ FDUHHU DQG PDUULDJH SODQV ,Q 5DQG t 0LOOHUf 3DUHOLXVf DQG &XPPLQJVf ILQGLQJV RI VWXGLHV FRQVLVWHQWO\ UHSRUWHG WKDW WKH PDMRULW\ RI FROOHJH ZRPHQ SODQQHG WR FRPELQH D IDPLO\ DQG D FDUHHU )LQDOO\ =XFNHUPDQ LQ D VWXG\ RI IHPDOH XQGHUJUDGXDWHV IRXQG WKH RYHUZKHOPLQJ PDMRULW\ RI ZRPHQ ZHUH LQWHUHVWHG LQ PDUULDJH DQG FKLOGEHDULQJ EXW QHLWKHU RI WKHVH ZDV SHUFHLYHG WR EH D GHWHUUHQW WR SXUVXLQJ D FDUHHU $OWKRXJK WKH PDMRULW\ RI WRGD\nV FROOHJH ZRPHQ DVSLUH WR FRPELQH FDUHHU DQG IDPLO\ UROHV WKH\ DSSHDU WR GHPRQVWUDWH GLIIHULQJ H[SHFWDWLRQV UHJDUGLQJ WKHLU LQYROYHPHQW LQ WKH RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH )RU H[DPSOH 5HJDQ DQG 5RODQG f UHSRUWHG ILYH GLIIHUHQW SDWWHUQV RI OLIH UROH VDOLHQFH IRU ZRPHQ JUDGXDWLQJ IURP FROOHJH LQ 1LQHWHHQ SHUFHQW RI WKHVH ZRPHQ ZHUH FRPPLWWHG VROHO\ WR IDPLO\ LQYROYHPHQW b ZHUH SULPDULO\ FRPPLWWHG WR IDPLO\ UROHV EXW DOVR FRPPLWWHG WR RFFXSDWLRQDO LQYROYHPHQW b ZHUH SULPDULO\ FRPPLWWHG WR WKH RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH EXW DOVR IDPLO\ FRPPLWWHG b ZHUH VROHO\ FRPPLWWHG WR RFFXSDWLRQDO LQYROYHPHQW DQG b ZHUH FRPPLWWHG WR OLIH UROHV RWKHU WKDQ IDPLO\ RU RFFXSDWLRQ VXFK DV OHLVXUH RU UHOLJLRXV LQYROYHPHQWV 'XH WR WKH GLVWLQFWLYHQHVV RI WKH RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH GHYHORSPHQW SURFHVV IRU ZRPHQ D QXPEHU RI UHVHDUFKHUV KDYH SURSRVHG DQG LQYHVWLJDWHG VSHFLILF IDFWRUV ZKLFK DFFRXQW IRU

PAGE 11

YDULDWLRQV LQ ZRPHQnV RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH VDOLHQFH DQG EHKDYLRU $OPTXLVW DQG $QJULVW f IRXQG YDULDWLRQV LQ FROOHJH ZRPHQnV RFFXSDWLRQDO DVSLUDWLRQ OHYHOV DV D IXQFWLRQ RI UROH PRGHO LQIOXHQFHV VRURULW\ PHPEHUVKLS DQG VHOI SHUFHSWLRQV RI DFDGHPLF DELOLW\ $OWPDQ DQG *URVVPDQ f %DUXFK f DQG .DKQ f IRXQG YDULDWLRQV LQ RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH VDOLHQFH RI FROOHJH ZRPHQ WR EH UHODWHG WR PDWHUQDO HPSOR\PHQW VWDWXV DQG PDWHUQDO UROH VDWLVIDFWLRQ 2WKHU VWXGLHV KDYH UHODWHG RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH VDOLHQFH RI FROOHJH ZRPHQ WR VXFK IDFWRUV DV SHUVRQDOLW\ WUDLWV
PAGE 12

KDYH QRW EHHQ FRQVLGHUHG XVHIXO LQ H[SODLQLQJ DQG SUHGLFWLQJ ZRPHQfV RFFXSDWLRQDO FKRLFHV DQG DVSLUDWLRQV +ROODQG 6XSHU 7LHGHPDQ t 2f+DUD f 7KRVH WKHRULHV KDYH WHQGHG WR IRFXV RQ IDFWRUV LQIOXHQFLQJ DQ LQGLYLGXDOfV RFFXSDWLRQDO FKRLFH UDWKHU WKDQ H[DPLQLQJ IDFWRUV DFFRXQWLQJ IRU YDULDWLRQ LQ RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH VDOLHQFH ,Q DGGLWLRQ WKRVH WKHRULHV KDYH IRFXVHG RQ LQGLYLGXDO WUDLW IDFWRUV VXFK DV LQWHUHVWV DELOLWLHV VHOI FRQFHSW DQG YDOXHV ZKLFK LQIOXHQFH RFFXSDWLRQDO FKRLFH 5HFHQW UHVHDUFKHUV HJ )LW]JHUDOG t &ULWHV 2VLSRZ 3DWWHUVRQ t 9HWWHU f KDYH FRQWHQGHG WKDW WUDGLWLRQDO WKHRULHV ODFN SRZHU LQ H[SODLQLQJ WKH RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH GHYHORSPHQW SURFHVV IRU ZRPHQ IRU VHYHUDO UHDVRQV )LUVW LW KDV EHHQ SURSRVHG WKDW IRU ZRPHQ H[SHFWDWLRQV DERXW WKH RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH LQFOXGH QRW RQO\ ZKDW RFFXSDWLRQ WKH\ ZLOO FKRRVH EXW HYHQ PRUH EDVLFDOO\ ZKHWKHU WKH\ FKRRVH WR ZRUN RXWVLGH WKH KRPH DW DOO DQG LI VR WR ZKDW H[WHQW .ULJHU f 6HFRQG IDFWRUV LPSDFWLQJ RQ RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH H[SHFWDWLRQV RI ZRPHQ FDQQRW EH H[DPLQHG ZLWKRXW DFNQRZOHGJLQJ WKH LPSDFW RI VH[XDO GLVFULPLQDWLRQ LQ WKH ZRUNSODFH DV DQ HQYLURQPHQWDO FRQVWUDLQW ZKLFK KDV EHHQ GRFXPHQWHG DV OLPLWLQJ RSSRUWXQLW\ LQ WKH IRUP RI ORZHU SD\ ORZHU VWDWXV MREV DQG VORZHU DGYDQFHPHQW IRU ZRPHQ $VWLQ +DXVHU t )HDWKHUUDDQ /HYLWLQ 4XLQQ t 6WDLQHV 7UHLPDQ t 7HUUHOO f 7KXV IRU ZRPHQ WKH RSSRUWXQLW\ WR PDWFK LQWHUHVWV

PAGE 13

DQG DELOLWLHV ZLWK DQ RFFXSDWLRQDO FKRLFH PD\ QRW RFFXU 7KLUG UHVHDUFKHUV KDYH IRXQG WKDW RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH H[SHFWDWLRQV IRU ZRPHQ DUH UHODWLYH WR WKHLU PDULWDO DQG SDUHQWDO UROH H[SHFWDWLRQV DQG VWDWXV DQG QHHG WR EH FRQVLGHUHG ZLWKLQ WKLV PXOWLSOH UROH FRQWH[W $VWLQ t 0\QW %HUVRQ )XUXPRWR t 6FDUERURXJK 6FKXOHQEHUJ 9RQGUDFHN t &URXWHU f )LQDOO\ PDQ\ UHVHDUFKHUV KDYH IRXQG RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH H[SHFWDWLRQV RI ZRPHQ WR EH UHODWHG WR WKHLU VH[ UROH DWWLWXGHV DQG RULHQWDWLRQ %LHOE\ )DVVLQJHU )LW]JHUDOG t &ULWHV +DFNHWW t %HW] ,OOIHOGHU 3DUVRQV HW DO 7LWWOH
PAGE 14

SRSXODWLRQV UHDOL]HG WKDW OLWWOH FRQVLGHUDWLRQ ZDV JLYHQ WR WKH H[WHQW WR ZKLFK SHRSOH GLIIHU LQ OHYHOV RI ZRUN FRPPLWPHQW RU LPSRUWDQFH $V VWDWHG E\ 2VLSRZ f 6HOGRP LV DQ\ FRQVLGHUDWLRQ JLYHQ WR WKH OLNHOLKRRG WKDW D JLYHQ LQGLYLGXDO PD\ KDYH QHJDWLYH DWWLWXGHV WRZDUG ZRUN S f ,Q WKH V WKH VHFRQG PRYHPHQW HPHUJHG LQ UHVSRQVH WR FKDQJHV LQ IHPDOH ODERU IRUFH SDUWLFLSDWLRQ DQG WKH VWDWXV RI ZRPHQ LQ VRFLHW\ 7KHVH FKDQJHV OHG WR TXHVWLRQLQJ E\ SV\FKRORJLVWV DQG VRFLRORJLVWV RI WKH IDFWRUV LQIOXHQFLQJ YDU\LQJ OLIH UROH SDWWHUQV RI ZRPHQ 6XSHU f UHSUHVHQWLQJ WKH ILUVW PRYHPHQW GHILQHG RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH VDOLHQFH DV WKH UHODWLYH DPRXQW RI DIIHFWLYH EHKDYLRUDO DQG FRJQLWLYH HQHUJ\ SODFHG RQ WKH RFFXSDWLRQDO RU ZRUN UROH $PDWHD &URVV &ODUN t %REE\ f UHSUHVHQWLQJ WKH VHFRQG PRYHPHQW GHILQHG RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH VDOLHQFH DV WKH UHODWLYH YDOXH RU LPSRUWDQFH DVFULEHG E\ DQ LQGLYLGXDO WR WKH RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH 2FFXSDWLRQDO UROH VDOLHQFH LV GHILQHG LQ WKLV VWXG\ DV DQ LQGLYLGXDOnV SHUVRQDO YDOXLQJ RI DQG FRPPLWPHQW WR WKH RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH UHODWLYH WR RWKHU OLIH UROHV &OHDUO\ D GLVWLQFWLRQ QHHGV WR EH PDGH EHWZHHQ VWXGLHV ZKLFK DWWHPSW WR SUHGLFW DQG H[SODLQ RFFXSDWLRQDO DQG IDPLOLDO UROH DVSLUDWLRQV RU VDOLHQFH DQG WKRVH DWWHPSWLQJ WR SUHGLFW RU H[SODLQ VSHFLILF FDUHHU FKRLFHV RU DFWXDO RFFXSDWLRQDO LQYROYHPHQW SDWWHUQV 7KH WZR DUH QRW V\QRQ\PRXV IRU ZRPHQ 7LWWOH f 7KH VWUXFWXUH RI

PAGE 15

RSSRUWXQLW\ LQ WKH ZRUOG RI ZRUN PD\ OLPLW D ZRPDQf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fV RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH H[SHFWDWLRQV DQG EHKDYLRUV DUH DVVXPHG WR YDU\ DFURVV WLPH %HHGOH -RUGDQ9LROD (XQLFH t &URVV 0DWWKHZV t 7LHGHPDQ =XFNHUPDQ f DV D IXQFWLRQ RI KHU DJH DQG KHU UHODWLYH SDUWLFLSDWLRQ LQ VSHFLILF UROHV DFURVV WKH OLIH VSDQ 1HYLOO f 7KHUHIRUH LW LV LPSRUWDQW WR VSHFLI\ WKH GHYHORSPHQWDO VWDJH RI WKH SRSXODWLRQ XQGHU VWXG\ ,Q WKLV VWXG\ RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH VDOLHQFH RI IUHVKPHQ DQG VRSKRPRUH FROOHJH ZRPHQ ZDV H[DPLQHG

PAGE 16

$OWKRXJK RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH VDOLHQFH HYROYHV RYHU WLPH DV D JLUO PDWXUHV LQWR D ZRPDQ LW LV UHODWLYHO\ VWDEOH IRU D ZRPDQ DW D SDUWLFXODU GHYHORSPHQWDO VWDJH DQG LW FDQ EH XVHG WR GHWHFW GLIIHUHQFHV DPRQJ ZRPHQ ZLWKLQ WKDW VWDJH 7KH IDFWRUV SURSRVHG WR LQIOXHQFH ZRPHQfV YDOXLQJ RI DQG FRPPLWPHQW WR WKH RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH FDQ EH JURXSHG LQWR WKUHH EURDG VSKHUHV LQGLYLGXDO WUDLW DQG VWDWXV LQIOXHQFHV VRFLDOL]DWLRQ LQIOXHQFHV DQG VWUXFWXUH RI RSSRUWXQLW\ LQIOXHQFHV 0RVW VWXGLHV RI RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH VDOLHQFH RI ZRPHQ KDYH H[DPLQHG WKH ILUVW WZR VSKHUHV RI LQIOXHQFH WUDLW DQG VWDWXV IDFWRUV RU VRFLDOL]DWLRQ LQIOXHQFHV 2QO\ UHFHQWO\ KDYH VWXGLHV H[DPLQHG WKHVH WZR VSKHUHV RI LQIOXHQFH FRQMRLQWO\ )DVVLQJHU +HVVH%LEHU t *RVVHOLQ 5RVHQ t $QHVKHQVHO 6WHSKDQ t &RUGHU
PAGE 17

,OOIHOGHU 3DUVRQV HW DO 7LWWOH
PAGE 18

IDPLO\ VWDWXV YDULDEOHV DQG SDUHQWGDXJKWHU UHODWLRQVKLS YDULDEOHV )DPLO\ VWUXFWXUDO YDULDEOHV H[DPLQHG KDYH LQFOXGHG LQWDFWQHVV RI IDPLO\ &ROHPDQ t *DQRQJ *DQRQJ &ROHPDQ t %URZQ .XOND t :HLQJDUWHQ f VL]H RI IDPLO\ $XVWHU t $XVWHU 5RVHQ t $QHVKHQVHO f DQG ELUWK RUGHU DQG VH[ RI VLEOLQJV $XVWHU t $XVWHU 5RVHQ t $QHVKHQVHO 6HHJPLOOHU f )DPLO\ VWDWXV YDULDEOHV H[SORUHG KDYH LQFOXGHG SDUHQWDO RFFXSDWLRQDO DQG HGXFDWLRQDO VWDWXV $OOUHG $XVWHU t $XVWHU %XUOLQ 'H)URQ]R t %RXGUHDXX *ROG t $QGUHV 6PLWK t 6HOI 7DQJUL 9DQIRVVHQ f SDUHQWDO VDWLVIDFWLRQ ZLWK UROH VWDWXV $OWPDQ t *URVVPDQ %DUXFK .DKQ 0XOOLQV f SDUHQWDO DWWLWXGHV DERXW UROHV 0H\HU 0XVVHQ t 5XWKHUIRUG 2OLYHU 6PLWK t 6HOI f DQG IDPLO\ VRFLRHFRQRPLF VWDWXV $OEUHFKW %LHOE\ 'RXYDQ t $GHOVRQ +DXVHU 5RVHQ t $QHVKHQVHO 7DQJUL f $OWKRXJK WKHUH KDYH EHHQ QXPHURXV VWXGLHV H[DPLQLQJ WKH UROH RI IDPLO\ VWUXFWXUDO DQG VWDWXV LQIOXHQFHV LQ ZRPHQfV RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH H[SHFWDWLRQ GHYHORSPHQW IHZ VWXGLHV KDYH H[SORUHG IDPLO\ LQWHUDFWLRQ RU LQWHUSHUVRQDO UHODWLRQVKLS YDULDEOHV 2QH RI WKH IHZ SDUHQWGDXJKWHU UHODWLRQVKLS YDULDEOHV ZKLFK KDV EHHQ H[SORUHG DQG IRXQG WR EH UHODWHG WR ZRPHQnV RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH VDOLHQFH DQG LQQRYDWLRQ LH FKRLFH RI D QRQVH[VWHUHRW\SLF RFFXSDWLRQf KDV EHHQ SDUHQWDO

PAGE 19

VXSSRUW IRU DQG HQFRXUDJHPHQW RI GDXJKWHUnV RFFXSDWLRQDO DVSLUDWLRQV $XVWHU t $XVWHU .XWQHU t %URJDQ 6WDQGOH\ t 6RXOH 7HQ]HU f $OWKRXJK IHZ VWXGLHV KDYH UHODWHG VXFK SDUHQWGDXJKWHU UHODWLRQVKLS LQIRUPDWLRQ WR ZRPHQnV RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH VDOLHQFH D QXPEHU RI VWXGLHV KDYH H[DPLQHG SDUHQWGDXJKWHU UHODWLRQVKLS YDULDEOHV LQ UHODWLRQ WR GDXJKWHUnV VH[ UROH VRFLDOL]DWLRQ DQG GHYHORSPHQW 7KHVH VWXGLHV KDYH LPSOLFDWLRQV IRU ZRPHQnV RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH GHYHORSPHQW DV ZHOO DQG KDYH H[DPLQHG WKH TXDOLW\ RI WKH SDUHQWFKLOG UHODWLRQVKLS LQ WKH IROORZLQJ DUHDV ZDUPWK DQG RYHUDOO OHYHO RI JRRGQHVV $OWPDQ t *URVVPDQ 'H )URQ]R t %RXGUHDX .HOO\ t :RUHOO 0F%URRP f SDUHQWDO LGHQWLILFDWLRQ 5LGJHZD\ 7DQJUL f OHYHO RI SDWHUQDO LQYROYHPHQW LQ FKLOGUHDULQJ %DUXFK t %DUQHWW 'H )URQ]R t %RXGUHDX /DPE t %URQVRQ f LQWHOOHFWXDO DQG DFKLHYHPHQW HQFRXUDJHPHQW %DXPULQG 'H )URQ]R t %RXGUHDX .HOO\ t :RUHOO f SDUHQWDO GLVFLSOLQH VW\OH %DXPULQG .HOO\ t :RUHOO f DQG LQGHSHQGHQFH HQFRXUDJHPHQW %DXPULQG 'H )URQ]R t %RXGUHDX .HOO\ t :RUHOO f 0RVW RI WKHVH VWXGLHV RI SDUHQWDO VRFLDOL]DWLRQ LQIOXHQFHV GR QRW SURYLGH DQ H[SOLFLW WKHRUHWLFDO IUDPHZRUN WR H[SODLQ YDULDWLRQ LQ VH[ UROH GHYHORSPHQW DQG RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH VDOLHQFH RI ZRPHQ 7KHUH KDYH EHHQ VRPH LQYHVWLJDWRUV LQ WKLV DUHD KRZHYHU ZKR KDYH SURSRVHG XQGHUO\LQJ

PAGE 20

WKHRUHWLFDO IUDPHZRUNV IRU WKHLU VWXGLHV 7ZR GLIIHUHQW WKHRUHWLFDO WUDGLWLRQV DUH UHSUHVHQWHG $ SV\FKRG\QDPLF SHUVSHFWLYH KDV SURSRVHG WKDW SDUHQWDO LGHQWLILFDWLRQ RIWHQ PHDVXUHG DV SHUFHLYHG VLPLODULW\ WR PRWKHU RU IDWKHU LQIOXHQFHV GDXJKWHUfV VH[ UROH GHYHORSPHQW DQG VXEVHTXHQW RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH H[SHFWDWLRQV DQG LQYROYHPHQW +DUWOH\ 0XVVHQ 5LGJHZD\ 7DQJUL f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f 7KHRUHWLFDO )UDPHZRUN ,Q WKLV VWXG\ SDUHQWDO LQIOXHQFHV RQ ZRPHQnV RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH VDOLHQFH ZHUH H[DPLQHG XVLQJ D VRFLDO OHDUQLQJ WKHRU\ IUDPHZRUN 6RFLDO OHDUQLQJ WKHRU\ YLHZV WKH DFTXLVLWLRQ RI VH[W\SHG FKDUDFWHULVWLFV DQG UROH H[SHFWDWLRQV LQ WHUPV RI ERWK GLUHFW DQG LPLWDWLYH OHDUQLQJ H[SHULHQFHV 3DUHQWV DUH YLHZHG DV ERWK UROH PRGHOV DQG

PAGE 21

GLUHFW UHLQIRUFLQJ DJHQWV IRU WKHLU FKLOGUHQ .HOO\ t :RUHOO f DQG WKHLU LQIOXHQFH LV UHODWHG WR ERWK WKH SRZHU RI SDUHQWV DV UROH PRGHOV DQG WKH QDWXUH RI WKH UHODWLRQVKLS EHWZHHQ HDFK SDUHQW DQG WKH FKLOG 5HVHDUFK RQ WKH EHKDYLRU RI FKLOGUHQ LQ UHVSRQVH WR DGXOW UROH PRGHOV KDV LQGLFDWHG WKDW WKH OLNHOLKRRG RI LPLWDWLRQ LQFUHDVHV ZLWK WKH FORVHQHVV RI WKH UHODWLRQVKLS EHWZHHQ WKH FKLOG DQG WKH PRGHO %DQGXUD 0XVVHQ t 'LVWOHU f ,Q DGGLWLRQ LW LV DVVXPHG WKDW SDUHQWVr SRZHU DV RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH PRGHOV LV LQFUHDVHG ZKHQ WKH\ DUH SHUFHLYHG DV EHLQJ UHLQIRUFHG RU UHZDUGHG IRU WKHLU RFFXSDWLRQDO EHKDYLRU 6XFK UHZDUGV PLJKW LQFOXGH KDYLQJ KLJK VWDWXV LQ WHUPV RI ERWK H[WUDIDPLOLDO IDFWRUV VXFK DV HGXFDWLRQ DQG RFFXSDWLRQDO DWWDLQPHQW DQG LQWUDIDPLOLDO IDFWRUV VXFK DV WKH JUHDWHU HGXFDWLRQDO RU RFFXSDWLRQDO DWWDLQPHQW RI RQH VSRXVHf GHPRQVWUDWLQJ VDWLVIDFWLRQ ZLWK WKHLU UROHV DQG DSSHDULQJ VXSSRUWHG IRU HQJDJLQJ LQ WKHLU UROHV 7KHUHIRUH LQ H[DPLQLQJ WKH LPSDFW RI SDUHQWDO UROH PRGHO LQIOXHQFHV RQ FROOHJH ZRPHQnV FXUUHQW UROH H[SHFWDWLRQV IURP D VRFLDO OHDUQLQJ SHUVSHFWLYH WKUHH VHWV RI YDULDEOHV DUH VXJJHVWHG SDUHQWDO UROH FKDUDFWHULVWLFV FRQVHTXHQFHV IRU SDUHQWV RI WKHLU UROH LQYROYHPHQWV DQG WKH TXDOLW\ RI SDUHQWFKLOG UHODWLRQVKLSV )URP D VRFLDO OHDUQLQJ WKHRU\ SHUVSHFWLYH KLJK RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH VDOLHQFH LV K\SRWKHVL]HG WR UHVXOW IURP VHYHUDO GLVWLQFWLYHO\ GLIIHUHQW FRPELQDWLRQV RI WKHVH IDFWRUV )RU H[DPSOH D \RXQJ ZRPDQ ZKR UHSRUWV KDYLQJ KLJK

PAGE 22

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t $QJULVW $OWPDQ t *URVVPDQ %DQGXFFL %DUXFK 3DUVRQV HW DO 7DQJUL f ,Q DGGLWLRQ VRPH UHVHDUFKHUV KDYH IRXQG GDXJKWHUVf OHYHOV RI RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH VDOLHQFH WR EH UHODWHG WR LGHQWLI\LQJ ZLWK RU LPLWDWLQJ WKHLU IDWKHUV UDWKHU WKDQ WKHLU PRWKHUV 5LGJHZD\ 6WDQGOH\ t 6RXOH 7DQJUL f +RZHYHU WKH JUHDWHVW VXSSRUW IRU WKH WKHRU\ LV IRXQG LQ WKH UHVXOWV RI UHVHDUFK H[DPLQLQJ WKH QDWXUH RI WKH SDUHQWVn UROH LQYROYHPHQWV DQG WKH FRQVHTXHQFHV RI WKRVH LQYROYHPHQWV IRU SDUHQWV 5HVXOWV IURP WKHVH VWXGLHV LQGLFDWH WKDW WKH SRZHU RI PDWHUQDO HPSOR\PHQW VWDWXV LQ H[SODLQLQJ YDULDWLRQ LQ RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH DVSLUDWLRQV LQ

PAGE 23

GDXJKWHUV LV PHGLDWHG E\ PDWHUQDO SHUFHLYHG VDWLVIDFWLRQ ZLWK DQG UHLQIRUFHPHQW IRU UROH VWDWXV %DUXFK .DKQ 0DFNH t 0RUJDQ 0XOOLQV f PDWHUQDO RFFXSDWLRQDO SUHVWLJH OHYHO 7UHLPDQ t 7HUUHOO f PDWHUQDO HGXFDWLRQDO DWWDLQPHQW %XUOLQ 0XOYH\ 5RVHQ t $QHVKHQVHO f PDWHUQDO RFFXSDWLRQDO LQQRYDWLRQ 7DQJUL f IDPLO\ SRZHU VWUXFWXUH LQ WKH IRUP RI UHODWLYH RFFXSDWLRQDO DQG HGXFDWLRQDO VWDWXV RI SDUHQWV 9DQIRVVHQ f DQG SDWHUQDO VXSSRUW IRU PDWHUQDO RFFXSDWLRQDO VWDWXV &DUHZ /DPE t %URQVRQ 6PLWK f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f REYLRXVO\ FRQWULEXWH WR RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH VDOLHQFH WKHUH LV D QHHG WR FRQWURO IRU WKHVH LQIOXHQFHV $Q DWWHPSW ZDV PDGH WR FRQWURO

PAGE 24

IRU PDQ\ RI WKHVH IDFWRUV LQ WKLV VWXG\ E\ OLPLWLQJ WKH VDPSOH WR VLQJOH IUHVKPHQ DQG VRSKRPRUH FROOHJH ZRPHQ DJHV IURP LQWDFW IDPLOLHV ,Q DGGLWLRQ GHVFULSWLYH LQIRUPDWLRQ ZDV FROOHFWHG RQ VXEMHFWfV PDMRU FKRLFH 6FKRODVWLF $SWLWXGH 7HVW 6$7f SHUIRUPDQFH OHYHO PLQRULW\ VWDWXV DQG 86 FLWL]HQVKLS $OWKRXJK SDVW UHVHDUFK KDV EHHQ FRQGXFWHG XWLOL]LQJ VRFLDO OHDUQLQJ WKHRU\ SURSRVLWLRQV WR H[DPLQH SDUHQWDO LQIOXHQFHV RQ ZRPHQfV RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH VDOLHQFH IHZ UHVHDUFKHUV WR GDWH KDYH H[DPLQHG WKH FROOHFWLYH LPSDFW RI PRWKHUV DQG IDWKHUV LQ VKDSLQJ VXFK H[SHFWDWLRQV %HFDXVH ERWK SDUHQWV DUH K\SRWKHVL]HG WR KDYH D SDUW LQ VKDSLQJ GDXJKWHUfV UROH H[SHFWDWLRQV LQ WKLV VWXG\ WKH FROOHFWLYH LPSDFW RI PRWKHUV DQG IDWKHUV DV UROH PRGHOV RQ WKH RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH VDOLHQFH RI WKHLU GDXJKWHUV ZDV H[DPLQHG LQ WHUPV RI WKUHH DVSHFWV RI SUHVXPHG LQIOXHQFH SDUHQWDO UROH FKDUDFWHULVWLFV SDUHQWDO UROH FRQVHTXHQFHV DQG TXDOLW\ RI WKH SDUHQWFKLOG UHODWLRQVKLS ,Q RUGHU WR KDYH D PRUH FRPSUHKHQVLYH DVVHVVPHQW RI SDUHQWDO UROH VWDWXV FRQVHTXHQFHV WKLV VWXG\ DOVR LQFRUSRUDWHG SDUHQWDO JHQHUDO OLIH UROH VDWLVIDFWLRQ DQG PDULWDO UROH VDWLVIDFWLRQ 0RVW SUHYLRXV UHVHDUFKHUV H[SORULQJ WKH LPSDFW RI FHUWDLQ SDUHQWDO UROH FRQVHTXHQFHV RQ GDXJKWHUVn RFFXSDWLRQDO H[SHFWDWLRQV KDYH OLPLWHG WKHLU VWXGLHV WR H[DPLQLQJ RQO\ PDWHUQDO DQG SDWHUQDO RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH VDWLVIDFWLRQ DQG SDWHUQDO VXSSRUW IRU PDWHUQDO HPSOR\PHQW

PAGE 25

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f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

PAGE 26

UHODWHG WR WKH VWXGHQWfV UHSRUWHG OHYHO RI RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH VDOLHQFH 7KLV SKHQRPHQRORJLFDO SHUVSHFWLYH ZDV EHOLHYHG WR EH PRUH DFFXUDWH LQ H[SORULQJ LQIOXHQFHV RQ GDXJKWHUf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fV RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH VDOLHQFH DV D IXQFWLRQ RI PDWHUQDO HPSOR\PHQW VWDWXV 6XEVDPSOHV RI ZRPHQ ZLWK HPSOR\HG PRWKHUV DQG ZRPHQ ZLWK QRQHPSOR\HG PRWKHUV ZHUH WKHQ FUHDWHG WR H[DPLQH WKH FRQWULEXWLRQ RI PDWHUQDO UROH PRGHO LQIOXHQFHV 'DWD IURP WKHVH WZR VXEVDPSOHV ZHUH H[DPLQHG ZLWK PDWHUQDO DQG SDWHUQDO YDULDEOHV HYDOXDWHG ILUVW VHSDUDWHO\ DQG WKHQ LQ FRPELQDWLRQ 5HVHDUFK 4XHVWLRQV 7KH IROORZLQJ VHW RI UHVHDUFK TXHVWLRQV VXEGLYLGHG E\ WKH YDULDEOHV LQYROYHG ZDV DGGUHVVHG LQ WKLV VWXG\

PAGE 27

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

PAGE 28

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f

PAGE 29

,I WKH FRPELQHG LQIOXHQFH RI PRWKHUV DQG IDWKHUV DV UROH PRGHOV DQG UHLQIRUFLQJ DJHQWV RQ GDXJKWHUVn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n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

PAGE 30

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n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

PAGE 31

2FFXSDWLRQDO SUHVWLJH OHYHO LV GHILQHG DV WKH UHODWLYH VWDQGLQJ RI DQ RFFXSDWLRQ RU WKH DPRXQW RI SRZHU DQG LQIOXHQFH RI DQ RFFXSDWLRQDO SRVLWLRQ DQG WKH DPRXQW RI UHVRXUFHV VRFLHW\ SODFHV DW WKH GLVSRVDO RI LQFXPEHQWV +RGJH 6LHJHO t 5RVVL f 2FFXSDWLRQDO UROH H[SHFWDWLRQV LV GHILQHG DV WKH FKDQJHDEOH VHW RI SHUFHSWLRQV LQWHUQDOL]HG EHOLHIV DQG VWDQGDUGV KHOG E\ LQGLYLGXDOV ZKLFK GHWHUPLQH KRZ SHUVRQDOO\ UHOHYDQW RU YDOXHG WKH RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH LV WR WKHP ZKDW WKH\ SHUFHLYH WKHLU LQYROYHPHQW LQ WKDW UROH WR EH DQG KRZ WKH\ EHOLHYH WKDW UROH VKRXOG EH SHUIRUPHG $PDWHD HW DO f 2FFXSDWLRQDO UROH LQQRYDWLRQ LV GHILQHG DV WKH PHPEHUVKLS RI DQ LQGLYLGXDO LQ DQ RFFXSDWLRQ FRPSULVHG RI OHVV WKDQ b VDPH VH[ LQGLYLGXDOV D VH[DW\SLFDO RFFXSDWLRQDO FKRLFH 7DQJUL f 2FFXSDWLRQDO UROH VDOLHQFH LV GHILQHG LQ WKLV VWXG\ DV DQ LQGLYLGXDOfV SHUVRQDO YDOXLQJ RI DQG FRPPLWPHQW WR WKH RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH UHODWLYH WR RWKHU OLIH UROHV $PDWHD HW DO f 3DUHQW'DXJKWHU UHODWLRQVKLS TXDOLW\ LV GHILQHG LQ WKLV VWXG\ DV WKH GDXJKWHUnV SHUFHLYHG GLVVDWLVIDFWLRQ ZLWK WKH DPRXQW RI PDWHUQDO RU SDWHUQDO FRQWURO LQFOXVLRQ DQG DIIHFWLRQ H[SUHVVHG WRZDUG KHU DV D FKLOG 6FKW] f 3DUHQWDO UROH VWDWXV LV GHILQHG DV PDWHUQDO RU SDWHUQDO HGXFDWLRQDO DQG RFFXSDWLRQDO OHYHO DQG SDUHQWDO PDULWDO

PAGE 32

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f 6H[ UROH LV GHILQHG DV WKH FRPSOH[ RI EHKDYLRUV FRQVLGHUHG FKDUDFWHULVWLF RI RU DSSURSULDWH WR SHUVRQV

PAGE 33

RFFXS\LQJ D SDUWLFXODU JHQGHU VWDWXV DQG WKH DWWULEXWHG H[SHFWDWLRQV FRQFHUQLQJ WKRVH EHKDYLRUV +DUWOH\ f 6RFLDOL]DWLRQ LV GHILQHG DV WKH GLUHFW DQG LQGLUHFW GHYHORSPHQWDO SURFHVV E\ ZKLFK D VRFLHW\ WHDFKHV LWV PHPEHUV WR ILW LQ DFTXDLQWLQJ WKHP ZLWK LWV QRUPV YDOXHV DQG H[SHFWDWLRQV *ROGEHUJ f 6RFLRHFRQRPLF VWDWXV LV GHILQHG DV WKH UHODWLYH SRVLWLRQ RI D IDPLO\ LQ WKH FODVV VWUXFWXUH RI D VRFLHW\ DV LQGLFDWHG E\ SDWHUQDO RFFXSDWLRQDO SUHVWLJH OHYHO 'XQFDQ f 2UJDQL]DWLRQ RI WKH 6WXG\ 7KH UHPDLQGHU RI WKLV VWXG\ FRQVLVWV RI IRXU FKDSWHUV DQG WZR DSSHQGLFHV &KDSWHU ,, SUHVHQWV D UHYLHZ DQG DQDO\VLV RI UHODWHG OLWHUDWXUH ,Q FKDSWHU ,,, WKH PHWKRGRORJ\ XVHG LQ WKH VWXG\ LV GHVFULEHG LQFOXGLQJ WKH SRSXODWLRQ DQG VDPSOH VDPSOLQJ SURFHGXUHV YDULDEOHV DQG LQVWUXPHQWDWLRQ DQG GDWD FROOHFWLRQ DQG DQDO\VHV &KDSWHU ,9 SURYLGHV D SUHVHQWDWLRQ RI WKH UHVXOWV RI WKH VWXG\ 7KH ILQDO FKDSWHU LV GHYRWHG WR D GLVFXVVLRQ RI WKH UHVXOWV FRQVHTXHQW LQWHUSUHWDWLRQV DQG UHFRPPHQGDWLRQV

PAGE 34

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fV OLIH UROH SUHIHUHQFHV DQG H[SHFWDWLRQV DQG WKH OHYHO RI RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH VDOLHQFH UHVXOWLQJ IURP WKHP 7KH SXUSRVH RI WKLV FKDSWHU LV WR SURYLGH D UHYLHZ DQG DQDO\VLV RI WKH OLWHUDWXUH H[DPLQLQJ WKH IDFWRUV ZKLFK LQIOXHQFH FROOHJH ZRPHQnV RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH H[SHFWDWLRQV 5HVHDUFK DQG WKHRU\ RQ VRFLRORJLFDO GHYHORSPHQWDO DQG SV\FKRORJLFDO FRQWH[W IDFWRUV DUH SUHVHQWHG LQ WKH ILUVW WKUHH VHFWLRQV ,Q WKH IRXUWK VHFWLRQ UHVHDUFK DVVHVVLQJ WKH LQIOXHQFH RI SDVW VRFLDOL]DWLRQ IDFWRUV LV GLVFXVVHG DQG D SUHVHQWDWLRQ RI VRFLDO OHDUQLQJ WKHRU\ DV DSSOLHG WR ZRPHQnV UROH VDOLHQFH LV SURYLGHG $ VXPPDU\ RI WKLV UHYLHZ LV WKHQ SUHVHQWHG LQ WKH ILQDO VHFWLRQ

PAGE 35

6RFLRORJLFDO &RQWH[W )DFWRUV LQ WKH VRFLRORJLFDO FRQWH[W ZKLFK KDYH EHHQ SURSRVHG DV LQIOXHQFHV RQ ZRPHQf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f KDYH GHVFULEHG VRFLRORJLFDO FKDQJHV LQ WKH IRUP DQG IXQFWLRQ RI WKH IDPLO\ PDUULDJH SDUHQWDO UROHV ODERU IRUFH FRPSRVLWLRQ DQG WKH VWDWXV RI ZRPHQ ,Q H[SORULQJ WKH FKDQJHV LQ IDPLO\ IXQFWLRQV PDQ\ VRFLRORJLVWV KDYH FRQWHQGHG WKDW WKH WUDGLWLRQDO HGXFDWLRQDO UHOLJLRXV HFRQRPLF DQG ZHOIDUH IXQFWLRQV RI WKH IDPLO\ KDYH IRU WKH PRVW SDUW EHHQ WUDQVIHUUHG WR ODUJHU LQVWLWXWLRQV WKXV OHDYLQJ WKH IDPLO\ ZLWK WKH SULPDU\ IXQFWLRQ RI SV\FKRORJLFDO VRFLDOL]DWLRQ .XUGHN t 6LHVN\ /HVOLH 2JEXUQ 3DUVRQ f 7KHVH ZULWHUV KDYH SURSRVHG WKDW WKLV GHFUHDVH DQG FKDQJH LQ IDPLO\ IXQFWLRQV DOORZV IDPLO\ PHPEHUV LQFUHDVHG UROH RSWLRQV DQG IOH[LELOLW\ ZKLFK ZHUH QRW DOZD\V SRVVLEOH LQ WKH SDVW

PAGE 36

2QH H[DPSOH RI WKH LPSDFW RI WKHVH FKDQJLQJ IDPLO\ IRUPV DQG VRFLDO YDOXHV LV WKH FKDQJH LQ SDUHQWV DV UROH PRGHOV RI D PRUH DQGURJ\QRXV OLIHVW\OH 2I SDUWLFXODU LQWHUHVW LV WKH FKDQJH LQ PRWKHUVf UROHV UHODWHG WR WKH FKDQJLQJ VWDWXV RI ZRPHQ %ODX f SRLQWHG RXW WKDW WKHUH KDV EHHQ DQ LQFUHDVLQJ SDUWLFLSDWLRQ RI ZRPHQ LQ WKH ZRUN IRUFH LQFOXGLQJ PDUULHG ZRPHQ DQG PRWKHUV ,Q b RI WKH ODERU IRUFH ZDV IHPDOH FRPSDUHG WR b LQ DQG b LQ 0DUULHG ZRPHQ FRPSULVHG b RI WKH IHPDOH ODERU IRUFH LQ DQG b LQ 0RVW QRWDEOH KRZHYHU LV WKH ODUJH LQFUHDVH LQ WKH ODERU IRUFH SDUWLFLSDWLRQ UDWH RI PDUULHG ZRPHQ ZLWK SUHVFKRRODJH FKLOGUHQ IURP b LQ WR b LQ 7KLV LQFUHDVH LQ IHPDOH ODERU IRUFH SDUWLFLSDWLRQ KDV EHHQ YDULRXVO\ DWWULEXWHG WR D GHFUHDVH LQ VH[ GLVFULPLQDWLRQ .XUGHN t 6LHVN\ f D GHFUHDVH LQ IDPLO\ VL]H GXH WR RYHUSRSXODWLRQ +RIIPDQ f DQG WR HFRQRPLF UHFHVVLRQ +RIIPDQ f 5HODWHG WR WKH LQFUHDVH LQ HPSOR\PHQW IRU ZRPHQ LV WKH LQFUHDVH RYHU WKH ODVW WKUHH GHFDGHV LQ WKH UDWH RI GLYRUFH *OLFN f UHSRUWHG WKDW b RI GLYRUFHG PRWKHUV ZLWK FKLOGUHQ DUH OLNHO\ WR EH HPSOR\HG &XUUHQWO\ RXW RI HYHU\ PDUULDJHV HQG LQ GLYRUFH %DQH (VSHQVKDGH *OLFN +HWKHULQJWRQ &R[ t &R[ f $ GLUHFW UHVXOW RI WKH LQFUHDVHG GLYRUFH UDWH KDV EHHQ DQ LQFUHDVH LQ WKH QXPEHU RI IHPDOHKHDGHG KRXVHKROGV ZLWK FKLOGUHQ IURP PLOOLRQ LQ WR PLOOLRQ LQ (VSHQVKDGH

PAGE 37

f ,Q b RI DOO KRXVHKROGV ZHUH KHDGHG E\ IHPDOHV %DQH f *OLFN f SUHGLFWHG WKDW E\ FORVH WR RQHWKLUG RI DOO FKLOGUHQ PLJKW EH H[SHFWHG WR H[SHULHQFH D SDUHQWVf GLYRUFH EHIRUH WKH\ UHDFK WKH DJH RI /HYLQJHU DQG 0ROHV f UHSRUWHG D GHFUHDVH LQ WKH HPRWLRQDO OHJDO UHOLJLRXV DQG VRFLDO EDUULHUV WR GLYRUFH 7KLV FKDQJH LQ IDPLO\ IRUP PD\ KDYH DQ LPSDFW RQ WKH RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH H[SHFWDWLRQV RI ZRPHQ H[SRVHG WR GLYRUFH DQGRU VLQJOH SDUHQW IDPLOLHV GXULQJ WKHLU FKLOGKRRG )URP D VRPHZKDW GLIIHUHQW SHUVSHFWLYH LW KDV EHHQ SURSRVHG WKDW WKH ZRPHQfV OLEHUDWLRQ PRYHPHQW JDLQLQJ SRZHU LQ WKH V SOD\HG D VLJQLILFDQW UROH LQ LQFUHDVLQJ DZDUHQHVV RI ZRPHQfV VWDWXV DQG FKDQJLQJ ZRPHQfV UROH H[SHFWDWLRQV SHUFHSWLRQV DQG EHKDYLRU )UHHPDQ f 7KH PRYHPHQW DGYRFDWHG HTXDOL]DWLRQ RI UHODWLRQVKLSV ZLWK PHQ ERWK PDULWDO DQG QRQUDDULWDO )ULHGDQ f 'DWD LQ VXSSRUW RI WKH VXFFHVV RI WKLV PRYHPHQW LQGLFDWHG FROOHJH HQUROOPHQW RI ZRPHQ GRXEOHG IURP IURP PLOOLRQ WR PLOOLRQ :HLW]PDQ f )XUWKHU ZRPHQ DFFRXQWHG IRU b RI ODZ VWXGHQWV LQ DQG b LQ b RI PHGLFDO VWXGHQWV LQ DQG b LQ 7KH ZRPHQfV PRYHPHQW DQG WKH 1DWLRQDO 2UJDQL]DWLRQ IRU :RPHQ IRUPHG VRRQ DIWHU LQ JDYH YRLFH DQG YLVLELOLW\ WR ZRPHQfV LQFUHDVLQJ GLVVDWLVIDFWLRQ ZLWK WUDGLWLRQDO UROHV DQG WKHLU GHVLUH IRU LQFUHDVLQJ LQGHSHQGHQFH VKDULQJ RI FKLOGUHDULQJ DQG

PAGE 38

RSSRUWXQLW\ DQG SDUWLFLSDWLRQ LQ WKH ODERU IRUFH %ODX )UHHPDQ /HVOLH f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t 6LHVN\ /HVOLH f 7KLV LQ WXUQ KDV UHVXOWHG LQ D VLJQLILFDQW DOWHUDWLRQ LQ WKH QDWXUH RI PRGHOV DQG UHODWLRQVKLSV FKLOGUHQ DUH H[SRVHG WR DQG XOWLPDWHO\ FKDQJHV WKH UROH H[SHFWDWLRQV SUHIHUHQFHV DQG RSWLRQV RI WKH QH[W JHQHUDWLRQ +RIIPDQ f $OWKRXJK SURSRVHG DV D VDOLHQW LQIOXHQFH OLPLWHG UHVHDUFK PDQLSXODWLRQ RI WKLV RYHUULGLQJ VRFLRORJLFDO FRQWH[W KDV EHHQ SRVVLEOH ,Q WKLV VWXG\ WKLV FRQWH[W LV K\SRWKHVL]HG WR DFW DV D FRQVWDQW 'HYHORSPHQWDO &RQWH[W 7KH GHYHORSPHQWDO FRQWH[W LQFOXGHV WKRVH IDFWRUV ZKLFK LPSDFW RQ D ZRPDQ DQG KHU H[SHFWDWLRQV DQG EHKDYLRU DV D UHVXOW RI KHU GHYHORSPHQWDO VWDJH LQ WKH OLIH F\FOH 5HVHDUFK DQG WKHRU\ GHVFULELQJ QRUPDWLYH SDWWHUQV RI KXPDQ GHYHORSPHQW KDYH VXJJHVWHG WKDW FHUWDLQ IDFWRUV LQIOXHQFH

PAGE 39

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f SHUVRQDOLW\ DQG FDUHHU GHYHORSPHQW KDYH VXJJHVWHG IDFWRUV RI LPSRUWDQFH LQ FROOHJH ZRPHQnV RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH H[SHFWDWLRQV 7ZR ZHOOHVWDEOLVKHG WKHRULHV RI KXPDQ GHYHORSPHQW EDVHG RQ PDOH SRSXODWLRQV KDYH H[DPLQHG DGROHVFHQFH IURP D VRFLRORJLFDO DQG D SV\FKRORJLFDO SHUVSHFWLYH (ULNVRQ +DYLJKXUVW +DYLJKXUVW t 7DED f +DYLJKXUVWn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

PAGE 40

PDUULDJH DQG IDPLO\ +DYLJKXUVW +DYLJKXUVW t 7DED f $V PLJKW EH H[SHFWHG WKLV RUGHULQJ RI GHYHORSPHQWDO WDVNV DSSHDUV WR EH PRUH DSSOLFDEOH WR PDOHV WKDQ IHPDOHV (ULNVRQ SURSRVHG D SV\FKRG\QDPLF WKHRU\ RI KXPDQ GHYHORSPHQW GHVFULELQJ D SURJUHVVLRQ WKURXJK HLJKW GLVWLQFW VWDJHV (ULNVRQ /H)UDQFRLV f (DFK VWDJH LV FKDUDFWHUL]HG E\ WKH UHVROXWLRQ RI D FRQIOLFW RU DQ LQWUDSV\FKLF FULVLV 7KH UHVROXWLRQ RI FULVHV DW HDUOLHU VWDJHV LPSDFW RQ WKH FRQIOLFW UHVROXWLRQ DW ODWHU VWDJHV 7KH GHYHORSPHQWDO WDVNV DQG SRWHQWLDO FULVHV EHOLHYHG WR EH IRFDO GXULQJ WKH ODWH DGROHVFHQW \HDUV DQG HDUO\ DGXOW \HDUV DUH LGHQWLW\ IRUPDWLRQ YHUVXV UROH GLIIXVLRQ DQG LQWLPDF\ YHUVXV LVRODWLRQ &OHDUO\ IURP WKLV SV\FKRG\QDUDLF GHYHORSPHQWDO SHUVSHFWLYH D FROOHJH ZRPDQfV VWDWXV UHODWLYH WR WKHVH WZR LPSRUWDQW SV\FKRORJLFDO GHYHORSPHQWDO WDVNV ZRXOG KDYH LPSRUWDQW LPSOLFDWLRQV IRU KHU RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH H[SHFWDWLRQV 7KHRULVWV LQ FRJQLWLYH SV\FKRORJ\ KDYH SURYLGHG IXUWKHU H[SODQDWLRQ RI ZRPHQnV GHYHORSPHQW .RKOEHUJ f EHOLHYHG GHYHORSPHQWDO FRJQLWLYH FKDQJHV DIIHFW WKH ZD\ FKLOGUHQ DVVLPLODWH LQIRUPDWLRQ DERXW WKH VH[HV DQG WKHUHIRUH WKHVH FKDQJHV KDYH LPSOLFDWLRQV IRU VH[ UROH GHYHORSPHQW 7DYULV DQG 2IILU f GHVFULEHG WKLV SHUVSHFWLYH ,W DVVXPHV FKLOGUHQ DQG DGXOWV WU\ WR PDLQWDLQ D FRKHUHQW DQG EDODQFHG SLFWXUH RI WKHPVHOYHV DQG WKH ZRUOG LQ ZKLFK EHOLHIV DFWLRQV DQG YDOXHV DUH FRQJUXHQW 7KH NQRZOHGJH WKDW JHQGHU

PAGE 41

LV SHUPDQHQW PRWLYDWHV WKH FKLOG WR GLVFRYHU KRZ WR EH D FRPSHWHQW RU SURSHU JLUO RU ER\ $V D FRQVHTXHQFH KH RU VKH ILQGV PDOH RU IHPDOH DFWLYLWLHV UHZDUGLQJ 5HLQIRUFHPHQWV DQG PRGHOV KHOS VKRZ FKLOGUHQ KRZ ZHOO WKH\ DUH GRLQJ EXW HVVHQWLDOO\ WKH\ VRFLDOL]H WKHPVHOYHV S f &DURO *LOOLJDQ D FRJQLWLYH SV\FKRORJLVW IRFXVLQJ RQ IHPDOH GHYHORSPHQW GHVFULEHG ZRPHQ DV VSHDNLQJ LQ D GLIIHUHQFH YRLFH WKDQ PHQ QRW RQO\ LQ WHUPV RI WKH GHFLVLRQV WKH\ PDNH EXW HYHQ LQ KRZ WKH\ PDNH GHFLVLRQV %DUXFK %DUQHWW t 5LYHUV *LOOLJDQ f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

PAGE 42

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f .DW] IRXQG PDQ\ VWXGHQWV WR EH VWURQJO\ LQIOXHQFHG E\ WKHLU SDUHQWVf ZLVKHV DQG DVSLUDWLRQV DQG WKH SUHYDLOLQJ IDVKLRQV DQG RSSRUWXQLWLHV LQ VRFLHW\ DW WKH WLPH )RU PDQ\ FROOHJH VWXGHQWV WKHUH DSSHDUV WR EH QR FOHDU FXW GHFLVLRQn PDNLQJ SURFHVV UHJDUGLQJ FDUHHU PDUULDJH DQG IDPLO\ UROHV 0DGLVRQ f VXJJHVWHG WKUHH SKDVHV ZKLFK DUH GHVFULSWLYH RI WKH GHYHORSPHQWDO SDWWHUQ RI FKDQJHV LQ ERWK PHQ DQG ZRPHQ GXULQJ WKH FROOHJH \HDUV LQLWLDO RUJDQL]DWLRQ HURVLRQ RI WKH LQLWLDO RUJDQL]DWLRQ DQG UHn V\QWKHVLV 7KHVH WKUHH SKDVHV FDQ EH DSSOLHG WR DQ\ GLPHQVLRQ RI VLJQLILFDQFH WR WKH FROOHJH VWXGHQW HJ FDUHHU FKRLFH OLIH UROH SHUFHSWLRQV DQG FKRLFHV UHODWLRQVKLSVf 'XULQJ WKH LQLWLDO RUJDQL]DWLRQ SKDVH VWXGHQWV PDNH GHFLVLRQV DERXW PDWWHUV RI VLJQLILFDQFH ODUJHO\

PAGE 43

EDVHG RQ WKHLU SHUVRQDOLW\ DQG IDPLO\ LQIOXHQFHV WR WKH QHJOHFW RI UHDOLVWLF NQRZOHGJH 7KH HURVLRQ RI WKH LQLWLDO RUJDQL]DWLRQ RFFXUV ZKHQ WKH VWXGHQW EHJLQV WR HQFRXQWHU WKH UHDOLWLHV RI D JLYHQ VLWXDWLRQ DQG VXEVHTXHQW DZDUHQHVV RI PRUH UHDOLVWLF DOWHUQDWLYHV DQG SRVVLELOLWLHV 7KHUH DUH REYLRXV VLPLODULWLHV EHWZHHQ 0DGLVRQfV GHVFULSWLRQ RI LQGLYLGXDO FKDQJHV LQ WKH FROOHJH \HDUV DQG WKH H[SORUDWLRQ VWDJH RI 6XSHUfV FDUHHU GHYHORSPHQW WKHRU\ 6XSHU f DV ERWK WKHRULVWV GHVFULEHG PRYHPHQW WRZDUG JUHDWHU UHDOLVP RYHU WLPH 6HYHUDO LQYHVWLJDWRUV KDYH QRWHG GHYHORSPHQWDO FKDQJHV LQ SHUVRQDOLW\ DQG DWWLWXGHV DERXW RFFXSDWLRQDO PDULWDO DQG SDUHQWDO UROHV DPRQJ ZRPHQ DW YDULRXV HGXFDWLRQDO OHYHOV =XFNHUUDDQ f IRU H[DPSOH VXUYH\HG ZRPHQ HQUROOHG DV VWXGHQWV DW D OLEHUDO DUWV FROOHJH 6KH H[SORUHG WKH FRQWULEXWLRQV RI GHPRJUDSKLF EDFNJURXQG VHOI HVWHHP DQG HQUROOPHQW LQ ZRPHQnV VWXGLHV FRXUVHV LQ H[SODLQLQJ GLIIHULQJ HGXFDWLRQDO RFFXSDWLRQDO DQG PDU L WDOPRWKHUKRRG SODQV 8VLQJ UHJUHVVLRQ DQDO\VLV VKH IRXQG WKDW DJH ZDV D VLJQLILFDQW SUHGLFWRU RI UHDOLVP RI JRDOV ZLWK ROGHU VWXGHQWV EHFRPLQJ PRUH UHDOLVWLF +DUPRQ f VWXGLHG WKH FKLOGKRRG DQG DGROHVFHQW FDUHHU DQG OLIH SODQV UHSRUWHG E\ ZRPHQ HQWHULQJ D PLGZHVWHUQ XQLYHUVLW\ 6KH IRXQG WKDW WKHLU FKRLFHV IROORZHG WKH SURFHVV VXJJHVWHG E\ 6XSHU f ZLWK D SUHDGROHVFHQW IDQWDV\ SHULRG DQG DQ DGROHVFHQW SHULRG RI WHQWDWLYH FKRLFHV

PAGE 44

ZKLFK VKRZHG FRQVLGHUDEOH FKRLFH UDQJH IROORZHG E\ D QDUURZLQJ RI WKHLU FKRLFHV E\ WKH WLPH WKHVH ZRPHQ ZHUH IUHVKPHQ LQ FROOHJH ,QWHUHVWLQJO\ VHYHUDO UHVHDUFKHUV KDYH UHSRUWHG IHPDOHV VFRUH KLJKHU RQ PHDVXUHV RI FDUHHU PDWXULW\ WKDQ PDOHV DW DOO DJH OHYHOV DERYH WKH VHYHQWK JUDGH +DUPRQ t .UXHJHU -RQHV +DQVHQ t 3XWQDP f 7KHVH UHVHDUFKHUV KDYH DOVR QRWHG KRZHYHU WKDW IHPDOHV VXEVHTXHQWO\ PDNH WKHLU FDUHHU FKRLFHV IURP D PRUH OLPLWHG UDQJH RI ILHOGV WKDQ WKHLU PDOH FRXQWHUSDUWV 86 'HSDUWPHQW RI /DERU f DQG WKDW WKHVH FKRLFHV DUH XQUHDOLVWLFDOO\ ORZ LQ WHUPV RI WKHLU DSWLWXGHV DQG LQWHUHVWV 7KLV LV QRW VXUSULVLQJ ZKHQ FRQVLGHULQJ WKDW LQ WKH RFFXSDWLRQDO SUHVWLJH KLHUDUFK\ WKH PDMRULW\ RI IHPDOHGRPLQDWHG RFFXSDWLRQV DUH RYHUUHSUHVHQWHG LQ WKH PLGGOH DQG XSSHUPLGGOH UDQJH RI WKH GLVWULEXWLRQ 0DULQL f 7KH DERYH ILQGLQJV VXJJHVW WKDW ERWK VH[ UROH VRFLDOL]DWLRQ DQG FRQVWUDLQWV RQ RFFXSDWLRQDO RSSRUWXQLWLHV PD\ EH RSHUDWLQJ WR OLPLW FDUHHU FKRLFHV RI IHPDOHV GHVSLWH DGHTXDWH NQRZOHGJH RI WKH FDUHHU SODQQLQJ SURFHVV 5DQG DQG 0LOOHU f H[SORUHG GLIIHUHQFHV LQ DWWLWXGHV DQG SODQV DERXW HGXFDWLRQ PDUULDJH DQG RFFXSDWLRQ LQ D FURVVVHFWLRQDO VWXG\ RI ZRPHQ LQ MXQLRU KLJK KLJK VFKRRO DQG FROOHJH 7KHLU UHVXOWV LQGLFDWHG WKDW DOWKRXJK WKHUH ZDV D GHVLUH DFURVV DOO DJH JURXSV WR PDUU\ DQ LQFUHDVH LQ OLEHUDOQHVV ZLWK DJH ZDV HYLGHQFHG E\ LQFUHDVHG

PAGE 45

RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH VDOLHQFH DQG PRUH OLEHUDO VH[ UROH DWWLWXGHV LQ FROOHJH ZRPHQ $QJULVW f LQ D IRXU\HDU ORQJLWXGLQDO VWXG\ RI IHPDOH IUHVKPHQ H[SORUHG FKDQJHV LQ RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH DVSLUDWLRQV $WWULWLRQ DIWHU IRXU \HDUV OHIW VHQLRUV ZLWK FRPSOHWH TXHVWLRQQDLUH GDWD RQ VWXGHQWV 6KH IRXQG WKDW b RI WKHVH VXEMHFWV KDG FKDQJHG WKHLU FDUHHU FKRLFH E\ WKHLU VRSKRPRUH \HDU DQG DOWKRXJK RQO\ b ZHUH FDUHHU VDOLHQW DV IUHVKPHQ E\ WKHLU VHQLRU \HDU b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

PAGE 46

7KLUG LW DSSHDUV WKDW WKH RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH VDOLHQFH RI ZRPHQ LQ WKHLU ILUVW WZR \HDUV DW FROOHJH PD\ EH PRUH LQIOXHQFHG E\ IDPLO\ VRFLDOL]DWLRQ DQG SHUVRQDOLW\ IDFWRUV WKDQ IRU FROOHJH MXQLRUV DQG VHQLRUV ZKR PD\ EH PRUH DIIHFWHG E\ D UHDOLVWLF DVVHVVPHQW RI WKHLU FXUUHQW RSSRUWXQLWLHV DQG DELOLWLHV 3V\FKRORJLFDO &RQWH[W 0RVW UHVHDUFKHUV RI \RXQJ ZRPHQfV RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH H[SHFWDWLRQV DQG FKRLFHV KDYH H[DPLQHG WKH LPSDFW RI SV\FKRORJLFDO FRQWH[W IDFWRUV EHFDXVH WKHVH IDFWRUV KDYH EHHQ DVVXPHG WR KDYH WKH JUHDWHVW SRZHU LQ H[SODLQLQJ GLIIHUHQFHV LQ ZRPHQfV RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH H[SHFWDWLRQV ,Q FRQWUDVW VRFLRORJLFDO DQG GHYHORSPHQWDO FRQWH[W IDFWRUV KDYH EHHQ DVVXPHG WR H[HUW D FRQVWDQW LQIOXHQFH DFURVV D VLPLODU DJH FRKRUW 3V\FKRORJLFDO IDFWRUV K\SRWKHVL]HG DV LQIOXHQFLQJ FROOHJH ZRPHQnV RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH H[SHFWDWLRQV LQFOXGH FXUUHQW DWWULEXWHV DWWLWXGHV DQG VWDWXV DQG SDVW VRFLDOL]DWLRQ LQIOXHQFHV 5HVHDUFK H[DPLQLQJ WKH LQIOXHQFH RI FXUUHQW DWWULEXWHV DWWLWXGHV DQG VWDWXV LV SUHVHQWHG ILUVW 7KLV LV IROORZHG E\ SUHVHQWDWLRQ RI UHVHDUFK DQG WKHRU\ H[DPLQLQJ SDVW VRFLDOL]DWLRQ LQIOXHQFHV )LQDOO\ DQ DQDO\VLV RI WKH DSSOLFDWLRQ RI VRFLDO OHDUQLQJ WKHRU\ WR ZRPHQnV RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH GHYHORSPHQW LV SUHVHQWHG 3HUVRQDO DWWULEXWHV DQG DWWLWXGHV IRXQG WR EH UHODWHG WR RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH H[SHFWDWLRQV RI \RXQJ ZRPHQ LQFOXGH VH[

PAGE 47

UROH YDOXHV DQG DWWLWXGHV )DVVLQJHU ,OOIHOGHU 3DUVRQV HW DO 6WHSKDQ t &RUGHU 7LWWOH
PAGE 48

ZRPHQ )DVVLQJHU .ULJHU 0DUVKDOO t :LMWLQJ 5DQG f DV KDV DFWXDO DFDGHPLF DFKLHYHPHQW DQG DELOLW\ $OPTXLVW t $QJULVW $VWLQ t 0\QW )DVVLQJHU 5DQG 5RVHQ t $QHVKHQVHO f DQG HGXFDWLRQDO DWWDLQPHQW $VWLQ t 0\QW
PAGE 49

ZRPHQ DQG WKHVH UROHV KDYH QRW EHHQ YLHZHG DV PXWXDOO\ H[FOXVLYH 0DOVRQ 1RHO 7KRPDV t 1HDO 7LWWOH f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f 0XHOOHU DQG &DPSEHOO f DQG
PAGE 50

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fV RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH VDOLHQFH 3DVW 6RFLDOL]DWLRQ ,QIOXHQFHV 5HVHDUFKHUV H[DPLQLQJ WKH LPSDFW RI SDVW VRFLDOL]DWLRQ LQIOXHQFHV RQ ZRPHQnV RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH H[SHFWDWLRQV KDYH

PAGE 51

IRFXVHG SULPDULO\ RQ IDPLOLDO LQIOXHQFHV ,Q WKHVH VWXGLHV WKH LQIOXHQFH RI WKH IDPLO\ RI RULJLQ LQ VKDSLQJ ZRPHQfV VH[ UROH DQG RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH H[SHFWDWLRQV KDV EHHQ H[DPLQHG LQ WHUPV RI ERWK IDPLO\ VWDWXV DQG VWUXFWXUH DQG WKH TXDOLW\ RI WKH SDUHQWGDXJKWHU UHODWLRQVKLS ,Q WKH IROORZLQJ VHFWLRQV UHVHDUFK RQ IDPLO\ VWDWXV DQG VWUXFWXUDO IDFWRUV DQG SDUHQW GDXJKWHU UHODWLRQVKLS IDFWRUV LV SUHVHQWHG IROORZHG E\ DQDO\VLV RI WKHLU LQIOXHQFH RQ ZRPHQf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f $V D UHVXOW RI WKLV RPLVVLRQ +DXJ f VXJJHVWHG WKDW QHDUO\ RQHWKLUG RI DOO IDPLO\ VRFLRHFRQRPLF VWDWXV HVWLPDWHV ZHUH LQDFFXUDWH 7KLV PD\ DFFRXQW IRU WKH PL[HG ILQGLQJV UHJDUGLQJ IDPLO\ VRFLRHFRQRPLF VWDWXV LQIOXHQFHV RQ UROH H[SHFWDWLRQV DQG DWWLWXGHV GHSLFWHG LQ WKH IROORZLQJ VWXGLHV 6HYHUDO UHVHDUFKHUV KDYH IRXQG D VOLJKWO\ QHJDWLYH UHODWLRQVKLS EHWZHHQ IHPDOH RFFXSDWLRQDO RULHQWDWLRQ DQG

PAGE 52

EDFNJURXQG VRFLRHFRQRPLF VWDWXV %LHOE\ 'RXYDQ t $GHOVRQ 7DQJUL f ,Q D VWXG\ RI WKH LPSDFW RI PDWHUQDO HPSOR\PHQW RQ GDXJKWHUVn RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH VDOLHQFH LQ ZKLFK VRFLRHFRQRPLF VWDWXV ZDV FRQWUROOHG IRU DQG D QDWLRQDO SUREDELOLW\ VDPSOH RI IHPDOH FROOHJH JUDGXDWHV ZDV XVHG %LHOE\ f IRXQG WKDW IHPDOH FROOHJH JUDGXDWHV IURP OHVV HFRQRPLFDOO\ SULYLOHJHG KRPHV KDG KLJKHU RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH VDOLHQFH +RZHYHU WKLV ILQGLQJ GLG QRW DFFRXQW IRU PXFK RI WKH YDULDQFH &RQYHUVHO\ VHYHUDO LQYHVWLJDWRUV KDYH IRXQG D SRVLWLYH UHODWLRQVKLS EHWZHHQ IDPLO\ VRFLRHFRQRPLF VWDWXV DQG RFFXSDWLRQDO DQG HGXFDWLRQDO DVSLUDWLRQV RI GDXJKWHUV $VWLQ 5RVHQ t $QHVKHQVHO f $OWKRXJK VRFLRHFRQRPLF VWDWXV ZDV QRW GLUHFWO\ FRUUHODWHG ZLWK RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH VDOLHQFH $VWLQ f IRXQG WKDW DPRQJ WKRVH ZKR DWWHQG FROOHJH WKRVH ZLWK KLJKHU VRFLRHFRQRPLF EDFNJURXQGV KDG KLJKHU FROOHJH DGPLVVLRQ VFRUHV DQG JUHDWHU HGXFDWLRQDO RSSRUWXQLW\ ERWK RI ZKLFK KDYH EHHQ FRUUHODWHG ZLWK RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH VDOLHQFH LQ ZRPHQ $OPTXLVW t $QJULVW $VWLQ t 0\QW )DVVLQJHU f 6LPLODUO\ 5RVHQ DQG $QHVKHQVHO f LQ D SDWK DQDO\WLF PRGHO WKDW IRFXVHG RQ KRZ VH[ PHPEHUVKLS LQIOXHQFHV WKH HGXFDWLRQDO DQG RFFXSDWLRQDO H[SHFWDWLRQV SURFHVV VDPSOHG RQHWKLUG RI WKH VWXGHQWV DWWHQGLQJ DOO WKH MXQLRU DQG VHQLRU KLJK VFKRROV JUDGHV f LQ WKUHH XSVWDWH 1HZ
PAGE 53

KLJKHU VRFLRHFRQRPLF IDPLOLHV WKDQ IRU IHPDOHV IURP ORZHU VRFLRHFRQRPLF IDPLOLHV ,Q DGGLWLRQ IDPLO\ VRFLRHFRQRPLF VWDWXV IDPLO\ VL]H DQG PRWKHUnV HGXFDWLRQDO DQG RFFXSDWLRQDO VWDWXV KDG JUHDWHU WRWDO HIIHFWV RQ IHPDOH WKDQ RQ PDOH RFFXSDWLRQDO H[SHFWDWLRQV 7KHVH UHVHDUFKHUV WKXV SURSRVHG WKDW LQ D ODUJH IDPLO\ D FKLOGnV VH[ LQIOXHQFHV KRZ SDUHQWV GLVWULEXWH IDPLO\ ILQDQFLDO UHVRXUFHV DQG ZKRVH QHHGV WKH\ DFFRUG SULRULW\ 7KH\ SURSRVHG WKDW SUHIHUHQFH ZRXOG EH JLYHQ LQ VXFK IDPLOLHV WR PDOH VLEOLQJV +DXVHU f KRZHYHU UHSRUWHG WKDW PDOHV IURP ODUJHU IDPLOLHV KDG ORZHU HGXFDWLRQDO DQG RFFXSDWLRQDO DVSLUDWLRQV WKDQ PDOHV IURP VPDOOHU IDPLOLHV DQG WKDW RQO\ WKH HGXFDWLRQDO DVSLUDWLRQV RI IHPDOHV ZHUH DGYHUVHO\ DIIHFWHG E\ PHPEHUVKLS LQ ODUJH IDPLOLHV 5RVHQ DQG $QHVKHQVHO f DOVR UHSRUWHG WKDW PRWKHUVn VWDWXV DWWDLQPHQW KDG D JUHDWHU LPSDFW RQ GDXJKWHUVn RFFXSDWLRQDO H[SHFWDWLRQV WKDQ IDWKHUVn RQ VRQVn +RZHYHU WKH\ LQWHUSUHWHG WKLV ILQGLQJ DV EHLQJ UHODWHG WR WKH UHDOLW\ WKDW IHPDOHV KDYH IHZHU KLJK VWDWXV HGXFDWLRQDO DQG RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH PRGHOV DYDLODEOH WR WKHP ,Q DGGLWLRQ WKHVH LQYHVWLJDWRUV QRWHG WKDW LQWHUYHQLQJ SV\FKRORJLFDO DQG DFKLHYHPHQWUHODWHG IDFWRUV OLNH DFDGHPLF DFKLHYHPHQW PHQWDO DELOLW\ DQG VHOIDVVHVVPHQW ZHUH DOVR UHODWHG WR RFFXSDWLRQDO H[SHFWDWLRQV EXW WR D PXFK OHVVHU H[WHQW IRU IHPDOHV WKDQ PDOHV

PAGE 54

$OEUHFKW f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t $QJULVW /LSUDHQ%OXPHQ t /HDYLWW f ,W PD\ EH WKDW JOREDO PHDVXUHPHQW RI IDPLO\ VRFLRHFRQRPLF VWDWXV GXH WR LWV IDLOXUH WR GLIIHUHQWLDWH YDULDWLRQV DPRQJ IDPLOLHV LQ OHYHOV RI PDWHUQDO RFFXSDWLRQDO VWDWXV IDPLO\ VL]H RU VH[ RI VLEOLQJV LV WRR JURVV D PHDVXUH RI IDPLO\ VWDWXV WR DFFXUDWHO\ SUHGLFW WKH RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH VDOLHQFH RI FROOHJH ZRPHQ 7KH HIIHFW RI PDWHUQDO HPSOR\PHQW RQ JHQHUDO DWWLWXGHV WRZDUGV ZRPHQfV UROHV KDV EHHQ ZHOO GRFXPHQWHG LQ WKH UHVHDUFK OLWHUDWXUH 0DWHUQDO HPSOR\PHQW KDV FRQVLVWHQWO\ EHHQ DVVRFLDWHG ZLWK DFFHSWDQFH RI D ZLGHU UDQJH RI VH[ DSSURSULDWH EHKDYLRUV DQG PRUH HJDOLWDULDQ DQG OHVV VH[UROH VWHUHRW\SLF LGHRORJLHV DPRQJ GDXJKWHUV RI DOO DJHV %DUXFK 'RXYDQ 'RXYDQ t $GHOVRQ (\GH +DUWOH\ 0HLHU 9RJHO %URYHUUDDQ

PAGE 55

%URYHUPDQ &ODUNVRQ t 5RVHQNUDQW] f 9RJHO %URYHUPDQ %URYHUUDDQ &ODUNVRQ DQG 5RVHQNUDQW] f VWXGLHG WKH UHODWLRQVKLS EHWZHHQ WKH VH[ UROH SHUFHSWLRQV KHOG E\ PDOH DQG IHPDOH FROOHJH VWXGHQWV DQG WKHLU PRWKHUVn HPSOR\PHQW 5HVXOWV LQGLFDWHG IHPDOH VWXGHQWV ZLWK HPSOR\HG PRWKHUV SHUFHLYHG WKH GLIIHUHQFHV EHWZHHQ PHQ DQG ZRPHQ WR EH WKH VPDOOHVW IROORZHG E\ PDOH VWXGHQWV ZLWK HPSOR\HG PRWKHUV ZKLOH VWXGHQWV ZLWK XQHPSOR\HG PRWKHUV SHUFHLYHG WKH JUHDWHVW GLIIHUHQFHV EHWZHHQ PHQ DQG ZRPHQ ,Q DGGLWLRQ WKH HIIHFW RI PDWHUQDO HPSOR\PHQW ZDV WR UDLVH WKH HVWLPDWLRQ RI RQHfV RZQ VH[ 0HLHU f DOVR IRXQG D VLJQLILFDQW UHODWLRQVKLS EHWZHHQ IHPDOH FROOHJH VWXGHQWVn IDYRULQJ RI VRFLDO HTXDOLW\ IRU ZRPHQ DQG PDWHUQDO HPSOR\PHQW )XUWKHU WKH PRVW OLEHUDO VH[ UROH LGHRORJ\ ZDV KHOG E\ WKH GDXJKWHUV RI ZRPHQ LQ KLJK VWDWXV RFFXSDWLRQV /RRNLQJ DW WKH VRFLDO VWDWXV RI WKH IDPLO\ LQ WHUPV RI UHODWLYH SDUHQWDO SRZHU 9DQIRVVHQ f IRXQG WKDW WKH SDWWHUQ RI SDUHQWDO GRPLQDQFH ZDV D FUXFLDO LQWHUYHQLQJ YDULDEOH EHWZHHQ PDWHUQDO HGXFDWLRQDO DQG RFFXSDWLRQDO KLVWRU\ DQG VH[ UROH YDOXHV RI GDXJKWHUV 9DQIRVVHQ IRXQG WKDW IDWKHU GRPLQDQFH PHDVXUHG E\ KLV JUHDWHU HGXFDWLRQDO DQG RFFXSDWLRQDO DWWDLQPHQW GHSUHVVHG WKH UHODWLRQVKLS EHWZHHQ PDWHUQDO HPSOR\PHQW DQG HJDOLWDULDQ VH[ UROH YDOXHV LQ GDXJKWHUV ZKLOH PRWKHU GRPLQDQFH KHLJKWHQHG WKH UHODWLRQVKLS EHWZHHQ PDWHUQDO HPSOR\PHQW DQG HJDOLWDULDQ VH[ UROH YDOXHV LQ GDXJKWHUV

PAGE 56

6HYHUDO UHVHDUFKHUV H[DPLQLQJ PDWHUQDO HGXFDWLRQDO DWWDLQPHQW KDYH UHSRUWHG D UHODWLRQVKLS EHWZHHQ PDWHUQDO HGXFDWLRQDO OHYHO DQG UROH PRGHOLQJ RI GDXJKWHUV 6PLWK DQG 6HOI f H[SORULQJ WKH UHODWLRQVKLS EHWZHHQ WKH VH[ UROH DWWLWXGHV RI IHPDOH FROOHJH VWXGHQWV DQG WKHLU PRWKHUV PHDVXUHG WKH DWWLWXGHV RI PRWKHUGDXJKWHU SDLUV 7KH\ IRXQG WKDW PRWKHUV ZLWK D FROOHJH HGXFDWLRQ KDG WKH JUHDWHVW GHJUHH RI DWWLWXGLQDO VLPLODULW\ WR WKHLU GDXJKWHUV UHJDUGOHVV RI ZKHWKHU WKHLU DWWLWXGHV ZHUH OLEHUDO RU QRW )RFXVLQJ RQ WKH HIIHFWV RI PDWHUQDO HPSOR\PHQW RQ RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH VDOLHQFH WKH UHVXOWV RI RQH VWXG\ RI HOHPHQWDU\ VFKRRO FKLOGUHQ +DUWOH\ f DQG IRXU VWXGLHV RI DGROHVFHQW JLUOV %DQGXFFL 'HOODV *DLHU t (PLKRYLFK 3HWHUVRQ 6PLWK f LQGLFDWHG GDXJKWHUV RI ZRUNLQJ PRWKHUV ZHUH PRUH OLNHO\ WKDQ GDXJKWHUV RI QRQZRUNLQJ PRWKHUV WR YLHZ ZRUN DV VRPHWKLQJ WKH\ ZDQWHG WR GR ZKHQ WKH\ ZHUH PRWKHUV 'RXYDQ f IRXQG WKDW DGROHVFHQW GDXJKWHUV RI HPSOR\HG PRWKHUV ZHUH PRUH OLNHO\ WR QDPH WKHLU PRWKHUV DV WKH SHUVRQ WKH\ PRVW DGPLUHG ,Q VWXGLHV LQYHVWLJDWLQJ RFFXSDWLRQDO DVSLUDWLRQV DW WKH FROOHJH OHYHO $OPTXLVW DQG $QJULVW f IRXQG KLJKHU RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH VDOLHQFH DPRQJ GDXJKWHUV ZLWK ZRUNLQJ PRWKHUV DQG $OPTXLVW DQG $QJULVW f %DUXFK f DQG 7DQJUL f IRXQG WKDW FROOHJH GDXJKWHUV RI ZRUNLQJ PRWKHUV PRUH RIWHQ FKRVH RFFXSDWLRQV LQ QRQWUDGLWLRQDO FDUHHU ILHOGV

PAGE 57

,Q H[SORULQJ WKH LPSDFW RI WKH SHUFHLYHG FRQVHTXHQFHV RI PDWHUQDO HPSOR\PHQW RQ WKH RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH VDOLHQFH RI D VDPSOH RI FROOHJH IHPDOHV %DUXFK f IRXQG WKDW LI D VXEMHFWnV PRWKHU ZRUNHG EXW DOVR H[SHULHQFHG QHJDWLYH SHUVRQDO FRQVHTXHQFHV LH ODFN RI SDWHUQDO VXSSRUW RU UROH FRQIOLFWf EHFDXVH RI KHU FDUHHU WKH VXEMHFW ZDV OHVV OLNHO\ WR EH FDUHHU UROH VDOLHQW 6LPLODUO\ 0XOOLQV f LQ D UDQGRP VDPSOLQJ RI FROOHJH ZRPHQ H[SORUHG WKH UHODWLRQVKLS EHWZHHQ SHUFHLYHG SDUHQWDO UROH VDWLVIDFWLRQ DQG GDXJKWHUVn SHUVRQDO DVSLUDWLRQV DQG VH[ UROH DWWLWXGHV 6KH IRXQG WKDW ERWK SHUFHLYHG PDWHUQDO GLVVDWLVIDFWLRQ ZLWK WKH UROH RI PRWKHU DQG KRXVHZLIH DQG SDWHUQDO MRE GLVVDWLVIDFWLRQ ZHUH UHODWHG WR OLEHUDO VH[ UROH DWWLWXGHV DQG RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH VDOLHQFH &DUHZ f H[SORULQJ WKH UHODWLRQVKLS EHWZHHQ PDWHUQDO UROH VDWLVIDFWLRQ DQG SDWHUQDO VXSSRUW IRU PDWHUQDO HPSOR\PHQW IRU PRWKHUV ZKR ZHUH UHHQWHULQJ WKH ZRUN IRUFH IRXQG SDWHUQDO VXSSRUW IRU PDWHUQDO HPSOR\PHQW WR EH D FUXFLDO IDFWRU LQ WKH PRWKHUnV RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH VDWLVIDFWLRQ 7KH ILQGLQJV RI WKHVH VWXGLHV LQGLFDWH WKDW LQ DGGLWLRQ WR LPLWDWLRQ RI HPSOR\HG PRWKHUV DYRLGDQFH RI GLVVDWLVILHG HPSOR\HG DQG QRQHPSOR\HG PRWKHUV DSSHDUV WR EH D IDFWRU LQIOXHQFLQJ WKH RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH VDOLHQFH RI GDXJKWHUV DQG WKDW PDWHUQDO RFFXSDWLRQDO VDWLVIDFWLRQ LV UHODWHG WR SDWHUQDO VXSSRUW IRU PDWHUQDO HPSOR\PHQW 0XOOLQVn ILQGLQJV DOVR VXJJHVW WKDW SDWHUQDO UROH VWDWXV DQG

PAGE 58

VDWLVIDFWLRQ PD\ EH D VLJQLILFDQW EXW UDUHO\ H[SORUHG LQIOXHQFH RQ RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH VDOLHQFH RI GDXJKWHUV 7KLV UHYLHZ RI WKH UHVHDUFK OLWHUDWXUH RQ IDPLO\ VWDWXV DQG VWUXFWXUH VXJJHVWV WKDW GDXJKWHUV ZKRVH PRWKHUV DUH HPSOR\HG PD\ DVSLUH OLNH WKHLU PRWKHUV WR FRPELQH ZRUN DQG IDPLO\ OLIH DV DGXOWV PRUH WKDQ GR GDXJKWHUV ZKRVH PRWKHUV DUH QRW HPSOR\HG 6XFK HPSOR\PHQW SODQV DSSHDU KRZHYHU WR GHSHQG RQ WKH PRWKHUfV UROH VDWLVIDFWLRQ WKH PRWKHUf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nV RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH VDOLHQFH 7KH UHVXOWV IURP WKHVH VWXGLHV RQ IDPLO\ VWDWXV DQG VWUXFWXUH LQIOXHQFHV RQ RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH VDOLHQFH DQG VH[ UROH DWWLWXGHV RI GDXJKWHUV FDQ EH H[SODLQHG LQ WHUPV RI VRFLDO OHDUQLQJ WKHRU\ ,Q WKH IROORZLQJ VHFWLRQ ERWK WKH FRQFHSWV RI VRFLDO OHDUQLQJ WKHRU\ DQG WKH H[LVWLQJ UHVHDUFK UHODWLQJ VRFLDO OHDUQLQJ WKHRU\ WR ZRPHQnV RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH VDOLHQFH DUH UHYLHZHG

PAGE 59

6RFLDO /HDUQLQJ 7KHRU\ 6RFLDO OHDUQLQJ WKHRU\ YLHZV VH[W\SHG FKDUDFWHULVWLFV DQG UROH H[SHFWDWLRQV DV D IXQFWLRQ RI ERWK GLUHFW DQG LPLWDWLYH OHDUQLQJ H[SHULHQFHV %DQGXUD f 3DUHQWV DUH YLHZHG DV ERWK UROH PRGHOV DQG GLUHFW UHLQIRUFLQJ DJHQWV IRU WKHLU FKLOGUHQ .HOO\ t :RUHOO f 7KH OLNHOLKRRG RI LPLWDWLRQ RI D PRGHO LV PHGLDWHG E\ ERWK WKH PRGHOfV SRZHU DQG WKH QDWXUH RI WKH UHODWLRQVKLS EHWZHHQ WKH PRGHO DQG WKH OHDUQHU 7KH SRZHU RI D UROH PRGHO LV LQFUHDVHG LI KH RU VKH LV UHZDUGHG %DQGXUD f RU LI WKHUH LV D FORVH UHODWLRQVKLS EHWZHHQ PRGHO DQG OHDUQHU 0XVVHQ t 'LVWOHU f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fV RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH VDOLHQFH ZRXOG LQGLFDWH D SDWHUQDO UROH PRGHOLQJ LQIOXHQFH DV ZHOO 9LHZLQJ IDWKHUV DV ZHOO DV PRWKHUV DV SRWHQWLDO UROH PRGHOV LV

PAGE 60

FRQJUXHQW ZLWK VRFLDO OHDUQLQJ WKHRU\ DV LW GRHV QRW SXUSRUW WKDW PRGHOLQJ FDQ RFFXU RQO\ EHWZHHQ VDPH VH[ LQGLYLGXDOV .DKQ f LQ DQ LQQRYDWLYH DQG FRPSOH[ GHVFULSWLYH VWXG\ EDVHG RQ VRFLDO OHDUQLQJ WKHRU\ H[SORUHG WKH UHIOHFWLRQV E\ MXQLRU DQG VHQLRU FROOHJH ZRPHQ RQ WKH PHVVDJHV GHULYHG DERXW OLIH UROH FKRLFHV E\ REVHUYLQJ WKHLU PRWKHUVf OLYHV DQG WKH VXEVHTXHQW PHDQLQJ WKH\ SODFHG XSRQ WKDW H[SHULHQFH LQ WHUPV RI WKHLU RZQ IXWXUH UROH SUHIHUHQFHV 7KH ZRPHQ ZHUH SODFHG LQWR RQH RI WKUHH JURXSV DFFRUGLQJ WR WKHLU RZQ OLIHVW\OH SUHIHUHQFHV IRU WKH IXWXUH WUDGLWLRQDO IDPLO\FRPPLWWHGf FDUHHULVW FDUHHUFRPPLWWHGf DQG HPSOR\HG PRWKHU HTXDO IDPLO\ DQG FDUHHU FRPPLWPHQWf %DVHG RQ RSHQHQGHG ZULWWHQ GHVFULSWLRQV RI WKHLU PRWKHUV LQIRUPDWLRQ RQ PDWHUQDO HPSOR\PHQW DQG UHVSRQVHV WR WKH TXHVWLRQ RI ZKDW WKH\ KDG OHDUQHG IURP WKHLU PRWKHUVn OLYHV DV ZHOO DV PLQXWH VHPLVWUXFWXUHG LQWHUYLHZV GHVLJQHG WR XQFRYHU LQ JUHDWHU GHWDLO SDUWLFLSDQWVn UHVSRQVHV WR WKHLU PRWKHUV DV PRGHOV RI UROH RSWLRQV WKH IROORZLQJ UHVXOWV ZHUH REWDLQHG ,W DSSHDUHG WKDW PRWKHUV ZHUH DYRLGHG DV ZHOO DV LPLWDWHG DV OLIH UROH PRGHOV 6SHFLILFDOO\ PDQ\ FDUHHULVWV SHUFHLYHG WKHLU PRWKHUVn WUDGLWLRQDO PDUULDJHV DV SUHFOXGLQJ RWKHU DWWDLQPHQWV DQG WKXV FKRVH WR DYRLG WKLV &RQYHUVHO\ PRUH LPLWDWLRQ UDWKHU WKDQ DYRLGDQFH ZDV IRXQG LQ WKH WUDGLWLRQDO JURXS ZLWK KLJK VRFLRHFRQRPLF VWDWXV HPHUJLQJ DV D NH\ YDULDEOH XQGHUO\LQJ WKH DWWUDFWLYHQHVV RI WKLV JURXSnV PRWKHUV DV UROH PRGHOV RI IDPLO\ FRPPLWPHQW

PAGE 61

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f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fV GHYHORSPHQW KDYH H[DPLQHG SDUHQWDO LQIOXHQFHV LQ WKH IROORZLQJ DUHDV UHOHYDQW WR ZRPHQfV RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH H[SHFWDWLRQV GDXJKWHUnV RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH LQQRYDWLRQ VH[ DW\SLFDO RFFXSDWLRQDO FKRLFHf GDXJKWHUnV RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH

PAGE 62

VDOLHQFH DQG GDXJKWHUfV VH[ UROH RULHQWDWLRQ DQG DWWLWXGHV $OUDTXLVW DQG $QJULVW f KDYH IRXQG RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH LQQRYDWLRQ WR EH UHODWHG WR RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH VDOLHQFH LQ FROOHJH ZRPHQ DQG WKXV SURYLGH D UDWLRQDOH IRU UHYLHZLQJ OLWHUDWXUH RQ SDUHQWDO UHODWLRQVKLS LQIOXHQFHV RQ RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH LQQRYDWLRQ RI ZRPHQ 7DQJUL f H[DPLQLQJ GHWHUPLQDQWV RI RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH LQQRYDWLRQ DPRQJ FROOHJH ZRPHQ IRXQG UROH LQQRYDWRUV UHSRUWHG ZDUPHU IHHOLQJV WRZDUG WKHLU PRWKHUV EXW IHOW PRUH VLPLODU WR WKHLU IDWKHUV DQG UHSRUWHG DXWRQRPRXV UHODWLRQVKLSV ZLWK ERWK SDUHQWV &RQYHUVHO\ 6WDQGOH\ DQG 6RXOH f VDPSOLQJ ZRPHQ LQ D YDULHW\ RI PDOH GRPLQDWHG SURIHVVLRQV IRXQG WKDW WZLFH DV PDQ\ RI WKHVH ZRPHQ IHOW WKH\ ZHUH WKHLU IDWKHUfV IDYRULWH WKDQ WKHLU PRWKHUfV IDYRULWH ,Q GDWD FROOHFWHG E\ .XWQHU DQG %URJDQ f RQ IHPDOH PHGLFDO VWXGHQWV IDWKHUV ZHUH SHUFHLYHG DV PRUH VXSSRUWLYH WKDQ PRWKHUV 7HQ]HU f VWXG\LQJ ZRPHQ LQ LQQRYDWLYH SURIHVVLRQV LH ODZ\HUV SK\VLFLDQV PDQDJHUVf IRXQG WKDW IDWKHUV EXW QRW PRWKHUV VWUHVVHG LQVWUXPHQWDO YDOXHV DQG EHKDYLRUV UDWKHU WKDQ H[SUHVVLYH YDOXHV DQG EHKDYLRUV PRUH WKDQ GLG WKH IDWKHUV RI ZRPHQ LQ WUDGLWLRQDO SURIHVVLRQV LH VRFLDO ZRUNHUV QXUVHVf 5LGJHZD\ f H[DPLQHG SDUHQWDO LGHQWLILFDWLRQ DQG RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH VDOLHQFH LQ FROOHJH ZRPHQ 6KH IRXQG SDUHQWDO LGHQWLILFDWLRQ PHDVXUHG DV SHUFHLYHG VLPLODULW\ WR SDUHQWV WR PHGLDWH WKH LPSDFW RI PDWHUQDO HPSOR\PHQW VWDWXV

PAGE 63

DQG PDWHUQDO VH[ UROH LGHRORJ\ 2FFXSDWLRQDO UROH VDOLHQFH DPRQJ PRWKHULGHQWLILHG ZRPHQ ZDV UHODWHG WR PDWHUQDO HPSOR\PHQW DQG PRUH OLEHUDO VH[ UROH LGHRORJ\ LQ ERWK SDUHQWV )RU IDWKHULGHQWLILHG ZRPHQ RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH VDOLHQFH ZDV UHODWHG WR OHVV H[WHQVLYH PDWHUQDO HPSOR\PHQW DQG JUHDWHU WUDGLWLRQDOLW\ RI PDWHUQDO VH[ UROH LGHRORJ\ $OWPDQ DQG *URVVPDQ f IRXQG GDXJKWHUVn SHUFHSWLRQV RI PDWHUQDO JRRGQHVV WR EH SUHGLFWLYH RI ORZHU RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH VDOLHQFH DPRQJ FROOHJH ZRPHQ ZKRVH PRWKHUV GLG QRW ZRUN 0F%URRP f IRXQG WKDW XQLYHUVLW\ ZRPHQ ZKR UHMHFWHG WUDGLWLRQDO VH[ UROH VWHUHRW\SHV IRU ZRPHQ UHSRUWHG KDYLQJ SRRUHU UHODWLRQVKLSV ZLWK WKHLU IDWKHUV 7KLV UHODWLRQVKLS UHDFKHG JUHDWHVW VLJQLILFDQFH IRU ZRPHQ IURP ORZHU FODVV IDPLOLHV DQG ZDV LQWHUSUHWHG DV D SRVVLEOH IXQFWLRQ RI WKH JUHDWHU WUDGLWLRQDOLW\ RI WKH ZRUNLQJ FODVV IDWKHUV .HOO\ DQG :RUHOO f DQG 'H )URQ]R DQG %RXGUHDX f H[DPLQLQJ DQWHFHGHQWV DQG FRUUHODWHV RI DQGURJ\Q\ LQ FROOHJH VWXGHQWV IRXQGn PDWHUQDO HPSOR\PHQW SDWHUQDO LQYROYHPHQW LQ GRPHVWLF DFWLYLWLHV SDUHQWDO ZDUPWK DQG SDUHQWDO HQFRXUDJHPHQW RI DFKLHYHPHQW DQG VHOIUHOLDQFH ZHUH UHODWHG WR JUHDWHU PDVFXOLQLW\ DQG DQGURJ\Q\ LQ GDXJKWHUV $V FLWHG HDUOLHU RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH VDOLHQFH KDV EHHQ UHODWHG WR PDVFXOLQLW\ DQG DQGURJ\Q\ LQ ZRPHQ .DJDQ DQG 0RVV f LQ D ORQJLWXGLQDO VWXG\ IRXQG WKDW OHYHO RI PDWHUQDO SURWHFWLYHQHVV GXULQJ WKH ILUVW WKUHH \HDUV RI OLIH ZDV QHJDWLYHO\ UHODWHG WR DFKLHYHPHQW EHKDYLRU LQ DGXOW ZRPHQ

PAGE 64

+RIIPDQ f GHVFULEHG WKLV UHODWLRQVKLS DV DQ DEVHQFH RI VPRWKHU ORYH IRU KLJK DFKLHYLQJ DGXOW ZRPHQ .ULJHU f IRXQG WKDW KLJK DFKLHYHPHQWRULHQWHG ZRPHQ WHQGHG WR IRFXV WKHLU QHHGV LQ WKH ZRUNSODFH ZKLFK LPSOLHV WKDW KLJKHU DFKLHYHPHQWRULHQWHG ZRPHQ KDYH KLJKHU RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH VDOLHQFH %DUXFK DQG %DUQHWW f H[DPLQLQJ VH[ UROH VWHUHRW\SLQJ LQ SUHVFKRRO FKLOGUHQ IRXQG IDWKHUV ZKR SDUWLFLSDWHG LQ FKLOGFDUH WDVNV LQGHSHQGHQWO\ UDWKHU WKDQ MRLQWO\ ZLWK WKHLU ZLYHVf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

PAGE 65

VWXGLHV DUH FRQVLVWHQW ZLWK WKH VRFLDO OHDUQLQJ WKHRU\ SRVWXODWH WKDW WKH SRZHU RI D UROH PRGHO LQFUHDVHV ZLWK WKH FORVHQHVV RI WKH UHODWLRQVKLS EHWZHHQ WKH PRGHO DQG WKH OHDUQHU 6HFRQG WKHVH UHVXOWV VXJJHVW WKDW ZDUP DQG VXSSRUWLYH UHODWLRQVKLSV ZLWK SDUHQWV ZKR HQFRXUDJH DFKLHYHPHQW DQG DXWRQRP\ DQG ZKR DUH UROH PRGHOV RI WKHVH WUDLWV WKHPVHOYHV HJ PDWHUQDO HPSOR\PHQWf DUH UHODWHG WR ZRPHQnV QRQWUDGLWL RQD VH[ UROH RULHQWDWLRQ DQG QRQWUDGLWLRQDO RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH FKRLFH 7KLV SRLQW RI YLHZ LV VXSSRUWHG LQ PRUH JHQHUDO VWXGLHV RQ WKH HIIHFWV RI SDUHQWLQJ /DPE &KDVH/DQVGDOH DQG 2ZHQ f KDYH SURSRVHG WKDW JRRG SDUHQWLQJ DFURVV DOO GHYHORSPHQWDO VWDJHV IRU D FKLOG UHTXLUHV VHQVLWLYLW\ LQ LQWHUSUHWLQJ WKH FKLOGnV VLJQDOV DQG XQGHUO\LQJ QHHGV DQG UHVSRQGLQJ DSSURSULDWHO\ )RU H[DPSOH LI SDUHQWV DUH VHQVLWLYH WR WKHLU LQIDQW WKH EDE\ ZLOO FRPH WR WUXVW LQ WKHLU UHOLDELOLW\ DQG SUHGLFWDELOLW\ DQG FRQVHTXHQWO\ ZLOO GHYHORSH D VHFXUH DWWDFKPHQW WR WKHP $LQVZRUWK %HOO t 6WD\WRQ f 7KLV VHFXUH DWWDFKPHQW LQ WXUQ UHVXOWV LQ WKH FKLOGnV JUHDWHU ZLOOLQJQHVV WR LQWHUDFW ZLWK RWKHU SHRSOH VXEVHTXHQW JUHDWHU H[SRVXUH WR VRFLDO H[SHULHQFHV DQG JUHDWHU VRFLDO VRSKLVWLFDWLRQ /DPE 2ZHQ t &KDVH /DQVGDOH f /DPE f XVLQJ VRFLDO OHDUQLQJ WKHRU\ WR HODERUDWH RQ WKH LPSRUWDQFH RI SDUHQWDO VHQVLWLYLW\ WR WKHLU FKLOGUHQnV QHHGV DQG VXEVHTXHQW DWWDFKPHQWV KDV DUJXHG 7KH ZDUPWK WKDW FKDUDFWHUL]HV DWWDFKPHQWV LQFUHDVHV ERWK WKH

PAGE 66

VDOLHQFH RI DWWDFKPHQW ILJXUHV DV PRGHOV DQG WKH UHLQIRUFLQJ SRWHQF\ RI WKHLU DWWHPSWV WR HQFRXUDJH RU GLVFRXUDJH EHKDYLRU S f /DPE DQG %URQVRQ f SURSRVHG WKDW WKH VHQVLWLYLW\ OHYHO RI SDUHQWV WRZDUG WKHLU FKLOGUHQ LV UHODWHG WR HDFK SDUHQWf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nV RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH VDOLHQFH WKH VRFLRORJLFDO FRQWH[W WKH GHYHORSPHQWDO FRQWH[W DQG WKH SV\FKRORJLFDO FRQWH[W 6RFLRORJLFDO WKHRULVWV KDYH SURSRVHG WKDW FKDQJHV LQ WKH VWDWXV RI ZRPHQ IHPDOH ODERU IRUFH SDUWLFLSDWLRQ DQG WKH IRUP DQG IXQFWLRQ RI WKH IDPLO\ KDYH UHVXOWHG LQ DQ LQFUHDVH LQ ZRPHQnV RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH VDOLHQFH DFURVV JHQHUDWLRQV

PAGE 67

%HFDXVH WKHVH VRFLRORJLFDO LQIOXHQFHV DUH FRQVLGHUHG FRQVWDQW DW D JLYHQ SRLQW LQ WLPH WKH\ ZHUH QRW H[DPLQHG LQ WKH SUHVHQW VWXG\ +XPDQ GHYHORSPHQW WKHRULVWV KDYH GHVFULEHG ODWH DGROHVFHQFH DV D WLPH RI UDSLG FKDQJH DV LGHQWLW\ LV GHYHORSHG DQG OLIH UROH GHFLVLRQV DUH PDGH 7KH EHJLQQLQJ FROOHJH \HDUV DUH SURSRVHG DV D FULWLFDO WLPH IRU UROH FKRLFHV ZLWK IDPLO\ H[HUWLQJ D VWURQJ LQIOXHQFH ([DPLQLQJ FKDQJHV LQ UROH H[SHFWDWLRQV UHVHDUFK RQ ZRPHQn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

PAGE 68

GHVFULSWLYH VWDWLVWLFV RQ 6FKRODVWLF $SWLWXGH 7HVW 6$7f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n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

PAGE 69

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

PAGE 70

&+$37(5 ,,, 0(7+2'2/2*< ,W KDV EHHQ VXJJHVWHG WKDW SDUHQWDO ILJXUHV H[HUW D SRZHUIXO UROH PRGHOLQJ LQIOXHQFH LQ VKDSLQJ ZRPHQnV RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH H[SHFWDWLRQV 7KLV VWXG\ H[DPLQHG WKH UROH PRGHOLQJ LQIOXHQFH RI PRWKHUV DQG IDWKHUV RI FROOHJH ZRPHQ 7KUHH IDFHWV RI SDUHQWDO LQIOXHQFH ZHUH H[DPLQHG Df SDUHQWDO UROH VWDWXV Ef SDUHQWDO UROH VWDWXV FRQVHTXHQFHV DQG Ff SDUHQWGDXJKWHU UHODWLRQVKLS TXDOLW\ 7KH SXUSRVH RI WKLV VWXG\ ZDV WR GHWHUPLQH ZKHWKHU WKHVH IDFHWV RI SDUHQWDO LQIOXHQFH FRXOG EH XVHG WR H[SODLQ GDXJKWHUVn RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH VDOLHQFH $ OLPLWHG QXPEHU RI IDFHWV RI PDWHUQDO DQG SDWHUQDO LQIOXHQFH ZHUH ILUVW H[DPLQHG IRU WKH VDPSOH DV D ZKROH 7KHQ WKH VDPSOH ZDV GLYLGHG LQ WHUPV RI PRWKHUVn HPSOR\PHQW VWDWXV DQG DVSHFWV RI WKH PRWKHUVn UROH LQIOXHQFH DQG IDWKHUVn UROH LQIOXHQFH ZHUH H[DPLQHG VHSDUDWHO\ IRU WKHVH WZR VXEVDPSOHV )LQDOO\ PRWKHUVn DQG IDWKHUVn UROH LQIOXHQFHV ZHUH MRLQWO\ H[DPLQHG IRU WKH VXEVDPSOHV RI GDXJKWHUV ZLWK HPSOR\HG DQG WKRVH ZLWK QRQHPSOR\HG PRWKHUV ,Q WKLV FKDSWHU WKH UHVHDUFK GHVLJQ DQG PHWKRGRORJ\ DUH GHVFULEHG 7KH FKDSWHU FRQVLVWV RI VHYHQ VHFWLRQV WKH UHVHDUFK GHVLJQ WKH SRSXODWLRQ DQG VDPSOH VDPSOLQJ

PAGE 71

SURFHGXUH LQVWUXPHQWDWLRQ GDWD FROOHFWLRQ SURFHGXUHV GDWD DQDO\VLV DQG OLPLWDWLRQV RI WKH VWXG\ 'HVLJQ 'XH WR WKH LQDELOLW\ WR FRQWURO IRU WKH SDUHQWDO DWWULEXWH YDULDEOHV H[DPLQHG LQ WKLV VWXG\ DQ H[ SRVW IDFWR GHVFULSWLYH GHVLJQ ZDV XVHG 7KUHH DVSHFWV RI SDUHQWDO LQIOXHQFH ZHUH H[DPLQHG XVLQJ WKUHH VHWV RI YDULDEOHV WR SUHGLFW WKH GHSHQGHQW YDULDEOH RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH VDOLHQFH RI FROOHJH ZRPHQ 7KH ILUVW VHW GHVFULEHG DVSHFWV RI WKH SDUHQWVn DFWXDO UROH VWDWXV Df DEVROXWH DQG UHODWLYH SUHVWLJH OHYHO RI PDWHUQDO LI HPSOR\HGf DQG SDWHUQDO HPSOR\PHQW Ef DEVROXWH DQG UHODWLYH OHYHO RI PDWHUQDO DQG SDWHUQDO HGXFDWLRQDO DWWDLQPHQW Ff H[WHQW RI PDWHUQDO HPSOR\PHQW DQG Gf PDWHUQDO LI HPSOR\HGf DQG SDWHUQDO HPSOR\PHQW LQQRYDWLRQ 7KH VHFRQG VHW RI YDULDEOHV H[DPLQHG WKH FRQVHTXHQFHV RI SDUHQWDO UROH VWDWXV Df SHUFHLYHG PDWHUQDO DQG SDWHUQDO OLIH VDWLVIDFWLRQ Ef SHUFHLYHG PDWHUQDO DQG SDWHUQDO PDULWDO UHODWLRQVKLS VDWLVIDFWLRQ Ff SHUFHLYHG PDWHUQDO DQG SDWHUQDO RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH VWDWXV VDWLVIDFWLRQ DQG Gf SHUFHLYHG PDWHUQDO DQG SDWHUQDO VXSSRUW IRU WKHLU VSRXVHVn RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH VWDWXV 7KH SDUHQWGDXJKWHU UHODWLRQVKLS ZDV H[DPLQHG DV WKH WKLUG SDUHQWDO LQIOXHQFH 7KLV UHODWLRQVKLS ZDV H[DPLQHG LQ WHUPV RI WKH GDXJKWHUnV SHUFHLYHG GLVVDWLVIDFWLRQ ZLWK WKH DPRXQW RI FRQWURO DIIHFWLRQ DQG LQFOXVLRQ H[SUHVVHG 7KLV

PAGE 72

YDULDEOH ZDV JDXJHG ERWK IRU WKH PRWKHUGDXJKWHU DQG IDWKHU GDXJKWHU UHODWLRQVKLS 7KH GHSHQGHQW YDULDEOH RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH VDOLHQFH LQYROYHG WKH GDXJKWHUn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f ,W KDV D UHVLGHQWLDO FDPSXV DQG KDV WUDGLWLRQDOO\ EHHQ FKDUDFWHUL]HG DV D FRQVHUYDWLYH VRXWKHUQ XQLYHUVLW\ )DOO HQUROOPHQW VWDWLVWLFV VKRZHG RYHU IHPDOH VWXGHQWV HQUROOHG DW WKH XQLYHUVLW\ FRPSULVLQJ b RI WKH WRWDO JUDGXDWH DQG XQGHUJUDGXDWH VWXGHQW HQUROOPHQW 7KHUH ZHUH RYHU IUHVKPHQ DQG VRSKRPRUH VWXGHQWV HQUROOHG FRPSULVLQJ b RI

PAGE 73

WKH WRWDO HQUROOPHQW )RUHLJQ VWXGHQWV DFFRXQWHG IRU b RI WKH VWXGHQW ERG\ UHSUHVHQWLQJ FRXQWULHV 0LQRULW\ VWXGHQWV DFFRXQWHG IRU DSSUR[LPDWHO\ b RI WKH HQUROOPHQW 1RQ)ORULGD UHVLGHQWV DFFRXQWHG IRU DQRWKHU b RI DOO VWXGHQWV HQUROOHG UHSUHVHQWLQJ HYHU\ VWDWH LQ WKH QDWLRQ 7KH YDVW PDMRULW\ RI VWXGHQWV HQUROOHG DW WKH XQLYHUVLW\ b ZHUH )ORULGD UHVLGHQWV ZLWK VWXGHQWV UHSUHVHQWLQJ HYHU\ FRXQW\ LQ )ORULGD )URP WKURXJK WKH DWWULWLRQ UDWH IRU IUHVKPHQ QRW UHWXUQLQJ WR WKH XQLYHUVLW\ IRU WKHLU VHFRQG VHPHVWHU ZDV DSSUR[LPDWHO\ b RI HDFK FODVV 8QLYHUVLW\ RI )ORULGD 2IILFH RI $FDGHPLF $IIDLUV f 7KH GHVLUHG PLQLPXP VDPSOH VL]H IRU WKLV VWXG\ ZDV VWXGHQWV 7R LQVXUH WKDW WKH VDPSOH ZDV UHSUHVHQWDWLYH RI WKH SRSXODWLRQ EDVH WKH FRPSRVLWLRQ RI WKH VDPSOH LQFOXGHG DSSUR[LPDWHO\ b IRUHLJQ VWXGHQWV DQG b PLQRULW\ VWXGHQWV 6DPSOLQJ 3URFHGXUH 7KH VDPSOH ZDV REWDLQHG WKURXJK XVH RI WKH 3V\FKRORJ\ 6WXGHQW 6XEMHFW 3RRO DW WKH 8QLYHUVLW\ RI )ORULGD 7KLV VXEMHFW SRRO FRQVLVWV RI DOO VWXGHQWV UHJLVWHUHG LQ LQWURGXFWRU\ SV\FKRORJ\ FRXUVHV 7KHVH VWXGHQWV ZHUH UHTXLUHG WR SDUWLFLSDWH DV VXEMHFWV LQ D VSHFLILHG QXPEHU RI KRXUV RI HPSLULFDO UHVHDUFK 3UHYLRXV XVH RI WKH VXEMHFW SRRO )XQGHUEXUN f UHYHDOHG D ZLGH YDULHW\ RI PDMRUV %RWK WUDGLWLRQDO DQG QRQWUDGLWLRQDO PDMRU FKRLFHV DV ZHOO DV PDQ\ XQGHFLGHG VWXGHQWV ZHUH UHSUHVHQWHG LQ WKH VXEMHFW SRRO

PAGE 74


PAGE 75

'HPRJUDSKLF ,QIRUPDWLRQ ,QIRUPDWLRQ ZDV REWDLQHG RQ WKH IROORZLQJ YDULDEOHV E\ PHDQV RI D GHPRJUDSKLF TXHVWLRQQDLUH LQ RUGHU WR ERWK OLPLW DQG DFFXUDWHO\ GHVFULEH WKH REWDLQHG VDPSOH VXEMHFWnV DJH PLQRULW\ VWDWXV 6FKRODVWLF $SWLWXGH 7HVW 6$7f VFRUH 86 FLWL]HQVKLS VRFLRHFRQRPLF VWDWXV PDULWDO VWDWXV PDMRU \HDU RI FROOHJH DQG LQWDFWQHVV RI IDPLO\ $SSHQGL[ $f 3DUHQWDO 5ROH 6WDWXV 3DUHQWDO UROH VWDWXV UHSUHVHQWLQJ WKH ILUVW FOXVWHU RI LQGHSHQGHQW YDULDEOHV ZDV DOVR DVVHVVHG LQ WKH GHPRJUDSKLF TXHVWLRQQDLUH $SSHQGL[ $f 7KLV VHW RI YDULDEOHV FRQVLVWHG RI WKH IROORZLQJ PDWHUQDO DQG SDWHUQDO HGXFDWLRQDO VWDWXV PDWHUQDO DQG SDWHUQDO UHODWLYH HGXFDWLRQDO VWDWXV PDWHUQDO LI HPSOR\HGf DQG SDWHUQDO RFFXSDWLRQDO SUHVWLJH OHYHO PDWHUQDO LI HPSOR\HGf DQG SDWHUQDO UHODWLYH RFFXSDWLRQDO SUHVWLJH OHYHO H[WHQW RI PDWHUQDO HPSOR\PHQW DQG PDWHUQDO LI HPSOR\HGf DQG SDWHUQDO RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH LQQRYDWLRQ 3DUHQWDO HGXFDWLRQDO VWDWXV 3DUHQWDO HGXFDWLRQDO VWDWXV ZDV DVVHVVHG E\ PHDQV RI ,WHPV DQG $SSHQGL[ $f LQ ZKLFK UHVSRQGHQWV ZHUH DVNHG WR LQGLFDWH WKH KLJKHVW JUDGH OHYHO RI VFKRROLQJ FRPSOHWHG DQG KLJKHVW GHJUHH HDUQHG E\ HDFK SDUHQW 6FRUHV UDQJHG IURP QR IRUPDO HGXFDWLRQf WKURXJK 3K' RU 0'f 3DUHQWVn UHODWLYH HGXFDWLRQDO VWDWXV ZDV WKHQ DVVHVVHG DV WKH GLIIHUHQFH EHWZHHQ WKH HGXFDWLRQDO OHYHO VFRUH RI WKH PRWKHU DQG WKH IDWKHU 'LIIHUHQFH VFRUHV UDQJHG IURP QR GLIIHUHQFH LQ

PAGE 76

HGXFDWLRQDO VWDWXVf WKURXJK H[WUHPH GLIIHUHQFH LQ HGXFDWLRQDO VWDWXVf RQ D FRQWLQXRXV VFDOH ,I WKH PRWKHUfV HGXFDWLRQ ZDV JUHDWHU WKDQ WKH IDWKHUnV WKH GLIIHUHQFH VFRUH ZDV FDOFXODWHG E\ DGGLQJ WKH GLIIHUHQFH WR LI WKH IDWKHUnV HGXFDWLRQ ZDV JUHDWHU WKDQ WKH PRWKHUnV WKH GLIIHUHQFH VFRUH ZDV FDOFXODWHG E\ VXEWUDFWLQJ WKH GLIIHUHQFH IURP 3DUHQWDO RFFXSDWLRQDO SUHVWLJH 3DUHQWDO HPSOR\PHQW SUHVWLJH OHYHO ZDV PHDVXUHG E\ PHDQV RI D VHULHV RI TXHVWLRQV ,WHPV $SSHQGL[ $f 7KHVH TXHVWLRQV ZHUH VLPLODU WR WKRVH XVHG E\ WKH 8QLWHG 6WDWHV %XUHDX RI WKH &HQVXV WR DVVLJQ RFFXSDWLRQDO FRGHV WR LQGLYLGXDOV 8QLWHG 6WDWHV 'HSDUWPHQW RI &RPPHUFH Ef )RU WKH SXUSRVHV RI WKLV VWXG\ WKHVH TXHVWLRQV ZHUH UHZRUGHG IURP UHTXHVWLQJ LQIRUPDWLRQ RQ RQHnV RZQ RFFXSDWLRQ WR UHTXHVWLQJ LQIRUPDWLRQ RQ RQHnV SDUHQWnV RFFXSDWLRQ :LWK NQRZOHGJH RI SDUHQWDO RFFXSDWLRQDO FRGH D SDUHQWDO RFFXSDWLRQDO SUHVWLJH VFRUH ZDV WKHQ DVVLJQHG XVLQJ WKH FRQWLQXRXV VFDOH f RI WKH 'XQFDQ 6RFLRHFRQRPLF ,QGH[ 6(,f GHYHORSHG E\ 'XQFDQ f 3DWHUQDO DQG PDWHUQDO SUHVWLJH OHYHO UHODWLYH WR HDFK RWKHU ZDV WKHQ DVVHVVHG DV WKH GLIIHUHQFH EHWZHHQ PDWHUQDO LI HPSOR\HGf DQG SDWHUQDO RFFXSDWLRQDO SUHVWLJH VFRUHV 7KHVH GLIIHUHQFH VFRUHV UDQJHG IURP ,I WKH PRWKHUnV RFFXSDWLRQDO SUHVWLJH VFRUH ZDV JUHDWHU WKDQ WKH IDWKHUnV WKH GLIIHUHQFH VFRUH ZDV GHULYHG E\ DGGLQJ WKH GLIIHUHQFH WR ,I WKH IDWKHUnV RFFXSDWLRQDO SUHVWLJH VFRUH ZDV JUHDWHU

PAGE 77

WKDQ WKH PRWKHUn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f LQ WHUPV RI ERWK WKH OHQJWK RI HPSOR\PHQW LQ QXPEHU RI \HDUVf DQG WKH H[WHQW RI HPSOR\PHQW IRU DQ\ JLYHQ \HDU IXOO WLPH 8SDUW WLPH Q R W HPSOR\HGf 7KHVH DGGLWLRQDO GDWD RQ PDWHUQDO HPSOR\PHQW ZHUH QHHGHG GXH WR WKH JUHDW YDULDWLRQ LQ HPSOR\PHQW SDWWHUQV RI PRWKHUV 7KH QXPEHU RI \HDUV HPSOR\HG IURP WKH WLPH WKH GDXJKWHU ZDV ERUQ XQWLO VKH ZDV DJH RU OHIW IRU FROOHJH ZDV FRPSXWHG DQG WKHQ PXOWLSOLHG E\ WKH H[WHQW RI HPSOR\PHQW IRU HDFK \HDU 7KLV UHVXOWHG LQ D FRQWLQXRXV VFRUH IRU H[WHQW RI PDWHUQDO HPSOR\PHQW UDQJLQJ IURP PRWKHU QHYHU ZRUNHG IURP WKH WLPH GDXJKWHU ZDV ERUQ XQWLO VKH ZDV DJH RU OHIW IRU FROOHJHf WKURXJK PRWKHU ZRUNHG IXOO WLPH IURP WKH WLPH WKH GDXJKWHU ZDV ERUQ XQWLO VKH ZDV DJH RU OHIW IRU FROOHJHf

PAGE 78

3DUHQWDO RFFXSDWLRQ LQQRYDWLRQ ,QQRYDWLRQ RI PDWHUQDO LI HPSOR\HGf DQG SDWHUQDO RFFXSDWLRQ ZDV GHWHUPLQHG E\ DVVHVVLQJ WKH H[WHQW WR ZKLFK WKH SDUHQW ZDV HPSOR\HG LQ DQ RFFXSDWLRQDO ILHOG FRQWDLQLQJ D PLQRULW\ RI VDPHVH[ LQFXPEHQWV 7KLV RFFXSDWLRQDO LQQRYDWLRQ LQGH[ ZDV FDOFXODWHG E\ XVLQJ WKH &HQVXV GDWD RQ 'HWDLOHG 2FFXSDWLRQV RI WKH &LYLOLDQ /DERU )RUFH E\ 6H[ 8QLWHG 6WDWHV 'HSDUWPHQW RI &RPPHUFH Df ,QQRYDWLYH RU VH[ DW\SLFDO RFFXSDWLRQV ZHUH FRQVLGHUHG WR EH WKRVH ILHOGV ZLWK OHVV WKHQ b VDPH VH[ LQFXPEHQWV WUDGLWLRQDO RFFXSDWLRQV ZHUH WKRVH ZLWK PRUH WKDQ b VDPH VH[ LQFXPEHQWV 2FFXSDWLRQDO LQQRYDWLRQ VFRUHV UDQJHG RQ D FRQWLQXRXV VFDOH IURP bb IRU ERWK PRWKHUV LI HPSOR\HGf DQG IDWKHUV 3DUHQWDO 5ROH 6WDWXV &RQVHTXHQFHV 3DUHQWDO UROH VWDWXV FRQVHTXHQFHV UHSUHVHQWHG WKH VHFRQG FOXVWHU RI LQGHSHQGHQW YDULDEOHV DVVHVVHG E\ PHDQV RI WKH GHPRJUDSKLF TXHVWLRQQDLUH ,QFOXGHG LQ WKLV FOXVWHU ZHUH SHUFHLYHG PDWHUQDO DQG SDWHUQDO PDULWDO UHODWLRQVKLS VDWLVIDFWLRQ SHUFHLYHG PDWHUQDO DQG SDWHUQDO JOREDO OLIH VDWLVIDFWLRQ SHUFHLYHG PDWHUQDO LI HPSOR\HGf DQG SDWHUQDO HPSOR\PHQW VDWLVIDFWLRQ SHUFHLYHG PDWHUQDO LI QRW HPSOR\HGf QRQHPSOR\HG VWDWXV VDWLVIDFWLRQ SHUFHLYHG SDWHUQDO VXSSRUW IRU PDWHUQDO LI HPSOR\HGf HPSOR\PHQW VWDWXV SHUFHLYHG SDWHUQDO VXSSRUW IRU PDWHUQDO LI QRW HPSOR\HGf QRQHPSOR\HG VWDWXV DQG SHUFHLYHG PDWHUQDO VXSSRUW IRU SDWHUQDO HPSOR\PHQW VWDWXV

PAGE 79

6XEMHFWV ZHUH UHTXHVWHG WR VKDUH WKHLU SHUFHSWLRQV RI WKHLU SDUHQWVf OHYHOV RI RFFXSDWLRQDO DQG JOREDO OLIH VDWLVIDFWLRQ DQG WKHLU SHUFHSWLRQV RI HDFK SDUHQWfV VXSSRUW IRU WKH RWKHUfV RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH 7KHVH PHDVXUHV ZHUH E\ QHFHVVLW\ UHODWLYHO\ XQLGLPHQVLRQDO DQG VLPSOLVWLF DV WKH VXEMHFWV REYLRXVO\ GLG QRW KDYH WKH VDPH ZHDOWK RI LQIRUPDWLRQ DERXW WKHVH LVVXHV DV GLG WKHLU SDUHQWV +RZHYHU WKH IRUPDW RI WKHVH PHDVXUHV SDUDOOHOHG WKDW XVHG LQ SUHYLRXV UHVHDUFK LQ WKLV DUHD $OWPDQ t *URVVPDQ &RODQJHOR 5RVHQWKDO t 'HWWUDDQ
PAGE 80

KLJKHU VFRUHV LQGLFDWLQJ JUHDWHU SHUFHLYHG SDUHQWDO PDULWDO UHODWLRQVKLS VDWLVIDFWLRQ 3DUHQWDO OLIH VDWLVIDFWLRQ $VVHVVPHQW RI GDXJKWHUVn SHUFHSWLRQV RI PDWHUQDO DQG SDWHUQDO JOREDO OLIH VDWLVIDFWLRQ ZDV GRQH E\ PHDQV RI RQH /LNHUW VFDOH LWHP IRU HDFK SDUHQW ,WHPV DQG $SSHQGL[ $f 5HVSRQVHV UDQJHG IURP /RZ VFRUHV LQGLFDWHG GLVDJUHHPHQW DQG KLJK VFRUHV LQGLFDWHG DJUHHPHQW ZLWK WKH VWDWHPHQW ,Q WHUPV RI KRZ VHH P\ PRWKHUIDWKHUf QRZ ZRXOG VD\ VKHKHf LV EDVLFDOO\ KDSS\ ZLWK WKH ZD\ VKHKHf OHDGV KHUKLVf OLIH 3DUHQWDO RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH VWDWXV VDWLVIDFWLRQ 'DXJKWHUVn SHUFHSWLRQV RI PDWHUQDO DQG SDWHUQDO RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH VWDWXV VDWLVIDFWLRQ ZHUH DVVHVVHG E\ PHDQV RI WKUHH /LNHUW VFDOH LWHPV ZLWK UHVSRQVHV UDQJLQJ IURP 7ZR TXHVWLRQV H[DPLQHG WKH RFFXSDWLRQDO VDWLVIDFWLRQ RI IDWKHUV DQG HPSOR\HG PRWKHUV E\ DVVHVVLQJ WKH GDXJKWHUnV SHUFHSWLRQV RI HDFK SDUHQWnV MRE VDWLVIDFWLRQ DQG MRE HQMR\PHQW ,WHPV DQG $SSHQGL[ $f 7KH WKLUG TXHVWLRQ PHDVXUHG SHUFHLYHG PDWHUQDO KDSSLQHVV ZLWK KHU GHJUHH RI LQYROYHPHQW LQ HPSOR\PHQW RXWVLGH RI WKH KRPH WKXV LQFOXGLQJ QRQHPSOR\HG DV ZHOO DV HPSOR\HG PRWKHUV LQ WKLV DVVHVVPHQW ,WHP $SSHQGL[ $f 'DXJKWHUV ZHUH DOVR DVNHG WR FKDUDFWHUL]H WKHLU PRWKHUnV ZRUN LQYROYHPHQW DQG VDWLVIDFWLRQ ,WHP $SSHQGL[ $f )RXU FDWHJRULHV ZHUH DYDLODEOH Df PRWKHU ZKR ZRUNHG DQG SUHIHUUHG QRW WR ZRUN Ef PRWKHU ZKR ZRUNHG DQG SUHIHUUHG WR

PAGE 81

ZRUN Ff PRWKHU ZKR GLG QRW ZRUN DQG SUHIHUUHG WR ZRUN DQG Gf PRWKHU ZKR GLG QRW ZRUN DQG SUHIHUUHG QRW WR ZRUN 7KH GDXJKWHUVn SODFHPHQW RI WKHLU PRWKHU LQ WKHVH FDWHJRULHV ZDV VFRUHG DV IROORZV %RWK HPSOR\HG DQG QRQHUDSOR\HG PRWKHUV ZKR ZHUH SHUFHLYHG DV VDWLVILHG FDWHJRULHV E DQG Gf ZHUH VFRUHG DV DQG ERWK HPSOR\HG DQG QRQHPSOR\HG PRWKHUV ZKR ZHUH SHUFHLYHG DV QRW VDWLVILHG FDWHJRULHV D DQG Ff ZHUH VFRUHG DV ([DPLQLQJ WKH VFDOH YDOXHV RI RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH VWDWXV VDWLVIDFWLRQ VFRUHV IRU IDWKHUV HPSOR\HG PRWKHUV DQG IRU QRQHUDSOR\HG PRWKHUV LQGLFDWHG WKH IROORZLQJ RYHUDOO VFDOH UDQJHV IRU HDFK JURXS )DWKHUVn RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH VDWLVIDFWLRQ VFRUHV UDQJHG RQ D FRQWLQXXP IURP ZLWK KLJKHU VFRUHV LQGLFDWLQJ JUHDWHU SDWHUQDO MRE VDWLVIDFWLRQ (PSOR\HG PRWKHUVn RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH VDWLVIDFWLRQ VFRUHV UDQJHG RQ D FRQWLQXXP IURP ZLWK KLJKHU VFRUHV LQGLFDWLQJ JUHDWHU PDWHUQDO RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH VWDWXV VDWLVIDFWLRQ 1RQHUDSOR\HG PRWKHUVn VDWLVIDFWLRQ ZLWK WKHLU QRQHPSOR\HG VWDWXV UDQJHG RQ D FRQWLQXXP IURP ZLWK KLJKHU VFRUHV LQGLFDWLQJ JUHDWHU VDWLVIDFWLRQ ZLWK WKHLU QRQHPSOR\HG VWDWXV 3DUHQWDO RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH VWDWXV VXSSRUW 0DWHUQDO VXSSRUW RI SDWHUQDO RFFXSDWLRQDO VWDWXV ZDV DVVHVVHG E\ D VLQJOH LWHP XVLQJ D ILYHSRLQW /LNHUWW\SH VFDOH ,WHP $SSHQGL[ $f 6FRUHV UDQJHG IURP ZLWK KLJKHU VFRUHV

PAGE 82

LQGLFDWLQJ JUHDWHU PDWHUQDO VXSSRUW IRU SDWHUQDO RFFXSDWLRQDO VWDWXV 3UHYLRXV UHVHDUFK KDV LQGLFDWHG WZR DVSHFWV RI SDWHUQDO VXSSRUW IRU PDWHUQDO HPSOR\PHQW DWWLWXGLQDO VXSSRUW DQG EHKDYLRUDO VXSSRUW LQ WKH IRUP RI SDUWLFLSDWLRQ LQ GRPHVWLF DFWLYLWLHV %RWK RI WKHVH DVSHFWV ZHUH LQFOXGHG DV LWHPV LQ WKLV VWXG\ ZLWK D ILYHSRLQW /LNHUWW\SH LWHP GHYHORSHG IRU HDFK DUHD ,WHPV DQG $SSHQGL[ $f ,Q DGGLWLRQ D VLQJOH ILYHSRLQW VFDOH /LNHUWW\SH LWHP GHVLJQHG WR DVVHVV SDWHUQDO VXSSRUW IRU OHYHO RI PDWHUQDO HPSOR\PHQW LQYROYHPHQW ZDV XVHG WR PHDVXUH SDWHUQDO VXSSRUW IRU QRQHUDSOR\HG DV ZHOO DV HPSOR\HG PRWKHUV ,WHP $SSHQGL[ $f 6FRUHV RQ SDWHUQDO VXSSRUW IRU HPSOR\HG PRWKHUV UDQJHG IURP ZLWK KLJKHU VFRUHV LQGLFDWLQJ JUHDWHU SDWHUQDO VXSSRUW RI PDWHUQDO HPSOR\PHQW 6FRUHV RQ SDWHUQDO VXSSRUW IRU QRQHUDSOR\HG PRWKHUV UDQJHG IURP ZLWK KLJKHU VFRUHV LQGLFDWLQJ JUHDWHU SDWHUQDO VXSSRUW RI PDWHUQDO QRQHUDSOR\HG VWDWXV 7KH 3DUHQW'DXJKWHU 5HODWLRQVKLS 7KH SDUHQWGDXJKWHU UHODWLRQVKLS YDULDEOH UHSUHVHQWLQJ WKH WKLUG IDFHW RI SDUHQWDO LQIOXHQFH ZDV PHDVXUHG E\ WKUHH VFDOHV RI WKH /LIH ,QWHUSHUVRQDO +LVWRU\ (QTXLU\ /,3+(f 7KHVH VFDOHV ZHUH XVHG WR DVVHVV WKH GDXJKWHUfV SHUFHLYHG GLVVDWLVIDFWLRQ ZLWK WKH PRWKHUGDXJKWHU DQG IDWKHUGDXJKWHU UHODWLRQVKLS LQ WHUUDV RI WKH DPRXQW RI FRQWURO DIIHFWLRQ DQG LQFOXVLRQ H[SUHVVHG

PAGE 83

7KH /,3+( LV D YHUVLRQ RI WKH )XQGDPHQWDO ,QWHUSHUVRQDO 5HODWLRQVKLS 2ULHQWDWLRQ ),52f VFDOHV GHYHORSHG E\ 6FKW] f 7KH /,3+( ZDV VHOHFWHG IRU XVH LQ WKLV VWXG\ EHFDXVH LW ZDV GHVLJQHG WR PHDVXUH WKH UHODWLRQVKLS EHWZHHQ SDUHQW DQG FKLOG IURP WKH SRLQW RI YLHZ RI WKH FKLOG DIWHU WKH FKLOG KDV EHFRPH DQ DGXOW 7KH UDWLRQDOH IRU XVLQJ D FXUUHQW VXEMHFWLYH DVVHVVPHQW RI SDVW SDUHQWFKLOG LQWHUDFWLRQV LQ WKLV VWXG\ ZDV WKUHHIROG )LUVW WKH GDXJKWHUnV SKHQRPHQRORJLFDO SHUVSHFWLYH PD\ EH WKH PRVW UHOHYDQW LQ DVVHVVLQJ SDVW SDUHQWDO LQIOXHQFHV RQ FXUUHQW RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH VDOLHQFH JLYHQ WKDW WKH GDXJKWHUn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t &KDVH/DQVGDOH f (DFK LWHP LQ WKH /,3+( LV VWDWHG LQ *XWWPDQ VFDOH IRUP 7KH GHJUHH RI GLVVDWLVIDFWLRQ LI DQ\ ZLWK ZKDW LQGLYLGXDOV UHFDOO RI WKHLU PRWKHUVn RU IDWKHUVn EHKDYLRUV RU IHHOLQJV LV UDWHG RQ D VL[SRLQW VFDOH (DFK UHODWLRQVKLS LV PHDVXUHG LQ

PAGE 84

WHUUDV RI WKH GLPHQVLRQV RI FRQWURO DIIHFWLRQ DQG LQFOXVLRQ 7KH /,3+( FRQVLVWV RI LWHUDV IRU HDFK SDUHQW IRU D FRPELQHG WRWDO RI LWHPV 7KH /,3+( KDV VL[ VFDOHV FRPSULVHG RI QLQH LWHPV HDFK RQ ZKLFK WKH VXEMHFWV UDWH HDFK SDUHQW 6FDOH VFRUHV UDQJH IURP LQGLFDWLQJ WKH GHJUHH RI GLVVDWLVIDFWLRQ ZLWK SHUFHLYHG SDUHQWDO EHKDYLRU DQG IHHOLQJV 7KH IROORZLQJ SDUHQWGDXJKWHU UHODWLRQVKLS DUHDV DUH DVVHVVHG LQFOXVLRQ EHKDYLRU FRQWURO EHKDYLRU LQFOXVLRQ IHHOLQJV FRQWURO IHHOLQJV DIIHFWLRQ DQG SDUHQWDO GLVDSSURYDO )RU WKLV VWXG\ RQO\ WKH LQFOXVLRQ EHKDYLRU FRQWURO EHKDYLRU DQG DIIHFWLRQ VFDOHV ZHUH LQFOXGHG GXH WR WKHLU IRFXV RQ RYHUW SDUHQWDO EHKDYLRUV UDWKHU WKDQ GDXJKWHUf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fV GLVVDWLVIDFWLRQ ZLWK WKH DPRXQW DQG TXDOLW\ RI ORYH VKH UHFHLYHG IURP KHU SDUHQWV %HFDXVH SDUHQWDO EHKDYLRU DQG IHHOLQJV DUH GLIILFXOW WR GLVWLQJXLVK LQ WKLV DUHD WKH\ DUH LQFOXGHG LQ RQH VFDOH $

PAGE 85

KLJK VFRUH LQGLFDWHV IHHOLQJ XQORYHG E\ WKH JLYHQ SDUHQW ,Q WKLV VWXG\ GDXJKWHUVn SHUFHSWLRQV RI ERWK PRWKHUV DQG IDWKHUV ZHUH DVVHVVHG RQ WKHVH WKUHH VFDOHV 7KH FRHIILFLHQWV RI LQWHUQDO FRQVLVWHQF\ IRU DOO WKH VFDOHV RI WKH /,3+( DUH RU DERYH 7KLV UHSURGXFLELOLW\ PHDVXUH WKH DSSURSULDWH UHOLDELOLW\ PHDVXUH IRU D *XWWPDQ W\SH VFDOH LQGLFDWHV WKDW b RI DOO LWHP UHVSRQVHV DUH SUHGLFWDEOH IURP NQRZOHGJH RI WKH VFDOH VFRUHV $OO VFDOHV KDYH UHODWLYHO\ KLJK LQWHUFRUUH DWLRQV LQGLFDWLQJ QRQn LQGHSHQGHQFH RI VFDOHV )DFWRU DQDO\VLV H[WUDFWHG WZR IDFWRUV IURP WKH /,3+( RQH IDFWRU LQFOXGHG DOO VFDOHV LQYROYLQJ PRWKHU DQG WKH RWKHU IDFWRU LQFOXGHG DOO VFDOHV LQYROYLQJ IDWKHU 7KLV LQGLFDWHV WKDW RYHUDOO OHYHO RI GLVVDWLVIDFWLRQ ZLWK WKH UHODWLRQVKLS ZLWK PRWKHU RU IDWKHU DUH WKH WZR PRVW FOHDUO\ GLIIHUHQWLDWHG FRQVWUXFWV 6FKW] f 'DXJKWHUnV 2FFXSDWLRQDO 5ROH 6DOLHQFH 7KH GHSHQGHQW YDULDEOH GDXJKWHUnV RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH VDOLHQFH ZDV PHDVXUHG E\ WKH WZR RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH VXEVFDOHV RI WKH /LIH 5ROH 6DOLHQFH 6FDOHV /566f 7KH /566 ZHUH GHVLJQHG WR DVVHVV SHUVRQDO H[SHFWDWLRQV FRQFHUQLQJ RFFXSDWLRQDO PDULWDO DQG SDUHQWDO UROHV IRU LQGLYLGXDOV ERWK SULRU WR DQG GXULQJ HQDFWPHQW RI WKHVH UROHV $UDDWHD HW DO f 7KH /566 KDV EHHQ QRUPHG RQ XQGHUJUDGXDWH PDOH DQG IHPDOH FROOHJH VWXGHQWV DFDGHPLF ZRPHQ DQG PDUULHG FRXSOHV ZKR DUH SDUHQWV 7KHUHIRUH WKH VFDOH DSSHDUHG WR EH

PAGE 86

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f

PAGE 87

'DWD &ROOHFWLRQ 3URFHGXUHV %\ PHDQV RI WKH ODUJH JURXS WHVWLQJ SURFHGXUH WKH LQVWUXPHQWV ZHUH DGPLQLVWHUHG GXULQJ FODVV WLPH WR ILYH HQWLUH FODVVHV RI LQWURGXFWRU\ SV\FKRORJ\ VWXGHQWV DW WKH EHJLQQLQJ RI VXPPHU DQG IDOO VHPHVWHUV 6HYHUDO RWKHU H[SHULPHQWHUVn LQVWUXPHQWV ZHUH DOVR JLYHQ DW WKLV WLPH DQG WKH RUGHU RI DGPLQLVWUDWLRQ RI LQVWUXPHQWV ZDV YDULHG DFURVV FODVVHV 6WXGHQWV ZHUH UHTXLUHG WR FRPSOHWH DOO WKH LQYHQWRULHV LQ RUGHU WR UHFHLYH WKH KRXU RI FUHGLW IURP WKHLU LQVWUXFWRU DV VXEMHFWV LQ HPSLULFDO UHVHDUFK 6WXGHQWV ZHUH JLYHQ ZULWWHQ LQVWUXFWLRQV RQ WKH QDWXUH RI WKH VWXG\ DQG WKH SURFHGXUHV IRU FRPSOHWLQJ WKH LQYHQWRULHV $SSHQGL[ %f 7KH\ ZHUH HQFRXUDJHG WR UHDG WKH LQVWUXFWLRQV FDUHIXOO\ SULRU WR EHJLQQLQJ WR DQVZHU TXHVWLRQV &RPSXWHUL]HG DQVZHU VKHHWV ZHUH XVHG IRU TXHVWLRQV /566 DQG /,3+(f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

PAGE 88

7KH H[SHULPHQWDO SDUWLFLSDWLRQ VLJQXS VKHHW FRQWDLQHG WKH IROORZLQJ LQIRUPDWLRQ WLWOH RI WKH VWXG\ GHVFULSWLRQ RI WKH VWXG\ WLPHV DQG ORFDWLRQ RI WKH VWXG\ DQG VSHFLILF UHTXLUHPHQWV IRU SDUWLFLSDWLRQ 7KH EULHI GHVFULSWLRQ RI WKH VWXG\ UHDG
PAGE 89

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f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

PAGE 90

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f H[DPLQLQJ WKH DPRXQW RI YDULDWLRQ LQ WKH GHSHQGHQW YDULDEOH DFFRXQWHG IRU E\ WKH PRGHO UHODWLYH WR RWKHU PRGHOV ZLWK HTXDO QXPEHUV RI YDULDEOHV Ef H[DPLQLQJ WKH LQFUHPHQW LQ DPRXQW RI YDULDWLRQ LQ WKH GHSHQGHQW YDULDEOH DFFRXQWHG IRU UHODWLYH WR PRGHOV ZLWK IHZHU YDULDEOHV DQG Ff WKH PRGHOnV FRUUHVSRQGHQFH WR WKH WKHRUHWLFDO IUDPHZRUN SURSRVHG IRU WKLV VWXG\ 'HVFULSWLYH VWDWLVWLFV ZHUH FDOFXODWHG RQ GHPRJUDSKLF GDWD FROOHFWHG VXFK DV VXEMHFWnV DJH SDUHQWDO 6(6 PDMRU PLQRULW\ VWDWXV 86 FLWL]HQVKLS DQG \HDU DW FROOHJH DQG ZHUH XVHG WR GHVFULEH WKH VDPSOH 0HWKRGRORJLFDO /LPLWDWLRQV 7KLV GHVFULSWLYH VWXG\ KDG VHYHUDO PHWKRGRORJLFDO OLPLWDWLRQV 7KHVH OLPLWDWLRQV FRQFHUQHG WKH IROORZLQJ SRSXODWLRQ VDPSOH DQG VDPSOLQJ SURFHGXUHV GHVLJQ DQG LQVWUXPHQWDWLRQ

PAGE 91

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f RU LQ RUGHU WR FRQWURO IRU WKH SRWHQWLDO LPSDFW RI FRQIRXQGLQJ YDULDEOHV VXFK DV DJH HGXFDWLRQDO DWWDLQPHQW IDPLO\ VWUXFWXUH DQG FXUUHQW PDULWDO VWDWXV RQ ZRPHQfV RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH VDOLHQFH ,Q DGGLWLRQ WKHUH PD\ KDYH EHHQ VDPSOH ELDV UHVXOWLQJ IURP VHOHFWLRQ RI VXEMHFWV IURP D SV\FKRORJ\ VWXGHQW VXEMHFW SRRO +RZHYHU WKLV VXEMHFW SRRO KDG EHHQ VKRZQ WR HQFRPSDVV D ZLGH YDULHW\ RI PDMRUV DQG WKH PDMRULW\ RI ORZHU GLYLVLRQ FROOHJH VWXGHQWV KDYH QRW \HW RIILFLDOO\ VHOHFWHG DQ XSSHU

PAGE 92

GLYLVLRQ FROOHJH PDMRU )XUWKHUPRUH WKHUH PD\ KDYH EHHQ VDPSOH ELDV LQ WKH VLJQXS VKHHW VXEVDPSOH RI VXEMHFWV EHFDXVH SDUWLFLSDQWV ZHUH VHOIVHOHFWHG 7KH H[ SRVW IDFWR GHVLJQ XVHG LQ WKLV VWXG\ UHTXLUHG VXEMHFWV WR UHSRUW WKHLU FXUUHQW SHUFHSWLRQV RI WKHLU SDUHQWVn UROH VWDWXV DQG UROH VWDWXV VDWLVIDFWLRQ DV ZHOO DV WKHLU SHUFHSWLRQV RI WKHLU UHODWLRQVKLS ZLWK HDFK SDUHQW ZKHQ WKH VXEMHFWV ZHUH FKLOGUHQ ,W ZDV DVVXPHG WKDW WKH VXEMHFWVn FXUUHQW VXEMHFWLYH SHUFHSWLRQV DQG DVVHVVPHQWV RI SDUHQWV LH D SKHQRPHQRORJLFDO SHUVSHFWLYHf ZRXOG EH PRUH SRZHUIXO LQ SUHGLFWLQJ WKHLU FXUUHQW DWWLWXGHV EHOLHIV DQG YDOXHV DERXW WKH RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH WKDQ ZRXOG PRUH REMHFWLYH PHDVXUHV RI SDUHQWDO UROH VWDWXV SDUHQWDO UROH VWDWXV VDWLVIDFWLRQ DQG SDUHQWGDXJKWHU UHODWLRQVKLS TXDOLW\ 1HYHUWKHOHVV SDUHQWDO LQIOXHQFHV PLJKW EH PHDVXUHG PRUH REMHFWLYHO\ WKURXJK SDUHQWDO VHOIUHSRUW RU GLUHFW REVHUYDWLRQ RI SDUHQWFKLOG UHODWLRQVKLS TXDOLW\ EHFDXVH WKH VXEMHFWVn VHOIUHSRUW RI FRQGLWLRQV LQ WKHLU IDPLOLHV PD\ QRW KDYH D KLJK FRUUHVSRQGHQFH ZLWK REMHFWLYH UHDOLW\ 7KLV ZDV DQ H[ SRVW IDFWR GHVFULSWLYH VWXG\ ZKLFK UHOLHG RQ WZR HVWDEOLVKHG LQVWUXPHQWV WR PHDVXUH WKH SV\FKRORJLFDO YDULDEOHV RI VXEMHFWVn RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH VDOLHQFH DQG SDUHQW GDXJKWHU UHODWLRQVKLS VDWLVIDFWLRQ ,Q DGGLWLRQ WKH VWXG\ UHOLHG RQ D GHPRJUDSKLF TXHVWLRQQDLUH GHVLJQHG E\ WKH H[SHULPHQWHU WR DVVHVV SHUFHLYHG SDUHQWDO UROH VWDWXV DQG UROH VDWLVIDFWLRQ 2EYLRXVO\ WKH DFFXUDF\ DQG YDOLGLW\ RI

PAGE 93

PHDVXUHPHQW RI WKH LQGHSHQGHQW DQG GHSHQGHQW YDULDEOHV ZDV GHSHQGHQW RQ WKH UHOLDELOLW\ DQG YDOLGLW\ RI WKHVH LQVWUXPHQWV 7KHUHIRUH PHDVXUHPHQW HUURU RI WKH LQVWUXPHQWV PLJKW KDYH LPSDFWHG RQ WKH YDOLGLW\ UHOLDELOLW\ DQG VLJQLILFDQFH RI WKH UHVXOWV ,Q DGGLWLRQ EHFDXVH WKH WKUHH LQVWUXPHQWV ZHUH LQ D VHOIUHSRUW IRUPDW VRFLDO GHVLUDELOLW\ UHVSRQVH VHW HUURUV ZHUH SRVVLEOH )RU H[DPSOH VXEMHFWnV UHVSRQVH ELDV LQ UHSRUWLQJ SDUHQWDO VDWLVIDFWLRQ DQG VXSSRUW YDULDEOHV RU SDUHQWGDXJKWHU UHODWLRQVKLS VDWLVIDFWLRQ FRXOG HIIHFW WKH UHOLDELOLW\ YDOLGLW\ DQG VLJQLILFDQFH RI WKH UHVXOWV

PAGE 94

&+$37(5 ,9 5(68/76 7R H[DPLQH ZKHWKHU FHUWDLQ SDUHQWDO UROH PRGHOLQJ LQIOXHQFHV H[SODLQHG YDULDWLRQ LQ GDXJKWHUn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bf IUHVKPHQ DQG bf VRSKRPRUHV DV PLJKW EH H[SHFWHG RI VWXGHQWV WDNLQJ DQ LQWURGXFWRU\ SV\FKRORJ\ FRXUVH 7DEOH SUHVHQWV D IUHTXHQF\ GLVWULEXWLRQ RI WKH YDULDEOHV XVHG WR GHVFULEH WKH VWXGHQWV LQ WKLV VWXG\ DJH \HDU DW FROOHJH PLQRULW\ VWDWXV PDMRU

PAGE 95

DQG 8QLWHG 6WDWHV FLWL]HQVKLS 7ZHQW\VHYHQ ZRPHQ bf ZHUH PLQRULW\ VWXGHQWV DQG HLJKW ZRPHQ bf ZHUH IRUHLJQ VWXGHQWV 7KHVH SURSRUWLRQV DUH FRQVLVWHQW ZLWK WKH IUHTXHQFLHV ZLWK ZKLFK WKHVH FDWHJRULHV DUH IRXQG LQ WKH JHQHUDO SRSXODWLRQ RI VWXGHQWV DW WKH 8QLYHUVLW\ RI )ORULGD 7KH DJH GLVWULEXWLRQ RI WKH VDPSOH ZDV DV IROORZV VWXGHQWV bf ZHUH DJH bf ZHUH DJH bf ZHUH DJH DQG bf ZHUH DJH ,QWHUHVWLQJO\ D GLYHUVLW\ RI PDMRU FKRLFHV ZDV UHSUHVHQWHG LQ WKH REWDLQHG VDPSOH ZRPHQ bf ZHUH XQGHFLGHG UHJDUGLQJ WKHLU PDMRU ZRPHQ bf KDG VHOHFWHG D WUDGLWLRQDO PDMRU ZRPHQ bf KDG VHOHFWHG D QHXWUDO PDMRU DQG ZRPHQ bf KDG VHOHFWHG D QRQWUDGLWLRQDO PDMRU 1RQWUDGLWLRQDO PDMRU FKRLFHV ZHUH WKRVH LQ ZKLFK OHVV WKDQ b RI WKH LQGLYLGXDOV FXUUHQWO\ ZRUNLQJ LQ WKDW ILHOG ZHUH ZRPHQ 7UDGLWLRQDO PDMRU FKRLFHV ZHUH WKRVH LQ ZKLFK PRUH WKDQ b RI WKH LQGLYLGXDOV FXUUHQWO\ ZRUNLQJ LQ WKDW ILHOG ZHUH ZRPHQ 1HXWUDO PDMRU FKRLFHV ZHUH WKRVH LQ ZKLFK bb RI WKH LQGLYLGXDOV FXUUHQWO\ ZRUNLQJ LQ WKDW ILHOG ZHUH ZRPHQ 7KH VWXGHQWVf 6FKRODVWLF $SWLWXGH 7HVW 6$7f VFRUHV UDQJHG IURP ZLWK D PHDQ VFRUH RI DQG VWDQGDUG GHYLDWLRQ RI %HFDXVH WKH PHDQ DQG VWDQGDUG GHYLDWLRQ ZHUH FDOFXODWHG IRU 6$7 VFRUHV UDWKHU WKDQ IUHTXHQF\ GLVWULEXWLRQ WKLV VDPSOH GHVFULSWRU YDULDEOH LV QRW SUHVHQWHG LQ 7DEOH 7KHVH 6$7 VFRUHV ZHUH ZLWKLQ WKH H[SHFWHG UDQJH IRU FROOHJH VWXGHQWV

PAGE 96

7DEOH )UHTXHQF\ 'LVWULEXWLRQV RI 'HVFULSWLYH 9DULDEOHV IRU WKH 7RWDO 6DPSOH DQG WKH (PSOR\HG DQG 1RQHUDSORYHG 0RWKHUV 6XEVDUDSOH V 7RWDO 6DPSOH (PSOR\HG 0RWKHUV 1RQHUDSORYHG 0RWKHUV 1 6XEVDPSOH Q 6XEVDPSOH Q $JH bB bB bB B B B 8) )UHVKPHQ 6RSKRPRUH 0LQRULW\ 1RQPLQRULW\ 0LQRULW\ -! B 0D LRU 8QGHFLGHG 7UDGLWLRQDO 1HXWUDO 1RQWUDGLWLRQDO 86 86 FLWL]HQ )RUHLJQ VWXGHQW

PAGE 97

'HVFULSWLYH VWDWLVWLFV IRU WKH LQGHSHQGHQW YDULDEOHV LH SDUHQWDO UROH DWWULEXWHVf DQG WKH GHSHQGHQW YDULDEOH LH GDXJKWHUnV RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH VDOLHQFHf ZHUH DOVR FDOFXODWHG DQG DUH UHSRUWHG LQ 7DEOH 7KH PHDQ OHYHO RI RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH VDOLHQFH IRU WKH FROOHJH ZRPHQ LQ WKH WRWDO VDPSOH ZDV ZLWK D VWDQGDUG GHYLDWLRQ RI LQGLFDWLQJ D ZLGH GLVWULEXWLRQ RI VFRUHV RQ WKH GHSHQGHQW YDULDEOH 7KH PDMRULW\ RI ZRPHQ QHLWKHU DJUHHG RU GLVDJUHHG RU DJUHHG WKDW WKH RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH LV LPSRUWDQW WR WKHP )RU WKH WRWDO VDPSOH RI FROOHJH ZRPHQ RI WKHVH ZRPHQ bf KDG PRWKHUV ZKR ZHUH QRQHUDSOR\HG DQG RI WKHVH ZRPHQ bf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

PAGE 98

7DEOH 'HVFULSWLYH 6WDWLVWLFV IRU 'HSHQGHQW DQG ,QGHSHQGHQW 9DULDEOHV IRU WKH 7RWDO 6DPSOH DQG WKH (PSOR\HG DQG 1RQHPSOR\HG 0RWKHUV 6 X E V D cQ S H V 7RWDO 1 9DULDEOH 9DULDEOH DQG 6FDOH 0 i 6DOLHQFH f 0DWHUQDO HPSOR\PHQW H[WHQW f 0DWHUQDO HGXFDWLRQ OHYHO f 3DWHUQDO HGXFDWLRQ OHYHO f 3DUHQWnV UHODWLYH HGXFDWLRQ OHYHO f 0DWHUQDO SUHVWLJH f RFFXSDWLRQ OHYHO 3DWHUQDO SUHVWLJH f RFFXSDWLRQ OHYHO 3DUHQWnV SUHVWLJH f UHODWLYH OHYHO 0DWHUQDO RFFXSDWLRQ LQQRYDWLRQ f 3DWHUQDO RFFXSDWLRQ LQQRYDWLRQ f 0DWHUQDO RFFXSDWLRQ VDWLVIDFWLRQ f (PSOR\HG 1RQHPSOR\HG QB QB 0 6' 0 6'

PAGE 99

7DEOH FRQWLQXHG 9DULDEOH DQG 9DULDEOH 6FDOH 7RWDO 1 0 6-f (PSOR\HG Q 0 6' 1RQHUQSOR\HG QB 0 6' 3DWHUQDO RFFXSDWLRQ VDWLVIDFWLRQ f 0DWHUQDO QRQHUQSOR\HG UROH VDWLVIDFWLRQ f 3DWHUQDO VXSSRUW RI PDWHUQDO HPSOR\PHQW f 0DWHUQDO VXSSRUW RI SDWHUQDO HPSOR\PHQW f 3DWHUQDO VXSSRUW RI PDWHUQDO QRQHPSOR\PHQW f 0DWHUQDO OLIH VDWLVIDFWLRQ f 3DWHUQDO OLIH 6DWLVIDFWLRQ f 0DWHUQDO PDULWDO VDWLVIDFWLRQ f 3DWHUQDO PDULWDO VDWLVIDFWLRQ f 0RWKHUGDXJKWHU UHODWLRQVKLS GLVVDWLVIDFWLRQ f )DWKHUGDXJKWHU UHODWLRQVKLS GLVVDWLVIDFWLRQ f

PAGE 100

\HDUV DQG VWDQGDUG GHYLDWLRQ RI \HDUV 7KH PHDQ PDWHUQDO HGXFDWLRQDO OHYHO ZDV \HDUV WKH HTXLYDOHQW RI DQ DVVRFLDWHV GHJUHH RU WZR \HDUV RI FROOHJH ZLWK D UDQJH RI IURP \HDUV DQG VWDQGDUG GHYLDWLRQ RI \HDUV 2Q D VFDOH IURP WKH PHDQ SUHVWLJH OHYHO RI SDWHUQDO RFFXSDWLRQ ZDV ZLWK D UDQJH IURP WR DQG VWDQGDUG GHYLDWLRQ RI 7KLV LQGLFDWHV WKDW WKH PDMRULW\ RI WKH REWDLQHG VDPSOH FDPH IURP D PLGGOH WR XSSHUPLGGOH FODVV EDFNJURXQG 7KH PHDQ OHYHO RI SDWHUQDO RFFXSDWLRQDO LQQRYDWLRQ ZDV b ZLWK D VWDQGDUG GHYLDWLRQ RI b 7KLV LQGLFDWHV D PDMRULW\ RI IDWKHUV ZHUH LQ VH[ UROH WUDGLWLRQDO RFFXSDWLRQV WKRVH RFFXSDWLRQV FRPSRVHG RI JUHDWHU WKDQ b PDOHVf RU QHXWUDO RFFXSDWLRQV WKRVH RFFXSDWLRQV FRPSRVHG RI bb PDOHVf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

PAGE 101

7KLV VXEVDPSOH RI ZRPHQ ZLWK HPSOR\HG PRWKHUV FRQVLVWHG RI VXEMHFWV DQG LQFOXGHG PLQRULW\ VWXGHQWV bf DQG IRUHLJQ VWXGHQWV bf 7KLV VXEVDUDSOH ZDV FRPSRVHG RI bf IUHVKPHQ DQG bf VRSKRPRUHV 7KH DJH GLVWULEXWLRQ RI VWXGHQWV LQ WKLV VDPSOH ZDV DV IROORZV bf ZHUH \HDUV RI DJH bf ZHUH \HDUV bf ZHUH \HDUV DQG bf ZHUH \HDUV RI DJH )UHTXHQFLHV RI PDMRU FKRLFHV LQFOXGHG bf XQGHFLGHG bf WUDGLWLRQDO FKRLFH bf QHXWUDO FKRLFH DQG bf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

PAGE 102

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b SUHVWLJH OHYHO 0DWHUQDO RFFXSDWLRQDO LQQRYDWLRQ UDQJHG IURP bb ZLWK D PHDQ RI b DQG D VWDQGDUG GHYLDWLRQ RI b 7KLV LQGLFDWHV WKDW WKH PDMRULW\ RI ZRUNLQJ PRWKHUV ZHUH LQ VH[ UROH WUDGLWLRQDO RFFXSDWLRQV LH WKRVH RFFXSDWLRQV ZKLFK DUH FRPSRVHG RI PRUH WKDQ b ZRPHQf RU LQ QHXWUDO RFFXSDWLRQV LH WKRVH RFFXSDWLRQV ZKLFK DUH FRPSRVHG RI bb ZRPHQf 7KH PHDQ SDWHUQDO HGXFDWLRQDO OHYHO LQ WKLV VXEVDUDSOH ZDV \HDUV WKH HTXLYDOHQW RI D EDFKHORUnV GHJUHH 7KH PHDQ SDWHUQDO RFFXSDWLRQDO SUHVWLJH OHYHO ZDV 7KH SDWHUQDO RFFXSDWLRQDO LQQRYDWLRQ VFRUHV LQ WKLV VXEVDUDSOH RI ZRPHQ UDQJHG IURP bb ZLWK D PHDQ RI b DQG VWDQGDUG GHYLDWLRQ RI b LQGLFDWLQJ WKDW WKH PDMRULW\ RI IDWKHUV ZHUH LQ WUDGLWLRQDO PDOHGRPLQDWHG SURIHVVLRQV RU SURIHVVLRQV ZLWK DSSUR[LPDWHO\ HTXDO QXPEHUV RI PDOHV DQG IHPDOHV

PAGE 103

7KH 1RQHPSOR\HG 0RWKHUV 6XEVDPSOH ,Q DGGLWLRQ WR H[DPLQLQJ FKDUDFWHULVWLFV RI WKH VDPSOH DV D ZKROH DQG RI WKH VXEVDPSOH RI ZRPHQ ZLWK HPSOR\HG PRWKHUV WKH FKDUDFWHULVWLFV RI WKH VXEVDUDSOH RI ZRPHQ ZKRVH PRWKHUV ZHUH QHYHU HPSOR\HG ZHUH DOVR H[DPLQHG DQG DUH SUHVHQWHG LQ 7DEOHV DQG 7KH IUHTXHQF\ GLVWULEXWLRQV RI WKH VDPSOH GHVFULSWLYH YDULDEOHV DUH UHSRUWHG ILUVW IRU WKLV VXEVDPSOH 7DEOH f IROORZHG E\ SUHVHQWDWLRQ RI WKH PHDQV DQG VWDQGDUG GHYLDWLRQV IRU WKH SDUHQWDO UROH DWWULEXWH YDULDEOHV DQG WKH GHSHQGHQW YDULDEOH GDXJKWHUfV RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH VDOLHQFH 7DEOH f 7KH REWDLQHG VXEVDPSOH RI VXEMHFWV ZKRVH PRWKHUV KDG QHYHU ZRUNHG ZKLOH WKH\ ZHUH JURZLQJ XS LQFOXGHG PLQRULW\ VWXGHQWV bf DQG IRUHLJQ VWXGHQWV bf 7KLV LV b IHZHU PLQRULW\ VWXGHQWV DQG b IHZHU IRUHLJQ VWXGHQWV WKDQ LQ WKH RWKHU VWXGHQW VXEVDPSOH 7KLV VXEVDUDSOH ZDV FRPSRVHG RI bf IUHVKPHQ DQG bf VRSKRPRUHV 7KH DJH GLVWULEXWLRQ ZDV DV IROORZV bf ZHUH \HDUV RI DJH bf ZHUH \HDUV bf ZHUH \HDUV DQG bf ZHUH \HDUV RI DJH )UHTXHQFLHV RI PDMRU FKRLFHV LQ WKLV VXEVDUDSOH ZHUH DV IROORZV bf XQGHFLGHG bf WUDGLWLRQDO FKRLFH bf QHXWUDO FKRLFH DQG bf QRQWUDGLWLRQDO FKRLFH 7KLV LV b IHZHU VWXGHQWV LQ WKH QHXWUDO DQG QRQWUDGLWLRQDO PDMRU FKRLFH FDWHJRULHV DQG b PRUH VWXGHQWV LQ WKH XQGHFLGHG FDWHJRU\ WKDQ LQ WKH VXEVDPSOH RI ZRPHQ ZKRVH PRWKHUV ZRUNHG

PAGE 104

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nV GHJUHH 3DWHUQDO RFFXSDWLRQDO SUHVWLJH OHYHO VFRUHV UDQJHG IURP ZLWK D PHDQ RI DQG VWDQGDUG GHYLDWLRQ RI 7KLV SUHVWLJH OHYHO ZDV DOPRVW SRLQWV KLJKHU WKDQ WKH PHDQ SDWHUQDO RFFXSDWLRQDO SUHVWLJH OHYHO RI WKH ZRUNLQJ PRWKHUV VXEVDPSOH 7KH OHYHO RI SDWHUQDO RFFXSDWLRQDO LQQRYDWLRQ IRU WKLV VXEVDPSOH UDQJHG IURP bb ZLWK D PHDQ RI b DQG VWDQGDUG GHYLDWLRQ RI b 7KLV LQGLFDWHV WKDW WKH PDMRULW\ RI IDWKHUV LQ WKLV VXEVDPSOH ZHUH LQ WUDGLWLRQDO VH[ UROH RFFXSDWLRQV ,Q FRQWUDVW WKH VXEVDPSOH RI ZRPHQ ZLWK HPSOR\HG PRWKHUV UHSRUWHG D PDMRULW\ RI IDWKHUV ZLWK QHXWUDO QHLWKHU SUHGRPLQDQWO\ WUDGLWLRQDO RU QRQWUDGLWLRQDOf DV ZHOO DV WUDGLWLRQDO VH[ UROH RFFXSDWLRQV

PAGE 105

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

PAGE 106

VXEVDPSOHV VHSDUDWHO\ 7KHVH DUH UHSRUWHG LQ ODWHU VHFWLRQV 7KH HLJKW LQGHSHQGHQW YDULDEOHV DVVHVVLQJ YDULRXV DVSHFWV RI SDWHUQDO UROH PRGHO LQIOXHQFH ZHUH FRQFHSWXDOL]HG DV KDYLQJ ERWK D GLUHFW LPSDFW RQ GDXJKWHUnV RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH VDOLHQFH DQG DQ LQGLUHFW LPSDFW WKURXJK SDWHUQDO LQIOXHQFHV RQ PRWKHUV DV UROH PRGHOV )RU WKLV UHDVRQ WKH FRUUHODWLRQV RI SDWHUQDO UROH DWWULEXWHV ZLWK GDXJKWHUVn RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH VDOLHQFH ZHUH H[DPLQHG IRU WKH WRWDO VDPSOH ILUVW DQG WKHQ LQ VHSDUDWH DQDO\VHV IRU WKH HPSOR\HG DQG QRQHUDSOR\HG PRWKHUV VXEVDPSOHV LQ FRQMXQFWLRQ ZLWK PDWHUQDO UROH DWWULEXWH LQIOXHQFHV ,Q FRUUHODWLQJ WKH GHSHQGHQW YDULDEOH ZLWK WKH QLQH LQGHSHQGHQW YDULDEOHV RQO\ WKUHH LQGHSHQGHQW YDULDEOHV ZHUH IRXQG WR EH VLJQLILFDQW S f 7KHVH DUH SUHVHQWHG LQ 7DEOH 7KHUH ZDV D VOLJKW f SRVLWLYH FRUUHODWLRQ EHWZHHQ WKH H[WHQW RI PDWHUQDO HPSOR\PHQW DQG WKH RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH VDOLHQFH RI GDXJKWHUV D VOLJKW JB f QHJDWLYH FRUUHODWLRQ EHWZHHQ SDWHUQDO HGXFDWLRQDO OHYHO DQG GDXJKWHUVn RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH VDOLHQFH DQG D VOLJKW B mf FRUUHODWLRQ EHWZHHQ SDUHQWDO UHODWLYH HGXFDWLRQDO OHYHO DQG RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH VDOLHQFH RI GDXJKWHUV 7KLV ILQGLQJ LQGLFDWHG WKDW GDXJKWHUVn RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH VDOLHQFH ZDV VOLJKWO\ UHODWHG WR PRWKHUV KDYLQJ HTXDO RU PRUH HGXFDWLRQ WKDQ WKHLU KXVEDQGV

PAGE 107

7DEOH 6LJQLILFDQW ,QWHUFRUUHODWLRQV $PRQJ 'HSHQGHQW ,QGHSHQGHQW DQG 'HVFULSWRU 9DULDEOHV IRU WKH 7RWDO 6DPSOH 'HSHQGHQW :LWK ,QGHSHQGHQW 9DULDEOHV 1 U 2FFXSDWLRQDO UROH VDOLHQFH ZLWK ([WHQW RI PDWHUQDO HPSOR\PHQW rrr 3DUHQWDO UHODWLYH HGXFDWLRQDO OHYHO rrr 3DWHUQDO HGXFDWLRQDO OHYHO Qr ,QGHSHQGHQW :LWK ,QGHSHQGHQW 9DULDEOHV 3DWHUQDO HGXFDWLRQDO OHYHO ZLWK 3DWHUQDO RFFXSDWLRQDO SUHVWLJH OHYHO rrrr 3DWHUQDO MRE VXSSRUW rrrr 3DWHUQDO PDULWDO VDWLVIDFWLRQ rrrr 3DWHUQDO OLIH VDWLVIDFWLRQ rrrr 3DWHUQDO RFFXSDWLRQDO SUHVWLJH OHYHO ZLWK 3DWHUQDO MRE VXSSRUW rrrr 3DWHUQDO OLIH VDWLVIDFWLRQ rrrr 3DUHQWDO UHODWLYH HGXFDWLRQDO OHYHO Brrrr 3DWHUQDO MRE VDWLVIDFWLRQ ZLWK 3DWHUQDO MRE VXSSRUW rrrr 3DWHUQDO PDULWDO VDWLVIDFWLRQ rrrr 3DWHUQDO OLIH VDWLVIDFWLRQ rrrr 3DWHUQDO MRE VXSSRUW ZLWK 3DWHUQDO PDULWDO VDWLVIDFWLRQ rrrr 3DWHUQDO OLIH VDWLVIDFWLRQ rrrr 3DWHUQDO PDULWDO VDWLVIDFWLRQ ZLWK )DWKHUGDXJKWHU UHODWLRQ GLVVDWLVIDFWLRQ Brrrr 3DWHUQDO OLIH VDWLVIDFWLRQ rrrr 3DWHUQDO OLIH VDWLVIDFWLRQ ZLWK )DWKHUGDXJKWHU UHODWLRQ GLVVDWLVIDFWLRQ rrrr 'HSHQGHQW :LWK 'HVFULSWRU 9DULDEOHV 2FFXSDWLRQDO UROH VDOLHQFH ZLWK 8QGHFLGHG PDMRU FKRLFH rrrr r rr SB rrr JB rrrr eB

PAGE 108

&RUUHODWLRQV DPRQJ WKH LQGHSHQGHQW YDULDEOHV IRU WKH WRWDO VDPSOH ZHUH DOVR FRPSXWHG DQG DUH UHSRUWHG LQ 7DEOH 'XH WR WKH QXPEHU RI FRPSDULVRQV LQYROYHG LQ H[DPLQLQJ LQWHUFRUUHODWLRQV DPRQJ WKH LQGHSHQGHQW YDULDEOHV WKH DOSKD OHYHO IRU VLJQLILFDQFH ZDV VHW DW ,QWHUFRUUHODWLRQV DPRQJ WKH QLQH LQGHSHQGHQW YDULDEOHV H[DPLQHG IRU WKH WRWDO VDPSOH \LHOGHG VLJQLILFDQW FRUUHODWLRQV JB f DPRQJ WKH SDWHUQDO UROH DWWULEXWH YDULDEOHV $V FDQ EH VHHQ LQ 7DEOH VLJQLILFDQW LQWHUFRUUHODWLRQV UDQJHG IURP ZLWK WKH PDMRULW\ RI FRUUHODWLRQV DPRQJ WKH SDWHUQDO UROH VWDWXV YDULDEOHV UDQJLQJ EHWZHHQ DQG 3DWHUQDO HGXFDWLRQDO OHYHO ZDV SRVLWLYHO\ FRUUHODWHG ZLWK SDWHUQDO RFFXSDWLRQDO SUHVWLJH OHYHO UB f PDWHUQDO VXSSRUW IRU SDWHUQDO RFFXSDWLRQDO VWDWXV UB f SDWHUQDO PDULWDO VDWLVIDFWLRQ UB f DQG SDWHUQDO OLIH VDWLVIDFWLRQ UB f ,Q DGGLWLRQ WR SDWHUQDO HGXFDWLRQDO OHYHO SDWHUQDO RFFXSDWLRQDO SUHVWLJH OHYHO ZDV DOVR FRUUHODWHG ZLWK PDWHUQDO VXSSRUW IRU SDWHUQDO RFFXSDWLRQDO VWDWXV UB f DQG SDWHUQDO OLIH VDWLVIDFWLRQ UB f )XUWKHUPRUH SDWHUQDO MRE VDWLVIDFWLRQ ZDV FRUUHODWHG ZLWK PDWHUQDO VXSSRUW IRU SDWHUQDO RFFXSDWLRQDO VWDWXV UB f SDWHUQDO PDULWDO VDWLVIDFWLRQ UB f DQG SDWHUQDO OLIH VDWLVIDFWLRQ UB f 0DWHUQDO VXSSRUW IRU SDWHUQDO RFFXSDWLRQDO VWDWXV ZDV DOVR FRUUHODWHG ZLWK SDWHUQDO PDULWDO VDWLVIDFWLRQ UB f DQG SDWHUQDO OLIH VDWLVIDFWLRQ UB f

PAGE 109

,QWHUHVWLQJO\ GDXJKWHUnV UHSRUWHG VDWLVIDFWLRQ ZLWK WKH IDWKHUGDXJKWHU UHODWLRQVKLS ZDV SRVLWLYHO\ UHODWHG WR KHU SHUFHSWLRQV RI SDWHUQDO PDULWDO VDWLVIDFWLRQ UB f DQG SDWHUQDO OLIH VDWLVIDFWLRQ UB f§ f DQG SDWHUQDO OLIH VDWLVIDFWLRQ DQG SDWHUQDO PDULWDO VDWLVIDFWLRQ ZHUH FRUUHODWHG WR HDFK RWKHU UB f )LQDOO\ PRWKHUVn HTXDO RU JUHDWHU HGXFDWLRQDO VWDWXV UHODWLYH WR IDWKHU ZDV QHJDWLYHO\ UHODWHG WR SDWHUQDO RFFXSDWLRQDO SUHVWLJH UB f ,W LV LQWHUHVWLQJ WR QRWH WKDW WKH RQH PDWHUQDO YDULDEOH H[DPLQHG IRU WKH WRWDO VDPSOH H[WHQW RI PDWHUQDO HPSOR\PHQW ZDV QRW VLJQLILFDQWO\ FRUUHODWHG ZLWK DQ\ RI WKH SDWHUQDO UROH DWWULEXWH YDULDEOHV IRU WKH WRWDO VDPSOH ,QWHUFRUUHODWLRQV RI WKH VDPSOH GHVFULSWRU YDULDEOHV ZLWK WKH GHSHQGHQW YDULDEOH ZHUH DOVR FRPSXWHG IRU WKH WRWDO VDPSOH 2QO\ RQH LQWHUFRUUHODWLRQ ZDV VLJQLILFDQW SB f WKDW RI XQGHFLGHG PDMRU FKRLFH ,W KDG D VOLJKW ( f QHJDWLYH FRUUHODWLRQ ZLWK RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH VDOLHQFH 7DEOH f 6XEMHFWVn 6$7 VFRUHV PLQRULW\ VWDWXV 86 FLWL]HQVKLS DJH DQG \HDU DW FROOHJH ZHUH QRW IRXQG WR FRUUHODWH VLJQLILFDQWO\ ZLWK RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH VDOLHQFH VFRUHV &RUUHODWLRQV IRU WKH (PSOR\HG 0RWKHUV 6XEVDPSOH 7ZR W\SHV RI LQWHUFRUUHODWLRQV ZHUH FRPSXWHG IRU WKH HPSOR\HG PRWKHUV VXEVDPSOH &RUUHODWLRQV RI WKH GHSHQGHQW YDULDEOH ZLWK WKH PDWHUQDO DQG SDWHUQDO UROH DWWULEXWH

PAGE 110

YDULDEOHV DUH UHSRUWHG ILUVW 7KHQ WKH FRUUHODWLRQV DPRQJ WKH LQGHSHQGHQW YDULDEOHV DUH UHSRUWHG 7KH UHVXOWV RI FRUUHODWLQJ WKH VFRUHV RI WKH GDXJKWHUV RI HPSOR\HG PRWKHUV RQ DOO WKH LQGHSHQGHQW YDULDEOHV ZLWK WKH GHSHQGHQW YDULDEOH \LHOGHG FRUUHODWLRQV ZKLFK GLG QRW UHDFK VWDWLVWLFDO VLJQLILFDQFH $OWKRXJK WKH FRUUHODWLRQV EHWZHHQ RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH VDOLHQFH DQG WKH LQGHSHQGHQW YDULDEOHV ZHUH VOLJKW UB f WKH\ ZHUH ODUJHO\ LQ WKH SUHGLFWHG GLUHFWLRQV )RU H[DPSOH IRU WKH HPSOR\HG PRWKHUV VXEVDPSOH RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH VDOLHQFH RI GDXJKWHUV ZDV SRVLWLYHO\ UHODWHG WR WKH H[WHQW RI PDWHUQDO HPSOR\PHQW PDWHUQDO HGXFDWLRQDO OHYHO PDWHUQDO DQG SDWHUQDO PDULWDO VDWLVIDFWLRQ PDWHUQDO RFFXSDWLRQDO SUHVWLJH OHYHO PDWHUQDO DQG SDWHUQDO OLIH VDWLVIDFWLRQ SDWHUQDO VXSSRUW IRU PDWHUQDO HPSOR\PHQW DQG GDXJKWHUnV VDWLVIDFWLRQ ZLWK WKH PRWKHU GDXJKWHU DQG IDWKHUGDXJKWHU UHODWLRQVKLS &RUUHODWLRQV ZHUH DOVR FRPSXWHG DPRQJ DOO LQGHSHQGHQW YDULDEOHV DQG \LHOGHG VLJQLILFDQW FRUUHODWLRQV J f 7KHVH LQWHUFRUUHODWLRQV UDQJHG IURP DQG DUH SUHVHQWHG LQ 7DEOH &RUUHODWLRQV IRU WKH 1RQHPSOR\HG 0RWKHUV 6XEVDPSOH 7ZR W\SHV RI LQWHUFRUUHODWLRQV ZHUH FRPSXWHG IRU WKH VXEVDUDSOH RI ZRPHQ ZLWK QRQHPSOR\HG PRWKHUV &RUUHODWLRQV RI WKH GHSHQGHQW YDULDEOH ZLWK WKH PDWHUQDO YDULDEOHV DQG WKH SDWHUQDO YDULDEOHV DUH UHSRUWHG ILUVW IROORZHG E\ D

PAGE 111

7DEOH 6LJQLILFDQW ,QWHUFRUUHODWLRQV DPRQJ WKH ,QGHSHQGHQW 9DULDEOHV IRU WKH (PSOR\HG 0RWKHUV 6XEVDPSOH 9DULDEOH 1DPH Q U 0DWHUQDO HGXFDWLRQDO OHYHO ZLWK 3DWHUQDO HGXFDWLRQDO OHYHO 0DWHUQDO RFFXSDWLRQDO SUHVWLJH 3DWHUQDO RFFXSDWLRQDO SUHVWLJH 3DWHUQDO HGXFDWLRQDO OHYHO ZLWK 3DWHUQDO PDULWDO VDWLVIDFWLRQ 3DWHUQDO RFFXSDWLRQDO SUHVWLJH 3DUHQWDO UHODWLYH RFFXSDWLRQDO SUHVWLJH 3DWHUQDO MRE VXSSRUW 0DWHUQDO MRE VDWLVIDFWLRQ 3DWHUQDO OLIH VDWLVIDFWLRQ 3DUHQWDO UHODWLYH HGXFDWLRQDO OHYHO ZLWK 3DWHUQDO RFFXSDWLRQDO SUHVWLJH 3DUHQWDO UHODWLYH RFFXSDWLRQDO SUHVWLJH ([WHQW RI PDWHUQDO HPSOR\PHQW ZLWK 3DUHQWDO UHODWLYH RFFXSDWLRQDO SUHVWLJH 0DWHUQDO RFFXSDWLRQDO SUHVWLJH OHYHO ZLWK 0DWHUQDO RFFXSDWLRQDO LQQRYDWLRQ 3DWHUQDO PDULWDO VDWLVIDFWLRQ 3DWHUQDO RFFXSDWLRQDO SUHVWLJH 3DWHUQDO RFFXSDWLRQDO SUHVWLJH OHYHO ZLWK 0DWHUQDO MRE VDWLVIDFWLRQ 3DWHUQDO MRE VXSSRUW 0DWHUQDO MRE VDWLVIDFWLRQ ZLWK 3DWHUQDO MRE VXSSRUW 3DWHUQDO PDULWDO VDWLVIDFWLRQ 0DWHUQDO OLIH VDWLVIDFWLRQ 0DWHUQDO MRE VXSSRUW 3DWHUQDO MRE VDWLVIDFWLRQ ZLWK 3DWHUQDO OLIH VDWLVIDFWLRQ 0DWHUQDO MRE VXSSRUW ZLWK 0DWHUQDO PDULWDO VDWLVIDFWLRQ 3DWHUQDO PDULWDO VDWLVIDFWLRQ 3DWHUQDO OLIH VDWLVIDFWLRQ 0DWHUQDO OLIH VDWLVIDFWLRQ 0RWKHUGDXJKWHU UHODWLRQ GLVVDWLVIDFWLRQ )DWKHUGDXJKWHU UHODWLRQ GLVVDWLVIDFWLRQ

PAGE 112

7DEOD FRQWLQXHG 9DULDEOH 1DPH Q U 3DWHUQDO MRE VXSSRUW ZLWK 0DWHUQDO PDULWDO VDWLVIDFWLRQ 3DWHUQDO PDULWDO VDWLVIDFWLRQ 3DWHUQDO OLIH VDWLVIDFWLRQ 0DWHUQDO OLIH VDWLVIDFWLRQ 0DWHUQDO PDULWDO VDWLVIDFWLRQ ZLWK 3DWHUQDO PDULWDO VDWLVIDFWLRQ 0DWHUQDO OLIH VDWLVIDFWLRQ 3DWHUQDO OLIH VDWLVIDFWLRQ 0RWKHUGDXJKWHU UHODWLRQ GLVVDWLVIDFWLRQ )DWKHUGDXJKWHU UHODWLRQ GLVVDWLVIDFWLRQ 3DWHUQDO PDULWDO VDWLVIDFWLRQ ZLWK 3DWHUQDO OLIH VDWLVIDFWLRQ 0DWHUQDO OLIH VDWLVIDFWLRQ 0RWKHUGDXJKWHU UHODWLRQ GLVVDWLVIDFWLRQ )DWKHUGDXJKWHU UHODWLRQ GLVVDWLVIDFWLRQ 1RWH IRU DOO YDOXHV

PAGE 113

UHSRUWLQJ RI WKH LQWHUFRUUHODWLRQV DPRQJ WKH LQGHSHQGHQW YDULDEOHV 7KH UHVXOWV RI FRUUHODWLQJ WKH VFRUHV RI WKH GDXJKWHUV RI QRQHPSOR\HG PRWKHUV RQ DOO WKH LQGHSHQGHQW YDULDEOHV ZLWK WKH GHSHQGHQW YDULDEOH \LHOGHG VHYHUDO VLJQLILFDQW UHODWLRQVKLSV ZKLFK DUH SUHVHQWHG LQ 7DEOH 2FFXSDWLRQDO UROH VDOLHQFH KDG D SB f QHJDWLYH FRUUHODWLRQ ZLWK PDWHUQDO PDULWDO VDWLVIDFWLRQ DQG D f QHJDWLYH FRUUHODWLRQ ZLWK SDWHUQDO PDULWDO VDWLVIDFWLRQ DPRQJ VXEMHFWV ZLWK QRQZRUNLQJ PRWKHUV ,Q DGGLWLRQ GDXJKWHUfV RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH VDOLHQFH KDG D e f QHJDWLYH FRUUHODWLRQ ZLWK SDWHUQDO OLIH VDWLVIDFWLRQ DQG D SB f QHJDWLYH FRUUHODWLRQ ZLWK SDWHUQDO HGXFDWLRQDO OHYHO /HYHO RI SDWHUQDO VXSSRUW IRU PDWHUQDO QRQHPSOR\HG UROH VWDWXV KDG D SB rf QHJDWLYH FRUUHODWLRQ ZLWK GDXJKWHUVf RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH VDOLHQFH )LQDOO\ GDXJKWHUV GLVVDWLVIDFWLRQ ZLWK KHU UHODWLRQVKLS ZLWK IDWKHU KDG D SB f SRVLWLYH UHODWLRQVKLS WR KHU RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH VDOLHQFH &RUUHODWLRQV ZHUH DOVR FRPSXWHG DPRQJ DOO LQGHSHQGHQW YDULDEOHV ([DPLQDWLRQ RI LQWHUFRUUHODWLRQV DPRQJ WKHVH PDWHUQDO DQG SDWHUQDO UROH DWWULEXWH YDULDEOHV IRU WKH VXEVDUDSOH RI GDXJKWHUV ZLWK QRQHPSOR\HG PRWKHUV \LHOGHG VLJQLILFDQW LQWHU FRUUHODWLRQV SB f UDQJLQJ IURP 7KHVH LQWHUFRUUHODWLRQV DUH DOVR SUHVHQWHG LQ 7DEOH

PAGE 114

7DEOH 6LJQLILFDQW ,QWHUFRUUHODWLRQV $PRQJ WKH 'HSHQGHQW DQG ,QGHSHQGHQW 9DULDEOHV IRU WKH 1RQHPSOR\HG 0RWKHUV 6XEVDPSOH 'HSHQGHQW :LWK ,QGHSHQGHQW 9DULDEOHV Q U 2FFXSDWLRQDO UROH VDOLHQFH ZLWK 0DWHUQDO PDULWDO VDWLVIDFWLRQ rr 3DWHUQDO PDULWDO VDWLVIDFWLRQ rr 0DWHUQDO QRQHPSOR\HG UROH VXSSRUW rr 3DWHUQDO OLIH VDWLVIDFWLRQ rr 3DWHUQDO HGXFDWLRQDO OHYHO r )DWKHUGDXJKWHU UHODWLRQ GLVVDWLVIDFWLRQ r ,QGHSHQGHQW :LWK ,QGHSHQGHQW 9DULDEOHV 0DWHUQDO HGXFDWLRQDO OHYHO ZLWK 3DWHUQDO HGXFDWLRQDO OHYHO rrrr 3DWHUQDO HGXFDWLRQDO OHYHO ZLWK 3DWHUQDO RFFXSDWLRQDO SUHVWLJH Rrrrr 0DWHUQDO QRQHPSOR\HG UROH VDWLVIDFWLRQ ZLWK 0DWHUQDO PDULWDO VDWLVIDFWLRQ rrrr 3DWHUQDO PDULWDO VDWLVIDFWLRQ rrrr 0DWHUQDO OLIH VDWLVIDFWLRQ rrrr 3DWHUQDO MRE VDWLVIDFWLRQ ZLWK 3DWHUQDO OLIH VDWLVIDFWLRQ rrrr 3DWHUQDO MRE VXSSRUW ZLWK 3DWHUQDO PDULWDO VDWLVIDFWLRQ rrrr 0DWHUQDO PDULWDO VDWLVIDFWLRQ rrrr 3DWHUQDO OLIH VDWLVIDFWLRQ rrrr 0DWHUQDO OLIH VDWLVIDFWLRQ rrrr 0DWHUQDO PDULWDO VDWLVIDFWLRQ ZLWK 3DWHUQDO PDULWDO VDWLVIDFWLRQ rrrr 3DWHUQDO OLIH VDWLVIDFWLRQ rrrr 3DWHUQDO MRE VXSSRUW rrrr 0DWHUQDO OLIH VDWLVIDFWLRQ rrrr )DWKHUGDXJKWHU UHODWLRQ GLVVDWLVIDFWLRQ rrrr rr r B B rrr rrrr

PAGE 115

7DEOH FRQWLQXHG ,QGHSHQGHQW :LWK ,QGHSHQGHQW 9DULDEOHV QB U 3DWHUQDO PDULWDO VDWLVIDFWLRQ ZLWK 3DWHUQDO OLIH VDWLVIDFWLRQ 0DWHUQDO OLIH VDWLVIDFWLRQ )DWKHUGDXJKWHU UHODWLRQ GLVVDWLVIDFWLRQ rrrr Brrrr 0DWHUQDO OLIH VDWLVIDFWLRQ ZLWK 3DWHUQDO OLIH VDWLVIDFWLRQ )DWKHUGDXJKWHU UHODWLRQ GLVVDWLVIDFWLRQ rrrr rrrr )DWKHUGDXJKWHU UHODWLRQ GLVVDWLVIDFWLRQ ZLWK 0RWKHUGDXJKWHU UHODWLRQ GLVVDWLVIDFWLRQ rrrr rrrrS

PAGE 116

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f LQGLFDWLQJ WKDW RQO\ b RI WKH YDULDQFH LQ GDXJKWHUVf RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH VDOLHQFH ZDV DFFRXQWHG IRU E\ YDULDWLRQ LQ WKH LQGHSHQGHQW YDULDEOHV 3RVW KRF DQDO\VHV ZHUH FRQGXFWHG LQ ZKLFK DOO SRVVLEOH FRPELQDWLRQV RI YDULDEOHV ZHUH H[DPLQHG %RWK D VL[YDULDEOH

PAGE 117

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f 7KH WRWDO 5VTXDUH IRU WKH WKUHH YDULDEOH PRGHO PDWHUQDO HPSOR\PHQW H[WHQW SDWHUQDO RFFXSDWLRQDO SUHVWLJH OHYHO SDWHUQDO HGXFDWLRQDO OHYHO ZDV S f ,W VKRXOG EH QRWHG WKDW WKHUH ZHUH HLJKW RWKHU PDWHUQDO UROH DWWULEXWH YDULDEOHV ZKLFK ZHUH QRW LQFOXGHG LQ WKLV DQDO\VLV RI WKH WRWDO VDPSOH 7KLV ZDV EHFDXVH LW ZDV DVVXPHG WKDW WKH LQIOXHQFH RI WKHVH VSHFLILF PDWHUQDO VDWLVIDFWLRQ VXSSRUW DQG UHODWLRQVKLS YDULDEOHV RQ GDXJKWHUnV RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH VDOLHQFH ZRXOG GLIIHU IRU GDXJKWHUV ZLWK HPSOR\HG DQG ZLWK QRQHPSOR\HG PRWKHUV 7KHVH

PAGE 118

QR 7DEOH 5HJUHVVLRQ RI 0DWHUQDO DQG 3DWHUQDO 5ROH 0RGHO ,QIOXHQFH 9DULDEOHV RQ &ROOHJH :RPHQfV 2FFXSDWLRQDO 5ROH 6DOLHQFH 6HOHFWHG 6XEVHW 0RGHOV IRU WKH 7RWDO 6DPSOH 1 f 7KUHH9DULDEOH 0RGHO 0DWHUQDO HPSOR\PHQW H[WHQW 3DWHUQDO RFFXSDWLRQDO SUHVWLJH 3DWHUQDO HGXFDWLRQDO OHYHO 7RWDO 56TXDUH 6L[9DULDEOH 0RGHO 0DWHUQDO HPSOR\PHQW H[WHQW 3DWHUQDO RFFXSDWLRQDO VXSSRUW 3DWHUQDO RFFXSDWLRQDO SUHVWLJH 3DWHUQDO HGXFDWLRQDO OHYHO 3DWHUQDO RFFXSDWLRQ LQQRYDWLRQ )DWKHU'DXJKWHU 5HODWLRQVKLS % WB W R 2n ) % ( 7RWDO 56TXDUH )

PAGE 119

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eB !f LQGLFDWLQJ QRQH RI WKH YDULDWLRQ LQ WKH GHSHQGHQW YDULDEOH ZDV DFFRXQWHG IRU E\ WKH IXOO PRGHO RI PDWHUQDO YDULDEOHV IRU WKH HPSOR\HG PRWKHUV VXEVDPSOH 3RVW KRF DQDO\VHV ZHUH FRQGXFWHG DQG D ILYHYDULDEOH DQG WZRYDULDEOH PRGHO ZHUH VHOHFWHG IURP DPRQJ DOO SRVVLEOH

PAGE 120

FRPELQDWLRQV RI YDULDEOHV DQG WHVWHG IRU VLJQLILFDQFH 7KHVH PRGHOV DUH SUHVHQWHG LQ 7DEOH 7KH 5VTDDUH IRU WKH IROORZLQJ ILYHYDULDEOH PRGHO ZDV SB !f 2FFXSDWLRQDO UROH VDOLHQFH RI GDXJKWHUV PDWHUQDO HPSOR\PHQW H[WHQW PDWHUQDO RFFXSDWLRQDO SUHVWLJH PDWHUQDO MRE VDWLVIDFWLRQ PDWHUQDO PDULWDO VDWLVIDFWLRQ PRWKHUGDXJKWHU UHODWLRQVKLS GLVVDWLVIDFWLRQ 7KH 5VTXDUH IRU WKH WZRYDULDEOH PRGHO VHOHFWHG RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH VDOLHQFH PDWHUQDO HPSOR\PHQW H[WHQW PDWHUQDO PDULWDO VDWLVIDFWLRQ ZDV JB f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

PAGE 121

7DEOH 6HSDUDWH 5HJUHVVLRQV RI 0DWHUQDO DQG 3DWHUQDO 5ROH 0RGHO ,QIOXHQFH 9DULD EOHV RQ &ROOHJH :RPHQfV 2FFXSDWLRQDO 5ROH 6DOLHQFH 6HOHFWHG 6XEVHW 0RGHOV IRU WKH (PSOR\HG 0RWKHUV 6XEVDPSOH Q f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

PAGE 122

7KH 5VTXDUH IRU WKH IXOO PRGHO ZDV !f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eB !f 7KH 5VTXDUH IRU WKH WKUHHYDULDEOH PRGHO VHOHFWHG RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH VDOLHQFH SDWHUQDO RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH VXSSRUW SDWHUQDO PDULWDO VDWLVIDFWLRQ IDWKHU GDXJKWHU UHODWLRQVKLS GLVVDWLVIDFWLRQ ZDV JB!f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

PAGE 123

7KH YDULDEOH UHJUHVVLRQ PRGHO FRUUHVSRQGLQJ WR WKLV UHVHDUFK TXHVWLRQ ZDV DV IROORZV 2FFXSDWLRQDO UROH VDOLHQFH PDWHUQDO HPSOR\PHQW H[WHQW SDUHQWDO UHODWLYH HGXFDWLRQDO OHYHO SDUHQWDO UHODWLYH RFFXSDWLRQDO SUHVWLJH OHYHO PDWHUQDO RFFXSDWLRQDO LQQRYDWLRQ SDWHUQDO RFFXSDWLRQDO LQQRYDWLRQ SDWHUQDO MRE VDWLVIDFWLRQ PDWHUQDO MRE VDWLVIDFWLRQ SDWHUQDO PDULWDO VDWLVIDFWLRQ PDWHUQDO PDULWDO VDWLVIDFWLRQ SDWHUQDO RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH VXSSRUW PDWHUQDO RFFXSDWLRQDO VXSSRUW SDWHUQDO OLIH VDWLVIDFWLRQ PDWHUQDO OLIH VDWLVIDFWLRQ IDWKHUGDXJKWHU UHODWLRQVKLS GLVVDWLVIDFWLRQ PRWKHUGDXJKWHU UHODWLRQVKLS GLVVDWLVIDFWLRQ 7KH 5VTXDUH YDOXH IRU WKH IXOO PRGHO ZDV eB !f 'XULQJ SRVW KRF DQDO\VHV RI DOO SRVVLEOH VXEVHW FRPELQDWLRQV RI LQGHSHQGHQW YDULDEOHV D IRXUYDULDEOH PRGHO ZDV VHOHFWHG DQG WHVWHG IRU VLJQLILFDQFH 7KLV VXEVHW PRGHO LV SUHVHQWHG LQ 7DEOH DQG ZDV RUGHUHG DV IROORZV 2FFXSDWLRQDO UROH VDOLHQFH PDWHUQDO HPSOR\PHQW H[WHQW IDWKHUGDXJKWHU UHODWLRQVKLS VDWLVIDFWLRQ SDWHUQDO PDULWDO VDWLVIDFWLRQ SDWHUQDO RFFXSDWLRQDO VXSSRUW 7KH 5VTXDUH IRU WKH IRXU YDULDEOH PRGHO ZDV !f 7KH 1RQHPSOR\HG 0RWKHUV 6XEVDPSOH 0DWHUQDO 9DULDEOHV $ UHJUHVVLRQ DQDO\VLV RI WKH GDWD IURP GDXJKWHUV ZLWK QRQHPSOR\HG PRWKHUV ZDV SHUIRUPHG WR DGGUHVV WKH WKLUG UHVHDUFK TXHVWLRQ 7R ZKDW H[WHQW FDQ YDULDWLRQ LQ RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH VDOLHQFH EH DFFRXQWHG IRU E\ YDULDWLRQV LQ

PAGE 124

PDWHUQDO UROH VWDWXV SHUFHLYHG PDWHUQDO UROH VWDWXV FRQVHTXHQFHV DQG WKH SHUFHLYHG TXDOLW\ RI WKH PRWKHU GDXJKWHU UHODWLRQVKLS IRU GDXJKWHUV ZLWK QRQZRUNLQJ PRWKHUV" 7KH VL[YDULDEOH UHJUHVVLRQ PRGHO IRU WKH QRQHUDSOR\HG PRWKHUV VXEVDUDSOH FRUUHVSRQGLQJ WR WKLV UHVHDUFK TXHVWLRQ ZDV DV IROORZV 2FFXSDWLRQDO UROH VDOLHQFH PDWHUQDO HGXFDWLRQ OHYHO PDWHUQDO QRQHPSOR\HG UROH VDWLVIDFWLRQ PDWHUQDO QRQHUDSOR\HG UROH VXSSRUW PDWHUQDO PDULWDO VDWLVIDFWLRQ PDWHUQDO OLIH VDWLVIDFWLRQ PRWKHUGDXJKWHU UHODWLRQVKLS GLVVDWLVIDFWLRQ 7KH 5VTXDUH IRU WKH IXOO PRGHO ZDV eB !f 3RVW KRF DQDO\VHV ZHUH FRQGXFWHG H[DPLQLQJ DOO SRVVLEOH VXEVHW FRPELQDWLRQV RI LQGHSHQGHQW YDULDEOHV LQ WKH PRGHO $ WKUHH YDULDEOH DQG D IRXUYDULDEOH PRGHO ZHUH VHOHFWHG DQG WHVWHG IRU VLJQLILFDQFH 7KHVH VXEVHW PRGHOV DUH SUHVHQWHG LQ 7DEOH 7KH 5VTXDUH IRU WKH WKUHHYDULDEOH PRGHO VHOHFWHG PDWHUQDO QRQHPSOR\HG UROH VXSSRUW PDWHUQDO PDULWDO VDWLVIDFWLRQ PDWHUQDO OLIH VDWLVIDFWLRQ ZDV MfBfn 7KH 5VTXDUH IRU WKH IRXUYDULDEH PRGHO PDWHUQDO QRQHPSOR\HG UROH VXSSRUW PDWHUQDO PDULWDO VDWLVIDFWLRQ PDWHUQDO OLIH VDWLVIDFWLRQ PRWKHUGDXJKWHU UHODWLRQVKLS VDWLVIDFWLRQ ZDV M!Bf 7KH 1RQHPSOR\HG 0RWKHUV 6XEVDPSOH 3DWHUQDO 9DULDEOHV $ UHJUHVVLRQ DQDO\VLV H[DPLQLQJ WKH LPSDFW RI SDWHUQDO UROH DWWULEXWH YDULDEOHV RQ RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH VDOLHQFH ZDV SHUIRUPHG RQ WKH GDWD IURP GDXJKWHUV ZLWK QRQHPSOR\HG PRWKHUV

PAGE 125

7DEOH 6HSDUDWH 5HJUHVVLRQV RI 0DWHUQDO DQG 3DWHUQDO 5ROH 0RGHO ,QIOXHQFH 9DULDEO H V RQ &ROOHJH :RPHQnV 2FFXSDWLRQDO 5ROH 6DOLHQFH 6HOHFWHG 6XEVHW 0RGHOV IRU WKH 1RQHUDSOR\HG 0RWKHUV 6XEVDPSOH Q f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

PAGE 126

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f 3RVW KRF DQDO\VHV ZHUH FRQGXFWHG RI DOO SRVVLEOH VXEVHW FRPELQDWLRQV RI LQGHSHQGHQW YDULDEOHV WKUHHYDULDEOH DQG VL[YDULDEOH PRGHO ZHUH VHOHFWHG DQG WHVWHG IRU VLJQLILFDQFH 7KHVH WZR VXEVHW PRGHOV DUH SUHVHQWHG LQ 7DEOH 7KH 5 VTXDUH IRU WKH VHOHFWHG WKUHHYDULDEOH PRGHO SDWHUQDO HGXFDWLRQDO OHYHO SDWHUQDO RFFXSDWLRQDO SUHVWLJH SDWHUQDO OLIH VDWLVIDFWLRQ ZDV JB f 7KH 5VTXDUH IRU WKH VL[YDULDEOH PRGHO RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH VDOLHQFH SDWHUQDO HGXFDWLRQDO OHYHO SDWHUQDO MRE VDWLVIDFWLRQ SDWHUQDO SUHVWLJH OHYHO SDWHUQDO RFFXSDWLRQDO LQQRYDWLRQ SDWHUQDO PDULWDO VDWLVIDFWLRQ SDWHUQDO OLIH VDWLVIDFWLRQ ZDV eB f

PAGE 127

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rf 3RVW KRF DQDO\VHV RI DOO SRVVLEOH VXEVHW FRPELQDWLRQV RI LQGHSHQGHQW YDULDEOHV ZHUH FRQGXFWHG $ IRXUYDULDEOH DQG D ILYHYDULDEOH PRGHO ZHUH VHOHFWHG DQG WHVWHG IRU VLJQLILFDQFH 7DEOH f 7KH 5VTXDUH IRU WKH

PAGE 128

7DEOH 5HJUHVVLRQV RI 0DWHUQDO DQG 3DWHUQDO 5ROH 0RGHO RQnR DUQD.ORD LQ 3QP9LLQQULQQ QQ 2QOOQQD -QPQQnR 2FFXSDWLRQDO 5ROH 6DOLHQFH 6HOHFWHG 6XEVHW 0RGHOV IR WKH (PSOR\HG DQG 1RQHPSOR\HG 0RWKHUV 6XEVDPSOH (PSOR\HG 0RWKHUV 6XEVDPSOH Q )RXU 9DULDEOH 0RGHO % WB ( 0DWHUQDO (PSOR\PHQW ([WHQW )DWKHUGDXJKWHU UHODWLRQVKLS 3DWHUQDO PDULWDO VDWLVIDFWLRQ 3DWHUQDO RFFXSDWLRQDO VXSSRUW 7RWDO 56TXDUH ) 1RQHUDSOR\HG 0RWKHUV 6XEVDUDSOH Q f )RXU 9DULDEOH 0RGHO % WB 0DWHUQDO PDULWDO VDWLVIDFWLRQ 3DUHQWDO UHODWLYH HGXFDWLRQ OHYHO 3DWHUQDO RFFXSDWLRQDO SUHVWLJH 0DWHUQDO OLIH VDWLVIDFWLRQ 7RWDO 56TXDUH ) )LYH 9DULDEOH 0RGHO % ( 0DWHUQDO PDULWDO VDWLVIDFWLRQ 3DUHQWDO UHODWLYH HGXFDWLRQ OHYHO 3DWHUQDO RFFXSDWLRQDO SUHVWLJH 0DWHUQDO OLIH VDWLVIDFWLRQ 0DWHUQDO QRQHPSOR\HG UROH VXSSRUW 7RWDO 56TXDUH )

PAGE 129

IROORZLQJ ILYHYDULDEOH PRGHO IRU WKH QRQHPSOR\HG PRWKHUV VXEVDUDSOH PDWHUQDO PDULWDO VDWLVIDFWLRQ SDUHQWDO UHODWLYH HGXFDWLRQDO OHYHO SDWHUQDO RFFXSDWLRQDO SUHVWLJH PDWHUQDO OLIH VDWLVIDFWLRQ PDWHUQDO QRQHPSOR\HG UROH VXSSRUW ZDV SB f 7KH 5VTXDUH IRU WKH IROORZLQJ IRXUYDULDEOH PRGHO PDWHUQDO PDULWDO VDWLVIDFWLRQ SDUHQWDO UHODWLYH HGXFDWLRQDO OHYHO SDWHUQDO RFFXSDWLRQDO SUHVWLJH PDWHUQDO OLIH VDWLVIDFWLRQ ZDV J f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

PAGE 130

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

PAGE 131

&+$37(5 9 ',6&866,21 ,Q WKLV FKDSWHU WKH UHVXOWV RI WKH UHJUHVVLRQ DQDO\VHV DUH GLVFXVVHG LQ WHUPV RI WKH VHYHQ UHVHDUFK TXHVWLRQV 3DWHUQDO DQG PDWHUQDO UROH PRGHOLQJ LQIOXHQFHV RQ RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH VDOLHQFH RI FROOHJH ZRPHQ ZHUH H[DPLQHG IRU D WRWDO VDPSOH RI FROOHJH IUHVKPHQ DQG VRSKRPRUHV DQG WKHQ IRU VXEVDPSOHV RI WKH ZRPHQ GLYLGHG E\ PRWKHUn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b RI WKH YDULDQFH LQ WKH ZRPHQnV RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH VDOLHQFH VFRUHV SB f 7KLV PRGHO LQFOXGHG RQO\ WKUHH RI WKH RULJLQDO QLQH YDULDEOHV H[DPLQHG 3ULRU WR GLVFXVVLQJ WKH

PAGE 132

FRQWULEXWLRQV RI WKHVH WKUHH YDULDEOHV H[SODQDWLRQV DUH RIIHUHG IRU WKH VPDOO DPRXQW RI YDULDQFH DFFRXQWHG IRU E\ WKH PRGHO 7KH VPDOO DPRXQW RI YDULDQFH DFFRXQWHG IRU E\ WKH PRGHO SURSRVHG LQ WKH ILUVW UHVHDUFK TXHVWLRQ PD\ EH GXH WR VHYHUDO FRQGLWLRQV )LUVW PDQ\ IDFWRUV PLJKW LPSDFW RQ FROOHJH ZRPHQnV RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH VDOLHQFH ,Q WKLV VWXG\ KRZHYHU RQO\ SDUHQWDO UROH PRGHOLQJ LQIOXHQFH ZDV H[DPLQHG )DFWRUV VXFK DV LQGLYLGXDO SHUVRQDOLW\ WUDLWV DWWLWXGHV DQG DELOLWLHV VLWXDWLRQDO IDFWRUV WKH VWUXFWXUH RI RSSRUWXQLW\ LQ WKH ZRUOG RI ZRUN RU UROH PRGHO LQIOXHQFHV RWKHU WKDQ SDUHQWV PD\ EHWWHU H[SODLQ WKH YDULDWLRQ LQ FROOHJH ZRPHQnV RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH VDOLHQFH )RU H[DPSOH FRUUHODWLRQV IRU WKH WRWDO VDPSOH EHWZHHQ WKH GHSHQGHQW YDULDEOH DQG VXEMHFWVn PDMRU FKRLFH D YDULDEOH LQLWLDOO\ LQWHQGHG WR GHVFULEH WKH VDPSOH UHYHDOHG D VLJQLILFDQW QHJDWLYH UHODWLRQVKLS U f EHWZHHQ RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH VDOLHQFH DQG XQGHFLGHG PDMRU FKRLFH 2WKHU XQH[DUDLQHG IDFWRUV ZKLFK PD\ H[SODLQ YDULDWLRQ LQ RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH VDOLHQFH LQFOXGH VXEMHFWVn VH[ UROH DWWLWXGHV DQG RULHQWDWLRQ DV ZHOO DV RWKHU UROH PRGHO LQIOXHQFHV VXFK DV WHDFKHUV RU ROGHU VLEOLQJV $ VHFRQG SRVVLEOH H[SODQDWLRQ IRU WKH VPDOO DPRXQW RI YDULDWLRQ DFFRXQWHG IRU E\ WKLV PRGHO ZDV WKH H[FOXVLRQ RI DOO WKH PDWHUQDO UROH DWWULEXWH YDULDEOHV ZLWK WKH H[FHSWLRQ RI PDWHUQDO HPSOR\PHQW H[WHQW IURP WKH DQDO\VLV RI WKH WRWDO VDPSOH 7KHVH YDULDEOHV ZHUH H[FOXGHG IURP WKLV DQDO\VLV GXH

PAGE 133

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n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

PAGE 134

UROH VDOLHQFH RI GDXJKWHUV ZLWK QRQHPSOR\HG PRWKHUV ZKLOH KLJK SDWHUQDO PDULWDO VDWLVIDFWLRQ PD\ LQFUHDVH RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH VDOLHQFH RI GDXJKWHUV ZLWK HPSOR\HG PRWKHUV 7KXV SDWHUQDO PDULWDO VDWLVIDFWLRQ DQG PDWHUQDO HPSOR\PHQW H[WHQW PD\ LQWHUDFW LQ D QRQDGGLWLYH ZD\ ,Q DQRWKHU H[DPSOH RQH GDXJKWHU PD\ KDYH KLJK RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH VDOLHQFH H[SODLQHG E\ KLJK PDWHUQDO HPSOR\PHQW LQYROYHPHQW DQG VDWLVIDFWLRQ ZKLOH DQRWKHU GDXJKWHUf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nV RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH VDOLHQFH IRU WKH WRWDO VDPSOH H[WHQW RI PDWHUQDO HPSOR\PHQW OHYHO RI SDWHUQDO RFFXSDWLRQDO SUHVWLJH DQG SDWHUQDO HGXFDWLRQDO OHYHO 7KH ILQGLQJ WKDW RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH VDOLHQFH RI GDXJKWHUV ZDV SRVLWLYHO\ UHODWHG WR PDWHUQDO HPSOR\PHQW LV FRQVLVWHQW ZLWK UHVXOWV IURP SUHYLRXV UHVHDUFK VWXGLHV $OPTXLVW t $QJULVW %DQGXFFL f ,Q WKLV VWXG\ WKH JUHDWHU WKH QXPEHU RI \HDUV DQG KRXUV ZRUNHG E\ D ZRPDQfV PRWKHU WKH PRUH OLNHO\ WKH ZRPDQ ZDV WR KDYH KLJK RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH VDOLHQFH

PAGE 135

3DWHUQDO RFFXSDWLRQDO SUHVWLJH OHYHO ZKLFK LV IUHTXHQWO\ YLHZHG DV D PHDVXUH RI D IDPLO\fV VRFLRHFRQRPLF VWDWXV ZDV DOVR IRXQG WR H[SODLQ D VLJQLILFDQW DPRXQW RI WKH YDULDQFH LQ FROOHJH ZRPHQfV RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH VDOLHQFH DIWHU DFFRXQWLQJ IRU YDULDQFH H[SODLQHG E\ H[WHQW RI PDWHUQDO HPSOR\PHQW 7KLV ILQGLQJ LV FRQVLVWHQW ZLWK UHVXOWV IURP D SUHYLRXV VWXG\ FRQGXFWHG E\ 5RVHQ DQG $QHVKHQVHO f LQ ZKLFK D SRVLWLYH UHODWLRQVKLS ZDV IRXQG EHWZHHQ IDPLO\ VRFLRHFRQRPLF VWDWXV DQG RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH VDOLHQFH RI GDXJKWHUV +RZHYHU WKLV ILQGLQJ FRQWUDGLFWV WKH UHVXOWV IURP D VWXG\ FRQGXFWHG E\ %LHOE\ f LQ ZKLFK LW ZDV UHSRUWHG WKDW IHPDOH FROOHJH VWXGHQWV IURP OHVV HFRQRPLFDOO\ SULYHOHJHG KRPHV KDG KLJKHU RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH VDOLHQFH :KHQ WKH WKLUG VLJQLILFDQW YDULDEOH SDWHUQDO HGXFDWLRQDO OHYHO ZDV SODFHG LQ WKH UHJUHVVLRQ HTXDWLRQ D SRVVLEOH H[SODQDWLRQ ZDV VXJJHVWHG $IWHU DFFRXQWLQJ IRU WKH YDULDQFH LQ ZRPHQf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

PAGE 136

7KLV IDPLO\ PLJKW EH YLHZHG DV KDUGZRUNLQJ DQG KLJK DFKLHYLQJ JLYHQ WKH IDFW WKDW ERWK SDUHQWV ZRUN H[WHQVLYHO\ DQG WKDW IDWKHU LV VXFFHVVIXO GHVSLWH KLV ORZHU HGXFDWLRQDO OHYHO UHODWLYH WR RWKHU IDWKHUV ZLWK VLPLODU RFFXSDWLRQDO SUHVWLJH 7KLV IDPLO\ SDWWHUQ LV IXUWKHU H[SOLFDWHG E\ FRUUHODWLRQDO GDWD H[DPLQHG IRU WKH WRWDO VDPSOH 7KHUH ZDV D VLJQLILFDQW f WKRXJK VOLJKW FRUUHODWLRQ UB f IRXQG EHWZHHQ UHODWLYH SDUHQWDO HGXFDWLRQDO OHYHO DQG FROOHJH ZRPHQfV RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH VDOLHQFH D UHODWLRQVKLS ZKLFK ZDV QRW H[DPLQHG LQ WKLV UHJUHVVLRQ HTXDWLRQ 0RWKHUnV HTXDO RU JUHDWHU HGXFDWLRQDO DWWDLQPHQW UHODWLYH WR IDWKHU ZDV SRVLWLYHO\ UHODWHG WR GDXJKWHUnV RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH VDOLHQFH 7KLV ILQGLQJ LV FRQVLVWHQW ZLWK UHVXOWV IURP D SUHYLRXV VWXG\ E\ 9DQIRVVHQ f ZKLFK IRXQG PDWHUQDO SRZHU DV UHIOHFWHG LQ UHODWLYH SDUHQWDO HGXFDWLRQDO OHYHO WR LQFUHDVH WKH LQIOXHQFH RI PRWKHUV DV UROH PRGHOV ,Q VXP D SRVVLEOH IDPLO\ SDWWHUQ LV VXJJHVWHG E\ WKLV WKUHHYDULDEOH PRGHO 'DXJKWHUnV KLJKHU RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH VDOLHQFH PD\ EH DVVRFLDWHG ZLWK D SDWHUQDO UROH PRGHO RI KDUG ZRUN DQG KLJK DFKLHYHPHQW DQG D ZRUNLQJ PRWKHU UROH PRGHO RI HTXDO RU JUHDWHU HGXFDWLRQDO OHYHO UHODWLYH WR KHU KXVEDQG 7KLV IDPLO\ SDWWHUQ ZRXOG LQFUHDVH ERWK WKH PRWKHUnV SRZHU LQ WKH IDPLO\ DQG KHU SRZHU DV D UROH PRGHO RI ZRUN 7KHUH DUH VHYHUDO SRVVLEOH WKHRUHWLFDO DQG PHWKRGRORJLFDO UHDVRQV ZK\ WKH RWKHU VL[ SDWHUQDO UROH DWWULEXWH YDULDEOHV H[DPLQHG IRU WKH WRWDO VDPSOH ZHUH QRW

PAGE 137

IRXQG WR EH VLJQLILFDQW LQ H[SODLQLQJ YDULDWLRQ LQ RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH VDOLHQFH IRU WKH WRWDO VDPSOH RI FROOHJH ZRPHQ )LUVW H[DPLQLQJ WKH LQIOXHQFH RI WKHVH SDWHUQDO UROH VDWLVIDFWLRQ DQG VXSSRUW YDULDEOHV RQ RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH VDOLHQFH RI GDXJKWHUV ZDV ODUJHO\ H[SORUDWRU\ )HZ SUHYLRXV VWXGLHV KDYH FRQVLGHUHG SDWHUQDO LQIOXHQFHV RWKHU WKDQ SDWHUQDO UROH VWDWXV DQG IDWKHUGDXJKWHU UHODWLRQVKLS YDULDEOHV +RZHYHU WKH LQDELOLW\ RI SDWHUQDO MRE VDWLVIDFWLRQ WR DFFRXQW IRU YDULDWLRQ LQ RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH VDOLHQFH LQ GDXJKWHUV ZDV LQFRQVLVWHQW ZLWK 0XOOLQV f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f 0RVW RI WKH YDULDEOHV QRW VHOHFWHG IRU LQFOXVLRQ LQ WKH PRGHO DVVHVVHG WKH RWKHU WZR DVSHFWV RI SDUHQWDO UROH PRGHO LQIOXHQFH LH SDUHQWDO UROH VDWLVIDFWLRQ DQG VXSSRUW DQG WKH SDUHQWGDXJKWHU UHODWLRQVKLS TXDOLW\f 7KHVH UROH VWDWXV FRQVHTXHQFH DQG

PAGE 138

UHODWLRQVKLS YDULDEOHV PLJKW EH H[SHFWHG WR EH VHFRQGDU\ WR RU OHVV SRZHUIXO WKDQ WKH UROHV WKHPVHOYHV LQ SUHGLFWLQJ LPLWDWLRQ 7KLUG WKH LQIOXHQFH RI SDWHUQDO PDULWDO UHODWLRQVKLS VDWLVIDFWLRQ RQ RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH VDOLHQFH PLJKW EH H[SHFWHG WR EH QRQOLQHDU EDVHG RQ PDWHUQDO HPSOR\PHQW VWDWXV DQG WKHUHIRUH QRW DSSOLFDEOH WR WKH WRWDO VDPSOH 7XUQLQJ WR PHWKRGRORJLFDO OLPLWDWLRQV WKHUH ZHUH VHYHUDO SDUHQWDO UROH DWWULEXWHn YDULDEOHV ZKLFK KDG D UHVWULFWHG UDQJH RI UHVSRQVHV WKXV GHFUHDVLQJ WKH SRZHU RI WKHVH YDULDEOHV WR DFFRXQW IRU GLIIHUHQFHV LQ RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH VDOLHQFH RI GDXJKWHUV )RU LQVWDQFH WKH PDMRULW\ RI UHVSRQVH YDOXHV IRU WKH YDULDEOH DVVHVVLQJ SDWHUQDO RFFXSDWLRQDO LQQRYDWLRQ bf§bf ZHUH UHVWULFWHG WR WKH WUDGLWLRQDO UDQJH bbf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

PAGE 139

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

PAGE 140

WKHVH QRQVLJQLILFDQW UHVXOWV 7KH ZRUNLQJ PRWKHUV VXEVDPSOH ZDV FRPSRVHG RI D ZLGH UDQJH RI PDWHUQDO HPSOR\PHQW H[WHQW ZLWK D PHDQ RI \HDUV IXOOWLPH HPSOR\PHQW RU \HDUV SDUWWLPHf DQG D VWDQGDUG GHYLDWLRQ RI \HDUV 7KH PDMRULW\ RI PRWKHUV LQ WKLV VDPSOH ZRUNHG EHWZHHQ \HDUV IXOO WLPH \HDUV SDUW WLPHf DQG \HDUV IXOO WLPH IURP WKH WLPH WKH GDXJKWHU ZDV ERUQ XQWLO VKH ZDV DJH RU OHIW IRU FROOHJH ,Q DQDO\]LQJ WKH HPSOR\HG PRWKHUV VXEVDPSOH LQ WHUPV RI H[WHQW RI PDWHUQDO HPSOR\PHQW LW EHFRPHV FOHDU WKDW PDQ\ RI WKH FROOHJH ZRPHQ LQFOXGHG LQ WKLV VXEVDPSOH KDG PRWKHUV ZKR ZHUH QRW HPSOR\HG IRU D PDMRULW\ RI WKH GDXJKWHUn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

PAGE 141

VXEVDPSOH GXH WR WKH SUREDEOH QRQOLQHDULW\ RI VXEVHTXHQW PDWHUQDO DQG SDWHUQDO UROH VDWLVIDFWLRQ DQG UROH VXSSRUW DQG SDUHQWUHODWLRQVKLS YDULDEOHV ZLWK RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH VDOLHQFH RI GDXJKWHUV 7KH JUHDWHU VLJQLILFDQFH RI UHVXOWV IRU WKH QRQHPSOR\HG PRWKHUV VXEVDPSOH GHVSLWH LWV UHODWLYHO\ VPDOOHU VDPSOH VL]H QB f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

PAGE 142

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f DQG SB f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

PAGE 143

ZDV ZLWK KHU PDUULDJH DQG KHU QRQZRUNLQJ VWDWXV WKH KLJKHU KHU GDXJKWHUfV RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH VDOLHQFH 7KH UHVXOWV VXJJHVWHG E\ WKHVH ILUVW WZR YDULDEOHV LQ WKH PRGHO FRQIRUP ZHOO WR D VRFLDO OHDUQLQJ WKHRU\ PRGHO RI RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH GHYHORSPHQW IRU ZRPHQ DQG DUH FRQVLVWHQW ZLWK UHVXOWV RI .DKQnV VWXG\ RI FROOHJH ZRPHQnV UROH SUHIHUHQFHV DV D IXQFWLRQ RI LPLWDWLRQ DQG DYRLGDQFH RI WKHLU PRWKHUVn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b RI WKH YDULDQFH *LYHQ WKH VPDOO LQFUHPHQW LQ YDULDQFH DFFRXQWHG IRU E\ WKLV WKLUG YDULDEOH LQ WKH PRGHO

PAGE 144

LW LV SRVVLEOH WKDW LWV FRQWULEXWLRQ LV GXH WR FKDQFH IOXFWXDWLRQV RI WKLV YDULDEOH ZLWKLQ WKH REWDLQHG VDPSOH 7KLV H[SODQDWLRQ VHHPV SDUWLFXODUO\ SODXVLEOH JLYHQ WKDW PDWHUQDO OLIH VDWLVIDFWLRQ ZDV DVVHVVHG E\ PHDQV RI RQH LWHP ZLWK D ILYHSRLQW VFDOH f 7KH PHDQ VFRUH RQ WKLV VFDOH IRU WKLV VDPSOH ZDV ZLWK WKH PDMRULW\ RI VFRUHV LQ WKH UHVWULFWHG UDQJH EHWZHHQ DQG 7KLV LQGLFDWHV D UHVSRQVH ELDV RI VXEMHFWV HLWKHU DJUHHLQJ WKDW PRWKHU LV VDWLVILHG RU QHLWKHU DJUHHLQJ QRU GLVDJUHHLQJ $QRWKHU SRVVLEOH H[SODQDWLRQ IRU WKH LQFOXVLRQ RI PDWHUQDO OLIH VDWLVIDFWLRQ LQ WKH PRGHO LV WKDW LW PD\ SRLQW WR D GLIIHUHQW SDWWHUQ RI PDWHUQDO LQIOXHQFH RQ GDXJKWHUV WKDQ WKDW GHVFULEHG E\ WKH RWKHU WZR PDWHUQDO YDULDEOHV LQ WKH PRGHO 3HUKDSV IRU D VPDOO SHUFHQWDJH RI FROOHJH ZRPHQ D QRQZRUNLQJ PRWKHU ZLWK KLJK JHQHUDO OLIH VDWLVIDFWLRQ UHSUHVHQWV D UROH PRGHO RI VHOIFRQILGHQFH DQG VHOIHVWHHP ZKLFK VHUYHV WR HOHYDWH WKH GDXJKWHUfV VHOIHIILFDF\ UHJDUGLQJ WKH RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH DQG WKHUHIRUH LQFUHDVHV KHU RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH VDOLHQFH ,W DSSHDUV QRQZRUNLQJ PRWKHUfV OLIH VDWLVIDFWLRQ PD\ EH WDSSLQJ D VLJQLILFDQW IDFWRU LQIOXHQFLQJ GDXJKWHUfV UROH H[SHFWDWLRQV ,Q WKLV VWXG\ KRZHYHU LW ZDV WRR JOREDO D PHDVXUH RI PDWHUQDO UROH VWDWXV FRQVHTXHQFHV WR FOHDUO\ H[SODLQ YDULDWLRQ LQ RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH VDOLHQFH RI GDXJKWHUV 7KH WKUHH YDULDEOHV LQ WKH RULJLQDO UHJUHVVLRQ HTXDWLRQ IRU GDXJKWHUV ZLWK QRQHPSOR\HG PRWKHUV ZKLFK GLG QRW

PAGE 145

FRQWULEXWH WR H[SODLQLQJ YDULDWLRQ LQ GDXJKWHUVn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f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eB f DQG SB f UHVSHFWLYHO\ 'XH WR WKH ODFN RI LQFUHPHQW LQ YDULDQFH DFFRXQWHG IRU E\ WKH VL[

PAGE 146

YDULDEOH PRGHO WKH WKUHHYDULDEOH PRGHO ZDV VHOHFWHG DV WKH EHVW PRGHO 7KH WKUHHYDULDEH PRGHO ZDV RUGHUHG DV IROORZV SDWHUQDO HGXFDWLRQDO OHYHO SDWHUQDO RFFXSDWLRQDO SUHVWLJH OHYHO SDWHUQDO OLIH VDWLVIDFWLRQ 3DWHUQDO HGXFDWLRQDO OHYHO ZDV QHJDWLYHO\ UHODWHG WR RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH VDOLHQFH LQ GDXJKWHUV RI QRQZRUNLQJ PRWKHUV &RQYHUVHO\ SDWHUQDO RFFXSDWLRQDO SUHVWLJH OHYHO ZDV SRVLWLYHO\ UHODWHG WR RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH VDOLHQFH LQ WKH VXEVDPSOH RI ZRPHQ ZLWK QRQHPSOR\HG PRWKHUV DIWHU DFFRXQWLQJ IRU SDWHUQDO HGXFDWLRQDO OHYHO )LQDOO\ SDWHUQDO OLIH VDWLVIDFWLRQ ZDV QHJDWLYHO\ UHODWHG WR RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH VDOLHQFH RI GDXJKWHUV ZLWK QRQH P SOR\HG PRWKHUV DIWHU DFFRXQWLQJ IRU YDULDWLRQ DWWULEXWDEOH WR SDWHUQDO HGXFDWLRQDO OHYHO DQG SDWHUQDO RFFXSDWLRQDO SUHVWLJH OHYHO 7KHVH UHVXOWV VXJJHVW VHYHUDO SRVVLEOH DOWHUQDWLYH IDPLO\ LQIOXHQFHV RQ RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH VDOLHQFH RI GDXJKWHUV RI QRQZRUNLQJ PRWKHUV 2QH IDPLO\ SDWWHUQ LV VXJJHVWHG LQ ZKLFK IDWKHUfV ORZHU HGXFDWLRQDO OHYHO LQFUHDVHV RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH VDOLHQFH RI GDXJKWHUV ZLWK QRQHPSOR\HG PRWKHUV SDUWLFXODUO\ LI WKHVH IDWKHUV DUH QRW VDWLVILHG ZLWK WKHLU OLYHV ZKLFK DJDLQ LQFUHDVHV WKH RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH VDOLHQFH RI GDXJKWHUV 7KHVH UHVXOWV PDNH VHQVH LI FRQVLGHUHG LQ WKH FRQWH[W RI WKHVH IDPLOLHV DV WUDGLWLRQDO UROH PRGHOV RI QRQHPSOR\HG PRWKHUV DQG ZRUNLQJ IDWKHUV *LYHQ WKLV IDPLO\ FRQWH[W PDWHUQDO DWWUDFWLYHQHVV DV D UROH PRGHO RI ORZ

PAGE 147

RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH LQYROYHPHQW LV LQ SDUW D IXQFWLRQ RI SDWHUQDO UROH VWDWXV DQG VDWLVIDFWLRQ LQ KLV OLIH 7KH FKRLFH D PRWKHU PDNHV QRW WR ZRUN LV PRUH OLNHO\ WR EH DYRLGHG E\ WKH GDXJKWHU KHQFH KHU KLJKHU RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH VDOLHQFH LI IDWKHU KDV REWDLQHG D ORZHU HGXFDWLRQDO OHYHO 0F%URRP f DQG LV QRW VDWLVILHG ZLWK KLV OLIH $QRWKHU SRVVLEOH H[SODQDWLRQ IRU WKH LQYHUVH UHODWLRQVKLS EHWZHHQ GDXJKWHUfV RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH VDOLHQFH DQG SDWHUQDO HGXFDWLRQDO OHYHO LV GDXJKWHUfV UHEHOOLRQ DJDLQVW WUDGLWLRQDO VH[ UROH VWHUHRW\SLQJ ZKLFK KDV EHHQ UHSRUWHG WR EH PRUH OLNHO\ DPRQJ OHVV HGXFDWHG DGXOWV $OEUHFKW 0\DKLUD f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f RFFXSDWLRQDO FRPPLWPHQW UDWKHU WKDQ WKHLU PRWKHUVf QRQZRUNLQJ UROH FKRLFH DQ H[SODQDWLRQ FRQVLVWHQW ZLWK SUHYLRXV VWXGLHV RI IDWKHUV DV LQIOXHQFHV RI FDUHHU FRPPLWPHQW LQ ZRPHQ 5LGJHZD\ 7HQ]HU f

PAGE 148

$QRWKHU SRVVLEOH H[SODQDWLRQ ZKLFK LV FRQVLVWHQW ZLWK SUHYLRXV UHVHDUFK LV WKDW RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH VDOLHQFH RI FROOHJH ZRPHQ LQFUHDVHV ZLWK VRFLRHFRQRPLF VWDWXV ZLWK SDWHUQDO RFFXSDWLRQDO SUHVWLJH EHLQJ D PHDVXUH RI VXFK VWDWXV LQ IDPLOLHV ZKHUH PRWKHUV DUH QRW HPSOR\HG $VWLQ 5RVHQ t $QHVKHQVHO f 3HUKDSV WKHVH FRQWUDGLFWRU\ UHVXOWV UHJDUGLQJ SDWHUQDO HGXFDWLRQDO DQG RFFXSDWLRQDO SUHVWLJH OHYHO LQGLFDWH WZR GLIIHUHQW SDWWHUQV RI SDWHUQDO UROH PRGHO LQIOXHQFH 2QH SDWWHUQ LQYROYLQJ DYRLGDQFH DQG WKH RWKHU LPLWDWLRQ ,Q RQH IDPLO\ SDWWHUQ OHVV HGXFDWHG DQG OHVV VDWLVILHG IDWKHUV OHDG WR JUHDWHU RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH VDOLHQFH LQ GDXJKWHUV ZKR ZDQW WR DYRLG WKH SDWKV WKHLU QRQZRUNLQJ PRWKHUV KDYH WDNHQ ,Q WKH VHFRQG IDPLO\ SDWWHUQ IDWKHUV ZLWK KLJK RFFXSDWLRQDO SUHVWLJH DUH SRVLWLYH UROH PRGHOV IRU KLJK RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH VDOLHQFH LQ GDXJKWHUV ZLWK QRQZRUNLQJ PRWKHUV 'DXJKWHUV RI QRQZRUNLQJ PRWKHUV DSSHDU WR DVVHVV WKH RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH LQ WKH FRQWH[W RI SDWHUQDO DV ZHOO DV PDWHUQDO UROH VWDWXV DQG VDWLVIDFWLRQ YDULDEOHV DQG PD\ HLWKHU LPLWDWH RU DYRLG WKHVH UROH PRGHOV 7KH 1RQHPSOR\HG 0RWKHU 6XEVDPSOH 0DWHUQDO DQG 3DWHUQDO 9DULDEOHV 7KH IXOO YDULDEOH UHJUHVVLRQ HTXDWLRQ H[DPLQLQJ WKH DPRXQW RI YDULDQFH LQ RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH VDOLHQFH RI GDXJKWHUV ZLWK QRQHPSOR\HG PRWKHUV DFFRXQWHG IRU E\ ERWK PDWHUQDO DQG SDWHUQDO UROH DWWULEXWH YDULDEOHV ZDV QRW VWDWLVWLFDOO\ VLJQLILFDQW +RZHYHU ERWK D IRXUYDULDEOH DQG D ILYH YDULDEOH PRGHO ZHUH VHOHFWHG IURP JHQHUDWLRQ RI DOO SRVVLEOH

PAGE 149

VXEVHW VROXWLRQV DQG \LHOGHG VLJQLILFDQW 5VTXDUHV RI f DQG SB f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n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n OLIH SDWWHUQV DQG VXEVHTXHQWO\ KDYH KLJKHU RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH VDOLHQFH 7KLV DQDO\VLV LV FRQVLVWHQW ZLWK .DKQnV f ILQGLQJV WKDW PDQ\ FROOHJH ZRPHQ ZKR SODQ WR FRPELQH IDPLO\

PAGE 150

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nV RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH VDOLHQFH &RQYHUVHO\ DV PHQWLRQHG SUHYLRXVO\ LQ WKH GLVFXVVLRQ RI WKH VHSDUDWH SDWHUQDO YDULDEOH DQDO\VHV WKH SRVLWLYH UHODWLRQVKLS EHWZHHQ GDXJKWHUnV RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH VDOLHQFH DQG IDWKHUn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nV

PAGE 151

FRPSHWHQF\ RU DGDSWDELOLW\ WKXV LQFUHDVLQJ WKH GDXJKWHUnV RZQ FRQILGHQFH DQG KHQFH LQFUHDVLQJ KHU RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH VDOLHQFH 3HUKDSV WKH QRQZRUNLQJ PRWKHUnV SHUFHLYHG JHQHUDO OLIH VDWLVIDFWLRQ GHVSLWH PDULWDO GLVVDWLVIDFWLRQ LV UHODWHG WR KHU UROH DV D PRWKHU DQG SDUHQW ,I WKH SDUHQWDO UROH LV YHU\ VDWLVI\LQJ WR WKH PRWKHU VKH PD\ QXUWXUH VHOIHVWHHP DQG VHOIHIILFDF\ LQ KHU GDXJKWHU 7KLV PD\ LQ WXUQ EH WUDQVODWHG LQWR WKH GDXJKWHUnV KLJKHU H[SHFWDWLRQV IRU WKH RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH SDUWLFXODUO\ VLQFH WKH RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH LV DQ LPSRUWDQW DUHD IRU HVWDEOLVKLQJ FRPSHWHQF\ DQG DGHTXDF\ IRU \RXQJ ZRPHQ WRGD\ )LQDOO\ SHUKDSV WZR GLIIHUHQW IDPLO\ SDWWHUQV DUH LQGLFDWHG E\ WKHVH ILQGLQJV ,Q WKH ILUVW SDWWHUQ D GDXJKWHU RI D QRQZRUNLQJ PRWKHU ZKR LV ZHOO HGXFDWHG DQG GLVVDWLVILHG LQ KHU PDUULDJH FKRRVHV WR DYRLG WKH SDWWHUQ RI KHU PRWKHUnV OLIH DQG KDV KLJK RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH VDOLHQFH ,Q WKH VHFRQG SDWWHUQ D GDXJKWHU SHUFHLYHV KHU QRQZRUNLQJ PRWKHU DV KLJKO\ VDWLVILHG ZLWK KHU OLIH SHUKDSV EDVHG RQ KHU PRWKHUnV VHOIFRQILGHQFH KLJK VHOIn HVWHHP DQG JRRG SDUHQWLQJ $V D UHVXOW WKH GDXJKWHU KDV VHOIFRQILGHQFH DQG KLJK VHOIHVWHHP DV ZHOO ZKLFK LQ WXUQ LQFUHDVHV KHU RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH VDOLHQFH 2YHUYLHZ RI 6LJQLILFDQW )LQGLQJV 2YHUDOO WKH UHVXOWV RI WKLV VWXG\ RQO\ PRGHVWO\ VXSSRUWHG WKH YLHZ WKDW SDUHQWDO UROH PRGHO LQIOXHQFHV H[SODLQ YDULDWLRQ LQ IUHVKPHQ DQG VRSKRPRUH FROOHJH ZRPHQnV RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH VDOLHQFH $OWKRXJK WKH FRQWULEXWLRQ RI

PAGE 152

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nV RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH VDOLHQFH $ VHFRQG WUHQG VXJJHVWHG E\ WKH UHVXOWV RI WKH WRWDO VDPSOH DQDO\VHV LV WKDW KLJK SDWHUQDO RFFXSDWLRQDO SUHVWLJH SRVVLEO\ FRPELQHG ZLWK ORZHU SDWHUQDO HGXFDWLRQDO OHYHO LV UHODWHG WR KLJKHU RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH VDOLHQFH LQ GDXJKWHUV UHJDUGOHVV RI PRWKHUV HPSOR\PHQW VWDWXV ,Q WKLV IDPLO\ SDWWHUQ IDWKHUV PD\ EH UROH PRGHOV RI KLJK DFKLHYHPHQW DQG KLJK RFFXSDWLRQDO FRPPLWPHQW IRU WKHLU GDXJKWHUV &RPELQLQJ WKHVH WZR WUHQGV D IDPLO\ SDWWHUQ HPHUJHV LQfZKLFK FROOHJH ZRPHQ ZKRVH PRWKHUV ZRUN H[WHQVLYHO\ DQG ZKRVH IDWKHUV KDYH KLJK RFFXSDWLRQDO SUHVWLJH SDUWLFXODUO\ JLYHQ WKHLU IDWKHUnV UHODWLYHO\ ORZ HGXFDWLRQDO DWWDLQPHQW DUH OLNHO\ WR KDYH KLJK RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH VDOLHQFH ,Q WKLV IDPLO\ SDWWHUQ ERWK SDUHQWV DUH UROH PRGHOV RI RFFXSDWLRQDO LQYROYHPHQW DQG FRPPLWPHQW

PAGE 153

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

PAGE 154

PDWHUQDO DQG SDWHUQDO UROH DWWULEXWHV LQ RUGHU WR XQGHUVWDQG WKH IDPLO\ FRQWH[W LQ ZKLFK GDXJKWHUnV RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH H[SHFWDWLRQV GHYHORS 'HVSLWH WKH LQWULJXLQJ WUHQGV DQG SDWWHUQV VXJJHVWHG E\ WKH ILQGLQJV IRU WKH WRWDO VDPSOH DQG WKH QRQHPSOR\HG PRWKHUV VXEVDPSOH WKHVH UHJUHVVLRQ PRGHOV RQO\ DFFRXQWHG IRU IURP bb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

PAGE 155

RU VDPH DJH QRQVWXGHQWV LQ RUGHU WR H[DPLQH DQG FRPSDUH WKH SDUHQWDO VRFLDOL]DWLRQ LQIOXHQFHV RQ RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH H[SHFWDWLRQV RI WKHVH GLIIHULQJ SRSXODWLRQV 6HYHUDO RI WKH PDWHUQDO DQG SDWHUQDO UROH VDWLVIDFWLRQ DQG VXSSRUW YDULDEOHV KDG OLPLWHG VFDOH YDOXHV 7KHVH YDULDEOHV ZHUH DVVHVVHG E\ RQO\ RQH RU WZR LWHPV XVLQJ ILYH SRLQW /LNHUW VFDOHV DQG WKHUHIRUH PD\ KDYH EHHQ LQDGHTXDWH LQ PHDVXULQJ WKH XQGHUO\LQJ FRQVWUXFWV WKH\ UHSUHVHQWHG RU LQ GHWHFWLQJ GLIIHUHQFHV DPRQJ VXEMHFWV *LYHQ WKH WLPH FRQVWUDLQWV RI VXEMHFWV DQG WKH QXPEHU RI GLIIHUHQW LQGHSHQGHQW YDULDEOHV H[DPLQHG LW ZDV QRW SRVVLEOH WR DVVHVV WKHVH SDUHQWDO UROHV VWDWXV FRQVHTXHQFH YDULDEOHV PRUH HODERUDWHO\ LQ WKLV VWXG\ )XWXUH VWXGLHV PLJKW EH GHVLJQHG WR GR WKLV 6HYHUDO KLJK LQWHUFRUUH DWLRQV DPRQJ WKH LQGHSHQGHQW YDULDEOHV ZHUH QRWHG ZKLFK PD\ KDYH OHG WR H[FOXVLRQ RI SRWHQWLDOO\ VLJQLILFDQW YDULDEOHV IURP WKH UHJUHVVLRQ PRGHOV GXULQJ VWHSZLVH VHOHFWLRQ )XWXUH VWXGLHV PLJKW XVH IDFWRU DQDO\VLV RU SULQFLSDO FRPSRQHQWV DQDO\VLV SULRU WR FRQVWUXFWLQJ UHJUHVVLRQ PRGHOV WR FRPELQH KLJKO\ LQWHUFRUUH DWHG LQGHSHQGHQW YDULDEOHV LQWR XQLILHG FRQVWUXFWV 7KLV VWXG\ XVHG VRFLDO OHDUQLQJ WKHRU\ WR H[DPLQH SDUHQWDO VRFLDOL]DWLRQ LQIOXHQFHV RQ FROOHJH ZRPHQfV RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH VDOLHQFH 2WKHU SRVVLEOH LQIOXHQFHV VXFK DV VXEMHFWVn LQWHUHVWV DELOLWLHV DWWLWXGHV RU SHUVRQDOLW\

PAGE 156

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f HPSOR\PHQW %HFDXVH RI WKLV WKH

PAGE 157

DVVXPSWLRQ IRU UHJUHVVLRQ DQDO\VLV RI DGGLWLYH UHODWLRQVKLSV DPRQJ LQGHSHQGHQW YDULDEOHV ZDV YLRODWHG 7KHUHIRUH WKH LPSOLFDWLRQV RI WKH UHVXOWV IRU WKLV VXEVDPSOH DUH LQFRQFOXVLYH )XWXUH VWXGLHV PLJKW FUHDWH D WKLUG SRSXODWLRQ WR EH H[DPLQHG RI ZRPHQ ZKRVH PRWKHUV ZRUNHG SDUW WLPH RU RQO\ IRU D IHZ \HDUV WKXV VHSDUDWLQJ WKLV JURXS IURP WKH PRWKHUV ZKR DUH FOHDUO\ UROH PRGHOV RI ZRUN FRPPLWPHQW RU LQYROYHPHQW RU FOHDUO\ UROH PRGHOV RI QRW ZRUNLQJ )XUWKHU LW PD\ EH WKDW WKH SDUHQWDO UROH DWWULEXWH YDULDEOHV DQG VXEVHTXHQW IDPLO\ SDWWHUQV ZKLFK H[SODLQ ORZ PRGHUDWH RU KLJK RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH VDOLHQFH LQ GDXJKWHUV DUH FDWHJRULFDOO\ GLIIHUHQW 7KHUHIRUH IXWXUH VWXGLHV PLJKW VRUW ZRPHQ EDVHG RQ WKHLU OHYHO RI RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH VDOLHQFH DQG WKHQ H[DPLQH WKH SDUHQWDO UROH DWWULEXWHV IRU HDFK JURXS RI ZRPHQ VHSDUDWHO\ SHUKDSV IXUWKHU GLYLGLQJ HDFK VXEJURXS RI ZRPHQ E\ WKHLU PDWHUQDO HPSOR\PHQW VWDWXV DV D ZD\ WR GHWHFW SDWWHUQV 7KHUH ZDV D WHQGHQF\ IRU VXEMHFWV WR KDYH D VRFLDO GHVLUDELOLW\ UHVSRQVH ELDV WRZDUG SRVLWLYH HVWLPDWLRQ RI ERWK WKHLU PRWKHUVf DQG IDWKHUVf UROH VDWLVIDFWLRQ DQG VXSSRUW DQG WKHLU RZQ VDWLVIDFWLRQ ZLWK WKH PRWKHUGDXJKWHU DQG IDWKHUGDXJKWHU UHODWLRQVKLS 7KLV UHVXOWHG LQ D UHVWULFWHG UDQJH RI UHVSRQVHV IRU WKHVH SDUHQWDO UROH VWDWXV FRQVHTXHQFH DQG UHODWLRQVKLS YDULDEOHV GHFUHDVLQJ LQWHUVXEMHFW YDULDWLRQ DQG WKHUHIRUH GHFUHDVLQJ WKH SRZHU RI WKHVH YDULDEOHV WR H[SODLQ YDULDWLRQ LQ GDXJKWHUnV RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH VDOLHQFH

PAGE 158

,Q DGGLWLRQ VXEMHFWfV REMHFWLYH DVVHVVPHQWV RI WKHVH VDWLVIDFWLRQ VXSSRUW DQG UHODWLRQVKLS YDULDEOHV PD\ QRW KDYH FRLQFLGHG ZLWK REMHFWLYH UHDOLW\ )XWXUH VWXGLHV PLJKW LQFOXGH SDUHQWVn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

PAGE 159

YDULDEOHV DQG WKH SDUHQWGDXJKWHU UHODWLRQVKLS YDULDEOHV H[DPLQHG IXWXUH VWXGLHV PLJKW GHYHORS PRUH VRSKLVWLFDWHG LQVWUXPHQWV DQG UHVHDUFK PHWKRGRORJLHV IRU DVVHVVLQJ WKHVH YDULDEOHV )RU H[DPSOH SDUHQW VHOIUHSRUW RI UROH VDWLVIDFWLRQ DQG VXSSRUW DQG WKHLU SHUFHSWLRQ RI WKH SDUHQW GDXJKWHU UHODWLRQVKLS FRXOG EH LQFRUSRUDWHG LQ IXWXUH VWXGLHV WR SURYLGH FRUURERUDWLRQ RI GDXJKWHUf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

PAGE 160

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

PAGE 161

5()(5(1&(6 $FNHU f :RPHQ DQG VRFLDO VWUDWLILFDWLRQ $ FDVH RI LQWHOOHFWXDO VH[LVP $PHULFDQ -RXUQDO RI 6RFLRORJ\ $LQVZRUWK 0 %HOO 6 0 t 6WD\WRQ f ,QIDQW PRWKHU DWWDFKPHQW DQG VRFLDO GHYHORSPHQW 6RFLDOL]DWLRQ DV D SURGXFW RI UHFLSURFDO UHVSRQVLYHQHVV WR VLJQDOV ,Q 0 3 5LFKDUGV (Gf 7KH LQWHJUDWLRQ RI WKH FKLOG LQWR D VRFLDO ZRUOG SS f 1HZ
PAGE 162

$VWLQ + 6 f
PAGE 163

%HHGOH 6 / -RUGDQ9LROD / (XQLFH 3 t &URVV + f 6H[ UROH RULHQWDWLRQ RI KLJK VFKRRO DQG FROOHJH VWXGHQWV 6H[ 5ROHV B %HUQDUG f :RPHQ ZLYHV PRWKHUV 9DOXHV DQG RSWLRQV &KLFDJR $OGLQH$WKHUWRQ %HUQDUG f &KDQJH DQG VWDELOLW\ LQ VH[UROH QRUPV DQG EHKDYLRU -RXUQDO RI 6RFLDO ,VVXHV %HUVRQ 6 f 3HUFHLYHG FRVWV RI FRPELQLQJ FDUHHU DQG IDPLO\ UROHV 7KH LQIOXHQFH RI HDUO\ IDPLO\ KLVWRU\ RQ DGXOW UROH GHFLVLRQ 5HSRUW 1R &*f &DUGLII :DOHV $ SDSHU SUHVHQWHG DW WKH 0HHWLQJ RI WKH :HOVK %UDQFK RI WKH %ULWLVK 3V\FKRORJLFDO 6RFLHW\ (5,& 'RFXPHQW 5HSURGXFWLRQ 6HUYLFH 1R (' f %LHOE\ ' 9 f 0DWHUQDO HPSOR\PHQW DQG VRFLRHFRQRPLF VWDWXV DV IDFWRUV LQ GDXJKWHUfV FDUHHU VDOLHQFH 6RPH VXEVWDQWLYH UHILQHPHQWV 6H[ 5ROHV %ODX ) f :RPHQ LQ WKH ODERU IRUFH $Q RYHUYLHZ ,Q )UHHPDQ (Gf :RPHQ $ IHPLQLVW SHUVSHFWLYH SS f 3DOR $OWR &$ 0D\ILHOG %ODX 3 t 'XQFDQ f 7KH $PHULFDQ RFFXSDWLRQDO VWUXFWXUH 1HZ
PAGE 164

&ROHPDQ 0 t *DQRQJ / + f (IIHFW RI WKH IDPLO\ VWUXFWXUH RQ IDPLO\ DWWLWXGHV DQG H[SHFWDWLRQV )DPL\ 5HODWLRQV &XPPLQJV / f 9DOXH VWUHWFK LQ GHILQLWLRQV RI FDUHHU DPRQJ FROOHJH ZRPHQ +RUDWLR $OJHU DV IHPLQLVW PRGHO 6RFLDO 3UREOHPV 'H )URQ]R t %RXGUHDX ) f )XUWKHU UHVHDUFK LQWR DQWHFHGHQWV DQG FRUUHODWHV RI DQGURJ\Q\ 3V\FKRORJLFDO 5HSRUWV 'HOODV 0 *DLHU ( / t (PLKRYLFK & $ f 0DWHUQDO HPSOR\PHQW DQG VHOHFWHG EHKDYLRUV DQG DWWLWXGHV RI SUHDGROHVFHQWV DQG DGROHVFHQWV $GROHVFHQFH 'RXYDQ ( f (PSOR\PHQW DQG WKH DGROHVFHQW ,Q ) 1\H t / : +RIIPDQ (GVf 7KH HPSOR\HG PRWKHU LQ $PHULFD SS f &KLFDJR 5DQG 0F1DOO\ 'RXYDQ ( t $GHOVRQ f 7KH DGROHVFHQW H[SHULHQFH 1HZ
PAGE 165

)DVVLQJHU 5 ( f $ FDXVDO PRGHO RI FROOHJH ZRPHQfV FDUHHU FKRLFH -RXUQDO RI 9RFDWLRQDO %HKDYLRU B f§ )LW]JHUDOG / ) t &ULWHV f 7RZDUG D FDUHHU SV\FKRORJ\ RI ZRPHQ :KDW GR ZH NQRZ" :KDW GR ZH QHHG WR NQRZ" -RXUQDO RI &RXQVHOLQJ 3V\FKRORJ\ )UHHPDQ f :RPHQ $ IHPLQLVW SHUVSHFWLYH 3DOR $OWR &$ 0D\ILHOG )UHXG $ f 7KH HJR DQG WKH PHFKDQLVP RI GHIHQVH & %DLQHV 7UDQVf 1HZ
PAGE 166

*ROG t $QGUHV f &RPSDULVRQV RI DGROHVFHQW FKLOGUHQ ZLWK HPSOR\HG DQG QRQHPSOR\HG PRWKHUV 0HUULOO3DOPHU 4XDUWHUO\ *ROGEHUJ 0 3 f 6H[ UROH VRFLDOL]DWLRQ DQG ZRUN UROHV 7KH H[SHULHQFH RI ZRPHQ 5HSRUW 1R 6f 0HQOR 3DUN &$ $ 5HSRUW RI WKH 3URMHFW RQ (GXFDWLRQDO 5HTXLUHPHQWV IRU ,QGXVWULDO 'HPRFUDF\(5,& 'RFXPHQW 5HSURGXFWLRQ 6HUYLFH 1R (' f +DFNHWW t %HW] 1 ( f $ VHOIHIILFDF\ DSSURDFK WR WKH FDUHHU GHYHORSPHQW RI ZRPHQ -RXUQDO RI 9RFDWLRQDO %HKDYLRU +DOO 6 f $GROHVFHQFH 1HZ
PAGE 167

+DYLJKXUVW 5 f 'HYHORSPHQWDO WDVNV DQG HGXFDWLRQ 1HZ
PAGE 168

,OOIHOGHU f )HDU RI VXFFHVV VH[ UROH DWWLWXGHV DQG FDUHHU VDOLHQFH DQG DQ[LHW\ OHYHOV RI FROOHJH ZRPHQ -RXUQDO RI 9RFDWLRQDO %HKDYLRU -RQHV 0 +DQVHQ & t 3XWQDP % $ f 5HODWLRQVKLS RI VHOIFRQFHSW DQG YRFDWLRQDO PDWXULW\ WR YRFDWLRQDO SUHIHUHQFHV RI DGROHVFHQWV -RXUQDO RI 9RFDWLRQDO %HKDYLRU B .DJDQ t 0RVV + f )URP ELUWK WR PDWXULW\ 1HZ
PAGE 169

.XUGHN / $ t 6LHVN\ $ ( f $Q LQWHJUDWLYH SHUVSHFWLYH RQ FKLOGUHQfV GLYRUFH DGMXVWPHQW $PHULFDQ 3V\FKRORJLVW .XWQHU 1 t %URJDQ 5 f 7KH GHFLVLRQ WR HQWHU PHGLFLQH 0RWLYDWLRQV SDUHQWDO VXSSRUW DQG GLVFRXUDJHPHQWV IRU ZRPHQ ,Q $ 6 5RVVL (Gf *HQGHU DQG OLIH FRXUVH 1HZ
PAGE 170

/LG] 7 f 7KH SHUVRQ +LV GHYHORSPHQW WKURXJKRXW WKH OLIH F\FOH 1HZ
PAGE 171

0HLHU + & f 0RWKHUFHQWHUHGQHVV DQG FROOHJH \RXWKVf DWWLWXGHV WRZDUG VRFLDO HTXDOLW\ IRU ZRPHQ 6RPH HPSLULFDO ILQGLQJV -RXUQDO RI 0DUULDJH DQG WKH )DPLO\ 0H\HU % f 7KH GHYHORSPHQW RI JLUOVf VH[ UROH DWWLWXGHV &KLOG 'HYHORSPHQW 0XHOOHU & : t &DPSEHOO % f )HPDOH RFFXSDWLRQDO DFKLHYHPHQW DQG PDULWDO VWDWXV $ UHVHDUFK QRWH -RXUQDO RI 0DUULDJH DQG WKH )DPLO\ 0XOOLQV ( f 3HUFHLYHG SDUHQWDO UROH VDWLVIDFWLRQ DQG GDXJKWHUfV VH[UROH DWWLWXGHV DQG DVSLUDWLRQV 6RFLRORJLFDO )RFXV 0XOYH\ 0 & f 3V\FKRORJLFDO DQG VRFLRORJLFDO IDFWRUV LQ SUHGLFWLRQ RI FDUHHU SDWWHUQV RI ZRPHQ *HQHWLF 3V\FKRORJ\ 0RQRJUDSKV 0XVVHQ + f (DUO\ VH[UROH GHYHORSPHQW ,Q $ *RVOLQ (Gf +DQGERRN RI VRFLDOL]DWLRQ WKHRU\ DQG UHVHDUFK &KLFDJR 5DQG 0F1DOO\ 0XVVHQ 3 t 'LVWOHU / f 0DVFXOLQLW\ LGHQWLILFDWLRQ DQG IDWKHUVRQ UHODWLRQVKLSV -RXUQDO RI $EQRUPDO DQG 6RFLDO 3V\FKRORJ\ 0XVVHQ 3 t 5XWKHUIRUG ( f 3DUHQWFKLOG UHODWLRQV DQG SDUHQWDO SHUVRQDOLW\ LQ UHODWLRQ WR \RXQJ FKLOGUHQfV VH[UROH SUHIHUHQFHV &KLOG 'HYHORSPHQW 0\DKLUD 6 f &ROOHJH ZRPHQfV FDUHHU RULHQWDWLRQV DV UHODWHG WR ZRUN YDOXHV DQG EDFNJURXQG IDFWRUV 'RFWRUDO GLVVHUWDWLRQ 2KLR 6WDWH 8QLYHUVLW\ f 'LVVHUWDWLRQ $EVWUDFWV ,QWHUQDWLRQDO f $ 1HYLOO ' f 7KH PHDQLQJ RI ZRUN LQ ZRPHQnV OLYHV 5ROH FRQIOLFW SUHSDUDWLRQ DQG FKDQJH 7KH &RXQVHOLQJ 3V\FKRORJLVW 1RHO ( f 6RFLDOL]DWLRQ DPELWLRQ DQG FDUHHU H[SHFWDWLRQV 5DFHVH[ YDULDWLRQV DPRQJ DGROHVFHQWV 5HSRUW 1R 5&f &ROOHJH 6WDWLRQ 7; 0DVWHUfV 7KHVLV 7H[DV $t0 8QLYHUVLW\ (ULF 'RFXPHQW 5HSURGXFWLRQ 6HUYLFHV 1R (' f 2JEXUQ : ) f 7KH FKDQJLQJ IDPLO\ 7KH )DPLO\

PAGE 172

2OLYHU / : f 7KH UHODWLRQVKLS RI SDUHQWDO DWWLWXGHV DQG SDUHQW LGHQWLILFDWLRQ WR FDUHHU DQG KRPHPDNLQJ RULHQWDWLRQ LQ FROOHJH ZRPHQ -RXUQDO RI 9RFDWLRQDO %HKDYLRU B 2SSHQKHLPHU 9 f :RUN DQG IDPLO\ $ VWXG\ LQ VRFLDO GHPRJUDSK\ 1HZ
PAGE 173

3LDJHW f 7KH RULJLQV RI LQWHOOHFW 6DQ )UDQFLVFR : + )UHHPDQ 5DQG / f 0DVFXOLQLW\ RU IHPLQLQLW\" 'LIIHUHQWLDWLQJ FDUHHURULHQWHG DQG KRPHUDDNLQJRULHQWHG FROOHJH IUHVKPHQ ZRPHQ -RXUQDO RI &RXQVHOLQJ 3V\FKRORJ\ 5DQG / t 0LOOHU $ / f $ GHYHORSPHQWDO FURVV VHFWLRQLQJ RI ZRPHQfV FDUHHUV DQG PDUULDJH DWWLWXGHV DQG OLIH SODQV -RXUQDO RI 9RFDWLRQDO %HKDYLRU B 5DSRSRUW 5 t 5DSRSRUW 5 f (DUO\ DQG ODWHU H[SHULHQFHV DV GHWHUPLQDQWV RI DGXOW EHKDYLRU 0DUULHG ZRPHQfV IDPLO\ DQG FDUHHU SDWWHUQV %ULWLVK -RXUQDO RI 6RFLRORJ\ 5HJDQ 0 & t 5RODQG + ( f 5HDUUDQJLQJ IDPLO\ DQG FDUHHU SULRULWLHV 3URIHVVLRQDO ZRPHQ DQG PHQ RI WKH HLJKWLHV -RXUQDO RI 0DUULDJH DQG WKH )DPLO\ 5HLVV $ 'XQFDQ +DWW 3 t 1RUWK & & f 2FFXSDWLRQV DQG VRFLDO VWDWXV 1HZ
PAGE 174

6HHJQLLOOHU % 5 f 6H[UROH GLIIHUHQWLDWLRQ LQ SUHVFKRROHUV (IIHFWV RI PDWHUQDO HPSOR\PHQW 7KH -RXUQDO RI 3V\FKRORJ\ 6PLWK ( f 7KH ZRUNLQJ PRWKHU $ FULWLTXH RI WKH UHVHDUFK -RXUQDO RI 9RFDWLRQDO %HKDYLRU 6PLWK + & f $Q LQYHVWLJDWLRQ RI WKH DWWLWXGHV RI DGROHVFHQW JLUOV WRZDUG FRPELQLQJ PDUULDJH PRWKHUKRRG DQG D FDUHHU 'LVVHUWDWLRQ $EVWUDFWV ,QWHUQDWLRQDO f $ 8QLYHUVLW\ 0LFURILOPV 1R f 6PLWK 0 t 6HOI f 7KH FRQJUXHQFH EHWZHHQ PRWKHUVn DQG GDXJKWHUVn VH[UROH DWWLWXGHV $ UHVHDUFK QRWH -RXUQDO RI 0DUULDJH DQG WKH )DPLO\ 6WDQGOH\ t 6RXOH % f :RPHQ LQ PDOHGRPLQDWHG SURIHVVLRQV &RQWUDVWV LQ WKHLU SHUVRQDO DQG YRFDWLRQDO KLVWRULHV -RXUQDO RI 9RFDWLRQDO %HKDYLRU B 6WHSKDQ & : t &RUGHU f )HPDOHVr FRPELQDWLRQ RI ZRUN DQG IDPLO\ UROHV $GROHVFHQWVn DVSLUDWLRQV -RXUQDO RI 0DUULDJH DQG WKH )DPLO\ 6WHSKDQ & : t &RUGHU f 7KH HIIHFWV RI GXDOn FDUHHU IDPLOLHV RQ DGROHVFHQWVn VH[UROH DWWLWXGHV ZRUN DQG IDPLO\ SODQV DQG FKRLFHV RI LPSRUWDQW RWKHUV -RXUQDO RI 0DUULDJH DQG 7KH )DPLO\ 6XSHU ( f 7KHRU\ RI YRFDWLRQDO GHYHORSPHQW $PHULFDQ 3V\FKRORJLVW B 6XSHU ( f &DUHHU GHYHORSPHQW 6HOI FRQFHSW WKHRU\ 1HZ
PAGE 175

7HQ]HU $ f 3DUHQWDO LQIOXHQFHV RQ WKH RFFXSDWLRQDO FKRLFH RI FDUHHU ZRPHQ LQ PDOHGRPLQDWHG DQG WUDGLWLRQDO RFFXSDWLRQV 'RFWRUDO GLVVHUWDWLRQ &ROXPELD 8QLYHUVLW\ 7HDFKHUfV &ROOHJHf 'LVVHUWDWLRQ $EVWUDFWV ,QWHUQDWLRQDO $ 7KRPDV 0 % t 1HDO 5 $ f &ROODERUDWLQJ FDUHHUV 7KH GLIIHUHQWLDO HIIHFWV RI UDFH -RXUQDO RI 9RFDWLRQDO %HKDYLRU W 7LHGHPDQ 9 t 2f+DUD 5 3 f &DUHHU GHYHORSPHQW &KRLFH DQG DGMXVWPHQW 1HZ
PAGE 176

9RJHO 6 5 %URYHUPDQ %URYHUPDQ 0 &ODUNVRQ ) ( t 5RVHQNUDQW] 3 6 f 0DWHUQDO HPSOR\PHQW DQG SHUFHSWLRQ RI VH[ UROHV DPRQJ FROOHJH VWXGHQWV 'HYHORSPHQWDO 3V\FKRORJ\ B 9RJHO 6 5 %URYHUPDQ %URYHUPDQ 0 &ODUNVRQ ) ( t 5RVHQNUDQW] 3 6 f 6H[UROH VHOI FRQFHSW DQG OLIHVW\OH SODQV RI \RXQJ ZRPHQ -RXUQDO RI &RQVXOWLQJ DQG &OLQLFDO 3V\FKRORJ\ :DOVK % : t 2VLSRZ 6 + f +DQGERRN RI YRFDWLRQDO SV\FKRORJ\ +LOOVGDOH 1/DZUHQFH (UOEDXLQ :DOVWHGW f 7KH DOWUXLVWLF RWKHU RULHQWDWLRQ $Q H[SORUDWLRQ RI IHPDOH SRZHUOHVVQHVV 3V\FKRORJ\ RI :RPHQ 4XDUWHUO\ B :HLW]PDQ / f 6H[UROH VRFLDOL]DWLRQ $ IRFXV RQ ZRPHQ ,Q )UHHPDQ (Gf :RPHQ $ IHPLQLVW SHUVSHFWLYH SS f 3DOR $OWR &$ 0D\ILHOG
PAGE 177

$33(1',; $ '(02*5$3+,& 48(67,211$,5( 3OHDVH ZULWH GLUHFWO\ RQ WKLV IRUP 6H[ PDOH IHPDOH $JH 0DMRU 5DFH 8) FODVVLILFDWLRQ 86 &LWL]HQVKLS \HV QR :KDW ZHUH \RXU WRWDO 6$7 VFRUHV IRU HQWHULQJ 8)" :KDW LV \RXU PDULWDO VWDWXV" VLQJOH GLYRUFHG PDUULHG ZLGRZHG $UH \RXU SDUHQWV VWLOO PDUULHG WR HDFK RWKHU" \HV QR :KR ZDV WKH EUHDGZLQQHUVf LQ \RXU IDPLO\ ZKLOH \RX ZHUH JURZLQJ XS" )DWKHU 0RWKHU %RWK 7DNLQJ HYHU\WKLQJ LQWR FRQVLGHUDWLRQ LQ JHQHUDO ZKDW VRFLDO FODVV EHVW GHVFULEHV \RXU IDPLO\ ORZHU FODVV ORZHU PLGGOH FODVV PLGGOH FODVV XSSHU PLGGOH FODVV XSSHU FODVV 3DWHUQDO %DFNJURXQG 3OHDVH DQVZHU WKH IROORZLQJ TXHVWLRQV DERXW \RXU IDWKHUfV ZRUN LI KH KDV KDG VHYHUDO GLIIHUHQW MREV SLFN WKH RQH WKDW \RX UHPHPEHU WKH PRVW DERXW RU WKDW VWDQGV RXW LQ \RXU PLQGf ,, :KR GRHV \RXU IDWKHU ZRUN IRU" 1DPH RI FRPSDQ\ EXVLQHVV RUJDQL]DWLRQ RU RWKHU HPSOR\HUf :KDW NLQG RI EXVLQHVV RU LQGXVWU\ LV WKLV" GHVFULEH WKH DFWLYLW\ DW WKH ORFDWLRQ ZKHUH HPSOR\HGf )RU H[DPSOH +RVSLWDO QHZVSDSHU SXEOLVKLQJ PDLO RUGHU KRXVH DXWR HQJLQH PDQXIDFWXULQJ EUHDNIDVW FHUHDO PDQXIDFWXULQJf

PAGE 178

:KDW NLQG RI ZRUN GRHV \RXU IDWKHU GR" IRU H[DPSOH UHJLVWHUHG QXUVH SHUVRQQHO PDQDJHU VXSHUYLVRU RI RUGHU GHSDUWPHQW JDVROLQH HQJLQH DVVHPEOHU JULQGHU RSHUDWRUf :KDW DUH \RXU IDWKHUVfV PRVW LPSRUWDQW ZRUN DFWLYLWLHV RU GXWLHV" IRU H[DPSOH SDWLHQW FDUH GLUHFWLQJ KLULQJ SROLFLHV VXSHUYLVLQJ RUGHU FOHUNV DVVHPEOLQJ HQJLQHV RSHUDWLQJ JULQGLQJ PLOOf ,V KH DQ HPSOR\HH RI D 3ULYDWH FRPSDQ\ EXVLQHVV RU LQGLYLGXDO IRU ZDJHV VDODU\ RU FRPPLVVLRQV" D *RYHUQPHQW HPSOR\HHIHGHUDO VWDWH FRXQW\ RU ORFDO JRYHUQPHQWf" 6 HOIHPSOR\HG LQ 2ZQ EXVLQHVV SURIHVVLRQDO SUDFWLFH RU IDUP RZQ EXVLQHVV QRW LQFRUSRUDWHG RU IDUPf RZQ EXVLQHVV LQFRUSRUDWHG ZRUNLQJ :LWKRXW 3D\ LQ D IDPLO\ EXVLQHVV RU IDUP" :KDW LV WKH KLJKHVW HGXFDWLRQDO JUDGH OHYHO DFKLHYHG E\ \RXU IDWKHU" )RU H[DPSOH FRPSOHWHG HLJKWK JUDGH KLJK VFKRRO JUDGXDWH FROOHJH JUDGXDWH JUDGXDWH ZRUNf :KDW LV WKH KLJKHVW HGXFDWLRQDO GHJUHH REWDLQHG E\ \RXU IDWKHU" )RU H[DPSOH +LJKVFKRRO 'LSORPD %DFKHORUV 'HJUHHf $OO LQ DOO KRZ VDWLVILHG ZRXOG \RX VD\ \RXU IDWKHU LV ZLWK KLV MRE" 9HU\ 6DWLVILHG 1RW DW DOO VDWLVILHG

PAGE 179

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f" 1RW DW DOO ,QYROYHG 9HU\ ,QYROYHG +RZ VXSSRUWLYH LV \RXU PRWKHU RI \RXU IDWKHUfV RFFXSDWLRQDO VWDWXV" 1RW DW DOO 6XSSRUWLYH 7RWDOO\ 6XSSRUWLYH

PAGE 180

,Q WHUPV RI KRZ VHH P\ IDWKHU QRZ ZRXOG VD\ KH LV EDVLFDOO\ KDSS\ ZLWK WKH ZD\ KH OHDGV KLV OLIH 6WURQJO\ GLVDJUHH 6WURQJO\ DJUHH 0DWHUQDO %DFNJURXQG :KDW LV WKH KLJKHVW HGXFDWLRQDO JUDGH OHYHO DFKLHYHG E\ \RXU PRWKHU" )RU H[DPSOH FRPSOHWHG HLJKWK JUDGH KLJK VFKRRO JUDGXDWH FROOHJH JUDGXDWH JUDGXDWH ZRUNf :KDW LV WKH KLJKHVW HGXFDWLRQDO GHJUHH REWDLQHG E\ \RXU PRWKHU )RU H[DPSOH KLJKVFKRRO 'LSORPD %DFKHORUV 'HJUHHf 'LG \RXU PRWKHU HYHU ZRUN RU KDYH D MRE DZD\ IURP KRPH ZKHQ \RX ZHUH JURZLQJ XS" \HV QR ,I 1R 3OHDVH VNLS WR LWHP ,I
PAGE 181

3OHDVH DQVZHU WKH IROORZLQJ TXHVWLRQV DERXW \RXU PRWKHUnV ZRUN LI VKH KDV KDG VHYHUDO GLIIHUHQW MREV SLFN WKH RQH WKDW \RX UHPHPEHU WKH PRVW DERXW RU WKDW VWDQGV RXW PRVW LQ \RXU PLQGf :KR GRHV \RXU PRWKHU ZRUN IRU" 1DPH RI FRPSDQ\ EXVLQHVV RUJDQL]DWLRQ RU RWKHU HPSOR\HUf :KDW NLQG RI EXVLQHVV RU LQGXVWU\ LV WKLV" GHVFULEH WKH DFWLYLW\ DW WKH ORFDWLRQ ZKHUH HPSOR\HGf )RU H[DPSOH +RVSLWDO QHZVSDSHU SXEOLVKLQJ PDLO RUGHU KRXVH DXWR HQJLQH PDQXIDFWXULQJ EUHDNIDVW FHUHDO :KDW NLQG RI ZRUN GRHV \RXU PRWKHU GR" IRU H[DPSOH UHJLVWHUHG QXUVH SHUVRQQHO PDQDJHU VXSHUYLVRU RI RUGHU GHSDUWPHQW JDVROLQH HQJLQH DVVHPEOHU JULQGHU RSHUDWRUf :KDW DUH \RXU PRWKHUnV PRVW LPSRUWDQW ZRUN DFWLYLWLHV RU GXWLHV" IRU H[DPSOH SDWLHQW FDUH GLUHFWLQJ KLULQJ SROLFLHV VXSHUYLVLQJ RUGHU FOHUNV DVVHPEOLQJ HQJLQHV RSHUDWLQJ JULQGLQJ PLOOf ,V VKH D Q HPSOR\HH RI D 3ULYDWH FRPSDQ\ EXVLQHVV RU LQGLYLGXDO IRU ZDJHV VDODU\ RU FRPPLVVLRQV" D *RYHUQPHQW HPSOR\HH IHGHUDO VWDWH FRXQW\ RU ORFDO JRYHUQPHQWf" 6HOIHPSOR\HG LQ 2ZQ EXVLQHVV SURIHVVLRQDO SUDFWLFH RU IDUP RZQ EXVLQHVV QRW LQFRUSRUDWHG RU IDUPf RZQ EXVLQHVV LQFRUSRUDWHG ZRUNLQJ :LWKRXW 3D\ LQ D IDPLO\ EXVLQHVV RU IDUP"

PAGE 182

7DNLQJ HYHU\WKLQJ LQWR DFFRXQW KRZ ZRXOG \RX FKDUDFWHUL]H \RXU IDWKHUVf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fV OHYHO RI LQYROYHPHQW LQ HPSOR\PHQW RXWVLGH RI WKH KRPH" ZKHWKHU VKH ZRUNHG IXOOWLPH SDUWLPH RU QRW DW DOOf 1RW DW DOO VXSSRUWLYH 7RWDOO\ VXSSRUWLYH ,Q JHQHUDO KRZ KDSS\ ZRXOG \RX VD\ \RXU PRWKHU LV ZLWK KHU OHYHO RI LQYROYHPHQW LQ HPSOR\PHQW RXWVLGH RI WKH KRPH" ZKHWKHU VKH ZRUNHG IXOOWLPH SDUWLPH RU QRW DW DOOf 1RW DW DOO KDSS\ 9HU\ KDSS\

PAGE 183

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

PAGE 184

$33(1',; % ,16758&7,216 72 3$57,&,3$176 'HVFULSWLRQ RI WKH 6WXG\ 7KH DLP RI WKLV VWXG\ LV WR H[SORUH WKH ZD\ LQ ZKLFK \RX YLHZ WKH RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH 7R SDUWLFLSDWH LQ WKLV UHVHDUFK \RX ZLOO QHHG WR FRPSOHWH WKUHH TXHVWLRQQDLUHV 7KH ILUVW TXHVWLRQQDLUH WKH /566f DVNV \RX WR H[SUHVV \RXU RSLQLRQV DQG LGHDV DERXW WKH RFFXSDWLRQDO UROH 7KH VHFRQG TXHVWLRQQDLUH WKH /,3+(f DVNV \RX WR H[SUHVV \RXU RSLQLRQV DERXW FHUWDLQ DVSHFWV RI \RXU FKLOGKRRG UHODWLRQVKLS ZLWK \RXU PRWKHU DQG IDWKHU 7KH WKLUG TXHVWLRQQDLUH DVNV IRU GHPRJUDSKLF LQIRUPDWLRQ DERXW \RXUVHOI DQG \RXU SDUHQWV DQG \RXU RSLQLRQV DERXW \RXU SDUHQWV VDWLVIDFWLRQ ZLWK FHUWDLQ OLIH UROHV 1R RQH RXWVLGH RI WKLV UHVHDUFK SURMHFW ZLOO KDYH DFFHVV WR DQ\ RI \RXU PDWHULDOV $OO PDWHULDOV DUH QXPEHU FRGHG LQVWHDG RI XVLQJ \RXU QDPHf WR DVVXUH DQRQ\PLW\ 6R SOHDVH GR QRW SXW \RXU QDPH VRFLDOVHFXULW\ QXPEHU RU DQ\ LGHQWLI\LQJ LQIRUPDWLRQ RQ \RXU TXHVWLRQQDLUHV 1R LQGLYLGXDO UHVXOWV ZLOO EH VKDUHG +RZHYHU JURXS UHVXOWV ZLOO EH VKDUHG ZLWK SDUWLFLSDQWV RQ UHTXHVW 3DUWLFLSDWLRQ LV YROXQWDU\ ,PSRUWDQW ,QVWUXFWLRQV 3OHDVH XVH WKH DQVZHU VKHH W SURYLGHG WR UHFRUG \RXU UHVSRQVHV WR WKH ILUVW WZR TXHVWLRQQDLUHV /566 DQG /,3+(f LWHPV )RU WKH WKLUG TXHVWLRQQDLUH WKH GHPRJUDSKLF TXHVWLRQQDLUH UHFRUG \RXU DQVZHUV GLUHFWO\ RQ WKH W\SHG TXHVWLRQQDLUH 7+$1. <28

PAGE 185

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nV SHUVRQDO DQG YRFDWLRQDO GHYHORSPHQW DQG UHODWHG FRXQVHOLQJ LVVXHV DQG FROOHJH VWXGHQW GHYHORSPHQW 6KH FRPSOHWHG KHU GRFWRUDO LQWHUQVKLS LQ DW WKH 8QLYHUVLW\ RI )ORULGD 3V\FKRORJLFDO DQG 9RFDWLRQDO &RXQVHOLQJ &HQWHU -DPLH H[SHFWV WR UHFHLYH KHU 3K' LQ FRXQVHOLQJ SV\FKRORJ\ LQ 0D\

PAGE 186

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mWRU RI 3KLORVRSK\ 5REHUW -HVWHU $VVRFLDWH 3UR VVRU RI )RXQGDWLRQV RI (GXFDWLRQ 7KLV GLVVHUWDWLRQ ZDV VXEPLWWHG WR WKH *UDGXDWH )DFXOW\ RI WKH &ROOHJH RI (GXFDWLRQ DQG WR WKH *UDGXDWH 6FKRRO DQG ZDV DFFHSWHG DV SDUWLDO IXOILOOPHQW RI WKH UHTXLUHPHQWV IRU WKH GHJUHH RI 'RFWRU RI 3KLORVRSK\ 0D\ M*Xr L 'HDQ &ROOHJH RI (GXFDWLRQ 'HDQ *UDGXDWH 6FKRRO

PAGE 187

81,9(56,7< 2) )/25,'$


137
contribute to explaining variation in daughters' occupational
role salience were maternal educational level, maternal
nonemployed role satisfaction, and mother-daughter
relationship quality. As with the total sample analyses,
possible methodological explanations for nonsignificant
results might include measurement error due to limited scale
values, social desirability response bias of subjects,
measurement error due to subjectivity of assessment, and
restricted response range. In support of these explanations,
the majority of scores on the maternal nonemployed role
satisfaction variable (0-5) were from 3-5, with a mean of 4,
indicating most daughters perceived mothers as either
satisfied with their nonworking role or neither satisfied nor
dissatisfied. Further, examination of the mean and standard
deviation for maternal educational level indicates the
majority of nonworking mothers had between 12 and 16 years of
education, a relatively restricted range considering that
possible educational levels range from 0-20.
The Nonemployed Mothers Subsample: Paternal Variables
Although the full eight-variab1e model examining the
impact of paternal role attribute variables on occupational
role salience for daughters of nonworking mothers did not
reach significance, the selected three-variable and six-
variable subset models reached significance with R-squares
equal to .12 ( £_ <.05) and .10 (p_ <.10) respectively. Due to
the lack of increment in variance accounted for by the six-


54
salience, and daughters sex role orientation and attitudes.
Alraquist and Angrist (1970) have found occupational role
innovation to be related to occupational role salience in
college women, and thus provide a rationale for reviewing
literature on parental relationship influences on
occupational role innovation of women.
Tangri (1972), examining determinants of occupational
role innovation among 200 college women, found role
innovators reported warmer feelings toward their mothers but
felt more similar to their fathers, and reported autonomous
relationships with both parents. Conversely, Standley and
Soule (1974), sampling 151 women in a variety of male-
dominated professions, found that twice as many of these
women felt they were their fathers favorite than their
mothers favorite. In data collected by Kutner and Brogan
(1985) on female medical students, fathers were perceived as
more supportive than mothers. Tenzer (1977), studying women
in innovative professions (i.e., lawyers, physicians,
managers), found that fathers, but not mothers, stressed
instrumental values and behaviors rather than expressive
values and behaviors more than did the fathers of women in
traditional professions (i.e., social workers, nurses).
Ridgeway (1978) examined parental identification and
occupational role salience in 457 college women. She found
parental identification, measured as perceived similarity to
parents, to mediate the impact of maternal employment status


30
opportunity and participation in the labor force (Blau, 1984;
Freeman, 1984; Leslie, 1982).
These above mentioned changes in the form and
functioning of the family, marriage, female labor force
participation, and the status of women, along with the shift
in social values and role definitions accompanying these
changes have undoubtedly had an impact on the occupational
role expectations of women. Specifically, it has been
hypothesized by sociologists that these changes have resulted
in changes in perceptions, definitions, attitudes, and
enactment of occupational, marital, and parental roles of men
and women (Kurdek & Siesky, 1981; Leslie, 1982). This in
turn has resulted in a significant alteration in the nature
of models and relationships children are exposed to and
ultimately changes the role expectations, preferences, and
options of the next generation (Hoffman, 1977). Although
proposed as a salient influence, limited research
manipulation of this overriding sociological context has been
possible. In this study, this context is hypothesized to act
as a constant.
Developmental Context
The developmental context includes those factors which
impact on a woman and her expectations and behavior as a
result of her developmental stage in the life cycle.
Research and theory describing normative patterns of human
development have suggested that certain factors influence


13
direct reinforcing agents for their children (Kelly & Worell,
1976), and their influence is related to both the power of
parents as role models and the nature of the relationship
between each parent and the child. Research on the behavior
of children in response to adult role models has indicated
that the likelihood of imitation increases with the closeness
of the relationship between the child and the model (Bandura,
1977; Mussen & Distler, 1959). In addition, it is assumed
that parents* power as occupational role models is increased
when they are perceived as being reinforced or rewarded for
their occupational behavior. Such rewards might include
having high status (in terms of both extrafamilial factors
such as education and occupational attainment and
intrafamilial factors such as the greater educational or
occupational attainment of one spouse), demonstrating
satisfaction with their roles, and appearing supported for
engaging in their roles. Therefore, in examining the impact
of parental role model influences on college women's current
role expectations from a social learning perspective three
sets of variables are suggested; parental role
characteristics, consequences for parents of their role
involvements, and the quality of parent-child relationships.
From a social learning theory perspective, high
occupational role salience is hypothesized to result from
several distinctively different combinations of these
factors. For example, a young woman who reports having high


167
Tenzer, A. (1977). Parental influences on the occupational
choice of career women in male-dominated and traditional
occupations (Doctoral dissertation, Columbia University
Teachers College). Dissertation Abstracts
International, 38 2014A .
Thomas, M. B., & Neal, R. A. (1978). Collaborating careers:
The differential effects of race. Journal of Vocational
Behavior t 12, 33-41.
Tiedeman, D. V., & OHara, R. P. (1963). Career development:
Choice and adjustment. New York: College Entrance
Examination Board.
Tittle, C. K. (1977, August). Sex role values: A neglected
factor in career decision making-theory. San Francisco,
CA: Paper presented at the Annual Convention of the
American Psychological Association. (ERIC Document
Reproduction Service No. ED 155 568)
Treiman, D. J. & Terrell, K. (1975). Sex and the process of
status attainment: A comparison of working women and
men. American Sociological Review, 40, 174-200.
United States Department of Commerce. (1970). Statistical
abstracts of the United States. Washington, DC: Bureau
of the Census.
United States Department of Commerce. (1983a). 1980 census of
occupations. Washington, DC: Bureau of the Census.
United States Department of Commerce. (1983b). Classified
index of industries and occupations. 1980 census of
population. Washington, DC: Bureau of the Census.
United States Department of Commerce. (1983c). General social
and economic characteristics. 1980 census of population.
Washington, DC: Bureau of the Census.
United States Department of Labor. (1975). 1975 handbook on
women workers. (Bulletin 297). Washington, DC: Womens
Bureau.
University of Florida Office for Academic Affairs. (March,
1985). Fact book. University of Florida, Gainesville.
Vanfossen, B. E. (1977). Sexual stratification and sex-role
socialization. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 39,
549-561.
Vetter, L. (1973). Career counseling for women. The
Counseling Psychologist, 4_, 54-67.


48
Several researchers examining maternal educational
attainment have reported a relationship between maternal
educational level and role modeling of daughters. Smith and
Self (1980), exploring the relationship between the sex role
attitudes of female college students and their mothers,
measured the attitudes of 74 mother-daughter pairs. They
found that mothers with a college education had the greatest
degree of attitudinal similarity to their daughters
regardless of whether their attitudes were liberal or not.
Focusing on the effects of maternal employment on
occupational role salience, the results of one study of
elementary school children (Hartley, 1966) and four studies
of adolescent girls (Banducci, 1967; Dellas, Gaier, &
Emihovich, 1979; Peterson, 1958/1959; Smith, 1969) indicated
daughters of working mothers were more likely than daughters
of nonworking mothers to view work as something they wanted
to do when they were mothers. Douvan ( 1963) found that
adolescent daughters of employed mothers were more likely to
name their mothers as the person they most admired. In
studies investigating occupational aspirations at the college
level, Almquist and Angrist (1971) found higher occupational
role salience among daughters with working mothers, and
Almquist and Angrist (1970), Baruch (1972), and Tangri (1972)
found that college daughters of working mothers more often
chose occupations in nontraditional career fields.


122
subsaraple of women with employed mothers revealed a wide
distribution, including women whose mothers only worked a few
years part time. This indicated a design flaw in defining
these mothers as employed, and violated linearity assumptions
for later regression analyses conducted on the employed
mothers subsaraple.
Intercorre1ations among and between the dependent
variable and independent variables were then presented for
the total sample and the subsamples of college women with
employed or noneraployed mothers. Intercorrelations among the
independent variables were generally higher than the
correlations between the dependent and independent variables,
with the lowest correlations between the dependent and
independent variables for the employed mothers subsaraple.
Finally the results of the regression analyses
corresponding to the seven research questions were presented,
followed by presentation of results of post hoc analyses of
selected subset models. The amount of variance accounted for
by the full model regression equations and selected subset
models of independent variables was small for both the total
sample and the employed mothers and noneraployed mothers
subsamples. The subset models of maternal and paternal role
attribute variables selected for the noneraployed mothers
subsample accounted for the greatest amount of variance in
occupational role salience of daughters with R-squares
ranging from .08-.14.


34
salience of college women appears to be an important factor
to understand, given its influence on the role choices and
future role behavior of this population.
It appears that the pressure to decide on future goals
may be so great for the college student that the individual
begins to feel that there is no time for a genuine
exploration of life role possibilities. Major life decisions
such as occupational choice may be made initially on the
basis of personality and family influences without the
advantage of realistic knowledge or experience. This
conceptualization was supported by the finding that many
college students view life with relative passivity (Katz,
1968). Katz found many students to be strongly influenced by
their parents wishes and aspirations, and the prevailing
fashions and opportunities in society at the time. For many
college students there appears to be no clear cut decision
making process regarding career, marriage, and family roles.
Madison (1969) suggested three phases which are
descriptive of the developmental pattern of changes in both
men and women during the college years: initial
organization, erosion of the initial organization, and re
synthesis. These three phases can be applied to any
dimension of significance to the college student (e.g.,
career choice, life role perceptions and choices,
relationships). During the initial organization phase
students make decisions about matters of significance largely


150
In addition, subjects objective assessments of these
satisfaction, support and relationship variables may not have
coincided with objective reality. Future studies might
include parents' self-report of their role satisfaction and
support, and their relationship with their daughters. This
would provide corroboration of the daughters perceptions. In
addition, if family interactions could be observed as in
family therapy process studies, then objective assessments of
parental satisfaction and support variables and parent-
daughter relationship variables could also be obtained.
Recommendations for Future Research
Recommendations for future research based on both
significant and nonsignificant findings as well as the
proposed limitations of this study are presented in this
section.
To increase generalizability of the findings for this
study, future research examining parental role modeling
influences on life role expectations and salience might be
conducted using both male students and upper division college
students, nonstudent populations, different age groups, or
married subjects as well as including subjects with deceased
or divorced parents. Additionally, future studies at other
colleges would allow for generalization to college
populations outside of Florida.
To increase the validity, reliability, and power of
measurement of the parental role satisfaction and support


168
Vogel, S. R., Broverman, I. K., Broverman, D. M., Clarkson,
F. E., & Rosenkrantz, P. S. (1970). Maternal employment
and perception of sex roles among college students.
Developmental Psychology, 3_, 384-391.
Vogel, S. R., Broverman, I. K., Broverman, D. M., Clarkson,
F. E., & Rosenkrantz, P. S. (1975). Sex-role self-
concept and life-style plans of young women. Journal of
Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 43, 427.
Walsh, B. W., & Osipow, S. H. (1983). Handbook of vocational
psychology. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbauin.
Walstedt, J. J. (1977). The altruistic other orientation: An
exploration of female powerlessness. Psychology of Women
Quarterly, 2_, 162-176.
Weitzman, L. J. (1984). Sex-role socialization: A focus on
women. In J. Freeman (Ed.), Women: A feminist
perspective (pp. 157-237). Palo Alto, CA: Mayfield.
Yanico, B. J. (1981). Sex-role self-concept and attitudes
related to occupational daydreams and future fantasies
of college women. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 19,
290-301.
Yarrow, M. R., Scott, P. deLeeuw, L. & Heinig, C.
(1962). Child rearing in families of working and
nonworking mothers. Social Psychology Quarterly, 25,
122-140.
Yuen, R. K., Tinsley, D. J., & Tinsley, H. E. (1980). The
vocational needs and background characteristics of
homemaker-oriented women and career-oriented women.
Vocational Guidance Quarterly, 28, 250-256.
Zuckerman, D. M. (1980). Self-esteem, personal traits, and
college womens life goals. Journal of Vocational
Behavior, 17, 310-319.


164
Oliver, L. W. (1975). The relationship of parental attitudes
and parent identification to career and homemaking
orientation in college women. Journal of Vocational
Behavior, 7_, 1-12.
Oppenheimer, V. K. (1982). Work and family: A study in social
demography. New York: Academic Press.
Osipow, S. H. (1968). Theories of career development. New
York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.
Osipow, S. H. (1973). Theories of career development (2nd
ed.). New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.
Osipow, S. H. (1975). The relevance of theories of career
development to special groups: Problems, needed data and
implications. In S. Picou & R. Campbell (Eds.), Career
behavior of special groups. Columbus, OH: Merrill.
Parelius, A. P. (1975). Emerging sex-role attitudes,
expectations, and strains among college women. Journal
of Marriage and the Family, 37, 146-153.
Parson, T. (1965). The forces of change. In. S. M. Farber, P.
Mustacchi, & R. Wilson (Eds.), Man and civilization: The
family's search for survival (pp. 31-51). New York:
McGraw-Hill.
Parsons, J E. Frieze, A. H., & Ruble, D. N. (197 8).
Intrapsychic factors influencing career aspirations in
college women. Sex Roles, 4_, 337-347.
Patterson, L. E. (1973). Girls' careers: Expression of
identity. Vocational Guidance Quarterly, 21, 268-275.
Perun, P. J., & Bielby, D. D. V. (1981). Towards a model of
female occupational behavior: A human development
approach. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 6_, 234-251.
Peterson, E. T. (1959). The impact of maternal employment on
the mother-daughter relationship and on the daughter's
role-orientation. (Doctoral dissertation, University of
Michigan, Ann Arbor, 1958). Dissertation Abstracts
International, 19 (12), 3407.
Piaget, J. (1932). The moral judgement of the child. London:
Kegan Paul.
Piaget, J. (1952). The origins of intelligence in children.
New York: International University Press.


109
and a three-variable model were selected from all possible
subset solutions of the regression equation and tested for
significance. The following criteria were used for selection
of these two subset models and all subsequent subset models
selected in later analyses: the magnitude of R-square
relative to other models with equal numbers of variables, the
incremental increase in R-square related to addition of a
variable to the model, and the theoretical justification for
a particular combination of variables in a given model.
The two subset models selected are presented in Table 6.
The six-variable model selected, which was ordered as
follows: maternal employment extent + paternal occupation
support + paternal occupational prestige + paternal
educational level + paternal occupational innovation +
father-daughter relationship dissatisfaction, yielded a total
R-square of .05 (p_ <.01). The total R-square for the three-
variable model, maternal employment extent + paternal
occupational prestige level + paternal educational level, was
.06 (p. <.01).
It should be noted that there were eight other maternal
role attribute variables which were not included in this
analysis of the total sample. This was because it was
assumed that the influence of these specific maternal
satisfaction, support, and relationship variables on
daughter's occupational role salience would differ for
daughters with employed and with nonemployed mothers. These


127
Paternal occupational prestige level, which is
frequently viewed as a measure of a familys socioeconomic
status, was also found to explain a significant amount of the
variance in college womens occupational role salience after
accounting for variance explained by extent of maternal
employment. This finding is consistent with results from a
previous study conducted by Rosen and Aneshensel (1978) in
which a positive relationship was found between family
socioeconomic status and occupational role salience of
daughters. However, this finding contradicts the results
from a study conducted by Bielby (1978) in which it was
reported that female college students from less economically
priveleged homes had higher occupational role salience.
When the third significant variable, paternal
educational level, was placed in the regression equation, a
possible explanation was suggested. After accounting for the
variance in womens occupational role salience contributed by
the extent of maternal employment and paternal occupational
prestige level, paternal educational level was a significant
factor. However, while the first two variables were directly
related to occupational role salience of daughters, this
third variable was inversely related to it. One possible
family pattern suggested by these results is that college
women with higher occupational role salience are more likely
to have a mother who worked extensively and a father with
high occupational prestige but a lower level of education.


61
psychological factors are most powerful in explaining
variation in occupational role salience of women. These
psychological factors clearly point to parental socialization
as wielding an influence on occupational role salience of
daughters. Such influence has been operationalized in terras
of parental role characteristics and qualitative aspects of
the parent-daughter relationships.
Social learning theory has been suggested as a useful
model for conceptualizing the distinctive nature of parental
socialization influences on occupational role salience of
college women. Two critical areas of influence are suggested
by this theoretical perspective: the quality of the parents
as role models and the power of parents a? role models.
These influences were examined in the present study for both
mothers and fathers of college women.


112
combinations of variables and tested for significance. These
models are presented in Table 7. The R-sqaare for the
following five-variable model was .01 (p_ >.10): Occupational
role salience of daughters = maternal employment extent +
maternal occupational prestige + maternal job satisfaction +
maternal marital satisfaction + mother-daughter relationship
dissatisfaction. The R-square for the two-variable model
selected, occupational role salience = maternal employment
extent + maternal marital satisfaction, was .02 (g_ =.10).
The Employed Mothers Subsample: Paternal Variables
A regression analysis was performed to examine the
influences of paternal role attribute variables on
occupational role salience of daughters with employed mothers
to address the fourth research question: To what extent can
variation in occupational role salience be accounted for by
variations in paternal role status, perceived paternal role
status consequences, and the perceived quality of the father-
daughter relationship for daughters of mothers who worked?
The eight-variable regression model corresponding to
this question was as follows: Occupational role salience =
paternal educational level + paternal occupational prestige +
paternal occupational innovation + paternal job satisfaction
+ paternal occupational role support + paternal marital
satisfaction + paternal life satisfaction + father-daughter
relationship dissatisfaction.


130
relationship variables might be expected to be secondary to
or less powerful than the roles themselves in predicting
imitation. Third, the influence of paternal marital
relationship satisfaction on occupational role salience might
be expected to be nonlinear based on maternal employment
status, and therefore not applicable to the total sample.
Turning to methodological limitations, there were
several parental role attribute' variables which had a
restricted range of responses thus decreasing the power of
these variables to account for differences in occupational
role salience of daughters. For instance, the majority of
response values for the variable assessing paternal
occupational innovation (1%100%) were restricted to the
traditional range (70%-100%). Further, the parent-daughter
relationship satisfaction variable appeared to be affected by
social desirability response bias which resulted in a
restricted range of responses. This restricted range of
response values assessing father-daughter relationship
satisfaction indicated the majority of subjects reported they
were not at all dissatisfied with the relationship.
A third possible methodological explanation for the lack
of findings were the subjective assessments required by
subjects on many of the self-report measures. In particular,
paternal role status satisfaction and support, and father-
daughter relationship quality were based on subjective
assessments made by the daughters. Therefore, these measures


63
procedure, instrumentation, data collection procedures, data
analysis, and limitations of the study.
Design
Due to the inability to control for the parental
attribute variables examined in this study, an ex post facto,
descriptive design was used. Three aspects of parental
influence were examined using three sets of variables to
predict the dependent variable, occupational role salience of
college women. The first set described aspects of the
parents' actual role status: (a) absolute and relative
prestige level of maternal (if employed) and paternal
employment, (b) absolute and relative level of maternal and
paternal educational attainment, (c) extent of maternal
employment, and (d) maternal (if employed) and paternal
employment innovation.
The second set of variables examined the consequences of
parental role status: (a) perceived maternal and paternal
life satisfaction, (b) perceived maternal and paternal
marital relationship satisfaction, (c) perceived maternal and
paternal occupational role status satisfaction, and (d)
perceived maternal and paternal support for their spouses'
occupational role status.
The parent-daughter relationship was examined as the
third parental influence. This relationship was examined in
terms of the daughter's perceived dissatisfaction with the
amount of control, affection, and inclusion expressed. This


8
Although occupational role salience evolves over time as
a girl matures into a woman, it is relatively stable for a
woman at a particular developmental stage, and it can be used
to detect differences among women within that stage.
The factors proposed to influence womens valuing of and
commitment to the occupational role can be grouped into three
broad spheres: individual trait and status influences,
socialization influences, and structure of. opportunity
influences. Most studies of occupational role salience of
women have examined the first two spheres of influence:
trait and status factors or socialization influences. Only
recently have studies examined these two spheres of influence
conjointly (Fassinger, 1985; Hesse-Biber & Gosselin, 1982;
Rosen & Aneshensel, 1978; Stephan & Corder, 1984, 1985;
Yanico, 1981).
Studies on the impact of current status on occupational
role salience of women have examined the influence of age
(Beedle et al., 1979; Matthews & Tiedeman, 1964; Rand &
Miller, 1972; Zuckerraan, 1980), marital status (Astin & Mynt,
1971; Berson, 1978; Bielby, 1978; Mueller & Campbell, 1977)
and educational attainment (Astin & Mynt, 1971; Yuen et al. ,
1980).
Studies of personal traits or characteristics related to
women's occupational role salience and involvement have
explored the impact of traits such as race (Malson, 1983;
Noel, 1979; Thomas & Neal, 1978), sex role attitudes


170
13.What kind of work does your father do?
(for example: registered nurse, personnel manager, supervisor
of order department, gasoline engine assembler, grinder
operator)
14.What are your fatherss most important work activities or
duties?
(for example: patient care, directing hiring policies,
supervising order clerks, assembling engines, operating
grinding mill)
15.Is he:
an employee of a Private company, business, or
individual for wages, salary, or commissions?
a Government employee(federal, state, county, or local
government)?
S elf-employed in Own business, professional practice,
or farm
own business not incorporated (or farm)
own business incorporated
working Without Pay in a family business or farm?
16.What is the highest educational grade level achieved by
your father?
(For example: 8=completed eighth grade, 12=high school
graduate, 16= college graduate, 18-20 = graduate work)
17.What is the highest educational degree obtained by your
father?
(For example: Highschool Diploma, Bachelors Degree)
18.All in all, how satisfied would you say your father is
with his job?
4
Very Satisfied
0 1
Not at all satisfied
2
3


18
related to the students reported level of occupational role
salience. This phenomenological perspective was believed to
be more accurate in exploring influences on daughters
occupational role salience than were objective, behavioral
measures of parental role status, or parental reports of
their role satisfaction or the quality of the parent-daughter
relationship.
Data from the total sample, and then from subsamples of
women with employed mothers and women with noneraployed
mothers, were examined to assess the contribution of each of
the parental attribute variables in explaining variation in
occupational role salience. The extent of maternal
employment and all paternal role attributes were examined for
the entire sample of women. The remaining maternal role
attributes were not examined for the total sample due to
their presumed nonlinear relationship with daughters
occupational role salience as a function of maternal
employment status. Subsamples of women with employed mothers
and women with nonemployed mothers were then created to
examine the contribution of maternal role model influences.
Data from these two subsamples were examined with maternal
and paternal variables evaluated first separately and then in
combination.
Research Questions
The following set of research questions, subdivided by
the variables involved, was addressed in this study:


43
focused primarily on familial influences. In these studies
the influence of the family of origin in shaping womens sex
role and occupational role expectations has been examined in
terms of both family status and structure and the quality of
the parent-daughter relationship. In the following sections
research on family status and structural factors, and parent-
daughter relationship factors is presented, followed by
analysis of their influence on womens occupational role
salience from a social learning theory perspective.
Family Structure and Status Influences
Family socioeconomic status is often used as a measure
of family status within the broader social context.
Researchers assessing the impact of family status have
generally measured family socioeconomic status by assessing
one or more of the following variables: paternal and
maternal educational attainment, and paternal occupational
status and income. Clearly lacking in these calculations of
socioeconomic status has been a consideration of maternal
occupational factors (Acker, 1978). As a result of this
omission, Haug (1973) suggested that nearly one-third of all
family socioeconomic status estimates were inaccurate. This
may account for the mixed findings regarding family
socioeconomic status influences on role expectations and
attitudes depicted in the following studies.
Several researchers have found a slightly negative
relationship between female occupational orientation and


57
studies are consistent with the social learning theory
postulate that the power of a role model increases with the
closeness of the relationship between the model and the
learner. Second, these results suggest that warm and
supportive relationships with parents who encourage
achievement and autonomy, and who are role models of these
traits themselves (e.g., maternal employment), are related to
women's nontraditi ona 1 sex role orientation and
nontraditional occupational role choice.
This point of view is supported in more general studies
on the effects of parenting. Lamb, Chase-Lansdale, and Owen
(1978) have proposed that good parenting across all
developmental stages for a child requires sensitivity in
interpreting the child's signals and underlying needs and
responding appropriately. For example, if parents are
sensitive to their infant, the baby will come to trust in
their reliability and predictability and consequently will
develope a secure attachment to them (Ainsworth, Bell, &
Stayton, 1974). This secure attachment in turn results in
the child's greater willingness to interact with other
people, subsequent greater exposure to social experiences,
and greater social sophistication (Lamb, Owen, & Chase-
Lansdale, 1980). Lamb (1978), using social learning theory
to elaborate on the importance of parental sensitivity to
their children's needs and subsequent attachments has argued,
"The warmth that characterizes attachments increases both the


42
ages 17-20, who were never married. In addition, information
was collected on abi1ity/aptitude level as measured by
student SAT scores in order to more accurately describe the
sample. Literature on the impact of race on occupational
role salience of women indicates that black women are less
likely to feel compelled to choose either family or work
commitment. In addition, for economic reasons, a married
black woman is less likely to have the luxury of choosing not
to be involved in an occupation. The absolute level of
occupational role salience for single women, however, does
not appear to vary by race. Therefore, the present study did
not control for the effect of race. The racial composition
of the obtained sample, however, is described.
Current trait and attitude factors found to be related
to occupational role salience of women include sex role
attitude and orientation; achievement orientation; needs for
dominance, autonomy, altruism, nurturance, and sociability;
and fear of success. Variations in these attributes are
considered to result in part from variations in family
socialization. In the present study it was hypothesized that
the parental role attributes examined would indirectly tap
some of the influence of these trait and attitude variables
on womens occupational role salience.
Past Socialization Influences
Researchers examining the impact of past socialization
influences on women's occupational role expectations have


OCCUPATIONAL ROLE SALIENCE OF COLLEGE WOMEN:
PERCEPTIONS OF PARENTAL INFLUENCES
By
JAMIE R. FUNDERBURK
A DISSERTATION PRESENTED TO THE GRADUATE SCHOOL
OF THE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA IN
PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS
FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY
UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA
1987


67
Demographic Information
Information was obtained on the following variables by
means of a demographic questionnaire in order to both limit
and accurately describe the obtained sample: subject's age,
minority status, Scholastic Aptitude Test (SAT) score, U.S.
citizenship, socioeconomic status, marital status, major,
year of college, and intactness of family (Appendix A).
Parental Role Status
Parental role status, representing the first cluster of
independent variables, was also assessed in the demographic
questionnaire (Appendix A). This set of variables consisted
of the following: maternal and paternal educational status,
maternal and paternal relative educational status, maternal
(if employed) and paternal occupational prestige level,
maternal (if employed) and paternal relative occupational
prestige level, extent of maternal employment, and maternal
(if employed) and paternal occupational role innovation.
Parental educational status. Parental educational
status was assessed by means of Items 16, 17, 27, and 28
(Appendix A) in which respondents were asked to indicate the
highest grade level of schooling completed and highest degree
earned by each parent. Scores ranged from 0 (no formal
education) through 20 (Ph.D. or M.D.). Parents' relative
educational status was then assessed as the difference
between the educational level score of the mother and the
father. Difference scores ranged from 0 (no difference in


134
for somewhat more variance than either the model for the
total sample or the models for the subsample of women with
working mothers. The most likely explanation for the greater
power of the parental role attribute variables in explaining
variation in occupational role salience for this subsample
was the homogeneity of this subsample in terms of maternal
employment status.
The Nonemployed Mothers Subsample: Maternal Variables
Although the initial six-variable regression of maternal
role attribute variables on occupational role salience of
daughters of nonemployed mothers was not significant, a
three-variable and a four-variable model were selected and
found to be significant in post hoc analyses with R-squares
equal to .09 (p_ <.05) and .08 (p_ <.10) respectively. Due to
the lack of increment in variance accounted for by the four-
variable model, the three-variable model was selected for
best-fit.
The three variable model was ordered as follows:
paternal support for maternal nonemployed role status +
maternal marital satisfaction + maternal life satisfaction.
Examining the influence of the first two variables in the
model for daughters with nonworking mothers, paternal support
of maternal nonemployed status and maternal marital
satisfaction were inversely related to occupational role
salience in these daughters. The less satisfied the mother


95
The Nonemployed Mothers Subsample
In addition to examining characteristics of the sample
as a whole and of the subsample of women with employed
mothers, the characteristics of the subsaraple of women whose
mothers were never employed were also examined and are
presented in Tables 1 and 2. The frequency distributions of
the sample descriptive variables are reported first for this
subsample (Table 1) followed by presentation of the means and
standard deviations for the parental role attribute variables
and the dependent variable, daughters occupational role
salience (Table 2).
The obtained subsample of 64 subjects whose mothers had
never worked while they were growing up included 5 minority
students (8%) and 2 foreign students (3%). This is 7% fewer
minority students and 1% fewer foreign students than in the
other student subsample. This subsaraple was composed of 50
(78%) freshmen and 14 (22%) sophomores. The age distribution
was as follows: 22 (34%) were 17 years of age, 28 (44%) were
18 years, 9 (14%) were 19 years, and 5 (8%) were 20 years of
age. Frequencies of major choices in this subsaraple were as
follows: 22 (34%) undecided, 10 (16%) traditional choice, 19
(30%) neutral choice, and 13 (20%) nontraditional choice.
This is 12% fewer students in the neutral and nontraditional
major choice categories and 15% more students in the
undecided category than in the subsample of women whose
mothers worked.


78
appropriate to use with college freshmen and sophomores. The
scales measure two aspects of the salience of each role: the
reward value attributed to the role as assessed by its
importance for self definition and/or personal satisfaction
and the level of commitment of personal time and energy
resources to assure success in the role or to develop the
role. Factor analysis of the scales has revealed six
distinct constructs: marital role value, marital role
commitment, parental role value, parental role commitment,
occupational role value, and occupational role commitment.
These six constructs are measured by six scales consisting of
five items each, for a total of 30 items. Items are rated on
a five-point scale with low scores reflecting disagreement
and high scores agreement with the attitudinal dimension.
Scores for each scale range from 0-20. In this study only
the occupational role value and commitment scales were used.
These two scales were combined for a total of 10 items with
an overall occupational role salience score on a continuous
scale ranging from 0-40.
Internal consistency estimates of the occupational role
value and commitment scales revealed alpha coefficients of
.84 and .83 respectively. Factor analysis revealed item
factor loadings ranged from .68 to .78 for the occupational
role value scale and .66 to .79 for the occupational role
commitment scale (Araatea et al., 1986).


171
19. Taking everything together, how much enjoyment would you
say your father gets from his job?
0 12 3 4
No Enjoyment A lot of Enjoyment
20. Taking everything together, how happy would you say your
father is with his marriage?
0 1
Not at all Happy
2 3 4
Extremely Happy
21. To your knowledge, has your father ever considered
divorcing your mother?
0 1
Many Times
2 3 4
Never
22. All in all, how satisfied would you say your father is
with his marriage?
0 1
Not at all Satisfied
2 3 4
Completely Satisfied
23. How happy is your father with the amount of understanding
he receives from his wife?
0 12 3 4
Not at all Happy Very Happy
24. How involved is your father in domestic activities
(cleaning, cooking, childcare)?
0 12 3 4
Not at all Involved Very Involved
25. How supportive is your mother of your fathers
occupational status?
0 1
Not at all Supportive
2
3 4
Totally Supportive


76
terras of the dimensions of control, affection, and inclusion.
The LIPHE consists of 54 iteras for each parent for a combined
total of 108 items. The LIPHE has six scales comprised of
nine items each on which the subjects rate each parent.
Scale scores range from 0-45 indicating the degree of
dissatisfaction with perceived parental behavior and
feelings. The following parent-daughter relationship areas
are assessed: inclusion behavior, control behavior, inclusion
feelings, control feelings, affection, and parental
disapproval. For this study, only the inclusion behavior,
control behavior, and affection scales were included due to
their focus on overt parental behaviors rather than
daughters feelings about those behaviors.
The inclusion behavior scale measures the amount of
parental attention the daughter believes that she received.
A high score indicates dissatisfaction with the amount of
attention received from the given parent. The control
behavior scale measures the degree to which the daughter
feels her parent allowed and encouraged her to develop her
independence and personal abilities. A high score indicates
dissatisfaction due to a lack of freedom allowed by a given
parent, and a lack of encouragement of abilities. The
affection scale measures the daughters dissatisfaction with
the amount and quality of love she received from her parents.
Because parental behavior and feelings are difficult to
distinguish in this area, they are included in one scale. A


16
for many of these factors in this study by limiting the
sample to single freshmen and sophomore college women, ages
17-20, from intact families. In addition, descriptive
information was collected on subjects major choice,
Scholastic Aptitude Test (SAT) performance level, minority
status, and U.S. citizenship.
Although past research has been conducted utilizing
social learning theory propositions to examine parental
influences on womens occupational role salience, few
researchers to date have examined the collective impact of
mothers and fathers in shaping such expectations. Because
both parents are hypothesized to have a part in shaping
daughters role expectations, in this study the collective
impact of mothers and fathers as role models on the
occupational role salience of their daughters was examined in
terms of three aspects of presumed influence: parental role
characteristics, parental role consequences, and quality of
the parent-child relationship. In order to have a more
comprehensive assessment of parental role status
consequences, this study also incorporated parental general
life role satisfaction and marital role satisfaction. Most
previous researchers exploring the impact of certain parental
role consequences on daughters' occupational expectations
have limited their studies to examining only maternal and
paternal occupational role satisfaction and paternal support
for maternal employment.


157
Fassinger, R. E. (1985). A causal model of college womens
career choice. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 8_, 123
153.
Fitzgerald, L. F., & Crites, J. 0. (1980). Toward a career
psychology of women: What do we know? What do we need to
know? Journal of Counseling Psychology, 27, 44-62.
Freeman, J. (1984). Women: A feminist perspective. Palo Alto
CA: Mayfield.
Freud, A. (1946). The ego and the mechanism of defense. (C.
Baines, Trans.) New York: International Press.
Freud, A. (1958). Adolescence. Psychoanalytic Study of the
Child, 13, 255-278.
Friedan, B.(1963). The feminine mystique. New York: W. W.
Norton.
Funderburk, J. R. (1983). The impact of parental divorce on
life role perceptions of college females. Unpublished
manuscript, University of Florida, Gainesville.
Furumoto, L., & Scarborough, E. (1986). Placing women in the
history of psychology: The first American women
psychologists. American Psychologist, 41, 35-42.
Ganong, L., Coleman, M., & Brown, G. (1981). Effect of family
structure on marital attitudes of adolescents.
Adolescence, 16, 281-288.
Gard, J., & Bendig, A. (1964). A factor analytic study of
Eysencks and Schutz's personality dimensions among
psychiatric groups. Journal of Consulting Psychology,
28, 252-258.
Gerson, M. (1980). The lure of motherhood. Psychology of
Women Quarterly, 5_, 207-218.
Gesell, A. L. (1940). Wolf child and human child. New York:
Harper .
Gilligan, C. (1979). In a different voice: Psychological
theory and womens development. Cambridge MA: Harvard
University Press.
Glick, P. C. (1979). Children of divorced parents in
demographic perspective. Journal of Social Issues, 35,
170-182.


152
salience of women in more detail, future studies might
increase the sample size and examine subsamples of women with
full-time employed mothers, part-time employed mothers, and
noneraployed mothers separately. Additionally, future studies
might use occupational role salience as an independent
variable, sorting the obtained sample according to level of
salience, and then examine the differing parental role model
characteristics and family patterns for subgroups of women
with low, medium and high occupational role salience.
Summary
The results of this study suggest that using social
learning theory to examine parental socialization influences
may be useful in explaining the occupational role development
process for women. However, improvements in research design,
sample size and population parameters, instrumentation, and
data analysis are suggested. In addition, the results of
this study suggest there are other spheres of influence such
as individual trait factors which may be equally or moire
important in explaining variation in occupational role
salience of college women.


23
Occupational prestige level is defined as the relative
standing of an occupation or the amount of power and
influence of an occupational position, and the amount of
resources society places at the disposal of incumbents
(Hodge, Siegel, & Rossi, 1966).
Occupational role expectations is defined as the
changeable set of perceptions, internalized beliefs, and
standards held by individuals which determine how personally
relevant or valued the occupational role is to them, what
they perceive their involvement in that role to be, and how
they believe that role should be performed (Amatea et al ,
1986).
Occupational role innovation is defined as the
membership of an individual in an occupation comprised of
less than 30% same sex individuals, a sex-atypical
occupational choice (Tangri, 1972).
Occupational role salience is defined in this study as
an individuals personal valuing of and commitment to the
occupational role relative to other life roles (Amatea et
al., 1986).
Parent-Daughter relationship quality is defined in this
study as the daughter's perceived dissatisfaction with the
amount of maternal or paternal control, inclusion, and
affection expressed toward her as a child (Schtz, 1958).
Parental role status is defined as maternal or paternal
educational and occupational level and parental marital


119
The Nonemployed Mothers Subsample: Maternal and Paternal
Variables
A regression analysis assessing the combined impact of
maternal and paternal role attributes on occupational role
salience of daughters with nonemployed mothers was conducted
corresponding to the seventh research question: To what
extent can variation in occupational role salience be
accounted for by variations in maternal and paternal role
status, perceived maternal and paternal role status
consequences, and the perceived quality of the mother-
daughter and father-daughter relationship? This regression
equation included the following 13 independent variables:
Occupational role salience = parental relative educational
level + paternal occupational prestige level + paternal
occupational innovation + maternal nonemployed role
satisfaction + maternal nonemployed role support + paternal
job satisfaction + paternal occupational role support +
maternal marital satisfaction + paternal marital satisfaction
+ paternal life satisfaction + maternal life satisfaction +
father-daughter relationship dissatisfaction + mother-
daughter relationship dissatisfaction.
The R-square for the full regression model was .05
(2. >*10). Post hoc analyses of all possible subset
combinations of independent variables were conducted. A
four-variable and a five-variable model were selected and
tested for significance (Table 9). The R-square for the


BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH
Jamie R. Funderburk was born in Los Angeles, California,
in 1957 and spent her childhood in Connecticut, moving to
Florida at age 14. She received her Bachelor of Arts degree
in psychology from the University of Florida in 1979, and was
elected to the honorary society of Phi Beta Kappa. After
working for a year in a group foster home for emotionally
disturbed adolescent boys, Jamie returned to school. In 1983
she received her Master of Education and Specialist in
Education degrees in counseling. Areas of specialized
training included agency/deve1opmental counseling and
marriage/faraily counseling. Jamie was admitted to the
counseling psychology doctoral program at the University of
Florida in 1981. Her area of subspecialization was marriage
and family counseling. Other areas of specialized training
included women's personal and vocational development and
related counseling issues, and college student development.
She completed her doctoral internship in 1984 at the
University of Florida Psychological and Vocational Counseling
Center. Jamie expects to receive her Ph.D in counseling
psychology in May 1987.
177


5
and abilities with an occupational choice may not occur.
Third, researchers have found that occupational role
expectations for women are relative to their marital and
parental role expectations and status, and need to be
considered within this multiple role context (Astin & Mynt,
1971; Berson, 1978; Furumoto & Scarborough, 1986;
Schulenberg, Vondracek, & Crouter, 1984). Finally, many
researchers have found occupational role expectations of
women to be related to their sex role attitudes and
orientation (Bielby, 1978; Fassinger, 1985; Fitzgerald &
Crites, 1980; Hackett & Betz, 1981; Illfelder, 1980; Parsons
et al., 1978; Tittle, 1977; Yanico, 1981). Therefore,
women's occupational role expectations may be as closely tied
to past sex role socialization influences as they are to
current interests and abilities, situational variables, or
environmental opportunity. Given these special
considerations when examining women's occupational
development, researchers assert that it is first necessary to
address whether the occupational role is salient for an
individual woman, and then examine the process and content of
occupational role salience formation as well as the process
and content of a specific occupational choice.
Occupational or career role salience emerged as a
concept in the late 1960s and the 1970s in response to two
separate movements. First, vocational development theorists
examining the career decision-making process in male


106
Table 5: Significant Intercorrelations Among the Dependent
and Independent Variables for the Nonemployed Mothers
Subsample
Dependent With Independent Variables
n
r
Occupational
role salience with
Maternal
marital satisfaction
64
-.26**
Paternal
marital satisfaction
64
-.28**
Maternal
nonemployed role support
64
-.24**
Paternal
life satisfaction
64
-.26**
Paternal
educational level
63
-.24*
Father-daughter relation dissatisfaction
64
.22*
Independent With Independent Variables
Maternal educational level with
Paternal
educational level
63
.47****
Paternal educational level with
Paternal
occupational prestige
63
.5o****
Maternal nonemployed role satisfaction with
Maternal
marital satisfaction
64
. 39****
Paternal
marital satisfaction
64
. 39****
Maternal
life satisfaction
64
.48****
Paternal job
satisfaction with
Paternal
life satisfaction
64
.59****
Paternal job ;
support with
Paternal
marital satisfaction
64
. 43****
Maternal
marital satisfaction
64
.44****
Paternal
life satisfaction
64
.60****
Maternal
life satisfaction
64
.45****
Maternal marital satisfaction with
Paternal
marital satisfaction
64
. 38****
Paternal
life satisfaction
64
.54****
Paternal
job support
64
.44****
Maternal
life satisfaction
64
35****
Father-daughter relation dissatisfaction
64
-.47****
**
* 2_ < 10.
2_ <.05. *** 2. <.01.
****
2. <.001


108
Results of the Repression Analyses
In this section the results of the regression analyses
corresponding to the seven proposed research questions are
presented. Post hoc analyses of several models selected from
all possible subset solutions generated for each full
regression equation are also presented for each research
question.
The Total Sample Regression: Maternal and Paternal Variables
A nine-variable regression equation was tested which
corresponds to the first research question: To what extent
can variation in occupational role salience be accounted for
by variations in extent of maternal employment, paternal role
status, perceived paternal role status consequences, and the
perceived quality of the father-daughter relationship?
This nine-variab1e regression model included the
following variables: Occupational role salience = maternal
employment extent + paternal occupational prestige + paternal
educational level + paternal occupational innovation +
paternal job satisfaction + paternal occupational support +
paternal marital satisfaction + paternal life satisfaction +
father-daughter relationship dissatisfaction. The R-square
for the full model was .04 (p_ <.05), indicating that only 4%
of the variance in daughters occupational role salience was
accounted for by variation in the independent variables.
Post hoc analyses were conducted in which all possible
combinations of variables were examined. Both a six-variable


163
Meier, H. C. (1972). Mother-centeredness and college youths
attitudes toward social equality for women: Some
empirical findings. .Journal of Marriage and the Family,
34, 115-121.
Meyer, B. (1980). The development of girls sex role
attitudes. Child Development, 51, 508-514.
Mueller, C. W., & Campbell, B. G. (1977). Female occupational
achievement and marital status: A research note. Journal
of Marriage and the Family, 39, 587-593.
Mullins, E. I. (1980). Perceived parental role satisfaction
and daughters sex-role attitudes and aspirations.
Sociological Focus, 13, 397-411.
Mulvey, M. C. (1963). Psychological and sociological factors
in prediction of career patterns of women. Genetic
Psychology Monographs, 68, 309-386.
Mussen, H. (1969). Early sex-role development. In D. A.
Goslin (Ed.), Handbook of socialization theory and
research. Chicago: Rand McNally.
Mussen, P., & Distler, L. (1959). Masculinity, identification
and father-son relationships. Journal of Abnormal and
Social Psychology, 59, 350-356.
Mussen, P., & Rutherford, E. (1963). Parent-child relations
and parental personality in relation to young childrens
sex-role preferences. Child Development, 34, 589-607.
Myahira, S. D. (1977). College womens career orientations as
related to work values and background factors (Doctoral
dissertation, Ohio State University, 1976). Dissertation
Abstracts International, 37 (8), 4868A.
Nevill, D. D. (1984). The meaning of work in women's lives:
Role conflict, preparation, and change. The Counseling
Psychologist, 12, 131-133.
Noel, D. E. (1979). Socialization, ambition, and career
expectations: Race-sex variations among adolescents.
(Report No. RC010973). College Station, TX: Masters
Thesis, Texas A&M University. (Eric Document
Reproduction Services No. ED 168 736).
Ogburn, W. F. (1938). The changing family. The Family, 19,
139-143.


31
individuals both internally, in terras of their biological,
psychological, and cognitive development, and externally, in
terras of socially defined developmental tasks prescribed at
different stages of the life cycle.
A woman in her first two years at college is defined as
being in the developmental stage of late adolescence, moving
toward young adulthood. In addition, her choice of college,
rather than work and/or marriage, places her in a specific
category within the general developmental stage of late
adolescence. Theories of adolescent development, and
research on college students personality and career
development have suggested factors of importance in college
women's occupational role expectations.
Two well-established theories of human development based
on male populations have examined adolescence from a
sociological and a psychological perspective (Erikson, 1950,
1968; Havighurst, 1951; Havighurst & Taba, 1949).
Havighurst's sociological theory of development views the
stage of adolescence in terras of a number of tasks the
individual must master in order to attain adult status in the
culture. Developmental tasks he described in late
adolescence included developing an appropriate sex role,
achieving emotional and economic independence from parents
and other adults, selecting and preparing for a vocation,
achieving appropriate relationships with peers, and preparing
for an adult lifestyle which might or might not include


24
status. Maternal occupational status is defined in this
study in terras of the extent, degree of innovation, and
prestige level of employment. Paternal occupational role
status is defined as the innovation and prestige level of
employment.
Perceived parental role status consequences is defined
from a social learning theory perspective as the perceived
consequences of engaging in a particular role for a parent in
terms of rewards and punishments. Parental role status
consequence are defined in this study as the degree of
support received for and satisfaction resulting from a
particular role for a given parent.
Reinforcing agent is defined from a social learning
theory perspective as an individual who provides rewards or
reinforcement to another, thus increasing the probability of
recurrence of the behavior that the recipient was engaged in
immediately prior to reinforcement.
Role model is defined from a social learning theory
perspective as an individual whose behavior is observed by a
learner and whose behavior is therefore either imitated or
avoided by the learner.
Role satisfaction is defined as the liking and enjoyment
of a role by the role occupant, or the pleasurable emotional
state resulting from participation in a role (Hopkins, 1983).
Sex role is defined as the complex of behaviors
considered characteristic of or appropriate to persons


28
One example of the impact of these changing family forms
and social values is the change in parents as role models of
a more androgynous lifestyle. Of particular interest is the
change in mothers roles related to the changing status of
women. Blau (1984) pointed out that there has been an
increasing participation of women in the work force,
including married women and mothers. In 1890, 17% of the
labor force was female compared to 25.2% in 1940 and 42.7% in
1982. Married women comprised 30% of the female labor force
in 1940 and 54% in 1960. Most notable, however, is the large
increase in the labor force participation rate of married
women with preschool-age children from 18.6% in 1960 to 47.8%
in 1981. This increase in female labor force participation
has been variously attributed to a decrease in sex
discrimination (Kurdek & Siesky, 1981), a decrease in family
size due to overpopulation (Hoffman, 1977), and to economic
recession (Hoffman, 1977).
Related to the increase in employment for women is the
increase, over the last three decades, in the rate of
divorce. Glick (1979) reported that 77% of divorced mothers
with children are likely to be employed. Currently 4 out of
every 10 marriages end in divorce (Bane, 1976; Espenshade,
1979; Glick, 1979; Hetherington, Cox, & Cox, 1979). A direct
result of the increased divorce rate has been an increase in
the number of female-headed households with children from
4.51 million in 1960 to 8.24 million in 1978 (Espenshade,


CHAPTER II
REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE
The life choices available to women in America are
becoming increasingly complex. As access to and
participation in occupational roles increases for women,
there is increased pressure on women to decide on their
relative involvement in work, marriage, and parenthood. Due
to their developmental stage and educational and economic
advantages, college women in particular have a wide variety
of life role options available to them. Many factors appear
to influence college womens life role preferences and
expectations and the level of occupational role salience
resulting from them.
The purpose of this chapter is to provide a review and
analysis of the literature examining the factors which
influence college women's occupational role expectations.
Research and theory on sociological, developmental, and
psychological context factors are presented in the first
three sections. In the fourth section, research assessing
the influence of past socialization factors is discussed and
a presentation of social learning theory as applied to
women's role salience is provided. A summary of this review
is then presented in the final section.
26


138
variable model, the three-variable model was selected as the
best model.
The three-variab1e model was ordered as follows:
paternal educational level + paternal occupational prestige
level + paternal life satisfaction. Paternal educational
level was negatively related to occupational role salience in
daughters of nonworking mothers. Conversely, paternal
occupational prestige level was positively related to
occupational role salience in the subsample of women with
nonemployed mothers after accounting for paternal educational
level. Finally, paternal life satisfaction was negatively
related to occupational role salience of daughters with
none m. ployed mothers after accounting for variation
attributable to paternal educational level and paternal
occupational prestige level.
These results suggest several possible alternative
family influences on occupational role salience of daughters
of nonworking mothers. One family pattern is suggested in
which fathers lower educational level increases occupational
role salience of daughters with nonemployed mothers,
particularly if these fathers are not satisfied with their
lives which again increases the occupational role salience of
daughters. These results make sense if considered in the
context of these families as traditional role models of
nonemployed mothers and working fathers. Given this family
context, maternal attractiveness as a role model of low


38
Third, it appears that the occupational role salience of
women in their first two years at college may be more
influenced by family socialization and personality factors
than for college juniors and seniors, who may be more
affected by a realistic assessment of their current
opportunities and abilities.
Psychological Context
Most researchers of young womens occupational role
expectations and choices have examined the impact of
psychological context factors because these factors have been
assumed to have the greatest power in explaining differences
in womens occupational role expectations. In contrast,
sociological and developmental context factors have been
assumed to exert a constant influence across a similar age
cohort.
Psychological factors hypothesized as influencing
college women's occupational role expectations include
current attributes, attitudes, and status; and past
socialization influences. Research examining the influence
of current attributes, attitudes, and status is presented
first. This is followed by presentation of research and
theory examining past socialization influences. Finally, an
analysis of the application of social learning theory to
women's occupational role development is presented.
Personal attributes and attitudes found to be related to
occupational role expectations of young women include sex


139
occupational role involvement is in part a function of
paternal role status and satisfaction in his life. The
choice a mother makes not to work is more likely to be
avoided by the daughter, hence her higher occupational role
salience, if father has obtained a lower educational level
(McBroom, 1981) and is not satisfied with his life. Another
possible explanation for the inverse relationship between
daughters occupational role salience and paternal
educational level is daughters rebellion against traditional
sex role stereotyping which has been reported to be more
likely among less educated adults (Albrecht, 1976; Myahira,
1976/1977). Still another possibility is that less educated
fathers may put more emphasis on attending college as a way
to gain access to prestigious occupations. Hence college
women with these fathers might tend to have higher
occupational role salience.
The inclusion of paternal occupational prestige as the
second variable in the model selected is a somewhat confusing
finding. In this study paternal occupational prestige was
positively related to occupational role salience of daughters
of noneraployed mothers. Perhaps these daughters are
imitating their fathers occupational commitment rather than
their mothers nonworking role choice, an explanation
consistent with previous studies of fathers as influences of
career commitment in women (Ridgeway, 1978; Tenzer, 1977).


172
26.In terms of how I see my father now, I would say he is
basically happy with the way he leads his life.
0 12 3 4
Strongly disagree Strongly agree
Maternal Background
27. What is the highest educational grade level achieved by
your mother?
(For example: 8=completed eighth grade, 12=high school
graduate, 16= college graduate, 18-20 = graduate work)
28. What is the highest educational degree obtained by your
mother ?
(For example highschool Diploma, Bachelors Degree)
29. Did your mother ever work or have a job away from home
when you were growing up? yes no
If No: Please skip to item 39.
If Yes: Please continue.
30. Please provide information about the number of years
that your mother worked during each of the following periods
when you were growing up:
your ages 1-5
Mother
worked
jears
partime (less than
25
hours/week)
Mother
worked
jears
fulltime (more than
25
hours/week)
Mother
worked
jears
total (add partime
and
fulltime)
your
ages
6-11
Mother
worked
jears
partime (less than
25
hours/week)
Mother
worked
jears
fulltime (more than
25
hours/week)
Mother
worked
jears
total (add partime
and
fulltime)
your
ages
12-18
Mother
worked
jears
partime (less than
25
hours/week)
Mother
worked
jears
fulltime (more than
25
hours/week)
Mother
worked
years
total (add partime
and
fulltime)


116
maternal role status, perceived maternal role status
consequences, and the perceived quality of the mother-
daughter relationship for daughters with nonworking mothers?
The six-variable regression model for the noneraployed
mothers subsaraple corresponding to this research question was
as follows: Occupational role salience = maternal education
level + maternal nonemployed role satisfaction + maternal
noneraployed role support + maternal marital satisfaction +
maternal life satisfaction + mother-daughter relationship
dissatisfaction.
The R-square for the full model was .05 (£_ >.10). Post
hoc analyses were conducted examining all possible subset
combinations of independent variables in the model. A three-
variable and a four-variable model were selected and tested
for significance. These subset models are presented in Table
8. The R-square for the three-variable model selected,
maternal nonemployed role support + maternal marital
satisfaction + maternal life satisfaction, was .09 (j)_<.05).'
The R-square for the four-variab1e model, maternal
nonemployed role support + maternal marital satisfaction +
maternal life satisfaction + mother-daughter relationship
satisfaction, was .08 (j>_<.10).
The Nonemployed Mothers Subsample: Paternal Variables
A regression analysis examining the impact of paternal
role attribute variables on occupational role salience was
performed on the data from daughters with nonemployed mothers


3
variations in women's occupational role salience and
behavior. Almquist and Angrist (1971) found variations in
college women's occupational aspiration levels as a function
of role model influences, sorority membership, and self-
perceptions of academic ability. Altman and Grossman (1977),
Baruch (1972), and Kahn (1982) found variations in
occupational role salience of college women to be related to
maternal employment status and maternal role satisfaction.
Other studies have related occupational role salience of
college women to such factors as personality traits (Yuen,
Tinsley, & Tinsley, 1980), sex role attitudes and orientation
(Illfelder, 1980; Parsons, Frieze, & Ruble, 1978; Yanico,
1981), parental identification (Oliyer, 1975; Ridgeway,
1978), and career-related self-efficacy (Hackett & Betz,
1981) .
Researchers have raised a number of questions in their
efforts to determine why such differences exist in women's
occupational role salience. Are there certain factors which
best account for variations in college women's occupational
role salience? What processes shape these different levels
of women's expected occupational role involvement? Are women
who differ in occupational role salience socialized
differently?
Scope of the Problem
Because traditional vocational development theories were
developed and validated primarily on male populations, they


129
found to be significant in explaining variation in
occupational role salience for the total sample of college
women. First, examining the influence of these paternal role
satisfaction and support variables on occupational role
salience of daughters was largely exploratory. Few previous
studies have considered paternal influences other than
paternal role status and father-daughter relationship
variables. However the inability of paternal job
satisfaction to account for variation in occupational role
salience in daughters was inconsistent with Mullins (1980)
finding that paternal job dissatisfaction was related to
occupational role salience for a sample of 299 college women.
In that study, however, the relationship was described as
significant in combination with maternal dissatisfaction with
the role of homemaker and mother. These maternal role
satisfaction variables were not examined in the total sample
analysis in this study.
Examining a second possible explanation, the three-
variable model selected accounted for variation in
occupational role salience related to parental role status
(i.e., maternal employment extent, paternal occupational
prestige, paternal educational level). Most of the variables
not selected for inclusion in the model assessed the other
two aspects of parental role model influence (i.e., parental
role satisfaction and support and the parent-daughter
relationship quality). These role status consequence and


6
populations realized that little consideration was given to
the extent to which people differ in levels of work
commitment or importance. As stated by Osipow (1968),
"Seldom is any consideration given to the likelihood that a
given individual may have negative attitudes toward work" (p.
247). In the 1970s, the second movement emerged in response
to changes in female labor force participation and the status
of women in society. These changes led to questioning by
psychologists and sociologists of the factors influencing
varying life role patterns of women. Super (1980),
representing the first movement, defined occupational role
salience as the relative amount of affective, behavioral, and
cognitive energy placed on the occupational or work role.
Amatea, Cross, Clark & Bobby (1986), representing the second
movement, defined occupational role salience as the relative
value or importance ascribed by an individual to the
occupational role. Occupational role salience is defined in
this study as an individual's personal valuing of and
commitment to the occupational role relative to other life
roles.
Clearly, a distinction needs to be made between studies
which attempt to predict and explain occupational and
familial role aspirations or salience, and those attempting
to predict or explain specific career choices or actual
occupational involvement patterns. The two are not
synonymous for women (Tittle, 1977). The "structure of


96
The mean level of occupational role salience in the
subsample of students with nonemployed mothers was 25.6 with
a standard deviation of 6. This occupational role salience
score was 2-3 points lower for this subsample of women than
for the subsample of women whose mothers were employed. The
mean maternal educational level in this subsaraple was 13.9
years, the equivalent of two years of college, with a range
of from 12-18 years and standard deviation of 2.0. This
range is more restricted than the range of from 1-20 years
for the maternal educational level of the student subsample
with working mothers. Paternal educational level in this
nonworking mothers subsample ranged from 6-20 years with a
mean of 15.9 years, the equivalent, of a bachelor's degree.
Paternal occupational prestige level scores ranged from 7-92,
with a mean of 73.4 and standard deviation of 19.8. This
prestige level was almost 5 points higher than the mean
paternal occupational prestige level of the working mothers
subsample. The level of paternal occupational innovation for
this subsample ranged from 45%-99% with a mean of 84.2% and
standard deviation of 12.7%. This indicates that the
majority of fathers in this subsample were in traditional sex
role occupations. In contrast, the subsample of women with
employed mothers reported a majority of fathers with neutral
(neither predominantly traditional or nontraditional) as well
as traditional sex role occupations.


25
occupying a particular gender status, and the attributed
expectations concerning those behaviors (Hartley, 1961).
Socialization is defined as the direct and indirect
developmental process by which a society teaches its members
to fit in, acquainting them with its norms, values, and
expectations (Goldberg, 1983).
Socioeconomic status is defined as the relative position
of a family in the class structure of a society as indicated
by paternal occupational prestige level (Duncan, 1961).
Organization of the Study
The remainder of this study consists of four chapters
and two appendices. Chapter II presents a review and
analysis of related literature. In chapter III, the
methodology used in the study is described, including the
population and sample, sampling procedures, variables and
instrumentation, and data collection and analyses. Chapter
IV provides a presentation of the results of the study. The
final chapter is devoted to a discussion of the results,
consequent interpretations, and recommendations.


19
1. To what extent can variation in occupational role
salience among women with employed and women with nonemployed
mothers be accounted for by variations in the extent of
maternal employment, paternal role status, perceived paternal
role status consequences, and the perceived quality of the
father-daughter relationship?
2. To what extent can variation in occupational role
salience among women with employed mothers be accounted for
by variations in maternal role status, perceived maternal
role status consequences, and the perceived quality of the
mother-daughter relationship?
3. To what extent can variation in occupational role
salience among women with nonemployed mothers be accounted
for by variations in maternal role status, perceived maternal
role status consequences, and the perceived quality of the
mother-daughter relationship?
4. To what extent can variation in occupational role
salience among women with employed mothers be accounted for
by variations in paternal role status, perceived paternal
role status consequences, and the perceived quality of the
father-daughter relationship?
5. To what extent can variation in occupational role
salience among women with nonemployed mothers be accounted
for by variations in paternal role status, perceived paternal
role status consequences, and the perceived quality of the
father-daughter relationship?


87
and United States citizenship. Twenty-seven women (13%) were
minority students and eight women (4%) were foreign students.
These proportions are consistent with the frequencies with
which these categories are found in the general population of
students at the University of Florida. The age distribution
of the sample was as follows: 60 students (28%) were age 17,
115 (54%) were age 18, 28 (13%) were age 19, and 11 (5%) were
age 20.
Interestingly, a diversity of major choices was
represented in the obtained sample: 51 women (24%) were
undecided regarding their major, 38 women (18%) had selected
a traditional major, 73 women (34%) had selected a neutral
major, and 52 women (24%) had selected a nontraditional
major. Nontraditional major choices were those in which less
than 30% of the individuals currently working in that field
were women. Traditional major choices were those in which
more than 70% of the individuals currently working in that
field were women. Neutral major choices were those in which
30%-70% of the individuals currently working in that field
were women. The students Scholastic Aptitude Test (SAT)
scores ranged from 730-1394 with a mean score of 1048 and
standard deviation of 118. Because the mean and standard
deviation were calculated for SAT scores, rather than
frequency distribution, this sample descriptor variable is
not presented in Table 1. These SAT scores were within the
expected range for college students.


79
Data Collection Procedures
By means of the large group testing procedure, the
instruments were administered during class time to five
entire classes of introductory psychology students at the
beginning of summer and fall semesters. Several other
experimenters' instruments were also given at this time and
the order of administration of instruments was varied across
classes. Students were required to complete all the
inventories in order to receive the hour of credit from their
instructor as subjects in empirical research. Students were
given written instructions on the nature of the study and the
procedures for completing the inventories (Appendix B). They
were encouraged to read the instructions carefully prior to
beginning to answer questions. Computerized answer sheets
were used for questions 1-64 (LRSS and LIPHE). Subjects were
instructed to write directly on the demographic
questionnaire. Subjects were not required to sign an
informed consent form. Subjects were encouraged to raise
their hands if they had questions. Using this data
collection method, 158 out of approximately 500 students
tested met the criteria for inclusion in this study.
After the large group testing occurred during the 1986
summer and fall semesters, a sign-up sampling procedure was
used until the minimum sample size of 200-250 was obtained.
A brief description of the study was posted in the lobby of
the psychology building for interested students to sign-up.


Abstract of Dissertation Presented to the Graduate School
of the University of Florida in Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy
OCCUPATIONAL ROLE SALIENCE OF COLLEGE WOMEN:
PERCEPTIONS OF PARENTAL INFLUENCES
By
Jamie R. Funderburk
May 1987
Chairperson: Dr. Ellen S. Amatea
Major Department: Counselor Education
Although most contemporary college women plan to combine
family and occupational roles, they have varying levels of
occupational role salience. In this study social learning
theory was used to examine parental influences on
occupational role salience of college women. Three aspects
of parental modeling influence were examined: parental role
status, parental role status consequences, and parent-
daughter relationship quality. Self-report data were
collected on 214 freshmen and sophomore college women at the
University of Florida. A series of regression analyses was
conducted to examine maternal and paternal influences both
separately and in combination for the total sample and for
subsamples of women with employed and noneraployed mothers.
vii


85
measurement of the independent and dependent variables was
dependent on the reliability and validity of these
instruments. Therefore measurement error of the instruments
might have impacted on the validity, reliability, and
significance of the results. In addition, because the three
instruments were in a self-report format, social desirability
response set errors were possible. For example, subject's
response bias in reporting parental satisfaction and support
variables or parent-daughter relationship satisfaction could
effect the reliability, validity and significance of the
results.


84
division college major. Furthermore, there may have been
sample bias in the sign-up sheet subsample of 56 subjects
because participants were self-selected.
The ex post facto design used in this study required
subjects to report their current perceptions of their
parents' role status and role status satisfaction as well as
their perceptions of their relationship with each parent when
the subjects were children. It was assumed that the
subjects' current subjective perceptions and assessments of
parents (i.e., a phenomenological perspective) would be more
powerful in predicting their current attitudes, beliefs, and
values about the occupational role than would more objective
measures of parental .role status, parental role status
satisfaction, and parent-daughter relationship quality.
Nevertheless, parental influences might be measured more
objectively through parental self-report or direct
observation of parent-child relationship quality because the
subjects' self-report of conditions in their families may not
have a high correspondence with objective reality.
This was an ex post facto descriptive study which relied
on two established instruments to measure the psychological
variables of subjects' occupational role salience and parent-
daughter relationship satisfaction. In addition, the study
relied on a demographic questionnaire designed by the
experimenter to assess perceived parental role status and
role satisfaction. Obviously, the accuracy and validity of


143
competency or adaptability, thus increasing the daughter's
own confidence and hence increasing her occupational role
salience. Perhaps the nonworking mother's perceived general
life satisfaction despite marital dissatisfaction is related
to her role as a mother and parent. If the parental role is
very satisfying to the mother she may nurture self-esteem and
self-efficacy in her daughter. This may in turn be
translated into the daughter's higher expectations for the
occupational role, particularly since the occupational role
is an important area for establishing competency and adequacy
for young women today. Finally, perhaps two different family
patterns are indicated by these findings. In the first
pattern a daughter of a nonworking mother who is well
educated and dissatisfied in her marriage chooses to avoid
the pattern of her mother's life and has high occupational
role salience. In the second pattern a daughter perceives
her nonworking mother as highly satisfied with her life,
perhaps based on her mother's self-confidence, high self
esteem and good parenting. As a result the daughter has
self-confidence and high self-esteem as well which in turn
increases her occupational role salience.
Overview of Significant Findings
Overall, the results of this study only modestly
supported the view that parental role model influences
explain variation in freshmen and sophomore college women's
occupational role salience. Although the contribution of


104
Tabla 4 continued
Variable Name n r
Paternal job support with
Maternal marital satisfaction 150 .33
Paternal marital satisfaction 150 .41
Paternal life satisfaction 150 .40
Maternal life satisfaction 150 .33
Maternal marital satisfaction with
Paternal marital satisfaction 150 .88
Maternal life satisfaction 150 .65
Paternal life satisfaction 150 .61
Mother-daughter relation dissatisfaction 150 -.27
Father-daughter relation dissatisfaction 150 -.34
Paternal marital satisfaction with
Paternal life satisfaction 150 .60
Maternal life satisfaction 150 .61
Mother-daughter relation dissatisfaction 150 -.29
Father-daughter relation dissatisfaction 150 -.30
Note. < .001 for all values.


27
Sociological Context
Factors in the sociological context which have been
proposed as influences on womens occupational role
expectations are current social and cultural norms, social
trends, and social standards. This normative context
surrounds women, shaping their identities, perceptions,
values, beliefs, expectations, and behavior.
Such sociological norms, values, and beliefs and changes
in those norms, values, and beliefs impact on the
occupational role salience of college women in two ways:
indirectly through increased opportunity for occupational
roles for women in society and directly through influencing
the environment in which socialization occurs.
Kurdek and Siesky (1981) have described sociological
changes in the form and function of the family, marriage,
parental roles, labor force composition, and the status of
women. In exploring the changes in family functions many
sociologists have contended that the traditional educational,
religious, economic, and welfare functions of the family have
for the most part been transferred to larger institutions,
thus leaving the family with the primary function of
psychological socialization (Kurdek & Siesky, 1981; Leslie,
1982; Ogburn, 1938; Parson, 1965). These writers have
proposed that this decrease and change in family functions
allows family members increased role options and flexibility
which were not always possible in the past.


81
about 25 minutes. All subjects were informed that they could
leave when they were finished. Data on 56 additional
subjects was obtained using this procedure for a total sample
size of 214.
Data Analyses
Separate regression analyses were performed to address
each of the seven proposed research questions. Prior to
conducting the regression analyses, intercorrelations between
the dependent and all independent variables and among the
independent variables were calculated for the total sample
and for the employed and noneraployed mothers subsamples.
The regression analyses corresponding to the seven
proposed research questions were as follows. First, the
impact on daughters occupational role salience of maternal
employment extent and all the paternal role attribute
variables were examined jointly for the total sample.
Second, all the maternal role attribute variables were
examined separately for the subsample of subjects with
employed mothers. Third, all the maternal role attribute
variables were examined separately for subjects with
noneraployed mothers. Parallel analyses were also conducted
to address the fourth and fifth research questions which
examined the influence of paternal role attribute variables
separately on the employed mothers subsample and then on the
noneraployed mothers subsaraple. Finally, analyses
corresponding to the sixth and seventh research questions


TABLE OF CONTENTS
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS iv
ABSTRACT vii
CHAPTERS
IINTRODUCTION 1
Scope of the Problem 3
Theoretical Framework 12
Need 15
Purpose 17
Research Questions 18
Significance of the Study 20
Definition of Terms 22
Organization of the Study 25
IIREVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE 26
Sociological Context 27
Developmental Context 30
Psychological Context 38
Past Socialization Influences 42
Summary 58
IIIMETHODOLOGY 62
Design . 63
Population and-Sample 64
Sampling Procedure 65
Instrumentation/Variables 66
Data Collection Procedures 79
Data Analyses 81
Methodological Limitations 82
IVRESULTS 86
Descriptive Statistics 86
Intercorrelations Among Variables 97
Results of the Regression Analyses 108
Summary 121
v


101
Interestingly, daughter's reported satisfaction with the
father-daughter relationship was positively related to her
perceptions of paternal marital satisfaction (r_ =-.36) and
paternal life satisfaction (r_ = 30) ; and paternal life
satisfaction and paternal marital satisfaction were
correlated to each other (r_ =.61). Finally, mothers' equal
or greater educational status relative to father was
negatively related to paternal occupational prestige (r_=
-.40).
It is interesting to note that the one maternal variable
examined for the total sample, extent of maternal employment,
was not significantly correlated with any of the paternal
role attribute variables for the total sample.
Intercorrelations of the sample descriptor variables
with the dependent variable were also computed for the total
sample. Only one intercorrelation was significant (p_ <.001),
that of undecided major choice. It had a slight -.22
(E. <.001) negative correlation with occupational role
salience (Table 3). Subjects' SAT scores, minority status,
U.S. citizenship, age, and year at college were not found to
correlate significantly with occupational role salience
scores.
Correlations for the Employed Mothers Subsample
Two types of intercorrelations were computed for the
employed mothers subsample. Correlations of the dependent
variable with the 11 maternal and 8 paternal role attribute


128
This family might be viewed as hard-working and high-
achieving given the fact that both parents work extensively
and that father is successful despite his lower educational
level relative to other fathers with similar occupational
prestige. This family pattern is further explicated by
correlational data examined for the total sample. There was
a significant (<.01) though slight correlation (r_ =.17)
found between relative parental educational level and college
womens occupational role salience, a relationship which was
not examined in this regression equation. Mother's equal or
greater educational attainment relative to father was
positively related to daughter's occupational role salience.
This finding is consistent with results from a previous study
by Vanfossen (1977) which found maternal power as reflected
in relative parental educational level to increase the
influence of mothers as role models.
In sum, a possible family pattern is suggested by this
three-variable model. Daughter's higher occupational role
salience may be associated with a paternal role model of hard
work and high achievement and a working mother role model of
equal or greater educational level relative to her husband.
This family pattern would increase both the mother's power in
the family and her power as a role model of work.
There are several possible theoretical and
methodological reasons why the other six paternal role
attribute variables examined for the total sample were not


69
than the mother's, then the difference score was calculated
by subtracting the difference from 100.
In addition, family socioeconomic status was derived
from paternal rating on the Duncan socioeconomic index.
Regrettably, the Duncan SEI does not take into consideration
maternal occupational status in calculating family SES.
Despite its inaccuracy due to omission of maternal
occupational information, the Duncan SEI was used as an
indicator of family SES in order to be comparable with other
studies.
Extent of maternal employment. In addition to parental
occupational prestige level, maternal employment was assessed
by Item 30 (Appendix A) in terms of both the length of
employment (in number of years) and the extent of employment
for any given year (2=full time, Upart time, 0 = n o t
employed). These additional data on maternal employment were
needed due to the great variation in employment patterns of
mothers. The number of years employed from the time the
daughter was born until she was age 18 or left for college
was computed and then multiplied by the extent of employment
for each year. This resulted in a continuous score for
extent of maternal employment ranging from 0 (mother never
worked from the time daughter was born until she was age 18
or left for college) through 36 (mother worked full time from
the time the daughter was born until she was age 18 or left
for college).


56
Hoffman (1972) described this relationship as an absence of
"smother love" for high achieving adult women. Kriger (1972)
found that high achievement-oriented women tended to focus
their needs in the workplace, which implies that higher
achievement-oriented women have higher occupational role
salience. Baruch and Barnett (1981), examining sex role
stereotyping in preschool children, found fathers who
participated in childcare tasks independently (rather than
jointly with their wives) had daughters who did less sex role
stereotyping.
The results of these studies on parent-daughter
relationships and role development, role expectations, and
role behavior of daughters are mixed and difficult to sort
out. This lack of consistent results may be due to the
varying populations and dependent variables examined and
differing methodologies used. However, several tentative
conclusions can be drawn from the findings. First, it
appears that the greater the degree of parental warmth toward
and involvement with the daughter, the greater the power of
the parent as role model. For example, poor relations with
traditional fathers predicted nontraditional sex role
attitudes in university women, and positive relations with
traditional nonworking mothers predicted low occupational
role salience in college women. In addition, high paternal
involvement in childcare activities predicted low sex role
stereotyping in preschool daughters. The results of these


149
assumption for regression analysis of additive relationships
among independent variables was violated. Therefore the
implications of the results for this subsample are
inconclusive. Future studies might create a third population
to be examined of women whose mothers worked part time or
only for a few years, thus separating this group from the
mothers who are clearly role models of work commitment or
involvement, or clearly role models of not working. Further,
it may be that the parental role attribute variables and
subsequent family patterns which explain low, moderate, or
high occupational role salience in daughters are
categorically different. Therefore, future studies might
sort women based on their level of occupational role salience
and then examine the parental role attributes for each group
of women separately, perhaps further dividing each subgroup
of women by their maternal employment status as a way to
detect patterns.
There was a tendency for subjects to have a social
desirability response bias toward positive estimation of both
their mothers and fathers role satisfaction and support,
and their own satisfaction with the mother-daughter and
father-daughter relationship. This resulted in a restricted
range of responses for these parental role status consequence
and relationship variables, decreasing intersubject variation
and therefore decreasing the power of these variables to
explain variation in daughter's occupational role salience.


47
Broverman, Clarkson, & Rosenkrantz, 1970). Vogel, Broverman,
Broverraan, Clarkson, and Rosenkrantz (1970) studied the
relationship between the sex role perceptions held by male
and female college students and their mothers' employment.
Results indicated female students with employed mothers
perceived the differences between men and women to be the
smallest, followed by male students with employed mothers,
while students with unemployed mothers perceived the greatest
differences between men and women. In addition, the effect
of maternal employment was to raise the estimation of ones
own sex. Meier (1972) also found a significant relationship
between female college students' favoring of social equality
for women and maternal employment. Further, the most liberal
sex role ideology was held by the daughters of women in high
status occupations.
Looking at the social status of the family in terms of
relative parental power, Vanfossen (1977) found that the
pattern of parental dominance was a crucial intervening
variable between maternal educational and occupational
history and sex role values of daughters. Vanfossen found
that father dominance, measured by his greater educational
and occupational attainment, depressed the relationship
between maternal employment and egalitarian sex role values
in daughters, while mother dominance heightened the
relationship between maternal employment and egalitarian sex
role values in daughters.


118
to address the fifth research question: To what extent can
variation in occupational role salience be accounted for by
variations in paternal role status, perceived paternal role
status consequences, and the perceived quality of the father-
daughter relationship?
The eight-variable regression model corresponding to
this research question was as follows: Occupational role
salience = paternal educational level + paternal occupational
prestige + paternal occupational innovation + paternal job
satisfaction + paternal occupational role support + paternal
marital satisfaction + paternal life satisfaction + father-
daughter relationship dissatisfaction.
The R-square for the full model was .08 (2. >.10). Post
hoc analyses were conducted of all possible subset
combinations of independent variables. 4 three-variable and
six-variable model were selected and tested for significance.
These two subset models are presented in Table 8. The R-
square for the selected three-variable model, paternal
educational level + paternal occupational prestige + paternal
life satisfaction, was .12 (g_ <.05). The R-square for the
six-variable model, occupational role salience = paternal
educational level + paternal job satisfaction + paternal
prestige level + paternal occupational innovation + paternal
marital satisfaction + paternal life satisfaction, was .10
(£_ <.10).


68
educational status) through 40 (extreme difference in
educational status) on a continuous scale. If the mothers
education was greater than the father's, the difference score
was calculated by adding the difference to 20; if the
father's education was greater than the mother's, the
difference score was calculated by subtracting the difference
from 20.
Parental occupational prestige. Parental employment
prestige level was measured by means of a series of questions
(Items 11-15, 31-35; Appendix A). These questions were
similar to those used by the United States Bureau of the
Census to assign occupational codes to individuals (United
States Department of Commerce, 1983b). For the purposes of
this study, these questions were reworded from requesting
information on one's own occupation to requesting information
on one's parent's occupation. With knowledge of parental
occupational code, a parental occupational prestige score was
then assigned using the continuous scale (0-100) of the
Duncan Socioeconomic Index (SEI) developed by Duncan (1961).
Paternal and maternal prestige level relative to each
other was then assessed as the difference between maternal
(if employed) and paternal occupational prestige scores.
These difference scores ranged from 0-200. If the mother's
occupational prestige score was greater than the father's,
the difference score was derived by adding the difference to
100. If the father's occupational prestige score was greater


41
women, and these roles have not been viewed as mutually
exclusive (Malson, 1983; Noel, 1979; Thomas & Neal, 1978;
Tittle, 1977). The results of research on the impact of race
on occupational role salience of women indicate that black
women are less likely to feel compelled to choose either
family or work commitment. Because these results do not
indicate a difference by race in absolute level of
occupational role salience for single women, the effect of
race was not controlled for in the present study. Instead,
efforts were made to select a sample in which the racial
composition was representative of the student population
being examined.
The impact of marital status on occupational role
salience of women has also been examined. Astin and Mynt
(1971), Mueller and Campbell (1977), and Yuen, Tinsley, and
Tinsley (1980) have reported marriage decreases occupational
role salience and achievement of women, although this was
less true for black women.
The results of this research suggest that current status
factors (i.e., educational level, academic achievement and
ability level, and marital status) are significantly related
to occupational role salience of women and therefore need to
be controlled for in a study of the influences of parental
socialization on the occupational role salience of women. In
this study several of these factors were controlled for by
limiting the sample to college freshmen and sophomore women,


55
and maternal sex role ideology. Occupational role salience
among mother-identified women was related to maternal
employment and more liberal sex role ideology in both
parents. For father-identified women occupational role
salience was related to less extensive maternal employment
and greater traditionality of maternal sex role ideology.
Altman and Grossman (1977) found daughters' perceptions of
maternal "goodness" to be predictive of lower occupational
role salience among college women whose mothers did not work.
McBroom (1981) found that university women who rejected
traditional sex role stereotypes for women reported having
poorer relationships with their fathers. This relationship
reached greatest significance for women from lower class
families, and was interpreted as a possible function of the
greater traditionality of the working class fathers.
Kelly and Worell (1976) and De Fronzo and Boudreau
(1979), examining antecedents and correlates of androgyny in
college students, found' maternal employment, paternal
involvement in domestic activities, parental warmth, and
parental encouragement of achievement and self-reliance were
related to greater masculinity and androgyny in daughters.
As cited earlier, occupational role salience has been related
to masculinity and androgyny in women. Kagan and Moss
(1962), in a longitudinal study, found that level of maternal
protectiveness during the first three years of life was
negatively related to achievement behavior in adult women.


151
variables and the parent-daughter relationship variables
examined, future studies might develop more sophisticated
instruments and research methodologies for assessing these
variables. For example, parent self-report of role
satisfaction and support and their perception of the parent-
daughter relationship could be incorporated in future studies
to provide corroboration of daughters perceptions.
Similarly, direct observations of family interactions could
provide additional information on these independent variables
thereby decreasing measurement error.
To further increase the power of the analyses conducted
by decreasing the number of highly i n t e r c o r r e 1 a t e d
independent variables examined and by decreasing the overall
number of independent variables examined, future studies
might factor analyze these variables and combine them into
unified constructs prior to constructing the regression
models .
In order to explain more of the variation in
occupational role salience of women, future studies might
include individual trait influences as well as parental
socialization influences. Future research might also assess
teacher, sibling, and peer role model influences on
occupational role salience of women in order to further test
social learning model constructs.
In order to examine the influence of certain family
patterns and parental role models on occupational role


10
family status variables, and parent-daughter relationship
variables. Family structural variables examined have
included intactness of family (Coleman & Ganong, 1984;
Ganong, Coleman, & Brown, 1981; Kulka & Weingarten, 1979),
size of family (Auster & Auster, 1981; Rosen & Aneshensel,
1978), and birth order and sex of siblings (Auster & Auster,
1981; Rosen & Aneshensel, 1978; Seegmiller, 1980). Family
status variables explored have included parental occupational
and educational status (Allred, 1982/1983; Auster & Auster,
1981; Burlin, 1976; DeFronzo & Boudreauu, 1979; Gold &
Andres, 1978; Smith & Self, 1980; Tangri, 1972; Vanfossen,
1977), parental satisfaction with role status (Altman &
Grossman, 1977; Baruch, 1972; Kahn, 1982; Mullins, 1980),
parental attitudes about roles (Meyer, 1980; Mussen &
Rutherford, 1963; Oliver, 1975; Smith & Self, 1980), and
family socioeconomic status (Albrecht, 1976; Bielby, 1978;
Douvan & Adelson, 1966; Hauser, 1971; Rosen & Aneshensel,
1978; Tangri, 1972).
Although there have been numerous studies examining the
role of family structural and status influences in womens
occupational role expectation development, few studies have
explored family interaction or interpersonal relationship
variables. One of the few parent-daughter relationship
variables which has been explored and found to be related to
women's occupational role salience and innovation (i.e.,
choice of a non-sex-stereotypic occupation) has been parental


Ill
maternal role attribute variables were analyzed separately,
however, for the subsaraples of women with employed or
noneraployed mothers.
The Employed Mothers Subsample: Maternal Variables
A regression analysis of the data from the subsample of
daughters with employed mothers was conducted to address the
second research question: To what extent can variations in
occupational role salience be accounted for by variations in
maternal role status, perceived maternal role status
consequences, and the perceived quality of the mother-
daughter relationship for daughters with employed mothers?
A nine-variable regression model corresponding to this
research question was formulated as follows: Occupational
role salience = maternal employment extent + maternal
education level + maternal occupational prestige level +
maternal occupational innovation + maternal job satisfaction
+ maternal job support + maternal marital satisfaction +
maternal life satisfaction + mother-daughter relationship
dissatisfaction.
The regression analysis predicting occupational role
salience from these maternal role variables yielded an R-
square of .00 (£_ >.10), indicating none of the variation in
the dependent variable was accounted for by the full model of
maternal variables for the employed mothers subsample.
Post hoc analyses were conducted and a five-variable and
two-variable model were selected from among all possible


90
Table 2: Descriptive Statistics for Dependent and Independent
Variables for the Total Sample and the Employed and
Nonemployed Mothers S u b s a ¡n p 1 e s
Total
N = 214
Variable
Variable
and
Scale
M
§1
Salience
(0-40)
27.2
5.5
Maternal
employment extent
(0-36)
11.6
11.3
Maternal
education level
(1-20)
14.5
2.4
Paternal
education level
(1-20)
15.7
3.2
Parent's relative
education level
(1-40)
18.7
3.2
Maternal
prestige
(1-100)
occupation
level
Paternal
prestige
(1-100)
occupation
level
69.9
18.5
Parent's
prestige
(1-200)
relative
level
Maternal occupation
innovation
(1-100)
Paternal occupation
innovation
(1-100)
82.3
15.7
Maternal occupation
satisfaction
(0-13)
Employed Nonemployed
n_ =
150
n_ =
64
M
SD
M
SD
27.9
5.1
25.6
6.0
16.6
10.0
14.7
2.6
13.9
2.0
15.6
3.2
15.9
3.1
19.0
3.2
17.9
2.8
57.9
14.2
68.5
17.8
73.4
19.8
89.1
18.0
68.7
25.5
80.0
16.7
84.2
12.7
9.9 2.7


102
variables are reported first. Then the correlations among
the independent variables are reported.
The results of correlating the scores of the 150
daughters of employed mothers on all the independent
variables with the dependent variable yielded correlations
which did not reach statistical significance. Although the
correlations between occupational role salience and the
independent variables were slight (r_ <.20), they were largely
in the predicted directions. For example, for the employed
mothers subsample, occupational role salience of daughters
was positively related to the extent of maternal employment,
maternal educational level, maternal and paternal marital
satisfaction, maternal occupational prestige level, maternal
and paternal life satisfaction, paternal support for maternal
employment, and daughter's satisfaction with the mother-
daughter and father-daughter relationship.
Correlations were also computed among all 19 independent
variables and yielded 41 significant correlations (g. <#001).
These intercorrelations ranged from .26-.69 and are presented
in Table 4.
Correlations for the Nonemployed Mothers Subsample
Two types of intercorrelations were computed for the
subsaraple of 64 women with nonemployed mothers. Correlations
of the dependent variable with the 6 maternal variables and
the 8 paternal variables are reported first followed by a


88
Table 1: Frequency
Distributions of
Descriptive Variables
for the
Total Sample and the Employed and Noneraploved
Mothers
Subsaraple
s
Total Sample
Employed Mothers
Noneraploved Mothers
N=214
Subsample n=150
Subsample n=64
Age
%_
%_
%_
17
28
25
34
18
54
58
44
19
13
13
14
20
_5
_4
_8
100
100
100
UF
Freshmen
83
85
78
Sophomore
12
15
22
100
100
100
Minority
Nonminority
87
85
92
Minority
13
1J>
_8
100
100
100
Ma ior
Undecided
24
19
34
Traditional
18
19
16
Neutral
34
36
30
Nontraditional 24
26
20
100
100
100
US
US citizen
96
96
97
Foreign
4
4
3
student
100
100
100


51
Social Learning Theory
Social learning theory views sex-typed characteristics
and role expectations as a function of both direct and
imitative learning experiences (Bandura, 1977). Parents are
viewed as both role models and direct reinforcing agents for
their children (Kelly & Worell, 1976). The likelihood of
imitation of a model is mediated by both the models power
and the nature of the relationship between the model and the
learner. The power of a role model is increased if he or she
is rewarded (Bandura, 1977 ) or if there is a close
relationship between model and learner (Mussen & Distler,
1959).
Examining the results of the previously mentioned
studies from a social learning theory perspective, the
increasing incidence of maternal employment would be
described as reflecting a shift in female role model status.
Subsequent maternal employment satisfaction, paternal support
for maternal employment, and absolute and relative maternal
occupational and educational status would be considered to
affect the power of employed mothers as role models for their
daughters. In addition, from this theoretical perspective,
the finding that paternal occupational satisfaction is
related to daughters occupational role salience would
indicate a paternal role modeling influence as well. Viewing
fathers as well as mothers as potential role models is


I certify that I have read this study and that in ray
opinion it conforms to acceptable standards of scholarly
presentation and is fully adequate, in scope and quality, as
a dissertation for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy.
Ellen Amates^ Chairperson
Associate Professor of Counselor Education
I certify that I have read this study and that in my
opinion it conforms to acceptable standards of scholarly
presentation and is fully adequate, in scope and quality, as
a dissertation for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy.
f / James Archer
j / Professor of Counselor Education
I certify that I have read this study and that in my
opinion it conforms to acceptable standards of scholarly
presentation and is fully adequate, in scope and quality, as
a dissertation for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy.
Psychology
I certify that I have read this study and that in my
opinion it conforms to acceptable standards of scholarly
presentation and is fully adequate, in scope and quality, as
a dissertation for the degree of Dp,tor of Philosophy.
Robert Jester
Associate Pro
ssor of Foundations of Education
This dissertation was submitted to the Graduate Faculty
of the College of Education and to the Graduate School and
was accepted as partial fulfillment of the requirements for
the degree of Doctor of Philosophy.
May 1987
jGu* i 0
Dean, College of Education
Dean, Graduate School


148
were not included in this study. Due to the relatively small
amount of variance in occupational role salience accounted
for by the parental socialization factors examined, future
studies might include variables from the individual trait
sphere of influence in an attempt to more successfully
explain the occupational role development process for women.
The obtained sample size of 214 subjects was adequate
for the total sample analysis of the eight paternal and one
maternal role attribute variables. However, due to the
smaller subsample sizes, the separate analyses for the 150
subjects with employed mothers and the 64 subjects with
nonemployed mothers may have lost power in detecting
contributions of the parental role attribute variables in
explaining variation in the dependent variable. Future
studies might increase the sample size and limit the
populations examined to women with either employed or
nonemployed mothers.
In addition to sample size limitations, the wide
variation in extent of maternal employment among subjects in
the employed mothers subsample, particularly the inclusion of
mothers who only worked part time for a few years, revealed
an error in research design related to criterion for
inclusion in the employed mothers subsample. This subsaraple
was contaminated with subjects who may not have perceived
their mothers as role models of work due to the limited
extent of their mothers employment. Because of this, the


72
higher scores indicating greater perceived parental marital
relationship satisfaction.
Parental life satisfaction. Assessment of daughters'
perceptions of maternal and paternal global life satisfaction
was done by means of one Likert scale item for each parent
(Items 26 and 46, Appendix A). Responses ranged from 0-4.
Low scores indicated disagreement and high scores indicated
agreement with the statement, "In terms of how I see my
mother(father) now, I would say she(he) is basically happy
with the way she(he) leads her(his) life".
Parental occupational role status satisfaction.
Daughters' perceptions of maternal and paternal occupational
role status satisfaction were assessed by means of three
Likert scale items with responses ranging from 0-4. Two
questions examined the occupational satisfaction of fathers
and employed mothers by assessing the daughter's perceptions
of each parent's job satisfaction and job enjoyment (Items
18, 19, 37, and 38, Appendix A). The third question measured
perceived maternal happiness with her degree of involvement
in employment outside of the home, thus including nonemployed
as well as employed mothers in this assessment (Item 41,
Appendix A).
Daughters were also asked to characterize their mother's
work involvement and satisfaction (Item 39, Appendix A).
Four categories were available: (a) mother who worked and
preferred not to work, (b) mother who worked and preferred to


36
which showed considerable choice range, followed by a
narrowing of their choices by the time these women were
freshmen in college.
Interestingly, several researchers have reported females
score higher on measures of career maturity than males at all
age levels above the seventh grade (Harmon & Krueger, 1981;
Jones, Hansen, & Putnam, 1976). These researchers have also
noted, however, that females subsequently make their career
choices from a more limited range of fields than their male
counterparts (U.S. Department of Labor, 1975), and that these
choices are unrealistically low in terms of their aptitudes
and interests. This is not surprising when considering that
in the occupational prestige hierarchy the majority of
female-dominated occupations are overrepresented in the
middle and upper-middle range of the distribution (Marini,
1978). The above findings suggest that both sex role
socialization and constraints on occupational opportunities
may be operating to limit career choices of females despite
adequate knowledge of the career planning process.
Rand and Miller (1972) explored differences in attitudes
and plans about education, marriage, and occupation in a
cross-sectional study of 180 women in junior high, high
school, and college. Their results indicated that although
there was a desire across all age groups to marry, an
increase in liberalness with age was evidenced by increased


124
contributions of these three variables, explanations are
offered for the small amount of variance accounted for by the
model.
The small amount of variance accounted for by the model
proposed in the first research question may be due to several
conditions. First, many factors might impact on college
women's occupational role salience. In this study, however,
only parental role modeling influence was examined. Factors
such as individual personality traits, attitudes and
abilities, situational factors, the structure of opportunity
in the world of work, or role model influences other than
parents may better explain the variation in college women's
occupational role salience. For example, correlations for
the total sample between the dependent variable and subjects'
major choice, a variable initially intended to describe the
sample, revealed a significant negative relationship
(r=-.22) between occupational role salience and undecided
major choice. Other unexarained factors which may explain
variation in occupational role salience include subjects' sex
role attitudes and orientation as well as other role model
influences such as teachers or older siblings.
A second possible explanation for the small amount of
variation accounted for by this model was the exclusion of
all the maternal role attribute variables, with the exception
of maternal employment extent, from the analysis of the total
sample. These variables were excluded from this analysis due


Dedicated to my husband, Ted, and my mother, Eleanor,
in loving appreciation of their support and encouragement.


155
Beedle, S. L., Jordan-Viola, L. Eunice, P., & Cross, H.
J. (1979). Sex role orientation of high school and
college students. Sex Roles, 5_, 363-364.
Bernard, J. (1975). Women, wives, mothers: Values and
options Chicago: Aldine-Atherton.
Bernard, J. (1976). Change and stability in sex-role norms
and behavior. Journal of Social Issues, 32, 207-223.
Berson, J. S. (1978). Perceived costs of combining career and
family roles: The influence of early family history on
adult role decision. (Report No. CG012545). Cardiff,
Wales: A paper presented at the 1977 Meeting of the
Welsh Branch of the British Psychological Society. (ERIC
Document Reproduction Service No. ED 156 953).
Bielby, D. D. V. (1978). Maternal employment and
socioeconomic status as factors in daughters career
salience: Some substantive refinements. Sex Roles, 4,
249-266.
Blau, F. D. (1984). Women in the labor force: An overview. In
J. Freeman (Ed.), Women: A feminist perspective (pp.
297-315). Palo Alto, CA: Mayfield.
Blau, P., & Duncan, D. ( 1967). The American occupational
structure. New York: Wiley.
Booth, A., Johnson, D. R., White, L. & Edwards, J. N.
(1984). Women, outside employment, and marital
instability. American Journal of Sociology, 90, 567-583.
Burlin, F. D. (1976). The relationship of parental education
and maternal work and occupational status to
occupational aspiration in adolescent females. Journal
of Vocational Behavior, 9_, 99-104.
Carew, M. C. (1979). Employment and mothers emotional
states: A psychological study of women reentering the
work force. (Doctoral dissertation, Yale University,
1978). Dissertation Abstracts International, 40 (01),
443B. (University Microfilms No. 79-15,806)
Clarey, J. H., & Sanford, A. (1982). Female career preference
and androgyny. Vocational Guidance Quarterly, 30, 258-
264. ~
Colangelo, N., Rosenthal, D. M. & Dettman, D. F. (1984).
Maternal employment and job satisfaction and their
relationship to childrens perceptions and behaviors.
Sex Roles, H), 693-702.


no
Table 6: Regression of Maternal and Paternal Role Model
Influence Variables on College Womens Occupational Role
Salience: Selected Subset Models for the Total Sample
(N =212)
Three-Variable Model
Maternal employment extent
Paternal occupational prestige
Paternal educational level
Total R-Square =
Six-Variable Model
Maternal employment extent
Paternal occupational support
Paternal occupational prestige
Paternal educational level
Paternal occupation innovation
Father-Daughter Relationship
B
t_
t
.10
3.02
.003
o
O'
2.34
.02
.39
-2.54
.01
.06
F = 5.38
.002
B
E.
.10
2.90
.004
.55
- .93
.355
.07
2.45
.015
.39
-2.42
.016
.02
- .77
.438
.01
- .66
.509
Total R-Square = .05 F = 3.00 .008


22
and confusion. In addition, the results of this study could
aid counselors involved in proactive career development
activities by explicating and normalizing the vocational
development process for women.
Finally, if the parental role status, role satisfaction
and support, and parent-child relationship variables
impacting occupational role expectations of college women
could be identified, then parents could become more aware of
their socialization influence on their daughters. They would
consequently have greater ability to consciously nurture and
model whatever life role expectations they felt important for
their children's later success and happiness.
Definition of Terms
In order to facilitate understanding of the terminology
used in this study, the key terms and concepts are defined
below.
Maternal employment extent is defined on a continuum as
the number of hours worked per week and number of years
worked by a mother from the time her daughter was born until
her daughter was 18 or left for college. .
Maternal employment status is defined dichotomously as
the raotherfs employed or nonemployed status. A mother who
has never worked from the time her daughter was born until
her daughter achieved 18 years of age or left for college is
defined as nonemployed. All other mothers are defined as
employed, regardless of employment extent during that time.


131
may have been less valid and reliable than the more objective
data requested on paternal educational level, paternal
occupational prestige level, and the extent of maternal
employment.
Finally, as mentioned previously, the impact of the
paternal role status consequence and relationship variables
was not examined in combination with all the maternal role
status variables for this total sample analysis due to the
nonadditive relationships expected between these variables
and maternal employment status. For this reason the
mediating influences of the maternal role model variables on
the paternal satisfaction and father-daughter relationship
variables could not be examined.
The Employed Mothers Subsample
The regression analyses addressing the second, fourth,
and sixth research questions were designed to examine the
influence of certain maternal and paternal role attribute
variables, both separately and in combination, on the
occupational role salience of only those college women whose
mothers were employed. None of the full mpdel regression
equations or the subset models selected significantly
accounted for variation in the dependent variable for this
subsample.
Examination of the mean and standard deviation for the
variable assessing the extent of maternal employment for the
working mothers subsample indicates a possible reason for


174
36.Taking everything into account, how would you
characterize your fathers attitude about your mother
working?
0 I 2 3 4
Not at all supportive Very Supportive
37.All in all, how satisfied would you say your mother is
with her job?
0 12 3 4
Not at all Satisfied Completely Satisfied
38.Taking everything into account, how much enjoyment would
you say your mother gets from her job?
0
i
2
3 4
No Enjoyment
A lot of Enjoyment
39.Which category best describes your mother?
mother who worked and preferred to work
mother who worked and preferred not to work
nonworking mother who preferred to work
nonworking mother who preferred not to work
40.All in all, how supportive is your father of your
mothers level of involvement in employment outside of the
home? (whether she worked fulltime, partime, or not at all)
0 12 3 4
Not at all supportive
Totally supportive
41.In general, how happy would you say your mother is with
her level of involvement in employment outside of the home?
(whether she worked fulltime, partime, or not at all)
0 12 3 4
Not at all happy
Very happy


CHAPTER IV
RESULTS
To examine whether certain parental role modeling
influences explained variation in daughter's occupational
role salience, data from 214 freshmen and sophomore college
women were collected and analyzed. In this chapter the
results of the data analyses are presented in three sections.
First, descriptive statistics on the total sample of college
women and on the subsamples of women whose mothers were
employed or nonemployed are presented. Then, correlations
between and among the dependent variable and independent
variables are reported for the total sample and for the
employed and the nonemployed mothers subsamples. Finally,
results of the regression analyses and corresponding post hoc
analyses are reported for each proposed research question.
Descriptive Statistics
The Total Sample
The total sample consisted of 214 college women. The
sample was composed of 178 (83%) freshmen and 36 (17%)
sophomores, as might be expected of students taking an
introductory psychology course. Table 1 presents a frequency
distribution of the variables used to describe the students
in this study: age, year at college, minority status, major,
86


117
Table 8: Separate Regressions of Maternal and Paternal Role
Model Influence Variabl
e s on
College
Women's
Occupational Role Salience:
Selected Subset
Models for
the Noneraployed Mothers Subsample (n
=64)
Three Maternal Variable Model
B
t
L
Maternal nonemployed role support
-1.06
-1.42
.160
Maternal marital satisfaction
- .72
-2.14
.036
Maternal life satisfaction
2.08
1.53
.131
Total R-Square =
.09
F = 2.96
.039
Four Maternal Variable Model
B
t
2_
Maternal occupational support
-1.01
-1.36
.180
Maternal marital satisfaction
- .77
-2.56
.028
Maternal life satisfaction
2.38
1.70
.095
Father Daughter Relationship
.03
.90
.373
Total R-Square =
.08
F = 2.42
.059
Three Paternal Variable Model
B
t
L
Paternal educational level
- .68
-2.31
.024
Paternal occupational prestige
.09
2.04
.046
Paternal life satisfaction
-1.70
-1.88
.065
Total R-Square =
.12
F = 3.69
.017
Six Paternal Variable Model
B
t
2.
Paternal educational level
- .56
-1.81
.077
Paternal job satisfaction
.43
.83
.410
Paternal occupational prestige
.08
1.63
.108
Paternal occupation innovation
- .05
- .92
.360
Paternal marital satisfaction
- .25
- .79
.430
Paternal life satisfaction
-1.51
-1.08
.284
Total R-Square =
.10
F = 2.20
.057


65
the total enrollment. Foreign students accounted for 4% of
the student body, representing 102 countries. Minority
students accounted for approximately 10% of the enrollment.
Non-Florida residents accounted for another 4% of all
students enrolled, representing every state in the nation.
The vast majority of students enrolled at the university,
92%, were Florida residents, with students representing every
county in Florida. From 1981 through 1984 the attrition rate
for freshmen not returning to the university for their second
semester was approximately 5% of each class (University of
Florida Office of Academic Affairs, 1985).
The desired minimum sample size for this study was 200-
250 students. To insure that the sample was representative
of the population base, the composition of the sample
included approximately 4% foreign students and 10% minority
students .
Sampling Procedure
The sample was obtained through use of the Psychology
Student Subject Pool at the University of Florida. This
subject pool consists of all students registered in
introductory psychology courses. These students were
required to participate as subjects in a specified number of
hours of empirical research. Previous use of the subject
pool (Funderburk, 1983) revealed a wide variety of majors.
Both traditional and nontraditional major choices as well as
many undecided students were represented in the subject pool.


44
background socioeconomic status (Bielby, 1978; Douvan &
Adelson, 1966; Tangri, 1972). In a study of the impact of
maternal employment on daughters' occupational role salience
in which socioeconomic status was controlled for, and a
national probability sample of female college graduates was
used, Bielby (1978) found that female college graduates from
less economically privileged homes had higher occupational
role salience. However, this finding did not account for
much of the variance.
Conversely, several investigators have found a positive
relationship between family socioeconomic status and
occupational and educational aspirations of daughters (Astin,
1975; Rosen & Aneshensel, 1978). Although socioeconomic
status was not directly correlated with occupational role
salience, Astin (1975) found that among those who attend
college those with higher socioeconomic backgrounds had
higher college admission scores and greater educational
opportunity, both of which have been correlated with
occupational role salience in women (Almquist & Angrist,
1971; Astin & Mynt, 1971; Fassinger, 1985). Similarly, Rosen
and Aneshensel (1978), in a path analytic model that focused
on how sex membership influences the educational and
occupational expectations process, sampled one-third of the
students attending all the junior and senior high schools
(grades 7-12) in three upstate New York cities. They found
occupational role expectations to be higher for females from


115
The 15-variable regression model corresponding to this
research question was as follows: Occupational role salience
= maternal employment extent + parental relative educational
level + parental relative occupational prestige level +
maternal occupational innovation + paternal occupational
innovation + paternal job satisfaction + maternal job
satisfaction + paternal marital satisfaction + maternal
marital satisfaction + paternal occupational role support +
maternal occupational support + paternal life satisfaction +
maternal life satisfaction + father-daughter relationship
dissatisfaction + mother-daughter relationship
dissatisfaction.
The R-square value for the full model was .03 (£_ >.10).
During post hoc analyses of all possible subset combinations
of independent variables a four-variable model was selected
and tested for significance. This subset model is presented
in Table 9 and was ordered as follows: Occupational role
salience = maternal employment extent + father-daughter
relationship satisfaction + paternal marital satisfaction +
paternal occupational support. The R-square for the four-
variable model was .02 >.10).
The Nonemployed Mothers Subsample: Maternal Variables
A regression analysis of the data from daughters with
nonemployed mothers was performed to address the third
research question: To what extent can variation in
occupational role salience be accounted for by variations in


9
(Illfelder, 1980; Parsons et al., 1978; Tittle, 1977; Yanico,
1981), sex role orientation (Clarey & Sanford, 1982; Marshall
& Wijting, 1980; Rand, 1968; Yanico, 1981), achievement
motivation (Kriger, 1972; Marshall & Wijting, 1980; Rand,
1968), abilities (Fassinger, 1985; Rand, 1968; Rosen &
Aneshensel, 1978); and personality (Yuen et al., 1980).
Relatedly, studies of socialization influences on
womens occupational role expectations and behavior have
examined the impact of school teachers and counselors
(Almquist & Angrist, 1971; Hesse-Biber & Gosselin, 1982;
Lemkau, 1981), friends (Hesse-Biber & Gosselin, 1982; Tangri,
1972), and family members (Altman & Grossman, 1977; Baruch,
1972; Burlin, 1976; Fassinger, 1985; McBroom, 1981; Ridgeway,
1978; Stephan & Corder, 1985; Tangri, 1972).
Because the family is considered to be the most
influential socializing agent during childhood (Lidz, 1968),
shaping personality as it translates and demonstrates
cultural roles and rules to the individual, studies of family
socialization influences on occupational role salience of
women have been numerous (Auster & Auster, 1981). These
studies have examined the influence of a variety of different
types of family variables.
Examining the influence of family socialization on sex
role development and occupational role expectations of women,
researchers have investigated family structural variables,


159
Havighurst, R. J. (1951). Developmental tasks and education.
New York: Longmans, Green.
Havighurst, R. J., & Taba, H. (1949). Adolescent character
and personality. New York: Wiley.
HesseBiber, S., & Gosselin, J.M. (1982). Career and
lifestyle aspirations of Boston College undergraduates.
(Report No. HE016816). Boston College, Chestnut Hill,
MA: Office of Affirmative Action. (ERIC Document
Reproduction Services No. ED 242 226).
Hetherington, E. M., Cox, M., & Cox, R. (1979). Play and
social interactions in children following divorce.
Journal of Social Issues, 35, 26-49.
Hodge, R. W., Siegel, P. M., & Rossi, P. H. (1964).
Occupational prestige in the United States, 1925-1963.
American Journal of Sociology, 70, 286-302.
Hodge, R. W., Siegel, P. M., & Rossi, P. H. (1966). A
comparative study of occupational prestige. In R. Bendix
& S. M. Lipset (Eds.), Class, status, and power (pp.
322-334). New York: Free Press.
Hodge, R. W., Siegel, P. M. & Rossi, P. H. (1977). Siegel
prestige scale. In R. M. Hauser & D. L. Featherraan
(Eds.), The process of social stratification: Trends and
analyses (pp.320-328). New York: Academic Press.
Hoffman, L. W. (1972). Early childhood experiences and
women's achievement motives. Journal of Social Issues,
28:, 129-155 .
Hoffman, L. W. (1974). Effects of maternal employment on the
child: A review of the research. Developmental
Psychology, 10, 204-228.
Hoffman, L. W. (1977). Changes in family roles,
socialization, and sex differences. American
Psychologist, 32, 644-657.
Holland, J. L. (1963). Explorations of theory of vocational
choice and achievement. Psychological Reports, 12, 547-
594.
Holland, J. L. (1973). Making vocational choices: A theory of
careers. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Hopkins, A. H. (1983). Work and job satisfaction in the
public sector. Totowa, NJ: Rowman & Allanheld.


29
1979). In 1974, 14% of all households were headed by females
(Bane 1976). Glick (1979) predicted that by 1990 close to
one-third of all children might be expected to experience a
parents divorce before they reach the age of 18. Levinger
and Moles (1979) reported a decrease in the emotional, legal,
religious, and social barriers to divorce. This change in
family form may have an impact on the occupational role
expectations of women exposed to divorce and/or single parent
families during their childhood.
From a somewhat different perspective, it has been
proposed that the womens liberation movement gaining power
in the 1960s played a significant role in increasing
awareness of womens status and changing womens role
expectations, perceptions, and behavior (Freeman, 1984).
The movement advocated equalization of relationships with
men, both marital and nonraarital (Friedan, 1963). Data in
support of the success of this movement indicated college
enrollment of women doubled from 1968-1980, from 3 million to
6 million (Weitzman, 1984). Further, women accounted for 4%
of law students in 1960 and 34% in 1980, 6% of medical
students in 1960 and 26% in 1980. The womens movement, and
the National Organization for Women formed soon after in
1966, gave voice and visibility to womens increasing
dissatisfaction with traditional roles and their desire for
increasing independence, sharing of childrearing, and


113
Table 7: Separate Regressions
of Maternal
and Paternal Role
Model Influence Varia
bles on
College
Womens
Occupational Role Salience
: Selected
Subset
Models for
the Employed Mothers Subsample (n =1
49)
Two Maternal Variable Model
B
t
2.
Maternal employment extent
.08
1.85
.067
Maternal marital satisfaction
.15
1.42
.157
Total R-Square =
.02
F =
2.32
.101
Five Maternal Variable Model
B
t
2_
Maternal employment extent
.07
1.62
.107
Maternal occupational prestige
.02
.64
.521
Maternal job satisfaction
.11
.69
.490
Maternal marital satisfaction
.11
.93
.352
Mother-daughter relationship
.00
-.24
.811
Total R-Square =
.01
F =
1.16
.331
Three Paternal Variable Model
B
t
2_
Paternal occupational support
-1.02
-1.54
.126
Paternal marital satisfaction
.19
1.34
.181
Father-daughter relationship
- .02
- .97
.333
Total R-Square =
.01
F
= 1.50
.216
Five Paternal Variable Model
B
t
p_
Paternal educational level
- .26
-1.39
.167
Paternal occupational support
1
o
N>
-1.49
.139
Paternal occupational prestige
.05
1.49
.137
Paternal marital satisfaction
.19
1.35
.179
Father-daughter relationship
- .02
- .93
.355
Total R-Square =
.01
F :
= 1.41
.223


33
is permanent motivates the child to discover how
to be a competent or "proper" girl or boy.
As a consequence, he or she finds male or female
activities rewarding. Reinforcements and models
help show children how well they are doing,
but essentially they socialize themselves, (p. 167)
Carol Gilligan, a cognitive psychologist focusing on
female development, described women as speaking "in a
difference voice" than men, not only in terms of the
decisions they make but even in how they make decisions
(Baruch, Barnett, & Rivers, 1983; Gilligan, 1979). Gilligan
argued that women are most concerned with caretaking,
responsibility to others, and relationships. She contended
that for women to be more successful in the occupational
world, with the first step being that of increasing their
occupational role salience, women needed to decrease their
constant attentiveness to others and tendency to always see
both sides. She further suggested that women must learn to
perceive their own needs as primary, to start nurturing
themselves, and to stop subordinating their individual
achievement.
In sum, the developmental context of college freshmen
and sophomores is one of change and transition as they
attempt to implement a cohesive and successful identity,
individuate from the family, develop intimate relationships,
and choose an occupation. For college women today in
particular, there are social pressures to succeed not only
vocationally and academically, but as women in intimate
interpersonal relationships as well. Occupational role


160
Illfelder, J. K. (1980). Fear of success, sex role
attitudes, and career salience and anxiety levels of
college women. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 16, 7-16.
Jones, 0. M., Hansen, J. C., & Putnam, B. A. (1976).
Relationship of self-concept and vocational maturity to
vocational preferences of adolescents. Journal of
Vocational Behavior, 8_, 31-40.
Kagan, J., & Moss, H. (1962). From birth to maturity. New
York: Wiley.
Kahn, D. G. (1982). Lessons of their mothers lives:
Imitation and avoidance by contemporary college women.
International Journal of Womens Studies, 5_, 58-74.
Kamraerman, S. B., & Hayes, C. D. (1982). Families that work:
Children in a changing world. Washington, DC: National
Academy Press.
Katz, J. (1968). No time for youth. San Francisco: Jossey-
Bass.
Kelly, A., & Worell, L. (1976). Parent behaviors related to
masculine, feminine, and androgynous sex role
orientations. Journal of Consulting and Clinical
Psychology, 44, 843-851.
Kohlberg, L. (1966). A cognitive-developmental analysis of
childrens sex-role concepts and attitudes. In E. E.
Maccoby (Ed.), The development of sex differences (pp.
82-173). Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
Kohlberg, L. (1969). Stage and sequence: The cognitive-
developmental approach to socialization. In D. A. Goslin
(Ed.), Handbook of socialization theory and research
(pp. 347-480). Chicago: Rand McNally.
Korn, H. A. (1968). Personality scale changes from the
freshman year to the senior year. In J. Katz (Ed.), No
time for youth (pp. 162-252). San Francisco: Jossey-
Bass.
Kriger, S. F. (1972). Need achievement and perceived parental
child-rearing attitudes of career women and homemakers.
Journal of Vocational Behavior, 2_, 419-432.
Kulka, R. A., & Weingarten, H. (1979). The longterm effects
of parental divorce in childhood on adult adjustment.
Journal of Social Issues, 35, 50-79.


39
role values and attitudes (Fassinger, 1985; Illfelder, 1980;
Parsons et al.,1978; Stephan & Corder, 1985; Tittle, 1977;
Yanico, 1981), sex role orientation (Marshall & Wijting,
1980; Rand, 1968; Yanico, 1981), race (Malson, 1983; Noel,
1979; Thomas & Neal, 1978; Tittle, 1977), marital role status
and expectations (Astin & Mynt, 1971; Mueller & Campbell,
1977; Yuen et al. 1980), achievement motivation and
orientation (Fassinger, 1985; Kriger, 1972; Marshall &
Wijting, 1980; Rand, 1968), fear of success (Illfelder,
1980), personality (Rand, 1968; Yuen et al., 1980), academic
achievement and ability level (Almquist & Angrist, 1971;
Astin & Mynt, 1971; Fassinger, 1985; Rand, 1968; Rosen &
Aneshensel, 1978), and educational attainment level (Astin &
Mynt, 1971; Yuen et al., 1980).
The results of these studies can be summarized as
follows. A positive relationship has been found between
college women's liberal, nontraditional sex role attitudes
and occupational role aspirations (Parsons et al., 1978) and
occupational salience (Fassinger, 1985; Illfelder, 1980;
Stephan & Corder, 1985; Yanico, 1981). Similarly, college
women's occupational role salience has been positively
related to both masculine and androgynous sex role
orientation and identity (Marshall & Wijting, 1980; Rand,
1968; Yanico, 1981).
Achievement motivation and orientation have also been
positively related to occupational role salience in young


154
Astin, H. S. (1975). Young women and their roles.
Chapter In R. J. Havighurst & P. H. Dreyer (Eds.),
Youth: Seventy-fourth yearbook of the national society
for the study of education (pp. 419-434). Chicago:
University of Chicago Press.
Astin, H. S. (1984). The meaning of work in women's lives: A
sociopsychological model of career choice and work
behavior. The Counseling Psychologist, 12, 117-126.
Astin, H. S., & Mynt, T. (1971). Career development of young
women during the post-high school years. Journal of
Counseling Psychology, 18, 369-393.
Auster, C. J., & Auster D. (1981). Factors influencing
women's choice of nontraditional careers: The role of
family, peers, and counselors. Vocational Guidance
Quarterly, 29, 253-263.
Banducci, R. (1967). The effect of mother's employment on the
achievement, aspirations, and expectations of the child.
Personality and Guidance Journal, 46, 263-267.
Bandura, A. (1977). Social learning theory. Englewood Cliffs,
NJ: Prentice Hall.
Bane, M. J. (1976). Marital disruption and the lives of
children. Journal of Social Issues, 26, 377-383.
Baruch, G. K. (1972). Maternal influences on college women's
attitudes toward women and work. Developmental
Psychology, 6_, 32-37.
Baruch, G. K., & Barnett, R. C. (1981). Fathers'
participation in the care of their preschool children.
Sex Roles, 7, 1043-1055.
Baruch, G., Barnett, R., & Rivers, C. (1983). Lifeprints: New
patterns of love and work for today's women. New York:
Signet.
Baumrind, D. (1967). Child care practices anteceding three
patterns of preschool behavior. Genetic Psychology, 75,
43-88. ~
Baumrind, D. (1970). Socialization and instrumental
competence in young children. Young Children, 26, 104-
118.
Baumrind, D. (1975). Early socialization and the discipline
controversy. Morristown, NJ: General Learning Press.


107
Table 5 continued
Independent With Independent Variables n_ r
Paternal marital satisfaction with
Paternal life satisfaction
Maternal life satisfaction
Father-daughter relation dissatisfaction
64
64
64
.61****
_,55****
Maternal life satisfaction with
Paternal life satisfaction
Father-daughter relation dissatisfaction
64
64
,47****
-.43****
Father-daughter relation dissatisfaction with
Mother-daughter relation dissatisfaction
64
,22****
****p <.001.


83
In terms of population limitations, this study purported
to explain the parental role model and pa r en t d a u g h t e r
relationship influences accounting for variations in
occupational role salience in lower division college women
who attended the University of Florida, were ages 17-20, from
intact families, and who had never been married. The
generalizabili ty of this study is thus limited to lower
division college females attending one university in Florida,
who are ages 17-20, from intact families, and who have never
been married.
Since subjects with divorced parents were not included,
it could be speculated that the extremes of parental marital
dissatisfaction were not included in this study thus limiting
the diversity of parental role models examined. It is
believed, however, that the majority of these sample and
population limitations were necessary for economic reasons,
convenience (e.g., limiting the sample to the University of
Florida), or in order to control for the potential impact of
confounding variables such as age, educational attainment,
family structure, and current marital status on womens
occupational role salience.
In addition, there may have been sample bias resulting
from selection of subjects from a psychology student subject
pool. However, this subject pool had been shown to encompass
a wide variety of majors, and the majority of lower division
college students have not yet officially selected an upper


15
daughters is mediated by maternal perceived satisfaction with
and reinforcement for role status (Baruch, 1972; Kahn, 1982;
Macke & Morgan, 1978; Mullins, 1980), maternal occupational
prestige level (Treiman & Terrell, 1975), maternal
educational attainment (Burlin, 1976; Mulvey, 1963; Rosen &
Aneshensel, 1978), maternal occupational innovation (Tangri,
1972), family power structure in the form of relative
occupational and educational status of parents (Vanfossen,
1977), and paternal support for maternal occupational status
(Carew, 1978/1979; Lamb & Bronson, 1980; Smith, 1981). Thus,
parental socialization influences on occupational role
salience of college women have been examined in terras of the
relative power of mothers and fathers as role models for
their daughters, as a function of their relative occupational
and educational status, support for and satisfaction with
their roles, and the quality of the parent-child
relationship.
Need
Although previous researchers have examined parental
influences on occupational role development of women, no
researcher to date has attempted to comprehensively control
for daughter status factors while examining parental
influences. Because such status variables (e.g., age, race,
educational level, major choice and marital status) obviously
contribute to occupational role salience, there is a need to
control for these influences. An attempt was made to control


46
Albrecht (1976) studied the relationship between social
class and occupational stereotyping of adult males and
females. Using a random sampling of 2,227 households in
Utah, he found education, but not income level, to be
strongly related to such stereotyping and concluded that the
females and males in educationally disadvantaged families
have dual blocks to occupational attainment in the form of
both limited training and attitudinal barriers which rule out
many occupations as viable choices.
Still other researchers have found no correlation
between occupational orientation in females and family
socioeconomic status (Almquist & Angrist, 1970; Lipraen-Blumen
& Leavitt, 1976). It may be that global measurement of
family socioeconomic status, due to its failure to
differentiate variations among families in levels of maternal
occupational status, family size, or sex of siblings, is too
gross a measure of family status to accurately predict the
occupational role salience of college women.
The effect of maternal employment on general attitudes
towards womens roles has been well documented in the
research literature. Maternal employment has consistently
been associated with acceptance of a wider range of sex-
appropriate behaviors and more egalitarian and less sex-role
stereotypic ideologies among daughters of all ages (Baruch,
1972; Douvan, 1963; Douvan & Adelson, 1966; Eyde, 1962;
Hartley, 1960, 1961; Meier, 1972; Vogel, Broverraan,


156
Coleman, M., & Ganong, L. H. (1984). Effect of the family
structure on family attitudes and expectations. Fami1y
Relations, 33, 425-432.
Cummings, L. D. (1977). Value stretch in definitions of
career among college women: Horatio Alger as feminist
model. Social Problems, 25, 65-74.
De Fronzo, J., & Boudreau, F. (1979). Further research into
antecedents and correlates of androgyny. Psychological
Reports, 44, 23-29.
Dellas, M., Gaier, E. L., & Emihovich, C. A. (1979). Maternal
employment and selected behaviors and attitudes of
preadolescents and adolescents. Adolescence, 14, 579-
589.
Douvan, E. (1963). Employment and the adolescent. In F. I.
Nye & L. W. Hoffman (Eds.), The employed mother in
America (pp. 142-182). Chicago: Rand McNally.
Douvan, E., & Adelson, J. (1966). The adolescent experience.
New York: Wiley.
Duncan, 0. D. (1961). A socioeconomic index for all
occupations. In A. J. Reiss, 0. D. Duncan, P. K. Hatt, &
C. C. North (Eds.), Occupation and social class (pp.
109-138). New York: Free Press.
Eiduson, B. T. (1979). Emergent families in the 1970s:
Values, practices and impact on children. In D. Reiss &
H. A. Hoffman (Eds.), The American family: Dying or
developing (pp. 157-201). New York: Plenum Press.
Empey, L. T. (1958). Role expectations of women regarding
marriage and career. Marriage and Family Living, 20,
152-155.
Erikson, E. H. (1950). Childhood and society. New York: W. W.
Norton.
Erikson, E. H. (1968). Identity: Youth and crisis. New York:
W. W. Norton.
Espenshade, T. J. (1979). The economic consequences of
divorce. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 41, 615-
625.
Eyde, L. D., (1962). Work values and background factors as
predictors of women's desire to work (Research Monograph
No. 108). Columbus, OH: Bureau of Business Research,
Ohio State University.


75
The LIPHE is a version of the Fundamental Interpersonal
Relationship Orientation (FIRO) scales developed by Schtz
(1958). The LIPHE was selected for use in this study because
it was designed to measure the relationship between parent
and child from the point of view of the child after the child
has become an adult. The rationale for using a current
subjective assessment of past parent-child interactions in
this study was threefold. First, the daughter's
phenomenological perspective may be the most relevant in
assessing past parental influences on current occupational
role salience given that the daughter's occupational role
salience was being self-reported from a phenomenological
perspective as well. Second, it can be argued that to the
extent individuals define situations to be real, they are
real in their consequences. Third, it can be argued that
parent-child relationships and parents as role models during
childhood have a more profound impact on personality
development, attitudes, and expectations than those same
relationships and role model influences in adult life due to
the greater dependency of the child and concomitant greater
power of the parent during childhood (Bandura, 1977; Lamb,
1978; Lamb, Owen, & Chase-Lansdale, 1980).
Each item in the LIPHE is stated in Guttman scale form.
The degree of dissatisfaction, if any, with what individuals
recall of their mothers' or fathers' behaviors or feelings is
rated on a six-point scale. Each relationship is measured in


REFERENCES
Acker, J. (1978). Women and social stratification: A case of
intellectual sexism. American Journal of Sociology, 78,
936-945.
Ainsworth, M. D., Bell, S. M., & Stayton, D. J. (1974).
Infant mother attachment and social development:
Socialization as a product of reciprocal responsiveness
to signals. In M. P. Richards (Ed.), The integration of
the child into a social world (pp. 99-135). New York:
Cambridge University Press.
Albrecht, S. L. (1976). Social class and sex-stereotyping of
occupations. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 9_, 321-328.
Allred, M. A. (1983). A study of the relationship between
fathers' social class, wives' education, wives'
employment status, and fathers' attitudes concerning sex
role differentiation. (Doctoral dissertation, Rutgers
University, 1982). Dissertation Abstracts International,
44 (2), 587A.
Almquist, E. M., & Angrist, S. S. (1970). Career salience and
atypicality of occupational choice among college women.
Journal of Marriage and the Family, 32, 242-249.
Almquist, E. M., & Angrist, S. S. (1971). Role model
influences on college women's career aspirations.
Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 17, 263-279.
Altman, S. L., & Grossman, F. K. (1977). Women's career plans
and maternal employment. Psychology of Women Quarterly,
1_, 365-376.
Amatea, E. S., Cross E. G., Clark, J. E., & Bobby, C. L.
(1986). Assessing the work and family role expectations
of career-oriented men and women: The life role salience
scales. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 48, 831-838.
Angrist, S. S. (1969). The study of sex roles. Journal of
Social Issues, 25, 215-232.
153


126
role salience of daughters with nonemployed mothers while
high paternal marital satisfaction may increase occupational
role salience of daughters with employed mothers. Thus
paternal marital satisfaction and maternal employment extent
may interact in a nonadditive way. In another example, one
daughter may have high occupational role salience explained
by high maternal employment involvement and satisfaction
while another daughters high occupational role salience
might be explained by low maternal employment involvement and
low maternal satisfaction combined with high paternal
occupational role modeling influence and encouragement. In
this first analysis of the total sample the daughters with
employed mothers and nonemployed mothers were combined.
Therefore interactions of independent variables as a function
of maternal employment extent may have gone undetected.
Three variables were found to be significant in
explaining variation in women's occupational role salience
for the total sample: extent of maternal employment, level
of paternal occupational prestige, and paternal educational
level. The finding that occupational role salience of
daughters was positively related to maternal employment is
consistent with results from previous research studies
(Almquist & Angrist, 1971; Banducci, 1967). In this study,
the greater the number of years and hours worked by a womans
mother, the more likely the woman was to have high
occupational role salience.


7
opportunity" in the world of work may limit a womans
occupational choice options without influencing the salience
of the occupational role for her. In contrast, occupational
role salience may be more influenced by family socialization
than specific occupational choices, which may be more
dependent on current opportunity and status variables. In
addition, family socialization influences might be expected
to be greater during a stage in which the daughter has
recently been involved with the family. Therefore, studies
of younger women may be of most interest when examining
socialization influences on occupational role salience. In
this study, the general level of occupational role salience
of college women was examined.
In addition to distinguishing between studies examining
occupational role salience and occupational choice
influences, it is important to differentiate studies of
occupational role salience of women at different
developmental stages. A womans occupational role
expectations and behaviors are assumed to vary across time
(Beedle, Jordan-Viola, Eunice, & Cross, 1979; Matthews &
Tiedeman, 1964; Zuckerman, 1980) as a function of her age and
her relative participation in specific roles across the life
span (Nevill, 1984). Therefore, it is important to specify
the developmental stage of the population under study. In
this study, occupational role salience of freshmen and
sophomore college women was examined.


14
occupational role salience might be expected to report having
a mother who is employed and perceived to be supported for
and satisfied with her role, and to report a warm and
involved relationship with her mother. Conversely, a woman
with high occupational role salience might have a nonworking
mother who she perceives as neither satisfied with nor
supported for her role, and whose behavior the woman wants to
avoid. Furthermore, high occupational role salience might be
reported by a daughter who has an occupationally successful
father with whom she is close and whom she wants to imitate.
Several studies appear to support the relationships
hypothesized by social learning theory. College women whose
mothers worked outside the home were reported more likely
than college women with homeraaking mothers to follow a career
(Almquist & Angrist, 1971; Altman & Grossman, 1977;
Banducci, 1967; Baruch, 1972; Parsons et al., 1978; Tangri,
1972). In addition, some researchers have found daughters
levels of occupational role salience to be related to
identifying with or imitating their fathers rather than their
mothers (Ridgeway, 1978; Standley & Soule, 1974; Tangri,
1972). However, the greatest support for the theory is found
in the results of research examining the nature of the
parents' role involvements and the consequences of those
involvements for parents. Results from these studies
indicate that the power of maternal employment status in
explaining variation in occupational role aspirations in


98
subsamples separately. These are reported in later sections.
The eight independent variables assessing various aspects of
paternal role model influence were conceptualized as having
both a direct impact on daughter's occupational role salience
and an indirect impact through paternal influences on mothers
as role models. For this reason the correlations of paternal
role attributes with daughters' occupational role salience
were examined for the total sample first, and then in
separate analyses for the employed and noneraployed mothers
subsamples in conjunction with maternal role attribute
influences.
In correlating the dependent variable with the nine
independent variables only three independent variables were
found to be significant (p <.10). These are presented in
Table 3. There was a slight .20 (<.01) positive
correlation between the extent of maternal employment and the
occupational role salience of daughters, a slight -.11 (g_
<.10) negative correlation between paternal educational level
and daughters' occupational role salience, and a slight .17
(2_ <01) correlation between parental relative educational
level and occupational role salience of daughters. This
finding indicated that daughters' occupational role salience
was slightly related to mothers having equal or more
education than their husbands.


53
with work, if at all, being secondary and due to choice
rather than necessity. Finally, the employed mother group of
women who described equal commitment to both future career
and family were characterized by two extremes: imitation of
well-educated, happily employed mothers in egalitarian
marriages or avoidance of either uneducated, unhappily
employed mothers perceived as having limited horizons or
unhappily unemployed mothers perceived as having wasted
potential. The design of this study allowed for exploration
of myriad family status and structural variables as they
mediated maternal role model influence on life role choices
of young women. Intriguing implications for social learning
theory were indicated in the finding that avoidance may be as
powerful as imitation of role models in explaining the
learning process and subsequent expectations and preferences.
However, two limitations to this study were evident. One
limitation was the neglect of paternal role factors and the
other limitation was the lack of information on qualitative
aspects of the mother-daughter or father-daughter
relationship.
Parent-Daughter Relationship Influences
Investigators of parent-daughter relationship factors
and daughters development have examined parental influences
in the following areas relevant to womens occupational role
expectations: daughter's occupational role innovation (sex-
atypical occupational choice), daughter's occupational role


20
6. To what extent can variation in occupational role
salience among women with employed mothers be accounted for
by variations in maternal and paternal role status, perceived
maternal and paternal role status consequences, and the
perceived quality of the mother-daughter and father-daughter
relationship?
7. To what extent can variation in occupational role
salience among women with nonemployed mothers be accounted
for by variations in maternal and paternal role status,
perceived maternal and paternal role status consequences, and
the perceived quality of the mother-daughter and father-
daughter relationship?
Significance of the Study
The results of this study have implications for theory
and for practice. It has become clear that the vocational
development process is not identical for men and women, yet
established theories of occupational development have
primarily used male populations in research validating their
constructs. Recently, models of vocational development for
women have been suggested. Rather than focusing primarily on
individual trait factors, such as attributes, aptitudes, and
interests, as do many male-oriented vocational development
theories, these theories suggest that sex role socialization
influences and the structure of opportunity in the world of
work are additional important determinants of occupational
role salience for women (Astin, 1984).


105
reporting of the intercorrelations among the 14 independent
variables.
The results of correlating the scores of the 64
daughters of nonemployed mothers on all the independent
variables with the dependent variable yielded several
significant relationships which are presented in Table 5.
Occupational role salience had a -.26 (p_ <.05) negative
correlation with maternal marital satisfaction and a -.28
(2. <.05) negative correlation with paternal marital
satisfaction among subjects with nonworking mothers. In
addition, daughters occupational role salience had a -.26
(£. <.05) negative correlation with paternal life satisfaction
and a -.24 (p_ <.10) negative correlation with paternal
educational level. Level of paternal support for maternal
nonemployed role status had a -.24 (p_ <*05) negative
correlation with daughters occupational role salience.
Finally, daughters dissatisfaction with her relationship with
father had a .22 (p_ <.10) positive relationship to her
occupational role salience.
Correlations were also computed among all 14 independent
variables. Examination of intercorrelations among these
maternal and paternal role attribute variables for the
subsaraple of daughters with nonemployed mothers yielded 21
significant inter correlations (p_ <.001), ranging from .22-
.88. These intercorrelations are also presented in Table 5.


CHAPTER III
METHODOLOGY
It has been suggested that parental figures exert a
powerful role modeling influence in shaping women's
occupational role expectations. This study examined the role
modeling influence of mothers and fathers of college women.
Three facets of parental influence were examined:
(a) parental role status, (b) parental role status
consequences, and (c) parent-daughter relationship quality.
The purpose of this study was to determine whether these
facets of parental influence could be used to explain
daughters' occupational role salience. A limited number of
facets of maternal and paternal influence were first examined
for the sample as a whole. Then the sample was divided in
terms of mothers' employment status and aspects of the
mothers' role influence and fathers' role influence were
examined separately for these two subsamples. Finally,
mothers' and fathers' role influences were jointly examined
for the subsamples of daughters with employed and those with
nonemployed mothers.
In this chapter the research design and methodology are
described. The chapter consists of seven sections: the
research design, the population and sample, sampling
62


120
Table 9:
Regressions of Maternal and Paternal Role Model
on/'o 1/arnaKloa in PnmViinnrinn nn Onllnna Jnmnn'o
Occupational Role Salience:
Selected
Subset Models fo:
the Employed and Nonemployed
Mothers
Subsample
Employed Mothers Subsample (n =1501
Four Variable Model
B
t_
E.
Maternal Employment Extent
.08
1.78
.077
Father-daughter relationship
- .02
-1.19
.237
Paternal marital satisfaction
.20
1.44
.152
Paternal occupational support
- .89
-1.35
. 180
Total R-Square =
.02
F <
= 1.93
.108
Noneraployed Mothers Subsaraple ( n
= 64)
Four Variable Model
B
t_
2.
Maternal marital satisfaction
- .84
-2.50
.015
Parental relative education level
.69
2.13
.033
Paternal occupational prestige
.08
1.87
.067
Maternal life satisfaction
2.52
1.81
.075
Total R-Square =
.13
F
= 3.37
.015
Five Variable Model
B
E.
Maternal marital satisfaction
- .78
-2.31
.025
Parental relative education level
.66
2.11
.040
Paternal occupational prestige
.09
2.03
.047
Maternal life satisfaction
2.65
1.91
.061
Maternal nonemployed role support
- .10
-1.32
.193
Total R-Square =
.14
F
= 3.08
.016


135
was with her marriage and her nonworking status, the higher
her daughters occupational role salience.
The results suggested by these first two variables in
the model conform well to a social learning theory model of
occupational role development for women and are consistent
with results of Kahn's 1982 study of college women's role
preferences as a function of imitation and avoidance of their
mothers' lives. If nonworking mothers were supported by
their husbands for not working, and were satisfied in their
marriages, then daughters were more likely to imitate them,
and their occupational role salience was lower. Conversely,
if nonworking mothers were neither supported by their
husbands for their nonemployed status, nor satisfied in their
marriages, then daughters were more likely to avoid this
pattern and subsequently reported higher occupational role
salience.
The third variable in the equation, maternal life
satisfaction, was surprisingly related to occupational role
salience of daughters with nonworking mothers in a positive
direction. If nonworking mothers were satisfied with their
lives in general, they were more likely to have daughters
with higher occupational role salience.
The addition of the third variable into the equation,
maternal life satisfaction, only accounted for an incremental
increase of 2% of the variance. Given the small increment in
variance accounted for by this third variable in the model,


32
marriage and family (Havighurst, 1951; Havighurst & Taba,
1949). As might be expected, this ordering of developmental
tasks appears to be more applicable to males than females.
Erikson proposed a psychodynamic theory of human
development describing a progression through eight distinct
stages (Erikson, 1950, 1968; LeFrancois, 1976). Each stage
is characterized by the resolution of a conflict or an
intrapsychic crisis. The resolution of crises at earlier
stages impact on the conflict resolution at later stages.
The developmental tasks and potential crises believed to be
focal during the late adolescent years and early adult years
are identity formation versus role diffusion, and intimacy
versus isolation. Clearly from this psychodynaraic
developmental perspective, a college womans status relative
to these two important psychological developmental tasks
would have important implications for her occupational role
expectations.
Theorists in cognitive psychology have provided further
explanation of women's development. Kohlberg (1966, 1969)
believed developmental cognitive changes affect the way
children assimilate information about the sexes, and
therefore these changes have implications for sex role
development. Tavris and Offir (1977) described this
perspective:
It assumes children and adults try to maintain
a coherent and balanced picture of themselves
and the world, in which beliefs, actions, and
values are congruent. The knowledge that gender


165
Piaget, J. (1969). The origins of intellect. San Francisco:
W. H. Freeman.
Rand, L. (1968). Masculinity or femininity? Differentiating
career-oriented and homeraaking-oriented college freshmen
women. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 15, 444-450.
Rand, L., & Miller, A. L. (1972). A developmental cross-
sectioning of womens careers and marriage attitudes and
life plans. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 2_, 317-331.
Rapoport, R., & Rapoport, R. (1971). Early and later
experiences as determinants of adult behavior: Married
womens family and career patterns. British Journal of
Sociology, 22, 16-30.
Regan, M. C., & Roland, H. E. (1985). Rearranging family and
career priorities: Professional women and men of the
eighties. Journal of Marriage and the Family. 47, 985-
992.
Reiss, A. J., Duncan, 0. D., Hatt, P. K., & North, C. C.
(1961). Occupations and social status. New York: Free
Press.
Ridgeway, C. (1978). Parental identification and patterns of
career orientation in college women. .Journal of
Vocational Behavior, 12, 1-11.
Rosen, B. C., & Aneshensel, C. S. (1978). Sex differences in
the educational-occupational expectation process. Social
Forces, 57, 164-186.
Schaffer, K. (1981). Sex roles and human behavior. Cambridge,
MA: Winthrop.
Schulenberg, J. E., Vondracek, F. W., & Crouter, A. C.
(1984). The influence of the family on vocational
development. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 46,
129-143.
Schtz, W. C. (1958) A three-dimensional theory of
interpersonal behavior. New York: Holt-Rinehart &
Winston.
Schtz, W. C. (1977). Leaders of schools: Firo theory applied
to administrators. La Jolla, CA: University Associates.
Schtz, W. C. (1978). Firo awareness scales manual. Palo
Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.


141
subset solutions and yielded significant R-squares of .13 (2.
<.05) and .14 ( p_ <.05) respectively. Due to the
insubstantial increment in variance accounted for by the
five-variable model, the four-variable model was selected for
best-fit.
The four-variable model was ordered as follows:
maternal marital satisfaction + parental relative educational
level + paternal occupational prestige level + maternal life
satisfaction. Marital satisfaction of nonemployed mothers
was inversely related to occupational role salience of
daughters. After accounting for variation due to maternal
marital satisfaction, parental relative educational level was
positively related to daughter's occupational role salience.
This finding indicated daughters in this sample whose
nonworking mothers had either equal or more education than
their fathers tended to have higher occupational role
salience than those daughters whose mothers had less
education than their husbands.
It may be that these college women perceive their
mothers as having wasted potential because they are
unsatisfied in their marriages and they are equally or better
educated than their husbands, yet they are not working.
Therefore these daughters may choose to avoid their mothers'
life patterns and subsequently have higher occupational role
salience. This analysis is consistent with Kahn's (1982)
findings that many college women who plan to combine family


40
women (Fassinger, 1985; Kriger, 1972; Marshall & Wijting,
1980; Rand, 1968), as has actual academic achievement and
ability (Almquist & Angrist, 1971; Astin & Mynt, 1971;
Fassinger, 1985; Rand, 1968; Rosen & Aneshensel, 1978), and
educational attainment (Astin & Mynt, 1971; Yuen et al. ,
1980). Rosen & Aneshensel (1978), however, found mental
ability and academic achievement less predictive of
occupational role expectations for adolescent women than for
adolescent men. This conclusion was confirmed by Marini
(1978) in her review of the research on sex differences in
the determination of adolescent aspirations. These
researchers attribute this lesser influence of abilities on
female occupational aspirations to the impact of traditional
sex role socialization.
Rand (1968) and Yuen, Tinsley, and Tinsley (1980) found
career-oriented women to have higher needs for autonomy and
dominance, while homemaker-oriented women had higher needs
for altruism, nurturance, and sociability. Similarly,
Illfelder (1980) found that fear of success and traditional
sex role attitudes, in combination, successfully predicted
low occupational role salience among college women.
The results of studies on variation in women's
occupational role expectations relative to race can be
summarized as follows. In the past married black women have
often worked for economic reasons. Occupational and family
roles have traditionally been occupied conjointly by black


103
Table 4: Significant Intercorrelations among the Independent
Variables for the Employed Mothers Subsample
Variable Name n r
Maternal educational level with
Paternal educational level 150 .38
Maternal occupational prestige 150 .43
Paternal occupational prestige 150 .43
Paternal educational level with
Paternal marital satisfaction 150 .27
Paternal occupational prestige 150 .69
Parental relative occupational prestige 150 -.46
Paternal job support 150 .33
Maternal job satisfaction 150 .30
Paternal life satisfaction 150 .27
Parental relative educational level with
Paternal occupational prestige 150 -.33
Parental relative occupational prestige 150 .39
Extent of maternal employment with
Parental relative occupational prestige 150 .26
Maternal occupational prestige level with
Maternal occupational innovation 150 -.31
Paternal marital satisfaction 150 .26
Paternal occupational prestige 150 .39
Paternal occupational prestige level with
Maternal job satisfaction 150 .33
Paternal job support 150 .31
Maternal job satisfaction with
Paternal job support 150 .28
Paternal marital satisfaction 150 .27
Maternal life satisfaction 150 .42
Maternal job support 150 .26
Paternal job satisfaction with
Paternal life satisfaction 150 .51
Maternal job support with
Maternal marital satisfaction 150 .44
Paternal marital satisfaction 150 .46
Paternal life satisfaction 150 .28
Maternal life satisfaction 150 .34
Mother-daughter relation dissatisfaction 150 -.27
Father-daughter relation dissatisfaction 150 -.32


82
examining the combined influence of paternal and maternal
role attribute variables for subjects in the employed mothers
subsample and the noneraployed mothers subsamples were
conducted.
Each full model regression equation was tested for
significance with the alpha level set at .10. In addition,
all possible subset solutions were generated for each
regression equation from which one or two subset models were
selected and tested for significance in post hoc analyses.
Criteria for selection of subset models during post hoc
analyses included (a) examining the amount of variation in
the dependent variable accounted for by the model relative to
other models with equal numbers of variables, (b) examining
the increment in amount of variation in the dependent
variable accounted for relative to models with fewer
variables, and (c) the model's correspondence to the
theoretical framework proposed for this study.
Descriptive statistics were calculated on demographic
data collected such as subject's age, parental SES, major,
minority status, U.S. citizenship, and year at college and
were used to describe the sample.
Methodological Limitations
This descriptive study had several methodological
limitations. These limitations concerned the following:
population, sample and sampling procedures, design, and
instrumentation.


175
42. All in all, how satisfied would you say your mother is
with her marriage?
0 1
2
3 4
Not at all Satisfied
Completely Satisfied
43. To your knowledge,
divorcing your father?
has
your
mother ever considered
0 1
2
3 4
Many Times
Never
44. Taking everything together,
mother is with her marriage?
how
happy would you say your
0 1
Not at all happy
2
3 4
Extremely happy
45. All in all, how happy
understanding she receives
is your
from her
mother with the amount of
husband?
0 12 3 4
very unhappy very happy
46. In terms of how I see my mother now, I would say she is
basically happy with the way she leads her life.
0 1
Strongly disagree
2
3
4
strongly agree


58
salience of attachment figures as models and the reinforcing
potency of their attempts to encourage or discourage
behavior" (p. 38) .
Lamb and Bronson ( 1980) proposed that the sensitivity
level of parents toward their children is related to each
parents level of role satisfaction and role support. Thus
the quality of the parent-child relationship mediates the
impact of parents as role models to their daughters, and the
quality of the parent-child relationship is in turn mediated
by the role satisfaction and support of parents.
These theoretical and empirical considerations of
parental socialization influences on sex role development and
occupational role salience of daughters indicate that parents
who are perceived by their daughters as affectionate,
sensitive, and involved, and who are perceived as satisfied
with and supported for their roles, would have the greatest
salience as role models.
Summary
A literature review was conducted on the following broad
spheres of influence pertaining to college women's
occupational role salience: the sociological context, the
developmental context, and the psychological context.
Sociological theorists have proposed that changes in the
status of women, female labor force participation, and the
form and function of the family have resulted in an increase
in women's occupational role salience across generations.


125
to the predicted nonlinear relationship between occupational
role salience and maternal role satisfaction and support, and
mother-daughter relationship variables for daughters with
employed mothers and nonemployed mothers. This exclusion
was, however, an obvious source of uncontrolled variation in
occupational role salience for daughters in the total sample.
A third possible explanation for the lack of findings is a
function of variable selection and instrumentation. Parental
role model influences may not have been accurately
operationalized by the variables examined in this study.
A fourth possible explanation for the low magnitude of
variance accounted for by the model is possible nonlinear
relationships between the independent variables and the
dependent variable which would have gone undetected in the
regression analysis. For example, both very low and very
high paternal occupational satisfaction may increase
daughter's occupational role salience, resulting in a
curvilinear relationship.
A final explanation for the small amount of variance
accounted for by the model is that nonadditive relationships
may exist among the various independent variables resulting
in undetected interaction effects on the dependent variable.
Thus varying and contradictory patterns of parental role
variables might provide different explanations for variation
in levels of occupational role salience. For example, very
low paternal marital satisfaction may increase occupational


142
and a career perceived their nonworking, dissatisfied,
educated mothers as having wasted potential.
This picture is modified by the third variable in the
equation, paternal occupational prestige, which is positively
related to occupational role salience of daughters after
accounting for maternal marital satisfaction and parental
relative educational level. Again, the perception of the
nonemployed, educated mother as having wasted potential might
be accentuated if the father with equal or less education has
a high prestige job, thus increasing the daughter's
occupational role salience. Conversely, as mentioned
previously in the discussion of the separate paternal
variable analyses, the positive relationship between
daughter's occupational role salience and father's
occupational prestige may be a direct function of paternal
role modeling influence. The final variable in the four-
variable model selected is maternal life satisfaction, which
was positively related to occupational role salience of
daughters with nonemployed mothers.
As mentioned previously in discussion of the results of
the analysis of maternal variables separately, this finding
regarding maternal life satisfaction is difficult to expTain
in the context of the other variables in the model. Perhaps
the perception of the nonworking mother as generally
satisfied with her life despite the perception of her as
having wasted potential is a measure of the mother's


CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
A person participates in a complex
society as a many-faceted actor,
an incumbent of many roles, carrier
of many labels, performer of different
sets of behavior, subject to multiple
kinds of expectations. (Angrist, 1969, p. 219)
The life choices available to American women have become
increasingly complex (Hoffman, 1977; Oppenheimer, 1982).
Recent changes in the form and function of the family, the
status of women, and the economy have been accompanied by
increased labor force participation of women (Kammerman &
Hayes, 1982; Kurdek & Siesky, 1981; Leslie, 1982). Whether
for economic or other reasons, most American women now
combine marital, parental, and occupational roles. Due to
their educational and economic advantages, college women in
particular now have a greater variety of life role choices
and combinations available to them.
Research findings on college womens life plans reflect
these changing preferences and patterns (Cummings, 1977;
Empey, 1958; Matthews & Tiedeman, 1964; Parelius, 1975; Rand
& Miller, 1972; Zuckerman, 1980). In 1958, Empey found that
80% of a sample of female high school seniors and college
undergraduates preferred marriage over a career. By 1964,
1


162
Lidz, T. (1968). The person: His development throughout the
life cycle. New York: Basic Books.
Lindahl, L. (1974). FIRO-B and the FIRO theory-some evidence
of validity. Unpublished manuscript, Uppsala University,
Department of Psychology, Sweden.
Lipmen-Blumen, J. & Leavitt, H. J. (1976). Vicarious and
direct achievement patterns in adulthood. Counseling
Psychologist, 6_, 26-31.
Lueptow, L. B. (1980). Social change and sex role change in
adolescent orientations toward life, work, and
achievement: 1964-1975. Social Psychology Quarterly, 43,
48-59.
Macke, A. S., & Morgan, W. R. (1978). Maternal employment,
race, and work orientation of high school girls. Social
Forces, 57, 187-204.
Macklin, E. D. (1980). Nontraditional family forms: A decade
of research. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 42,
905-922.
Madison, P. (1969). Personality development in college.
Reading, PA: Addison-Wesley.
Malson, M. R. (1983). Black women's sex roles: The social
context for a new ideology. Journal of Social Issues,
39, 101-113.
Mangen, D., & Peterson, W. (1982). Research instruments in
social gerontology: Social roles and social
participation (Vol. 3). Minneapolis, MN: University of
Minnesota Press.
Marini, M. M. (1978). Sex differences in determination of
adolescent aspirations: A review of research. Sex Roles,
5, 723-753.
Marshall, S. J., & Wijting, J. P. (1980). Relationships of
achievement motivation and sex-role identity to college
women's career orientation. Journal of Vocational
Behavior, 16, 299-309.
Matthews, E., & Tiedeman, D. V. (1964). Attitudes toward
career and marriage and the development of lifestyle in
young women. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 11, 375-
384.
McBroom, W. H. (1981). Relationships, socioeconomic status,
and sex-role expectations. Sex Roles, 1_, 1027-1033.


Copyright 1987
by
Jamie R. Funderburk