University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Familial Role Typology, Accuracy Of Perception, And Mutual Needs Among Pre-Nuptial Partners

(USC Thesis Other)

Familial Role Typology, Accuracy Of Perception, And Mutual Needs Among Pre-Nuptial Partners

PDF

Download

Open document

Flip pages

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content FAMILIAL ROLE TYPOLOGY, ACCURACY OF PERCEPTION, AND MUTUAL NEEDS AMONG PRE-NUPTIAL PARTNERS by Louis Irving Miller A Dissertation Presented to the FACULTY OF THE GRADUATE SCHOOL UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY (Sociology) January 1966 UNIVERSITY O F S O U T H E R N CALIFORNIA T H E GRAD U A TE SC H O O L U N IV ER SITY PARK L O S A N G E L E S, C A L IF O R N IA 9 0 0 0 7 This dissertation, written by LOUIS IRVING MILLER under the direction of h±*.. .Dissertation Com mittee, and approved by all its members, has been presented to and accepted by the Graduate School, in partial fulfillment of requirements for the degree of D O C T O R OF P H I L O S O P H Y — ..... Dean Datc 1966........ DISSERTATION COMMITTEE .. , A : . -V / ' V ; 1 • . • " . v .............................- ..................................V ................................................ .................. Chairman ACKNOWLEDGMENTS To my wife, Cecily, and my children, Naomi and David, my deepest appreciation for their inspiration, confidence, and support. Although it cannot be deter mined whether my wife's need for homogamy or her need for complementarity was the stronger one, nonetheless it is affirmed that both of these antithetical kinds of needs were not always fulfilled during the time that this dissertation was being written. To Professor James A. Peterson, I wish to acknowledge my gratitude for the extensive intellectual and emotional insights that he has provided me through out my years as a graduate student, and as chairman of my doctoral committee. To Professor Milton Bloombaum and Professor C. Edward Meyers, members of my doctoral committee, my sincere gratitude for the guidance that they have given me. TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGMENTS LIST OF TABLES LIST OF FIGURES Chapter I. THE PROBLEM AND DEFINITIONS OF TERMS USED.............................. The Problem Definitions of Terms Used The Conceptual Framework and the Variables Employed The Hypotheses Organization of the Remainder of the Dissertation II. REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE Familial Roles and Social Needs Instrumental-Expressive Roles Role Taking Accuracy Mate Selection and Needs Differential Role Expectations Summary III. THE SAMPLE AND THE METHODOLOGY USED The Selection of the Sample Social Characteristics The Instruments Used Statistical Procedures Limitations of the Study Summary IV. THE FINDINGS OF THE STUDY ........ Distribution of Scores on Two Variables Hypothesis I Hypothesis II Page ii v vii 1 35 74 113 Chapter Page Hypothesis III, A and B Hypothesis IV, A and B Emergent Findings Summary V. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS............. 139 Summary Conclusions Implications for Future Research BIBLIOGRAPHY ................................... 158 APPENDIX....................................... 168 iv LIST OF TABLES Table Page 1. Social Class Positions of Males for Total Interviewed Sample and the Selected Sample, by Percentages . . . 80 2. Occupational Positions of Males .... 83 3. Educational Positions of Males ......... 85 4. Age Distribution of Sample, by Percentages........................... 86 5. Religious Preferences of the Sample, by Percentages............. 88 6. Expected Marital D a t e .................. 90 7. Total Difference of Needs Scores for a Hypothetical Couple .................. 96 8. Frequency Distribution of Traditional- Equalitarian Familial Role Scores of the Sample............................. 114 9. Frequency Distribution of the Accuracy of Perception Scores of the Sample . . 116 10. Analysis of Variance of Difference Scores between Pre-Nuptial Pairs on Dominance (DOM) Need by Familial Role Attitudes and Accuracy of Perception............................. 119 11. Analysis of Variance of Difference Scores between Pre-Nuptial Pairs on Affiliation (LOV) Need by Familial Role Attitudes and Accuracy of Perception............................. 120 12. Analysis of Variance of Difference Scores between Pre-Nuptial Pairs on Total Difference of Needs Scores by Familial Role Attitudes and Accuracy of Perception........................ 121 v Table Page 13. Correlations between the Males' and Females' Scores among Subsamples and Total sample........................... 126 14. Correlations between the Partners' Differences of Interpersonal Need Scores and the Accuracy of Perception Scores, by Sex, of Subsamples and Total Sample........................... 131 15. Correlations between the Male's and the Female's Accuracy of Perception among Subsamples and Total Sample ........ 134 LIST OF FIGURES Figure Page 1. Diagram of the Interpersonal Check List by Oct a n t s....................... 93 2. Layout of a Two-Way Analysis of Variance Design ....................... 108 CHAPTER I THE PROBLEM AND DEFINITIONS OF TERMS USED The Problem Statement of the Problem In mate selection, does a person choose a partner whose characteristics are similar or opposite to his own? Winch* based his answer upon whether the traits in question were variables of a social or psychological nature. For social characteristics such as socio economic status, age, or religion, Winch concurred with the findings of fellow sociologists who indicated that mates select one another homogamously. For psycho logical characteristics, Winch hypothesized and found evidence that mates selected one another whose needs were complementary (heterogamous). 2 Employing the same data as Winch used, Roos and *Robert F. Winch, Mate Selection, A Study of Complementary Needs (New York: Harper and Brothers, 1958). o Donald E. Roos, "Complementary Needs in Mate Selection: A Study Based on R-Type Factor Analysis" (unpublished Doctoral dissertation, Northwestern University, 1956), discussed in Winch, pp. 127-128. 1 JJ Ktsanes corroborated the theory of need complemen tarity. Subsequently, six studies have found either (1) statistical support for need homogamy,^ or (2) no g statistical substantiation of need complementarity, or (3) statistical evidence that need homogamy and g marital happiness are related, or (4) no statistical evidence that need complementarity and marital happiness 3 Thomas Ktsanes, "Complementary Needs in Mate Selection: A Study Based upon an Empirical Typology of Personality" (unpublished Doctoral dissertation, Northwestern University, 1953), discussed in Winch, pp. 127-128. 4 James A. Schellenberg and Lawrence S. Bee, "A Re-Examination of the Theory of Complementary Needs in Mate Selection," Marriage and Family Living, XXII (August, 1960), 227-232. 5 Charles E. Bowerman and Barbara R. Day, "A Test of the Theory of Complementary Needs as Applied to Couples During Courtship," American Sociological Review, XXI (October, 1956), 602-60jTj Charles W. Hobart and Lauralee Lindholm, "The Theory of Complementary Needs, A Re-Examination," The Pacific Sociological Review, VI (Fall, 1963), 73-79; Irwin Katz, Sam (llucksberg, and Robert Krauss, "Need Satisfaction and Edwards PPS Scores in Married Couples," Journal of Consulting Psychology, XXIV (June, 1960), 265-208. John A. Blazer, "Complementary Needs and Marital Happiness," Marriage and Family Living, XXV (February, 1963), 89-95. 7 are related. 8 Recently, Kerckhoff and Davis' longitudinal research did support and materially add depth to Winch's theory, and these researchers inferred from their data the most elaborate process of mate selection yet con ceived. In brief, there are studies that corroborate Winch and others that do not. Since the need relation ship in mate selection is a relatively new field, to date no research has been attempted to integrate these diverse findings. Perhaps the lack of synthesis is due to the unrealized possibility of interpreting the need relationship as dependent upon the social char acteristics of the sample. To make such an interpretation, the present study will examine the familial role attitudes of partners in order to predict their need relationship. With a knowl edge of both partners' role attitudes, it will be predicted that one type of dyad will have the greatest 7 Jerold S. Heiss and Michael Gordon, "Need Patterns and the Mutual Satisfaction of Dating and Engaged Couples," Journal of Marriage and the Family, XXVI (August, 1964), 337-339. ®Alan C. Kerckhoff and Keith E. Davis, "Value Consensus and Need Complementarity in Mate Selection," American Sociological Review, XXVII (June, 1962), 295-303. interpersonal need differences, whereas another type will have an intermediate amount, and a third type will have the least. Moreover, it will be predicted that partners who mutually affirm one polar role type will correlate positively on interpersonal needs, and that partners who affirm the other polar role category will correlate negatively on interpersonal needs. In an attempt to refine the hypothesized rela tionship of interpersonal needs and role attitudes, this study will employ another variable of secondary consideration; namely, accuracy of perception. Importance of the Study A review of the literature indicates that mate selection is predicated upon need complementarity as well as upon need homogamy. Prior to this study, no reconciliation of these diverse findings has been considered. Perhaps there is indeed a hitherto unrecognized congruity of former research. It may lie in the fact that interpersonal needs of partners do vary as a function of specified characteristics of the sample selected. By focusing on familial role attitudes principally, and accuracy of perception secondarily, the present study intends to determine whether these variables can predict the direction and the difference 5 of interpersonal needs. Definitions of Terms Used Pre-nuptial partners are those who applied for and received a marriage license, and indicated they were to be married during a one to ninety day period from receipt of license. Traditional and equalitarian roles, with respect to familial relationships, are organized patterns of behavior which are expected of the marital pair. Role differentiation in the traditional family is sharply drawn; the husband's primary job is to earn a living, the wife's primary job "is in the home." In this family system, the husband is superordinate in authority and status; it is he who makes the more important decisions. Affection between the partners is not as essential in the traditional family as in the equali tarian. In the equalitarian family, the spousal roles are based upon shared authority and status; decision making is a joint responsibility. Characteristic of these roles is that affection is mutually expressed. The equalitarian family adheres to the belief that each spouse is entitled to freedom of expression and personality growth. Traditional partners or mutually traditional partners, mixed partners, and equalitarian partners or mutually equalitarian partners are dyads in which both members are traditional, one member is tradi tional— one member is equalitarian, and both members are equalitarian, respectively. The Family Typology Scale measures familial role attitudes; this scale discriminates between 9 traditional and equalitarian role types. Traditional and equalitarian individuals are operationally defined as those who fall on either side of a cutting point on the Family Typology Scale. A need, or a motive, is a goal-oriented drive and specifically refers to responses which are sought in interpersonal relationships."^ 9 See pages 98-103 below. ^Thomas and Virginia Ktsanes, "The Theory of Complementary Needs in Mate-Selection," Selected Studies in Marriage and the Family, edited by Robert F. Winch and Robert McGinnis (New York: Henry Holt and Company, 1953), p. 440. Interpersonal needs, or interpersonal motives, defined operationally, are scores that a person receives on a need (or motive) instrument, the Inter- 11 12 personal Check List. Leary, who was an essential contributor in the development of the Interpersonal Check List, maintained that all interpersonal motives can be categorized as falling on one of two axes: either on a continuum of (1) ascendancy, ranging from dominance to submission (called the DOM scale) or (2) affiliation, ranging from love to hate (called the LOV scale). For the present study, a third need is measured called "the total difference of need scores," which is a summation of the difference between the male and female DOM needs and the dif ference between the male and female LOV needs. Complementary needs are those interpersonal motives that form the bases of the attraction between ^See pages 89-98 below. 12 Timothy Leary, The Interpersonal Diagnosis of Personality (New York: The Ronald Press Company, 1957). pre-nuptial partners who have opposite characteristics. A negative correlation between the male and female needs operationally defines this term. Homogamous needs are those interpersonal motives that form the bases of the attraction between pre nuptial partners who have similar characteristics. A positive correlation between the male and female needs operationally defines this term. Accuracy of perception, defined operationally, is the score that a person receives by correctly pre dicting his partner's responses to a scale which measures familial role attitudes. Instrumental and expressive roles, relative to the marital relationship, are differentiations of 13 functions between the husband-father and wife-mother. The instrumental leader is the "breadwinner," the manager, the authority-figure in the family and assumes responsibility for the disciplining of the children. 1 3 See Talcott Parsons, "Family Structure and the Socialization of the Child," in Talcott Parsons and Robert F. Bales, Family, Socialization and Interaction Process (Glencoe, Illinois: The Free Press, 1955), Chapter II, p. 47; Morris Zelditch, Jr., "Role Differentiation in the Nuclear Family: A Comparative Study," in Parsons and Bales, Chapter VI, pp. 317-319. The expressive leader is the mediator, the conciliator, and the affectionate one in the family and assumes responsibility for the "care" of the children. The Conceptual Framework and the Variables Employed The Conceptual Framework To clarify the conceptual framework, five major headings are offered herein. A. Need Gratification in the Mate Selection Process Winch's mate selection theory is first presented, followed by the hypothesis that needs are "status- linked. " 14 1. Winch1s theory of mate selection at the psychological need level. Winch concurred with fellow sociologists in their conclusions that, at the level of social characteristics, a principle of homogamy operates in mate selection. Overwhelming substantia tion of "like-marrying-like" has been found on such social characteristics as age, race, religious affilia tion, ethnic origin, residential propinquity, socio economic status, education, and previous marital 14Winch, pp. 1-349. 10 15 status. Winch claimed that these social character istics operate "to limit the field of eligibles." At the psychological level, Winch continued, "each individual seeks . . . that person who gives the greatest promise of providing him or her with maximum 1 fi need gratification." Thus emphasizing the importance that needs play in the mate selection process, Winch proposed that maximal need gratification is based upon complementarity (heterogamy), as contrasted to simi larity (homogamy) of need patterns of the pair. Two types of complementarity are posited: (1) Type I is the attraction between one partner who is high on one need and his mate who is low on this same need; for instance, A has a need to dominate whereas his mate, B, has a need to be dominated; (2) Type II complementarity is the relationship between individuals with different needs; e.g., A has a strong need to receive succorance whereas his mate, B, has a strong need to give nurturance. Why do individuals select mates with dissimilar needs? Winch found the rationale principally in the 15 See Winch, pp. 5-7, for a comprehensive list of these studies. "^Winch, pp. 88-89. psychoanalytic concept of the "abandoned selves." In the process of socialization each person incorporates successive ego models, first with one's parents and later with others such as popular idols or respected professionals. The child learns that some models are not proper; e.g., mother is not an appropriate ego model for a school boy. These he abandons for more suitable ones, although he does incorporate some as ego ideals. Following Fliigel, Winch asserted that mate attraction is based upon an attempt to recapture an 17 "abandoned ego model." Flugel held that an ego represses "psychic dispositions" unbefitting to one's own sex, and projects these characteristics onto the opposite sex. The person is thereby attracted to another who appears to possess these projected char acteristics. In effect, the attracted one seems to "act out" those desired traits of his "abandoned self."18 Thus, mate selection is a process by which each partner, in his quest for maximal need gratification, selects one who has complementary needs. Winch 17 Flugel's framework is summarized in Robert F. Winch, The Modern Family (New York: Henry Holt and Company, 1952), pp. 329-333; also see John C. Flugel, Man. Morals and Society (New York: International Universities Press, 1945). 18Winch, The Modern Family, pp. 330-331. 12 maintained that his theory of mate attraction holds not only for neurotics, but for normally adjusted partners too. Because middle class Americans so strongly regard marriage as one of the most personally gratifying * experiences, he affirmed that his theory is most applicable to them. Winch employed a sample of twenty-five "normal" married couples, in which at least one from each pair was an undergraduate college student. Every respondent was administered a case history interview, the Thematic Apperception Test, and a "need interview" that was later rated by two examiners. Winch tested his theory by predicting the directions that the correlations would run on his Type I and Type II need relationships. He found that the evidence generally supported his hypotheses. In presenting Winch's theory, it was noted that he distinguished between Type I and Type II comple- mentariness. The present study tests only Type I complementariness; i.e., the relationship in which a person is high on one need and his mate is low on this same need. This procedure was advisable since the need instrument used herein is more reliable when measuring the same need than when measuring an anti thetical need. Further, agreeing with Hobart and 13 19 Lindholm, it is believed that Winch's theory can be confirmed or refuted by a Type I complementariness test. 2. "Status-linked" needs in mate selection. 20 In the opinion of the present writer, Parsons has outlined a theory to explain an individual's emphasis upon one cluster of needs rather than another. This theory is utilized in the study to explain why some pre-nuptial partners select mates on the basis of similar needs rather than complementary needs. Parsons' presentation is summarized in section C, below, of this rationale. The interrelationship between needs and the cultural/social systems was saliently set forth by 19 Hobart and Lindholm, The Pacific Sociological Review, VI, 75. 20 Parsons and Bales; Talcott Parsons and Edward A. Shils, Toward a General Theory of Action (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1952J; Talcott Parsons, "Social Structure and the Development of Personality," Studying Personality Cross-Culturally, edited by Bert Kaplan (New York:Row, Peterson and Company, 1961); Talcott Parsons, "Psychology and Sociology," For a Science of Social Man, edited by John Gillen (New York: The MacMillan Company, 1954); Talcott Parsons, Essays in Sociological Theory (Glencoe, Illinois: The Free Press, 1954^ 14 21 Kernodle. He posited that the culture not only defines the "field of eligibles," but further, that culture defines the expectations that people hold in reference to the needs that are to be fulfilled in marriage. Kernodle believed the culture has: . . . defined, shaped, and established the needs system of the societal members in such ways that they expect to find certain needs fulfilled in the marriage relationship. These have been internalized as a part of the social self and in this sense are "me-needs."22 Upon administering Strauss' list of personality needs to college students, Kernodle found that half of the needs were similarly shared by both sexes. In both his own study and Strauss', the need most often chosen was "someone to love me." He noted: Persons in our culture seek a mate who will fulfill the need to have someone love them, not because they have been unloved themselves by parents, or do not have the capacity to love others, but, primarily because marriage is defined in the culture as the relationship which one cannot have without being in love.2^ His critical conclusion was that the needs of people are "status-linked," rather than the consequence 21 Wayne Kernodle, "Some Implications of the Homogomy-Complementary Needs Theories of Mate Selection for Sociological Research." -Social Forces. XXXVIII (December, 1959), 145-152. 22Ibid., p. 149. 23Ibid., p. 150. 15 of haphazard individual experiences. This is buttressed by findings in his study that certain needs were char acteristically different for males and females: 70 per cent of the females checked the need for "someone to look up to," whereas only 22 per cent of the males checked this item. Women, as contrasted to men, also had a greater need to show affection and respect ideals, and had their mates help them make important decisions. The reverse was true for needs which dealt with build ing self-confidence, understanding moods, and stimu lating ambitions. B. Approximations of Ideal Role Types To contrast the role relationships of family members of a previous era with the one presently 24 emerging, Burgess and Locke devised the respective ideal constructs— the "institutional family" and the "companionship family." Burgess and Locke asserted that the bonds of the institutional family are main tained by a "willingness to do one's duty, fulfill one's obligations and help carry out the essential functions of the family," and the husband-father 24 Ernest W. Burgess and Harvey J. Locke, The Family: From Institution to Companionship (New York: American Book Company, 1953). 16 exercising undisputable authority over the wife and 25 children. The companionship family, as an abstracted pure type, is bound principally by love and affection between the mates. The companionship family is char acterized by "an assumption of equality of husband and wife, democracy in family decisions . . . the person ality development of its members and . . . freedom of self expression." Burgess noted that although mutual love and affection are basic to the companionship family, this does not imply that these traits are lacking in the traditional family. He described the difference between the familial types as qualitative: The point is not that companionship, affec tion, and happiness are absent from the institutional family. They exist there in greater or less degree, but they are not its primary aims. The central objectives of the institutional family are children, status, and the fulfillment of its social and economic function in society.27 25Ibid., pp. 304, 336. 26Ibid., p. 336. 27 Ernest W. Burgess, "The Family in a Changing Society," Selected Studies in Marriage and the Family, edited by Robert F. Winch and Robert McGinnis (New York: Henry Holt and Company, 1953), p. 39. 17 Burgess and Locke reiterated Weber's admonition that ideal types are not found in reality, and sug gested that approximations of the ideal types should be employed to determine how closely reality conforms 28 to the ideal construction. Following this suggestion, the present study employs the approximation the "traditional” for the ideal type the "institutional," and similarly the approximation the "equalitarian" for the ideal type the "companionship." These approximations are employed because there is some justification for assuming that both familial types are to be found within a population 29 (namely, middle class partners) applicable to this study. In order to operationalize the traditional and equalitarian types, the present research employs a scale which discriminates on attitudes that are indica tive of the familial constructs; namely, attitudes toward authority, status, decision making, and person ality growth of familial members. 28 Burgess and Locke, pp. 689-692. 29 See "'Equivocal' role allocations in tradi tional and equalitarian families," page 22 below. 18 30 C. The Parsonsian Approach to the Interrelationship between Needs and Roles At birth, ego is not a member of any role system. The process by which he becomes a member of increasingly complex role systems, and learns patterns of instru mental and expressive role behavior appropriate to his age and sex, is more fully explicated in a later section of this study.^ For the present it is noted that children of both sexes internalize both father and mother. However, since the male child has identified with the father, he incorporates qualitatively greater instrumental roles, and the female child, having identified with the mother, incorporates qualitatively greater expressive roles. The male tends more toward technical, executive, and managerial functions; the female toward emotionally supportive and integrative tasks. Parsons held that children of both sexes have a common set of value orientations. The difference 30 Parsons and Bales; Parsons and Shils; Parsons, "Social Structure and the Development of Personality," Studying Personality Cross-Culturally; Parsons, "Psychology and Sociology," For a Science of Social Man; Parsons, Essays in Sociological Theory. ^See "Familial Roles and Social Needs," Chapter II in this study, pages 35-44. 19 between the male and female personality lies principally in differentiated self-role-expectations: . . . It is not because the sexes have different values that they tend to assume different roles but, being socialized to assume different roles, they must organize their common value-heritage differently in order to implement it effectively in their respective roles.32 This diverse role incorporation is significantly related to the social needs of the personality. The interrelationships between personality and social sys tems are so closely interwoven in Parsons' conceptual 33 framework that he considers these systems as "inter penetrating." The foci of both systems are stable patterns of expectations whose cultural meanings have become institutionalized in the social framework and internalized in the personality structure. Conceptually, the role-expectation within the social system, and needs within the personality system, delineate this area of interpenetration. When Parsons refers to a role-expectation that has been internalized within the personality, he also explicitly refers to r to Talcott Parsons, "The Organization of Person ality as a System of Action," in Parsons and Bales, Chapter III, p. 165. 33 Parsons, "Social Structure and the Development of Personality," Studying Personality Cross-Culturally, p. 172. 20 the motivational component which comprises that expectation. . . . The role-expectation, that is, which is a unit of a system of social interaction, is itself also a motivational unit— an internalized object of the personality of the actor. When a person is fully socialized in the system of interaction it is not so nearly correct to say that a role is something an actor "has1 1 or "plays" as that it is something that he is. Parsons asserted that male and female person alities are essentially distinguished by the relative strengths of their needs. As a consequence of having been socialized to assume the more instrumental roles, the American male^ most significant needs are adequacy and conformity to the mores. The female, socialized respectively to expressive roles, finds her needs directed more toward security and nurturance. Zelditch, in collaboration with Parsons, affirmed that in certain respects the American middle class family is "equivocal" with respect to allocation of instrumental and expressive roles. (None the less, the husband-father's role is still differentiated in that he, not the wife-mother, is the wage earner and provides for the family.) ^Parsons, "Family Structure and the Socializa tion of the Child," in Parsons and Bales, Chapter II, p. 107. 21 . . . From certain points of view the American middle-class family approaches most clearly to equal allocation (or "no allocation") of instru mental and expressive activities. The universal- istic value schema (in which women are "just as good as" men) coupled with the general attitude toward the explicit expression of authority ("I'm agin it") apparently constitutes the limiting case of no differentiation at all. Underlying this broad value schema, however, a rather clear differentiation occurs. In the distribution of instrumental tasks, the American family maintains a more flexible pattern than most societies. Father helps mother with the dishes. He sets the table. He makes formula for the baby. Mother can supplement the income of the family by working outside. Nevertheless, the American male, by definition, must "provide" for his family. He is responsible jfror the support of his wife and children . . . his primary function in the family is to supply an "income," to be the "breadwinner." . . . American women, on the other hand, tend to hold jobs before they are married and to quit when "the day" comes; and not only is the mother the focus of emotional support for the American middle-class child, but much more exclu sively so than in most societies. . . . The cult of the warm, giving "Mom" stands in contrast to the "capable," "competent," "go-getting" male. The more expressive type of male as a matter of fact is regarded as "effeminate" and has too much fat on the inner side of his thigh.35 D. Traditional-Equalitarian Needs and Interpersonal Needs The current study's hypotheses about the rela tionship of roles and needs in the traditional and equalitarian family develop from a sequential order 35 Zelditch, in Parsons and Bales, Chapter VI, p. 339. 22 of factors. “Equivocal” role allocations in traditional and equalitarian families. It is generally known that not all middle class families allocate instrumental and expressive roles similarly. Among some, the male makes the family decisions unilaterally; among others, there is a role allocation in keeping with the illustration used by Zelditch — the husband does the dishes, and other chores. This observation was substantiated by Blood and Wolfe, who found that in their subsample of middle class families the majority were equalitarian, and tended to make important decisions jointly, whereas a minority of families were "husband-dominant” or 37 "wife-dominant." Thus Zelditch's statement about the "equivocal" role allocation in American middle class families appears applicable to a portion, but not to all such families. The relationship of the roles of authority and affection in the traditional and equalitarian families. In section B above, the rationale was given for 56Ibid. ^Robert 0. Blood, Jr. and Donald M. Wolfe, Husbands and Wives (Glencoe, Illinois: The Free Press, 1960}, p. 34. 23 employing the traditional and equalitarian family types as approximations of Burgess and Locke's institutional and companionship ideal types, respectively. In both family types, the husbands are super- 39 ordinate in authority (the instrumental leaders) and the wives are the affectionate ones (the expressive leaders).^ However, the roles of authority and affection are allocated more rigidly in the traditional family, with the husband controlling the authority and the wife holding the affection relations; whereas the equalitarian family is characterized by a more flexible sharing of authority and affection. Hence, it appears that in the equalitarian family the male is fulfilling more feminine roles (affection, or expressive) and the female more masculine roles (authority, or instrumental) than their counter- 38 See pages 15-17 above. 39 The 1 1 instrumental leader” is legitimized on the basis of being the provider of the family, whereas the concept "authority (leader)" is a diffuse legiti mization of a power function. None the less, the concepts are used interchangeably herein since the attitudes that inhere in these terms are comparable. ^The "expressive leader" is legitimized on the basis of functions performed in the family or a group, whereas the term "affection (leader)" is a more diffuse legitimization of an affiliative function. These concepts are used interchangeably herein since the attitudes that compose these terms are similar. 24 parts in the traditional family. Stated differently, the sex role allocations in the equalitarian family seem more convergent than in the traditional family. The relationship of roles and needs in the traditional and equalitarian families. As noted in 41 section C, Parsons maintained that patterns of meanings which have been institutionalized in the social framework have also been internalized in the personality. These meanings take the form of role expectations in the social system and the form of needs in the personality system. The systems inter relate to such a degree that Parsons considered roles and needs as "interpenetrating" one another. Further, that the difference in the personalities of the sexes is determined by differential sex role adaptations. Males and females internalize both instrumental and expressive roles, but as a consequence of socializa tion, one role rather than the other is uppermost. Parsons also asserted that the personalities of the two sexes differ with respect to the differential strength of needs. Applying Parsons1 theoretical framework to the present study, since the role expectations of 41 See pages 18-21 above. 25 traditional people are different from the role expecta tions of equalitarian people (and since roles and needs "interpenetrate")* it follows that their needs are likewise different. As stated by the present writer earlier in this section, the sex role allocations in the equalitarian family appear to be more convergent than similar distributions in the traditional family. In the equalitarian family, more than in the traditional, the male fulfills more expressive roles and also inter nalizes qualitatively greater needs associated with these roles. Similarly, it appears that the equali tarian female fulfills more instrumental roles and internalizes qualitatively greater needs associated with these roles than does the traditional female. Stated differently, the interpersonal needs associated with the sex role allocations in the equalitarian family are thus more convergent than in the counter part traditional family. Therefore, it is hypothesized that the difference between the interpersonal needs of equalitarian couples is less than the difference between the interpersonal needs of traditional couples. It is anticipated, however, that among some dyads, one member will affirm one role type whereas the other member will affirm the opposite (i.e., male 26 traditional-female equalitarian, and male equalitarian- female traditional). In order to predict in these cases; it is hypothesized that the need relationship of mixed dyads will be midway between the polar types (i.e., male traditional-female traditional, and male equalitarian-female equalitarian). To clarify, the greatest interpersonal need difference will be between traditional partners, the intermediate need difference will be between mixed partners. and the least need difference will be between equalitarians. This hypoth esis thus predicts that the difference between the interpersonal needs of partners varies as a function of their familial role attitudes. In the above hypothesis, the focus is upon the difference between partners' needs. The following hypothesis is directed toward the relationship between partners' needs, and states that the interpersonal needs of traditional partners are negatively corre lated. and the interpersonal needs of equalitarian partners are positively correlated. This latter hypothesis is predicated upon (1) a corollary of the first hypothesis; namely, that tra ditional partners have more divergent needs than do equalitarian partners; and also (2) upon correlations of past studies which have found both need similarity 27 and need complementarity. With reference to the find ings of past studies, it is hypothesized that those that substantiated the need complementarity theory unknowingly employed a traditional sample, whereas those studies which substantiated need similarity unknowingly used an equalitarian sample. E. Accuracy of Perception and Needs One of the hypotheses in this study affirms that: the difference of interpersonal needs of a dyad is associated with both (1) the familial role attitudes of the dyad, and (2) the accuracy of each partner's perceptions of his mate's familial role attitudes. To illustrate, suppose that there are three groups of traditional partners. In the first, both members are accurate in predicting each others' role attitudes; in the second, only one partner is accurate; in the third, neither is accurate. (As previously hypothesized in this study, traditional partners have the greatest need difference compared with mixed and equalitarian couples.) Therefore it is predicted that, of the three groups of traditional partners, the first group will have the greatest need difference, the second will be intermediate, and the third will have the least need difference. 28 To illustrate, for three comparable groups of equalitarian partners, the reverse prediction is made; namely, that mutually perceptive partners will have the least need difference, "one partner-perceptive" will have a greater need difference, and "neither partner- perceptive" will have the greatest need difference of the three equalitarian classifications. This hypothesis concerning the interrelationship of familial role attitudes and accuracy of perception in predicting the difference of interpersonal needs is based upon several factors. First, following Winch, it is assumed that each self selects the mate who evidences the greatest potential of providing that 42 self with maximal need gratification. Second, con curring with the symbolic interactionists,^ the present study believes that the self responds to another in terms of his perceptions of that other, rather than in terms of "objective reality." Third, it is assumed that when a self is able to predict another's familial role attitudes accurately, the self is thereby able to anticipate the other's expectations, and be cognizant ^Winch, pp. 88-89. 43 The interactionists' approach is presented on pages 48-50. 29 of the other's needs with respect to the familial roles 44 so predicted. Therefore, based on the above assump tions, and upon the Parsonsian framework regarding the interrelationship between needs and roles, it follows that the self who is accurate in his perceptions of his mate's familial role attitudes, and thereby more capable of anticipating the other's expectations and needs, is also in a better position to know what to look for in his quest for that person whose needs maximally mesh with his own. Accuracy of perception by itself, however, does not predict need complementarity or need similarity. It is accuracy of perception in conjunction with a particular role attitude that so predicts. For this reason, the present study suggests that Kerckhoff and 45 Davis, whose study is presented immediately below, have oversimplified the mate selection process. They 44 The drawback of this assumption is that there is no known way of distinguishing between the self who accurately predicts another's roles as the result of (1) really knowing the other's roles, or (2) merely projecting his own role attitudes upon the other, and coincidentally happening to predict correctly. For an elaboration of this dilemma see Chapter II, pages 51-53. 45 Kerckhoff and Davis, American Sociological Review, XXVII, 295-303. 30 stated that idealization and perceptual distortion 46 inhibit a realistic mate appraisal. Initially, the courtship is permeated with a high degree of euphoria. During this period, the prospective mates misperceive each other, and respond to the other's "stylized role 47 relationship rather than to another personality." Subsequently, a period of disillusionment or "reality shock" occurs. It is at this point that need comple mentarity between prospective marital partners becomes meaningful. Thereupon, those mates whose needs are based upon complementarity progress toward marriage at a significantly greater rate than those whose needs are based upon similarity. "Not until the idealization is destroyed can they interact at the more realistic level of personality, and only then can need comple- 48 mentarity 'make a difference' in the relationship." Notwithstanding, it is suggested that Kerckhoff and Davis' findings may have varied as a function of 46 Because it is not immediately relevant, the present discussion omits Kerckhoff and Davis' hypoth esis regarding mate selection as a process of a set of "filtering factors." See pages 61-65 below for a more comprehensive review. 47 Kerckhoff and Davis, American Sociological Review, XXVII, 302. 48Ibid., pp. 302-303. their sample, thereby they have oversimplified the mate selection process. To explicate, their population comprised a group of Duke University sorority girls who were "pinned," "seriously attached," or engaged, and their respective male partners. (No information was given regarding the proportion of each category.) It is proposed that the aforementioned sample was composed entirely of highly traditional individuals. Further, that in this sample the female "played dumb" and acted inferior to her date, similar to the college sample 49 reported by Komarovsky. Thus, assuming that their complete sample of sorority women and their mates were all highly traditional, it is asserted that those couples whose needs were complementary made greater progress toward marriage than the others because tradi tional couples are naturally gratified by, and therefore should select, mates whose needs are antithetical to their own. On the assumption that the entire group was highly traditional, then conversely, those couples whose needs were similar were mismatched and would naturally not make the same advance toward marriage. 49 Mira Komarovsky, "Cultural Contradictions and Sex Roles," American Journal of Sociology, LII (November, 1946), 184-189. 32 The present writer, however, does concur with 50 Kerckhoff and Davis' belief that perceptual distortion prevents realistic mate appraisal. But it is not perceptual accuracy by itself which can predict whether needs are related homogamously or heterogomously. Rather, it is perceptual accuracy in conjunction with a specified type of role attitude that predicts need complementarity or need similarity. The Variables Employed Based upon the rationale presented herein, the dependent variable is interpersonal needs; the inde pendent variables are familial role attitudes and accuracy of perception. In the two hypotheses to be treated by Pearson's product-moment correlation (Hypotheses III and IV) the control variable is familial role attitudes. The reason for employing this control is because it is anticipated that, in the latter two hypotheses, the data vary as a function of these roles. *50 Kerckhoff and Davis believed that it is the idealization period with all of its ramifications that is the basis of inaccuracy of perception. Neverthe less, the effect on realistic mate appraisal remains the same. 33 The Hypotheses I. The difference between the interpersonal needs of pre-nuptial partners varies as a function of their familial role attitudes. II. The difference between the interpersonal needs of pre-nup'tial partners varies as a function of the interactional effects of their familial role attitudes and their accuracy of perception. Ilia. There is a negative correlation between the interpersonal needs of traditional pre-nuptial partners. Illb. There is a positive correlation between the interpersonal needs of equalitarian pre-nuptial partners. IVa. There is a positive correlation between the difference of interpersonal needs and accuracy of perception of pre-nuptial traditional partners. IVb. There is a negative correlation between the difference of interpersonal needs and accuracy of perception of pre-nuptial equalitarian partners. Organization of the Remainder of the Dissertation Chapter II, the review of the literature, considers (1) familial roles and social needs, (2) instrumental-expressive roles,, (3) role taking accuracy, (4) male selection and needs, and (5) differential role expectations. Chapter III presents the selection of the sample, the social characteristics of the sample, the instruments used, and the statistical procedures employed. Chapter IV reports the distribution of scores and the findings of the study. Chapter V contains a summary, the conclusions, and the implications for future research. CHAPTER II REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE The review contains five sections: (1) familial roles and social needs, (2) instrumental-expressive roles, (3) role taking accuracy, (4) mate selection and needs, and (5) differential role expectations. Familial Roles and Social Needs The structural-functionalists, of whom Parsons1 is the leading exponent, perceived the family in terms of the functions it performs for society and the means by which it maintains itself. The functionalist might conceive of the family as one of the many components of the complete social system (society) and as best studied for the functions it performs in society. Internally, the family itself is composed of individuals who are best studied through their status-role bundles Talcott Parsons and Robert F. Bales, Family, Socialization and Interaction Process (Glencoe, Illinois: The Free Press, 1955); Talcott Parsons and Edward A. Shils, Toward a General Theory of Action (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1952J; Talcott Parsons, "Social Structure and the Development of Personality," Studying Personality Cross-Culturally edited by Bert Kaplan (New York: Row, Peterson and Company, 1961); Talcott Parsons, "Psychology and Sociology," For a Science of Social Man, edited by John Gillen (New York: The MacMillan Company, 1954); Talcott Parsons, Essays in Sociological Theory (Glencoe, Illinois: The Free Press, 1954TI ~ 35 36 and who are significant for their functions in the maintenance of the family system and ultimately, of the social system. Individuals contribute to the boundary maintenance of the system either by acting in response to demands of their structure 2 or by acting under the constraint of the structure. Within the Parsonsian framework, human behavior is viewed as the interdependency of four systems: (1) the organism as a biological entity; (2) the personality as a "set of ways in which organized patterns of learned response to objects in the situation operate to control the organism's goal directed and adaptive activity"; (3) the social system as a pattern of structured role relationships; and (4) the cultural system, a mutually shared set of values or meanings, of objects. The significance of these systems is that the meanings of the patterns of stable expectations in the culture become internalized in the personality and institutionalized in the social system: . . . This is what we mean by saying that action is "culturally" organized, that in a personality considered as a system there is an internalized Reuben Hill and Donald A. Hansen, "The Identi fication of Conceptual Frameworks Utilized in Family Study," Marriage and Family Living, XXII (November, 1960), 303. Parsons, "Social Structure and the Development of Personality," Studying Personality Cross-Culturally, pp. 167-172. 37 culture, while in a social system the counterpart of internalization in the personality is institu tionalization.4 To indicate the strong bond between social systems and the personality, Parsons described these relations as not merely interdependent, but as "inter penetrating.1 ' Conceptually, the area of interpenetra tion within the social system is the role; correspond- g ingly, within the personality it is relational needs. A role is the pattern of behavior that is expected of a person who occupies a position. The role has significance only in relation to other role occupants who have a complementary set of expectations. In Parsons' framework, these role expectations > are the attitudes, beliefs, and values of the culture which are internalized by ego, and felt as needs. The role expectations that have been internalized in this way have not been vested with meaning only, but also with motivational components. The developmental process by which ego's needs emerge within increasingly complex social systems is ^Parsons, "Psychology and Sociology," For a Science of Social Man, p. 71. 5 Parsons, "Social Structure and the Development of Personality," Studying Personality Cross-Culturally, p. 172. 38 g referred to as the "genealogy of need-dispositions." Intrinsic to the social systems are meanings which, over time, become symbolized and interiorized within the personality. These meanings "become the major focus of orientation of the individual for his own role-categorization and of course for alter in orient- 7 ing to him." As ego becomes "old enough" to assume more responsibility, the meanings of the social systems are altered and transformed by his parents. What is expected of an infant is different from that of a two year old and different still from that of a child who is supposed to behave "like a big boy.” Thus there are phases of development. Parents and surrogates employ various methods to induce ego to accept new demands by manipulating rewards, being emotionally supportive, denying reciprocity, and being permissive 8 with regard to ego's response to frustration. Talcott Parsons, "The Organization of Person ality as a System of Action," in Parsons and Bales, Chapter III, pp. 146-156. n Talcott Parsons and Robert F. Bales, "Conclu sion: Levels of Cultural Generality and the Process of Differentiation," in Parsons and Bales, Chapter VII, p. 387. Q Talcott Parsons and James Olds, "The Mechanisms of Personality Functioning with Special Reference to Socialization," in Parsons and Bales, Chapter IV, pp. 187-257. 39 Initially, the neonate is but "a possession." It is not a member of a social system, and by defini tion, has no personality. The personality buds when ego learns a set of expectations in reference to alter (usually the mother), as "basic" drives become organ ized and conditioned in the social system. Ego emerges not merely with a desire for a gratification of a specific need or group of needs, but a pervasive 9 dependency need upon alter. As yet, no self-identity has occurred; there is but one single role system. With the emergence of the self, ego perceives the social system as a two-role system. During this phase, mother anticipates that he will "do things for himself." In response to this expectation, which initially meant in effect "doing for mother," the child learns that he is capable of a giving and receiving reciprocity. This is the origin of a need which becomes diffused as autonomy. Ego has now internalized a more complex role system. At this point there are two needs: a new and more ascendant autonomy need and the older dependency need. Q Talcott Parsons, "Family Structure and the Socialization of the Child," in Parsons and Bales, Chapter II, p. 63. 40 . . . Implicated in this interactive system there must, then, be two personality systems of two need disposition units each, corresponding to two internalized objects. The mother, as now differ entiated from the autonomous self, is primarily "she who takes care of me" which is to say she who performs the primarily instrumental role. Secondarily, she is "she who loves me." In the case of the child's personality as object, on the other hand he is primarily "he who loves mother" and secondarily he who performs an instrumental function, i.e., takes care of self and mother. 0 The next stage (oedipal) is begun when parents impose still another set of demands of what "a big boy" or "a big girl" should do. Previously, the child was not significantly aware of his own sex role, nor had he distinguished between parental sex roles. Subse quently, a distinction is made between father as the instrumental leader— the one who is the managerial, disciplinarian, and adaptive leader, particularly in relation to the external system, and mother as the expressive leader— the one who is the integrative, mediative, conciliative, and affectionate one, particu larly in relation to the internal system.11 Having themselves internalized their respective roles as husband and wife, and as representatives of the social systems outside the family, the parents approach their children with a differential set of 10Ibid., p. 70. 11Ibid., p. 47. 41 expectations. As instrumental leader, the father requires that his children, both boys and girls: (1) obey society's laws (conformity), and (2) develop the capacity "to do things" (adequacy). As expressive leader, the mother: (1) provides both her sons and daughters with "care" (dependency), and (2) is the recipient of love or acceptance and "shows solidarity" 12 to alter (security). The internalization of father's and mother's new role demands results in a cleavage of the undif ferentiated needs of the simpler mother-child subsystem of the family. The old needs of dependency and autonomy are "bifurcated" into nurturance-conformity and autonomy- security needs respectively, corresponding to the internalized mother and father: Turning to the need-disposition aspect of the new organization, we have treated the "dependency" need of the earlier stage, corresponding to the parental object, as divided into the "nurturance" need and the "conformity" need, as aspects of the internalized mother and father objects respectively. Correspondingly the "autonomy" need-disposition of the earlier phase is treated as dividing into those of "security" as the expressively differentiated or "feminine" self, and "adequacy" as the instru- mentally differentiated or "masculine" self object .13 12Ibid., pp. 80-84. 13Ibid., p. 83. 42 To recapitulate and amplify, each child has internalized both the father and mother. Consequently, each has both masculine and feminine characteristics. But having identified with the sex role of the "proper" parent, the boy has incorporated qualit at ively greater instrumental roles, the girl qualitatively greater expressive roles. Thus the difference between the sexes is one of relative strengths of the need- dispositions. This sex role differentiation: . . . lies primarily in the relative balance of the instrumental and expressive components, and that this relative balance is determined primarily at the oedipal period. From this point of view the masculine and feminine personalities do not differ in the kinds of need-disposition units which make them up, but in the relative strengths of different subsystems of their personalities. The next phase (latency) is characterized by a distinction between familial and extrafamilial roles. As the child encounters both peers and teachers he learns to discern those roles that are ascribed him on the basis of his social position and those roles that are achieved. His extrafamilial associations teach that some norms are applicable to all members irrespective of social position; e.g., rules of a 14 Parsons, "The Organization of Personality as a System of Action," in Parsons and Bales, Chapter III, p. 147. 43 baseball game. Consequently, a further reorganization and differentiation of need-disposition occurs; whereas father was seen as a "technical expert" and "executive," the child discovers other role models such as teachers and older children who likewise function in these capacities.15 In the last phase, from adolescence to maturity, new standards are applied, primarily, what a person "can do." Increasingly, he becomes sensitized to the level of his competitive position in school, in "rating and dating," and in the occupational world. The Parsonsian framework of personality develop ment is contingent upon a set of internalized values in which there is a commonly held system of expectations. Deviances in the internalized value system, Parsons held, are concomitant with pathological syndromes in the per sonality. However, according to Parsons, the two pat terns of value systems, namely the normal and the "deviant," can be treated independently. Because the latter system is only tangential to this dissertation, 15 Parsons, "Family Structure and the Socializa tion of the Child," in Parsons and Bales, Chapter II, p. 118. 1 6 Parsons and Bales, "Conclusion: Levels of Cultural Generality . . . , in Parsons and Bales, Chapter VII, p. 393. it is not elaborated herein. Instrumental-Expressive Roles An aspect of the previous section dealt with the importance of parents being cognizant of, and motivated to fulfill, their instrumental and expressive roles. Having been socialized themselves, parents internalize both types of roles, but contingent upon their ascribed sex statuses they stress one rather than the other in rearing their own children. Bales and Slater analyzed role differentiation 17 in small decision making groups. It was found, especially over time, that the "best liked" man (expressive leader) was not the same person selected as the task specialist (instrumental leader). Bales and Slater believed that the nuclear family, similar to a small group, differentiates between leadership roles and functions more smoothly when there is harmonious interaction between the task and expressive leaders. Parsons claimed that the nuclear family is similar to any social system in that there must be both a differentiation and an allocation of tasks if 17Robert F. Bales and Philip E. Slater, "Role Differentiation in Small Decision-Making Groups," in Parsons and Bales, Chapter V, pp. 259-306. 45 it is to maintain itself over time. Having based his 18 premises upon Bales' early work with small groups, 19 and upon further elaboration by Bales and Slater, Parsons believed that differentiation occurred on an instrumental-expressive continuum. Within the nuclear family, this division is based upon sex-linked char acteristics; the male fulfills the adaptive functions of the family, primarily as breadwinner, as contrasted to the female who fulfills the expressive-integrative functions. Parsons reasoned that this evolved as a result of the woman's dependence upon her mate particu- 20 larly during the child rearing stage. Zelditch studied the ethnographic conclusions of fifty-six societies to test the Parsonsian requisites of role differentiation and role allocation in nuclear 21 families. He hypothesized: ^Robert F. Bales, "The Equilibrium Problem in Small Groups," in Talcott Parsons, et al., Working Papers in the Theory of Action (Glencoe, Illinois: Free Press, 1953), Chapter IV, pp. 111-161. ■^Bales and Slater, pp. 259-306. 20 Talcott Parsons, "The American Family: Its Relations to Personality and to the Social Structure," in Parsons and Bales, Chapter I, p. 23. ?i Morris Zelditch, Jr., "Role Differentiation in the Nuclear Family: A Comparative Study," in Parsons and Bales, Chapter VI, pp. 307-352. 46 1. If the nuclear family constitutes a social system stable over time, it will differentiate roles such that instrumental leadership and expressive leadership of the system are dis criminated. 2. If the nuclear family consists in a defined "normal" complement of the male adult, female adult and their immediate children, the male adult will play the role of instrumental leader and the female adult will play the role of expressive leader. In Zelditch's study, the instrumental leader was defined as one who was associated with the mana gerial functions, who had the requisite skills and information needed for the adaptive aspects of the role, and who was the disciplinarian. The expressive leader was defined as one who was associated with the integrative functions, and who performed the mediative, conciliative, and affectionate aspects of family living. Zelditch found that forty-six of the fifty-six societies differentiated between the leadership roles, and forty- eight of the fifty-six societies allocated these roles in the predicted direction. According to Zelditch, of the negative cases found there was not a single instance of no differentiation along the instrumental-expressive axis, nor of any sex reversal of role allocation in any society. The negative cases were those in which 22 Ibid., pp. 314-315. subsystems of the total kinship system differentiated or allocated roles, rather than assigning these func tions to the nuclear family. For example, the Arapesh were rated as undifferentiated because parents do not discipline their children or accept authority, but assign these roles to the mother's brother. Zelditch commented that though the father does not discipline his own children, this same individual disciplines in the role of brother to his sister, "thus clearly some differentiation occurs; and the father who is reluctant to discipline in one context must certainly be the mother's brother who instigates punishment in another context."23 Zelditch (in collaboration with Parsons) held that the husband-father role was essentially differ entiated from the wife-mother role in that he earned the living. Nevertheless, Zelditch perceived the allocation of instrumental and expressive roles of the American middle class as being "equivocal" in 24 certain respects. 23Ibid., p. 323. 24Ibid., p. 339. 48 Role Taking Accuracy The present study is primarily based upon the Parsonsian structural-functional framework but it is also founded upon the symbolic-interactionist 25 approach. Although many of the sociological concepts of these two schools overlap, one major difference is that the former tends to perceive the individual as a "reactive bundle of statuses and roles," whereas the latter focuses upon the indi vidual's capacity to initiate action. The interpre tation that the self makes in a situation is what is stressed by the symbolic interactionists. The interactionists assume that: . . . human behavior and social life are con tinually in flux. There is no abstract separation of social structure and social change, although one researcher may wish to concentrate on the structural aspects of a dynamic situation while another may wish to concentrate on its changing 25 The interactionist viewpoint is elucidated by a host of contributors in Arnold M. Rose (editor), Human Behavior and Social Processes (Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company, 1962). Also see Hill and Hansen, Marriage and Family Living, XXII, 310-311, for a list of definitive and illustrative studies that have employed the interactional approach. 26 Hill and Hansen, Marriage and Family Living, XXII, 303. 49 features. Social life is assumed to be "in process" never "in equilibrium." The integration that is found in the individual or in society is assumed to be based on ever changing relationships, not on inherent tendencies of a homeostatic char acter. This emphasis on process distinguishes the thought and researches of the interactionists from those of most followers of "functional" theory in sociology (although in practically every other respect the two are very similar or identical).27 From the standpoint of the social interaction ists, the self behaves toward another in terms of his perceptions of that other. It is not the "objective reality" that the self responds to in a given situa tion, but his interpretations of who and what the other is as influenced by that self's past experiences, interests, and needs: The term "symbolic interaction" refers, of course, to the peculiar and distinctive character of interaction as it takes place between human beings. The peculiarity consists in the fact that human beings interpret or "define" each other's actions instead of merely reacting to each other's actions. Their "response" is not made directly to the actions of one another but instead is based on the meaning which they attach to such actions. Thus, human interaction is mediated by the use of symbols, by interpretation, or by ascertaining the meaning of one another's actions. This mediation is equivalent to insert ing a process of interpretation between stimulus and response in the case of human behavior.28 27 Rose, p. ix. 28 Herbert Blumer, "Society as Symbolic Inter action," in Rose, p. 180. 50 Of prime concern to the interactionist is the self's ability to "take the role of the other." In order to "make sense" of the other's behavior, the self must imaginatively reconstruct that other's action within the context of a role. Only by imputing a role to the other's observed behavior can one understand the 29 meaning of that behavior. Following Mead, Turner asserted: "In this sense one responds to the behavior of the other as a gesture, as an 'incomplete act' which one completes in imagination by supplying the role of which it is an indication."3^ In Chapter I of this study it was assumed that the person who was able to accurately infer the other's role was thereby associated with an ability to antici pate accurately the other's feelings. However, this ability did not imply that the predictor necessarily felt greater affect or greater tolerance for the pre dicted one as a consequence. Turner has clarified this point by distinguishing between (1) taking the role of the other and identifying with the role of that 2Q Ralph H. Turner, "Role-Taking, Role Standpoint, and Reference-Group Behavior," American Journal of Sociology, LXI (January, 1956), 317. 30Ibid., p. 318. 51 other, and (2) taking the role of the other but making a clear distinction between the self's attitudes and the attitude of that other. Unless the researcher clearly differentiates between these two processes, a muddled conceptual framework is likely to result: An occasional confusion between taking the role of another and adopting the standpoint of another is partly responsible for the view that facility in role-taking necessarily results in altruistic or sympathetic behavior or eliminates divergence of purpose between opposing factions. Certain types of exploitation, for example, require elabo rate role-taking behavior on the part of the exploiter. The "confidence man" frequently succeeds because of his ability to identify accurately the feelings and attitudes of the person with whom he is dealing while completely avoiding any involvement or identification with these feelings.31 Studies that have investigated role taking have attempted to distinguish between role taking accuracy based upon projection or based upon knowledge of the other: The criteria used to infer the role of the other may also be either projection or knowledge of the other. . . . In the case of projection, one con structs the other-role as he would if he himself were in the situation or had made the particular gesture. When role-taking proceeds in this manner, the particular identity of the other is immaterial to the role content, since the role conceptions of the actor are simply imputed to the other. . . . In contrast to projection one may interpret the other's gesture on the basis of prior experience 31Ibid., p. 319. 52 with that individual .... Or one infers the other's role from prior experience with that „ other's behavior in similar situations .... The usual procedure employed in determining role taking accuracy is to obtain a discrepancy score between a person's prediction of the other's responses and that other's self responses. The smaller this discrepancy, the greater is the role taking accuracy. 33 Hastorf and Bender were the first to suggest that a projection score be subtracted from the accuracy score in order to derive a measure which would be rela tively free of contaminating effects. Hastorf and Bender considered someone a "pro jector" if his predicted scores for another were more similar to his own than to the other's self scores. A person was regarded as an "erapathizer" if his pre dicted scores for another were more similar to that other's, than to his own, self scores. 34 However, Gage and Cronbach held that this 32Ibid., p. 318. 33A. H. Hastorf and I. E. Bender, "A Caution Respecting the Measurement of Empathic Ability," Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, XLVII (April, 1952), 574-576. 34N. L. Gage and Lee J. Cronbach, "Conceptual and Methodological Problems in Interpersonal Percep tion," Psychological Review, LXII (November, 1955), 411-422. 53 technique was unable to discriminate between the very variables it intended to distinguish. Specifically, they pointed out that when the self responses of the predictor and his subject disagree, but the predictor is able to determine the other's responses correctly, the crucial question that Hastorf and Bender's technique cannot answer is "does the judge [i.e., the predictor] recognize the dissimilarity or does he assume simi- 35 larity?" The same problem arises when the predictor's self responses and the other's responses agree, and the judge is able to predict the other's responses cor rectly; that is, does the predictor recognize the similarity or does he merely assume similarity? 36 In another article Cronbach, in order to eliminate projection, employed four measures of accuracy in predicting others. However, this technique is applicable to a large group setting rather than to a dyadic relationship. 35Ibid., p. 416. Lee J. Cronbach, "Processes Affecting Scores on 'Understanding of Others' and 'Assumed Similarity,'" Psychological Bulletin, LII (May, 1955), 177-193. 54 Mate Selection and Needs Freud and other psychoanalysts Jioted that among their patients there was a tendency for mate choice to be predicated upon "complementary neuroses." Freud held, for example, that a typical complementary rela tionship existed between the dependent person's need to revere and the narcissistic person's need to be 37 admired ("anaclitic" and "narcissistic" love). Employing Jungian personality types (feeling vs. thinking, sensing vs. intuiting, introverting vs. 38 extroverting), Gray hypothesized that mate choice is based upon complementary rather than similar motiva tions. Winch asserted that he performed statistical analyses on Gray's published data and found the results 39 nonsignificant. nn Adopted from Robert F. Winch, Mate Selection: A Study of Complementary Needs (New York: Harper and Brothers, 1958), pp. 11 and l3l. 38 Horace Gray, "Psychological Types in Married People," Journal of Social Psychology, XXIX (May, 1949), 189-200. 39 Winch, pp. 131-132. Winch does not mention where his statistical data can be found. 55 40 Winch believed that mate attraction was based upon complementary needs, as did some of his predeces sors. However, he proposed a more comprehensive theory by (1) asserting that need complementarity was appli cable to all kinds of people, not merely the neurotic; and (2) distinguishing between social and psychological 41 characteristics. Calling attention to Winch's early formulations of mate selection in which needs were considered as 42 "discrete and independent variables," Rosow suggested a more holistic analysis of needs. This approach was followed out by two of Winch's associates. In separate Winch, Mate Selection . . . ; Robert F. Winch, "The Theory of Complementary Needs in Mate Selection: Final Results on the Test of the General Hypothesis," American Sociological Review, XX (October, 1955), 552- 555; Robert F. Winch, Thomas Ktsanes, and Virginia Ktsanes, "The Theory of Complementary Needs in Mate Selection: An Analytic and Descriptive Study," American Sociological Review, XIX (June, 1954), 241-249. 41 See Chapter I, pages 9-13, for a more compre hensive review of his theory and study. 42 Irving Rosow, "Issues in the Concept of Need-Complementarity," Sociometry, XX (September, 1957), 216-233. 56 43 44 studies by Roos and Ktsanes, Winch's original data were subjected to factor analysis, and limited corrobora tion was found. The first study to test Winch's theory 45 was that of Bowerman and Day. The instrument selected (and since used by several other researchers) was the Edward's Personal Preference Schedule (or the EPPS). 46 The EPPS, based upon Murray's classificatory system of needs, has several assets, one of which is its attempt to reduce the effects of social desirability by matching statements of similar satisfaction. Bowerman and Day selected a sample of sixty college students who were either regular dating partners or engaged. They Donald E. Roos, "Complementary Needs in Mate Selection: A Study Based on R-Type Factor Analysis" (unpublished Doctoral dissertation, Northwestern Uni versity, 1956), discussed in Winch, Mate Selection . . ., pp. 127-128. 44 Thomas Ktsanes, "Complementary Needs in Mate Selection: A Study Based upon an Empirical Typology of Personality" (unpublished Doctoral dissertation, North western University, 1953), discussed in Winch, Mate Selection . . . , pp. 127-128. 45 Charles E. Bowerman and Barbara R. Day, "A Test of the Theory of Complementary Needs as Applied to Couples During Courtship,*" American Sociological Review, XXI (October, 1956), 602-605. 46 Henry A. Murray, et al., Explorations in Personality (New York: Oxford University Press, 1938). 57 rejected the theory of need complementarity since they found that only five of a possible 225 correlations were statistically significant in the hypothesized direction. 47 Schellenberg and Bee attempted to reconcile the antithetical findings of Winch and Bowerman and Day. Perhaps, Schellenberg and Bee thought, the dif ference might be due to the original study having used married couples and the following one having employed an engaged couple sample. Hence, the third study investigating the need relationship of partners employed both married and engaged samples. Like Bowerman and Day, this third study tested the Winch hypothesis by use of the EPPS. Contrary to Winch's theory of comple mentary needs, Schellenberg and Bee's data showed need homogamy between partners: (1) in the married sample, needs were correlated in a significantly positive direction; (2) in the engaged sample, needs pointed in a positive direction but not significantly so; and (3) when the samples of the married and engaged partners were pooled the needs correlated in a significantly positive direction. 47 James A. Schellenberg and Lawrence S. Bee, "A Re-Examination of the Theory of Complementary Needs in Mate Selection," Marriage and Family Living» XXII (August, 1960), 227-232. Schellenberg and Bee then made an intensive analysis of the two main axes that Winch had found most relevant to complementary needs; namely, a dominant-submissive axis and a nurturant-receptive axis. The result of the sixteen correlations by Schellenberg and Bee which was most indicative of complementarity in Winch's study indicated a complete lack of statistical significance. Like Schellenberg and Bee's study, Hobart and 48 Lindholm found that the partners in their sample tended toward similar rather than complementary needs. In addition, these researchers further asked whether the mates might not be more complementary than a random sample of couples. Therefore, each spouse of the 100 married couples in the sample was randomly paired with a partner of a different marriage. To test this hypothesis, Hobart and Lindholm devised their own need scale and two distinct need measures— a similarity score, and a complementary score. The authors reported For none of the eleven need areas were the married couples found to be more complementary than the random couples. The opposite tendency 4 . 0 Charles W. Hobart and Lauralee Lindholm, "The Theory of Complementary Needs, A Re-Examination," The Pacific Sociological Review, VI (Fall, 1963), 73-79. 59 was in fact true. For all of the needs the random couples had mean scores indicating that they were more complementary than the married couples, although none of the differences met the 5 per cent criterion level. . . . Our data . . . suggest that married couple members are less complementary than random couple members.49 Two further hypotheses were tested: (1) the more complementary the needs of the married couple, the higher their marital adjustment scores; and the more similar the needs, the lower their marital adjustment scores; and (2) complementariness was positively asso ciated with length of marriage. The findings substan tiated neither of the hypotheses. 50 Blazer recently investigated whether comple mentariness of married couples was positively associated with marital happiness. The findings were in the opposite direction from that predicted: there was a significant negative correlation between the wife's happiness score and the degree of complementarity. Similarly, there was a negative correlation (but not a significant one) between these two variables for husbands. Blazer suggested that his conclusions 49Ibid., p. 77. 50 John A. Blazer, "Complementary Needs and Marital Happiness," Marriage and Family Living, XXV (February, 1963), 89-95. 60 indicated a greater requisite for the marital happiness of the wife to be married to a person with similar needs theui in the husband's case. Blazer also asked whether there was a signifi cantly greater than zero correlation in the predicted direction between husbands and wives on need scores. He found approximately the same number of significant correlations in the opposite direction as in the pre dicted one. Blazer concluded that his findings not only failed to support the theory of complementary needs but that the reverse held; namely, that people with similar needs tended to marry. 51 Heiss and Gordon, too, investigated whether there was a relationship between mutual satisfaction and similar or dissimilar need patterns. They employed the EPPS among sixty-two dating, "going steady," and engaged couples. Of the fifteen needs measured by the EPPS, only the need on autonomy bore a significant association between complementary needs and mutual satisfaction. Because this one difference among fifteen need comparisons could occur by chance at the Jerold S. Heiss and Michael Gordon, "Need Patterns and the Mutual Satisfaction of Dating and Engaged Couples," Journal of Marriage and the Family, XXVI (August, 1964), 337-339. 61 .05 level of rejection, Heiss and Gordon concluded that little reliance could be placed upon this finding. On the other fourteen nonsignificant associations of needs, six pointed in the direction of homogamy, and eight pointed in the direction of complementarity. 52 Katz, Glucksberg, and Krauss administered a shortened EPPS to fifty-six middle class couples. They found, as had their predecessors, that Winch's hypoth esis was not substantiated. A comparison of couples' scores on the Edwards' need instrument showed three pairs of couples' needs significantly correlated in the direction opposite to that predicted by Winch, and only one in the predicted direction. Interestingly, hus bands' satisfaction was correlated in the predicted direction on three variables, whereas wives' satisfac tion was correlated in the opposite direction on these variables. The authors warned that their modified version of the need instrument did not permit compari sons with the standardized instrument. 53 Kerckhoff and Davis developed the first pencil 52 Irwin Katz, Sam Glucksberg, and Robert Krauss, "Need Satisfaction and Edwards PPS Scores in Married Couples," Journal of Consulting Psychology, XXIV (June, 1960), 205-208. 53Alan C. Kerckhoff and Keith E. Davis, "Value Consensus and Need Complementarity in Mate Selection," American Sociological Review, XXVII (June, 1962), 295- 303. and paper test which corroborated Winch's complemen tarity thesis. Ninety-four Duke University sorority girls and their respective male partners who were "seriously attached," "pinned," or engaged made up their sample. They completed a series of tests at the first sitting and a second battery of tests after a seven month interval. The independent variables in the study were Farber's index of consensus on family values and Schutz FIRO-B scales of personality (or needs). The couples' length of engagement was employed as a control variable The dependent variable was the answer to the question, "Is the relationship (between you two) different from what it was last fall when you filled out the first questionnaire?" The length of engagement originally had little theoretical relevance and the question was asked per functorily. But by dichotomizing length of engagement into "long term couples" and "short term couples," Kerckhoff and Davis were able to conceptualize mate selection as a developmental process. The length-of- engagement dichotomy revealed two patterns. First that, among long term couples. those whose needs were complementary indicated significantly greater progress toward marriage than those whose needs were similar. Essential to their thesis was that among short term couples there was no such relationship between progress and similar or dissimilar needs. A second pattern was found among low consensus couples who, as a group, were negatively related to progress toward marriage. Similar to the first pattern, these low consensus couples whose needs were complementary indicated greater progress toward marriage than those whose needs were similar, whereas there was no relationship between progress toward marriage and similar or dissimilar needs among short term couples. The authors rhetorically asked, "How does it happen that the . . . effects of need complementarity are not noticeable until the later stages of court- 54 ship?" Kerckhoff and Davis asserted that there is a period of idealization and perceptual distortion which prevents a realistic appraisal of the potential mate in the initial stages of courtship. Over time, however, there is an increasing knowledge of the other, and a process of disillusionment or "reality shock" results. After the personalities have had a chance to really know each other, the significance of comple mentarity emerges. "Not until the idealization is 54Ibid., p. 302. 64 destroyed can they interact at the more realistic level of personality, and only then can need complementarity 55 'make a difference' in the relationship." The speculation that a realistic appraisal sub sequently replaces romantic idealization in mate selection was buttressed by the findings on personality ratings attributed to self and other. First, short term couples indicated "far less" negative personality characteristics to self and other in comparison with long terra couples. Secondly, after six months had elapsed in this longitudinal study, short terra couples became more negative in their perceptions of their mates' personality characteristics. From the data, Kerckhoff and Davis ingeniously inferred a process of mate selection in which there are three "filtering factors." First, there is the limiting of the field of eligibles with respect to social attributes. However, Kerckhoff and Davis dis tinguished between those social structure variables as social class, race, and religion in which homogamy is known to function and those attitude and value variables which Winch implicitly assumed would be highly correlated: 55Ibid., pp. 302-303. 65 . . . Although . . . [Winch does not 3 make the point explicit, he seems to be lumping social structure variables and attitude and value variables together in his discussion. The expectation that the two kinds of variables would be highly correlated is a reasonable one, but, we would argue, further understanding of the selection process might be gained if we examined the concept "field of eligibles" more closely.56 In reference to their own study, Kerckhoff and Davis asserted: The present study indicates that such a blanket statement concerning the homogamy variables may give a misleading image of the mate selection process . . . the use of the more individual measure of values reported here led to a much clearer discrimination among the couples . . . although even here the degree of homogamy is notable.57 Second, at a later period of time, value con sensus operates to further limit the field of eligibles 58 of those who eventuate in marriage. Third, and later still, among those couples whose association has been a lengthy one, there is a final selection factor in which complementarity does make a difference in deter mining the proportion of those who progress toward marriage. 56Ibid., p. 301. 57Ibid. 58Ibid., pp. 301-302. The lack of significance found among long term couples casts some doubt on this assertion. 66 59 Strauss examined the relationship between the ideal mate and the selected mate of engaged and recently married persons. Whereas 59 per cent of the sample remarked that there was a very close physical resem blance between the ideal and their chosen one, 74 per cent of the sample noted a very close personality resemblance between the two. When the person second arily preferred was compared with the chosen mate, there was no difference on physical characteristics, but the latter came closer to the ideal on personality characteristics. Strauss also found that 92 per cent of the sample indicated some trait that would disqualify a potential spouse. Those eliminating characteristics most often listed were differences in race, religion, education, and social background. Strauss reasoned that the cultural and tempera mental characteristics of the ideal mate have a significant influence upon the marital partner selected, whereas physical qualities are not as important. Following the principles of Durkheim and Simmel, rq Anselm Strauss, "The Ideal and the Chosen Mate," Sourcebook in Marriage and the Family, edited by Marvin B. Sussman (Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company, 1953), pp. 120-124. 67 fiO Kernodle maintained that, to determine the relation ship of partners' needs, the sociologist ought to examine the "social facts." Kernodle suggested that the relationship of needs in mate selection should be found in the "configuration of social and cultural phenomena" rather than in an exploration of the indi- f i 1 vidual's unique life history. Differential Role Expectations gn Turner suggested that there are varying degrees of slack between the permissiveness of certain social orders and the degree to which personalities can vary: An example which may be germane to this prin ciple is the importance of the domination-submission theme in the study of personality in the United States and some Western societies. Almost every system for the study of personality devised in the United States has emphasized variations of some sort about the idea of domination among its major vari ables. In Winch's study of mate selection the fifl Wayne Kernodle, "Some Implications of the Homogomy-Complementary Needs Theories of Mate Selection for Sociological Research," Social Forces, XXXVIII (December, 1959), 145-152. f i 1 See Chapter I, pages 13-15, for a more complete discussion of Kernodle's work. ®2Ralph H. Turner, "The Problems of Social Dimensions in Personality," Pacific Sociological Review, IV (Fall, 1961), 57-62. 68 "needs" which conform to the complementarity hypothesis are generally those related to a dimension of assertiveness and receptiveness. But the variable of ascendance, dominance, assertiveness, etc. may be less crucial in personality differentiation in other societies. . . . The preoccupation with questions of relative dominance in the family and in marital relations in the American family is likewise exceptional, and arises from the undefined character of dominance.63 64 Burgess and Locke utilized two ideal types as classificatory familial schemes— the institutional and the companionship family. The institutional family is characterized by authoritarianism, with autocratic power in the hands of the husband and the subordination of the rest of the family. This control of the family is derived from those sanctions of the "mores, religion and the law." The companionship family is one in which there are mutual bonds of affection, the husband and wife have equal status and authority, and major deci sions are arrived at by agreement. The studies by Burgess and Locke, and Turner have been introduced to indicate the significance of 63Ibid., p. 59. ^4Ernest W. Burgess and Harvey J. Locke, The Family: From Institution to Companionship (New York: American Book Company, 1953). 65Ibid., pp. 22-24. 69 roles in transition. The following studies were more specifically oriented towards some aspect of equali- tarian-traditional roles. 66 Jacobson hypothesized that "divorced couples exhibit a greater disparity in their attitudes toward the roles of the husband and wife in marriage than do 67 married couples." On a twenty-eight item test selected by an internal consistency analysis, weights were assigned a five point scale such that low scores were indicative of "traditional male dominance" or a conservative attitude, and high counts indicated an "emergent-feminine equalitarian" or liberal attitude. It was found that the divorced males had the lowest sums (i.e., most traditional) and the scores increased from married males, to married females, to divorced females, respectively. The difference between the mean scores of divorced couples was about four times greater than ^Alver Hilding Jacobson, "Conflict of Attitudes toward the Roles of the Husband and Wife in Marriage," American Sociological Review, XVII (April, 1952), 146- 150; see also Alver Hilding Jacobson, "Conflict in Attitude toward the Marital Roles of Husband and Wife," Research Studies of the State College of Washington, XIX (June, 1951), 103-106. 67 Jacobson, American Sociological Review, XVII, 146. 70 that of the married couples. These statistically significant results, concluded Jacobson, were indicative of both differential sex and marital status attitudes toward marital roles. fift A pilot study by Motz investigated a large sample of married college students regarding their role definitions. She found ego-involved roles to be dif ferentially defined as compared with those roles applied to generalized others, and that divergent concepts were held about traditional and companionate roles. Subse quently, a twenty-four item test discriminated between public and personal role definitions, and between traditional and equalitarian roles for six areas of behavior: housework, employment, financial support, care of children, participation in community activities, and schooling. The Traditional Family Ideology scale, con- 69 structed by Levinson and Huffman, analyzed family C O Annabelle Bender Motz, "The Role Conception Inventory: A Tool for Research in Social Psychology," American Sociological Review, XVII (August, 1952), 465-471. 69 Daniel J,* Levinson and Phyllis E. Huffman, "Traditional Family Ideology and Its Relation to Personality," Journal of Personality, XXIII (March, 1955), 251-273. 71 ideology at two levels: the institutional and the psychological. Theoretically derived from Adorno's The Authoritarian Personality, the scale measured five authoritarian personality syndromes applicable to family life: conventionalism, authoritarian submission, exaggerated masculinity and femininity, extreme emphasis on discipline, and moralistic rejection of impulse life. 70 Dyer and Urban examined a sample comprised almost entirely of Morman marital dyads and single individuals. On a five point scale ranging from decisions decided by husband alone to the other extreme of decisions decided by wife alone, it was found that there was a very high agreement on these variables, and principally in the direction of equalitarianism. This finding is most interesting in that the Mormons are supposedly quite traditional in their attitudes toward the family. To determine the "balance of power" between 71 husbands and wives, Blood and Wolfe developed a William G. Dyer and Dick Urban, "The Institu tionalization of Equalitarian Family Norms," Marriage and Family Living, XX (February, 1958), 53-58. 7*Robert 0. Blood, Jr. and Donald M. Wolfe, Husbands and Wives: The Dynamics of Married Living (Glencoe, Illinois: The Free Press, I960). 72 scale which comprised questions about decision making in several areas of familial living. The authors' sample was composed of a representative group of married women who resided in the Detroit area. Blood and Wolfe found that 46 per cent of the families were equalitarian, 22 per cent were "husband-dominant," and 22 per cent were "wife-dominant" (12 per cent no 72 response). Thus, according to the responses of wives in this sample, a majority were equalitarian. Summary Parsons' conceptualization of the "interpene tration" of roles and needs as the result of a common value system was outlined. Motives were shown to be emergent within increasingly complex subsystems of the family. At a later period in time, need-disposi- tions were seen to be influenced by peers, other adults, and the occupational system. Zelditch's empirical study corroborated Parsons' position that the family must differentiate and allocate roles. According to the social interactionists, the self interprets behavior in a situation, rather than responding to some "objective reality" in the environ- 72Ibid., p. 23. 73 ment. A self's ability to take the role of the other enables him to "make sense" of the other's behavior. The inability at the present time to distinguish between role taking based upon knowledge or based upon pro jection was noted. The literature on mate selection revealed a consistent lack of support for Winch's theory of comple mentarity, with the exception of Kerckhoff and Davis' study. The latter authors affirmed that there is an initial phase of mate selection in which idealization and perceptual distortion prevail. Subsequent to this period mates do appraise their prospective partners more realistically, and only then, hypothesized Kerckhoff and Davis, can need complementarity "make the difference." Burgess and Locke employed the "institutional family" and the "companionship family" as ideal con structs. In the former, the husband is superordinate; in the latter, the husband and wife have equal author ity and are bound together by mutual affection. Research has indicated statistically differentiated attitudes toward traditional and equalitarian role definitions. In the studies of Blood and Wolfe, and Dyer and Urban, a majority of the respondents reported equalitarian attitudes toward familial responsibilities. CHAPTER III THE SAMPLE AND THE METHODOLOGY USED The Selection of the Sample Considerations in the Selection of the Sample To test the theory of mate selection, the present writer wished to obtain a sample of couples who were neither "playing the field" nor already married. Because the goals among the members in the former group are manifest and not necessarily related to the selec tion of a marital partner, it was believed that a measure of their needs would be too erratic. The latter group, that is married couples, also appeared to offer hazards to the researcher in that the marriage relationship might have modified their need system. Couples were wanted who were firmly committed to marriage but as yet were not married. Hence the sample was obtained from among those applying for a marriage license. The fact that 98 per cent of the selected sample planned to marry within a month'*' was The percentage of dyads who planned to marry (1) the day the license was obtained, (2) within a week, (3) a month, or (4) three months is indicated on page 90. 74 75 an indication that the group viewed the licensing procedure as the final step toward matrimony, and not merely as an extension of the engagement period. Because Winch believed that middle class Americans are the most likely group to marry comple mentarity, a second consideration in the selection of the sample was to obtain only those who met the middle * - class criterion. To eliminate confounding effects, the third factor taken into consideration was to select a homogeneous sample with respect to race and relative homogeneity with respect to religious affiliation. Consequently, the sample was limited to Caucasian and non-Jewish individuals only. This avoided the possibility that the strong familial allegiances of 2 Jewish people might be an intervening variable which could affect the criterion. At the time that the sample was drawn it was thought that this same effect would not occur among any other "religious group," including those who responded with "no religion" and "other religion." 2 Nathan Glazer and Daniel Patrick Moynihan, Beyond the Melting Pot (Cambridge: Massachusetts Institute of Technology Press, 1963), p. 165. 76 Gathering the Sample The Marriage Bureau in the Los Angeles Courthouse appeared to be an appropriate site to obtain the present sample. This bureau services the Los Angeles County area as well as Los Angeles City. It was expected that in this location a sample of middle class, Caucasian, and non-Jewish partners could be drawn whose attributes were typical of an urban population with the above characteristics. The procedure was to approach each couple upon their completion of the application for a marriage license. The researcher indicated that he was conduct ing the study in connection with a doctoral dissertation to be obtained at the University of Southern California, and that he was interested in the attitudes of indi viduals applying for a marriage license. Each person was encouraged to be frank in com pleting the questionnaire and to note that there were JT no identifying names or addresses on the forms. A common number, but unique to each dyad, was printed on the questionnaires in order to distinguish respective partners. The researcher stressed that each mate should complete the form without permitting his partner to see * 5 See Appendix for copy of forms used. 77 his answers. Also, each respondent was given a separate sheet of paper, without the identifying dyad number, on which to indicate whether he would like the results of the research and/or would consider participating in a follow-up study. Approximately 90 per cent of the sample wished to receive a copy of the results, and about 75 per cent wanted to be advised of the follow-up. The questionnaire required about twenty-five minutes to complete. Rarely did a subject finish in less than twenty minutes, whereas a few needed as much as forty-five minutes. Social Characteristics The social characteristics of the sample, which included class, education, age, religious affiliation, and expected marital date, are now presented. The ages of the partners were included in order to determine roughly whether the sample would prove similar to the median age of couples applying for a marriage license in the State of California. The rationale for including the other attributes have 4 been examined previously in this chapter. ^See "Considerations in the Selection of the Sample," pages 74-75. 78 Class Using the method developed by Hollingshead, the class position of each dyad was determined by ranking the male member. The instrument, Hollingshead's "Two 5 Factor Index of Class Position," employs two indicators of class— educational and occupational status. Both of these factors are scored on a seven point scale, with low values indicative of high positions. Hollingshead assigns a weight of 7 to the subjects occupation and a weight of 4 to his education. The weights are multi plied by the scale values and the two weighted scores are combined. The following example is from Hollings- head. John Smith is the manager of a Safeway Store. He graduated from high school and finished one year of college. By finding these statuses in Hollingshead's scales (not shown in the present study) it is determined that Mr. Smith receives a scale score of 3 as an admin istrator and a scale score of 3 on the basis of his education. When these scale scores are multiplied by the factor weights of 7 (for occupation) and 4 (for education) respectively, the resultant weighted score August B. Hollingshead, "Two Factor Index of Social Position," paper written in 1957, pp. 1-2. 6Ibid. 79 of 7 x 3 is added to 4 x 3 to equal 33, the Index of Social Position Score. The final step after having calculated this index is to find the range of scores that Hollingshead assigns to each class, which in this case is in a Class 3 position. Class position is distributed along a five point scale: Class 1 is upper class Class 2 is upper-middle class Class 3 is middle class Class 4 is working class Class 5 is lower class Because middle class status is a prerequisite for inclusion in the present sample, only couples in which the male scored in Class 2 and Class 3 were retained. Table 1 presents the class positions of the males for the gross sample interviewed and the selected sample. This table indicates that there were 313 male subjects who comprised the gross sample interviewed (not including sixty-eight cases in which either the male or his fiancee was Jewish, ten cases in which either partner was Negro, and thirty-one incomplete sets in which one or both partners left vital information blank). Of the 313 males in the gross sample, 210 met the class requisites. 80 TABLE 1 SOCIAL CLASS POSITIONS OF MALES FOR TOTAL INTERVIEWED SAMPLE AND THE SELECTED SAMPLE, BY PERCENTAGES Class Total Interviewed Sample N = 313 Selected Sample N = 210 1 3.8 - 2 20.1 30.0 3 47.0 70.0 4 26.5 - 5 2.6 - 100.0 100.0 81 Table 1 further indicates that, in the gross sample interviewed, Classes 2 and 3 represented about 20 per cent and 47 per cent of the total, respectively, whereas, in the final selection, these two groupings composed 30 and 70 per cent of the sample, respectively. In the remaining sections herein, only the social characteristics of the selected sample (that is, the 210 partners) are discussed. Occupation The previous section examined the class compo sition of the sample but did not present the two variables which together comprise that class position. The present section delineates the occupational status of the selected sample, and the following section focuses upon its educational position. To classify a person's occupation, Hollingshead ranks his type of work along a seven point scale— the smaller the numerical value, the higher the socio economic position: Position 1 equals Higher Executives Proprietors of Large Concerns Major Professionals 82 Position 2 equals Business Managers Proprietors of Medium Sized Businesses Lesser Professionals Position 3 equals Administrative Personnel Small Independent Business Minor Professionals Position 4 equals Clerical and Sales Workers Technicians Owners of Little Businesses Position 5 equals Skilled Manual Employees Position 6 equals Machine Operators Semiskilled Employees Position 7 equals Unskilled Employees Table 2 presents the occupational distribution of the 210 males who fell within the accepted class range, i.e., Classes 2 and 3. Because Class 1 males were eliminated (in order that the selected sample be , 'middle class"), only one-half of 1 per cent of the retained male sample had a Position 1 in occupation. It is noted that a plurality of the sample was in Position 3. The remaining positions, as listed in their descending order of sample percentage, are 4, 2, 5, and 1. 83 TABLE 2 OCCUPATIONAL POSITIONS OF MALES Occupational Positions N = 210 Per Cent 1 .5 2 20 oO 3 39.0 4 31 oO 5 9.5 6 - 7 - 100.0 84 Education Hollingshead used a seven point scale to deter mine educational index. This scale is based upon the years of schooling completed by the male member of the dyad. The smaller the scale value, the greater the years of education: Years of School Completed Scale Professional (M.A., M.S., M.D. , Ph.D., LL.B.) 1 Four Year College Graduate (A.B., B.S., B.M.) 2 1-3 Years College (Also Business Schools) 3 High School Graduate 4 10-11 Years of School (Part High School) 5 7-9 Years of School 6 Under 7 Years of School 7 The distribution of the selected males on this criterion is presented in Table 3. This table shows that approximately 88 per cent had at least some college background. Table 4 indicates the ages of the males and females, respectively. The median age for the male sample was 22.9. The median age for males at first 7 marriage was 22.6 (not shown in table). Two males 7 During 1960 the median ages at first marriage for male and female in California were 23.0 and 19.7, respectively. Reported in U.S., Department of Com merce, Bureau of the Census, Statistical Abstract of the United States (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1963), p. 70. 85 TABLE 3 EDUCATIONAL POSITIONS OF MALES Educational Positions N = 210 Per Cent 1 5.2 2 31.4 3 51.5 4 11.4 5 .5 6 - 7 — 100.0 86 TABLE 4 AGE DISTRIBUTION OF SAMPLE, BY PERCENTAGES Age Group Males N = 210 Females N = 210 45 and over 41-44 37-40 33-36 29-32 25-28 21-24 17-20 .5 .5 2.9 2.9 7.4 24.3 52.9 8.6 1.9 1 o 4 5.3 10.0 45.2 36.2 100.0 100.0 who were seventeen years old were granted permission of the court to marry. Fifteen males between the ages of eighteen and twenty-one had obtained parental per mission to marry. The median age of the female sample was 20.9. The median age for females who had no prior marriages was 20.5 (not shown in table). There were four females who, being between sixteen and eighteen years old, had received parental consent to marry. Religious Affiliation The religious preferences of the partners are presented in Table 5. On this criterion, the majority of both sexes fall within the Protestant grouping. Combining the Protestants and the Catholics, the two religious sects account for 86 per cent and 91 per cent of the males and females, respectively. The remainder reported either another affiliation or no religious belief. Expe cted Marital Date The couples in the sample had obtained a license to marry just minutes before becoming subjects of this study. Each person was asked when he planned to marry. A very high agreement between the partners was found as to when this event would occur, and in those few 88 TABLE 5 RELIGIOUS PREFERENCES OF THE SAMPLE, BY PERCENTAGES Religious Preference Male N = 210 Female N = 210 Protestant 57.1 58.1 Catholic 29.0 32.8 None 8.7 2.4 Other 5.2 6.7 100.0 100.0 89 cases where there was a difference in response the mean of the two answers was computed. As Table 6 indicates, 63 per cent planned to marry within a week, and 98 per cent of the sample planned to marry within a month. The Instruments Used Both members of the dyad completed four forms: (1) a face sheet, (2) an inventory of motives (the Interpersonal Check List), (3) a familial role scale (the Family Role Typology Scale) as perceived by self, and (4) a prediction of the partner's perception of the same familial role scale. O The Interpersonal Check List — an Inventory of Motives Purpose. The Interpersonal Check List, here after referred to by its initials, the ICL, is an instrument specifically designed to measure culturally significant needs, or motives. Leary, one of the originators of the inter personal classification system, explicated five levels of personality: Q Timothy Leary, The Interpersonal Diagnosis of Personality (New York: The Ronald Press Company, 1957). 90 TABLE 6 EXPECTED MARITAL DATE Expected Marital Date_________________ Per Cent Within 3 months 1.9 Within 1 month 35.2 Within a week 58.1 Day obtained license 4.8 100.0 91 I. Public Communication II. Conscious Description III. Private Symbolization IV. Unexpressed Unconscious V. Values Each level is viewed as a pattern of interpersonal response in which the individual attempts to avoid anxiety or to establish and maintain self-esteem. The present study deals only with Level II, defined as "the interpersonal motive [italics not in originalJ attributed by the subject to himself or another in his g conscious descriptions." The current form of the ICL contains 128 adjectives or adjectival phrases which are descriptions of culturally relevant attributes, qualities, and traits. In the development of this instrument, the researchers amassed hundreds of verbal descriptions of interpersonal actions. These verbal interactions were then recorded as adjectives or adjectival phrases; e.g., I am strong, friendly, help ful. The psychologists engaged in this process then subsumed these lists into sixteen generic interpersonal motivations. These motivational variables were found to be related to either a power or an affiliative 9Ibid., pp. 134-135. 92 valence. Next, the sixteen themes were placed along a circular continuum such that the categories in proximity to each other were more similar than cate gories further apart. The sixteen variables were combined into octants. Code letters assigned to these interpersonal behaviors, as shown in Figure 1 (starting at the top, counterclockwise), were: AP (managerial- autocratic), BC (competitive-exploitive), DE (blunt- aggressive), FG (skeptical-distrustful), HI (modest- self-effacing), JK (docile-dependent), LM (cooperative- overconventional), and NO (responsible-overgenerous). The final step involved the selection of those adjectives or adjectival phrases characterizing interpersonal behavior which received differential frequencies of response among subjects— the greater the number of times that a word was chosen, the smaller its weight. Thus, if an adjective was chosen by 90 per cent of their sample as indicative of themselves, then that trait received an intensity (or weight) of 1; a word selected by 67 per cent obtained a weight of 2; an item selected by 33 per cent, a weight of 3; and that word selected by 10 per cent, a weight of 4. Intensity (or weight) 1 items reflect a "mild or necessary amount of the trait," intensity 2 items refer to a "moderate or appropriate amount of the AP BC NO DE LM FG JK HI AP— Manageri al-Aut o cr at i c BC— Competitive-Exploitive DE— Blunt — Aggr e s s i ve FG— Skeptical-Distrustful HI— Modest-Self-Effacing JK— Docile-Dependent LM— Cooperative-Overconventional NO— Responsible-Overgenerous FIGURE 1 DIAGRAM OF THE INTERPERSONAL CHECK LIST BY OCTANTS 94 trait/' intensity 3 items indicate a "marked or inappro priate amount of the trait," and intensity 4 items are "extreme amount of the trait." The ICL has been validated against several normative groups at Level II, the level employed in the present study. In one study, concurrent validity was obtained by comparing the most common interpersonal mode of self-response made by 200 psychiatric out patients on the ICL against diagnostic ratings on the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory. Leary and Coffey indicated that the ICL Level II has been validated against several other normative groups too, including 475 normal college students, 100 array offi cers, and fifty prison inmates.1^ To determine the internal consistency of the ICL, a sample of seventy-seven obese women was retested after a lapse of two weeks. The test-retest correla tions averaged .73 reliability for the sixteen inter personal categories, and .78 reliability when these same categories were combined as octants. Timothy Leary and Hubert S. Coffey, "Inter personal Diagnosis: Some Problems of Methodology and Validation," Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, L (January, 1955), 122. 95 The ICL as a measure of needs. Leary has main tained that all human interpersonal needs can be classified on one of two axes; namely, on a continuum of ascendancy, extending from dominance to submission (called the DOM scale), or on a continuum of affilia tion, extending from love to hate (called the LOV scale).^ One method of scoring the individual's ICL is to count the number of items that a person attributes to himself (or another) in each of the eight inter personal sectors. These raw scores are then converted to standard scores, and then plugged into formulae. These formulae are: DOM = AP - HI + .7 (NO + BC - FG - JK) LOV = LM - DE + .7 (NO - BC - FG + JK)12 To ascertain the relationship of the needs of two people, a difference between their need scores is computed disregarding arithmetic signs. To illustrate— in Table 7 the difference between the male's and female's DOM needs is 10; likewise, their difference on LOV needs is 5. ■^Leary, pp. 217-220 12Ibid., p. 69. TABLE 7 TOTAL DIFFERENCE OF NEEDS SCORES FOR A HYPOTHETICAL COUPLE Sex of DOM LOV Total Difference of Couple Needs Scores Needs Scores Needs Scores Male 60 35 Female ±50 ±40 Difference of Needs 10 + 5 = 1 5 97 At this point it is necessary to discuss the rationale for inclusion of a third need dimension, arbitrarily called the "total difference of needs." This latter measure is a summation of (1) the difference between the male's and female's DOM need scores, and (2) the difference between the male's and female's LOV need scores. The reason for this need dimension is to be able to summarize both the DOM differences and the LOV differences of a dyad. This method, although not specifically used by Leary, has been employed by Kotlar"^ and King.^ To illustrate the way the "total difference of needs" is computed, the reader is again referred to Table 7. In this table the summation of the difference of the partners' DOM plus LOV indices is 15. Administration of the ICL. Each subject com pleted this form only once. Each was instructed to complete the form for himself. The directions read: Write on each line: + if the statement describes you i3Sally Lee Kotlar, "Middle-Class Marital Roles— Ideal and Perceived in delation to Adjustment in Marriage" (unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University of Southern California, 1961). 14 Elsie V. King, "Personality Characteristics— Ideal and Perceived in Relation to Mate Selection" (unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University of Southern California, 1961). 0 if the statement does not describe you The Family Typology Scale Purpose. The study wished to determine the basis of each person’s attitudes toward familial role rela tionships. These could be derived from the traditional viewpoint; e.g., the husband should be the boss, make the important decisions affecting the family unilater ally, and the wife's place is in the home; or from the equalitarian viewpoint; e.g., the wife should take a job if she wants to, it is okay for the wife to earn as much as her husband, and women have as much right as men to sow "wild oats." 15 Validity. Following Jacobson, this study employed the technique of submitting items to three "experts" who decided upon the applicability of an item to predetermined criteria. This technique repre sented face validity for the scale. The procedure that determined which items were to be included in the scale was as follows. A list of Alver Hilding Jacobson, "Conflict of Attitudes toward the Roles of the Husband and Wife in Marriage," American Sociological Review, XVII (April, 1952), 146- 150. 99 thirty-five items that had been successful in dis criminating between traditional and equalitarian role attitudes was derived from several studies. These items were given to three "experts"— two sociologists and one psychologist— with the instructions to select those items that they deemed to have a bearing on attitudes toward authority, responsibility of decision making, and personality development of family members. This team unanimously concurred on twenty-three items, whereupon these items were considered as the Family Typology Scale. The scale items were drawn from the following sources: items one through eighteen were 1 6 obtained from Jacobson, items nineteen and twenty 17 from Levinson and Huffman, and items twenty-one 1 & through twenty-three from Motz. These items are: 1 fi Alver Hilding Jacobson, "Conflict in Attitudes toward the Marital Roles of Husband and Wife," Research Studies of the State College of Washington, XIX (June, 1951), 103-106. *7Daniel J. Levinson and Phyllis E. Huffman, "Traditional Family Ideology and Its Relation to Personality," Journal of Personality, XXIII (March, 1955), 251-273. 1 8 Annabelle Bender Motz, "The Role Conception Inventory: A Tool for Research in Social Psychology," American Sociological Review, XVII (August, 1952), 465-471. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6 . 7. 8. 9. 10 . 11. 12 . 13. 14. 15. 16. 100 The husband should help with the housework. The wife should take a job if she wants to. If the husband insists, the wife should quit a needed job. If a husband runs around, so can his wife. The husband should decide how to spend any extra money. Husbands should be more strict with their wives. A married woman should not work outside of the home. What a husband does in his spare time is his own business. The husband should decide where to live. Woman's place is in the home. The wife should fit her life to her husband's. The husband's wishes should come first in most things. Marriage is the best career for a woman. The husband should wear the pants. Marriage should be a full time job for the wife. It is okay for the wife to earn as much as her husband. 101 17. A wife should let her husband decide most things. 18. Almost all money matters should be decided by the husband. 19. Women who want to remove the word "obey" from the marriage service do not understand what it means to be a wife. 20. Women have as much right as men to sow wild oats. 21. The wife should help support the family only when it is absolutely necessary. 22. Marriage is a partnership in which the wife should share the responsibility of supporting the family with the husband whenever possible. 23. A married woman should work if she is able to and enjoys work. Internal consistency. The following method was employed to determine whether each item was consistent with the responses of the highest and the lowest scoring groups on the total set of items. First, each person's total score was computed on the Family Typology Scale. Next, those persons whose scores fell in the highest and the lowest 25 per cent of the total sample were 102 retained. The mean scores for each item were then computed for the highest scoring, and again for the lowest scoring groups. Lastly, the difference between the two means was determined; this difference repre sented the "discriminating power" of the item. Although it was found that not every item was statistically significant, each did differentiate in the expected direction.^ Procedure. The instructions for completing the Family Typology Scale read: CHECK THE COLUMN WHICH MOST CLOSELY EXPRESSES YOUR FEELINGS ABOUT EACH STATEMENT. The person answered each item by checking one of the following responses: strongly agree, agree, disagree, and strongly disagree. Scoring. Arbitrarily, low weights were assigned to responses indicative of an equalitarian attitude, and high weights to a traditional attitude. The state ments were worded either as equalitarian or traditional. For example, if a person answered "strongly disagree" to the traditional statement "the husband should wear the pants," he would be scored one point. A person who 19 See Claire Sellitz, et al., Research Methods in Social Relations (New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1963), pT 185. 103 answered "strongly agree" to the equalitarian "it is okay for the wife to earn as much as her husband" would again receive a score of 1 on that statement. Since there were twenty-three items and each item received from one to five points, the scores theoretically could have ranged from a low of 23 to a high of 115. A person was considered "equalitarian" or "traditional" depending upon which side of the median he placed. Accuracy of Perception Scale Procedure. To determine accuracy of perception, the subject was asked to complete a second Family Typology form. This time, instead of responding with his own attitudes, as he did on the first form, he replied as if his mate were taking the test. The instructions read: PRETEND THAT YOU ARE YOUR FUTURE MATE, AND CHECK THE COLUMN WHICH WOULD MOST CLEARLY EXPRESS YOUR MATE'S FEELINGS FOR EACH STATEMENT. REMEMBER, ATTEMPT TO GIVE YOUR MATE'S FEELINGS, NOT YOUR OWN. Scoring. The score an individual obtained was determined by the number of correct predictions that he made as a percentage of the total number of usable responses. 104 For this measure, "strongly agree" and "agree” were combined as a single response, and "strongly disagree” and "disagree" were combined as the other. An item left unanswered by either partner was not computed. In scoring, if person "A" predicted that his mate ”B" answered "agree” or "strongly agree," and in fact ”B" did respond with either, then "A" is credited with an accurate prediction on that item. If in this case, however, mate ”B” had answered either "disagree" or "strongly disagree," then "A" is scored inaccurate. If "A” correctly predicted fifteen of his mate's responses and incorrectly predicted seven, then his score is 15/23, or 65 per cent. If "A" correctly predicted fifteen and incorrectly predicted five, then his score is 15/20, or 75 per cent. Statistical Procedures The advantage of an analysis of variance design over other parametric techniques of statistical inference, such as the t-test or the z-test, are threefold:^ 20 Joy P. Guilford, Fundamental Statistics in Psychology and Education (New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, 1956), pp. 257-258. 105 1. The most important reason is that, in cases where many tests of significance are involved, the t- or z-tests might by chance reject the null hypothesis when in fact it should be accepted (Type I error). Employing a simultaneous test as the analysis of variance determines whether the entire distribution of sampling statistics could have arisen by chance. 2. The estimate of the population variance obtained in testing separate pairs of data is far less stable than when all of the subsamples are employed. 3. Also, the amount of labor involved in test ing for significance of differences on separate pairs of data is much greater than that required for one composite test. Although there is no question concerning the validity of advantages one and two listed above, issue is taken with the third under certain circumstances. If separate t-tests were run on the data in the present study, the computer could easily have handled the task. However, the computer was not employed, and each of the analysis of variance designs was worked on a calculator. The more laborious technique was required 106 since the data in the present study were unequally distributed in the cells of a 3 x 3 table, two-way analysis of variance design. Although computer pro grams existed for equal N's, there were none that could handle unequal N's in the cells of a two-way analysis of variance. The only method by which the computer could have been utilized was to discard cases in the overloaded cells. It was decided not to employ the latter method since a one-third loss of the sample would have resulted. Hence, by using a calculator, all of the cases were retained. Hypotheses I and II were treated by a 3 x 3, two-way analysis of variance. The analysis of variance design is contingent upon a normal bivariate population and upon each of the subclasses having the same standard deviation. An inspection of the data revealed that the first condition was met. However, when the test for the homogeneity of variance was run, it was found that this requisite was not fulfilled in two of the designs. Subsequent treatment of the latter designs by a loga rithmic transformation did result in the required homogeneity. In a two-way analysis of variance design, three research hypotheses can be devised: unequal row means (row effects), unequal column means (column effects), 107 and specified unequal cell means (interactional effects). In the present study, no research hypothesis was theoretically possible for row effects. Figure 2 helps to elucidate the problem. With reference to this figure, it is predicted in Hypothesis I that (x j^^X ^X Hypothesis II predicted the interactional effects; three predictions were made: 1. Cell ll) cell 12) cell 13 2. Cell 11^ cell 21^ cell 31 3. Cell 13 < cell 23 < cell 33 But the row effects were not predicted since one row, ^X^ , was hypothesized to contain both the highest score (cell 11) and the lowest score (cell 13) 21 of all the subclasses. In computing the two-way analysis of variance design with unequal cells, the procedure is different from the usual variance test in that the "sums of squares for rows, columns, and interaction are deter mined by treating each mean in the subclasses as a 21 Similarly, based on the three predictions of Hypothesis II. there were grounds for the assumptions that in row {X^ , cell 21 included high and cell 23 included low scores; also, that this same relationship in row ^X^ held between cell 31 and cell 33. 11 12 J.3 21 22 23 31 32 33 *X.l *X.2 *X.3 FIGURE 2 LAYOUT OF A TWO-WAY ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE DESIGN 22 single observation." Hypotheses III and IV were treated by Pearson's product-moment coefficient of correlation. In these hypotheses the conditions for employing parametric tests of significance were also met. The .05 level of significance was established for each of the four hypotheses employed in this study. Limitations of the Study One factor which might have affected the repre sentativeness of the sample was that not all partners who were approached agreed to take part in the study. Although no accurate record was kept, this number approximated 10 per cent. It is possible that some of these nonparticipating couples who would have been eligible (i.e., would have fulfilled the requisite social characteristics) would have responded to the questionnaires in a significantly different manner than did the participating partners. A second uncertain factor was the validity of the subjects' responses to the several instruments 22 The present researcher followed the method employed by Helen M. Walker and Joseph Lev, Statistical Inference (New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1953), pp. 381-382. 110 employed in this study. Specifically, it is not known whether partners who apply for a marriage license are in such a high state of euphoria that their responses are thereby invalid. What research has been done with respect to euphoria has been somewhat tangential to the specific problem herein.2* * A third factor which affected the study was the inability to determine whether the self who was accurate in his predictions of his mate's role attitudes was so as a result of (1) having had a real knowledge of the mate's role attitudes, or (2) having predicted what was actually the projection of his own role attitudes onto his mate with the two role attitudes fortuitously coin- P4. ciding. 23 Kerckhoff and Davis interpreted their data as having indicated that in their sample of "pinned, seriously attached and engaged" partners, those who were going together for a long period of time described their mates in less idealistic terms than those who had been together for a short time. From Kerckhoff and Davis' study, one can conclude that there is a diminution of euphoria among partners prior to marriage. But it is still quite possible that long term pre-nuptial partners remain relatively euphoric until "after the honeymoon." In King's study, only 42 per cent of partners applying for a marriage license perceived their mates' person ality "realistically." However, King did not test for the self's own level of euphoria. See Alan C. Kerckhoff and Keith E. Davis, "Value Consensus and Need Comple mentarity in Mate Selection," American Sociological Review, XXVII (June, 1962), 295-303; King, p. 98. 24 See page 29, footnote 44, and pages 51-53. Ill Summary The final sample of 210 couples was selected from those who had just obtained a marriage license. Generally, the males among these pre-nuptial partners had some college training, and were minor professionals, administrators, or small business owners. The average person was in his early twenties, reported Protestant affiliation, and planned to marry within a week. The prerequisites for admission to the sample were Caucasian ancestry, non-Jewish affiliation, and upper middle or middle class status. The instruments employed as a measure of the variables were the Family Typology Scale, the Accuracy of Perception Scale, and the Interpersonal Check List. The statistical techniques used were a two-way analysis of variance and Pearson's product-moment coefficient of correlation. The .05 level of significance was employed to test each hypothesis. The possible limitations of the study were: those who refused to participate in the study may have been significantly different from those that did; participants may have been in such a state of euphoria that their responses were not valid; there was no known methodology for separating the accurate role 112 taker who really knew his mate's familial role attitudes from the person who projected and acci dentally happened to agree with his mate's attitudes. CHAPTER IV THE FINDINGS OF THE STUDY This chapter first presents the distribution of scores on the Family Typology Scale and the Accuracy of Perception Scale. Secondly, in the main body of the chapter, the rationale of the hypotheses is elaborated upon and the findings and interpretations are indicated. Distribution of Scores on Two Variables Distribution of Scores on the Family Typology Scale By definition, low scores denoted equalitarian role attitudes and high scores represented traditional role attitudes on the Family Typology Scale. The potential range of scores, as shown in Table 8, was between twenty-three and 115 points, but the actual scores of participants in this study were between 35 and 85. The median of the sample, irrespective of sex, determined the cutting point on the criterion. Conse quently, the sample was divided into 197 equalitarian and 223 traditional people. A t-test performed on the data indicated a negligible difference between the means of the males' and females' scores on the Family Typology Scale.^ Xt = .09. 113 114 TABLE 8 FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF TRADITIONAL- EQUALITARIAN FAMILIAL ROLE SCORES OF THE SAMPLE Number Score Males Females Total 85-88 1 0 1 80-84 1 0 1 75-79 3 2 5 70-74 4 4 8 65-69 18 18 36 60-64 44 38 82 55-59 69 80 149 50-54 43 51 94 45-49 19 10 29 40-44 5 7 12 35-39 3 0 3 N 210 210 420 MEAN 57.3 57.2 57. MEDIAN 57 57 57 115 After having divided the subjects into traditional and equalitarian classifications, the individuals were once again regrouped with their respective pre-nuptial partners. In this manner the distribution of the dyads who were (1) both traditional, (2) mixed (one traditional, one equalitarian), and (3) both equalitarian was (1) seventy, (2) eighty-three, and (3) fifty-seven, respec tively. Distribution of Scores on the Accuracy ofPerception Scale The Accuracy of Perception score that a person received was computed as a percentage of the items accurately predicted over the total number of usable items for which predicted. Whereas the theoretical range of scores extended between zero and 100, the actual range shown in Table 9 was between 35 and 100. The median was employed as the cutting point, thus dichotomizing the total sample into 205 "accurate perceivers" and 215 "inaccurate perceivers." A t-test indicated that there was no significant difference 2 between the male and female on perceptivity. 2t = .34. 116 TABLE 9 FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF THE ACCURACY OF PERCEPTION SCORES OF THE SAMPLE Score Number Males Females Total 100 0 1 1 95-99 0 0 0 90-94 3 3 6 85-89 14 5 19 80-84 13 20 33 75-79 23 17 40 70-74 53 53 106 65-69 28 32 60 60-64 25 36 61 55-59 22 20 42 50-54 14 10 24 45-49 12 7 19 40-44 2 5 7 35-39 1 1 2 N 210 210 420 MEAN 67.7 67.4 67.5 MEDIAN 70 67 70 Hypothesis I 117 The difference between the interpersonal needs of pre-nuptial partners varies as a function of their familial role attitudes. It is predicted that (1) the difference between the interpersonal needs of traditional partners is the most discrepant, (2) the difference between the inter personal needs of mixed partners (male traditional- female equalitarian and male equalitarian-female "T traditional) is less discrepant, and (3) the difference between the interpersonal needs of equalitarian partners is least discrepant. The need instrument, the Interpersonal Check List, consists of two need dimensions; namely, domi- nance-submission (DOM) and love-hate (LOV). A third need dimension, called the total difference of needs, is also examined, which is a summation of the differ ence of the dyad's DOM and LOV need scores. Since each of these three needs is investigated in relation to Because no theoretical basis was known to the researcher upon which to predict whether one or the other of the two mixed familial types has the greater need difference, and since it follows from the rationale of the study that the difference of needs between part ners of either of the mixed familial types are less than between traditional dyads, but more than between equalitarian dyads, it therefore was decided to combine these two mixed familial types into one category. 1X8 familial role attitudes and accuracy of perception, 4 three separate analysis of variance tests are required. Tables 10, 11, and 12 present the DOM, LOV, and total difference of needs tests, respectively. With reference to each of these tables, it can be seen that the test is contingent upon the column effects. Symbolically, the prediction is that, among these columns, £x ^^ ^ y (x To test the hypothesis, the F ratio is computed on the column of each need measure. On all three needs, that is, on DOM, LOV, and the total difference of needs, the obtained F value is compared with the F.95 value, as shown in the respective tables. The column variances are of such small magnitude that Hypothesis I is refuted. Since the hypothesis was refuted, no further statistical test on the columns could be applied; nonetheless, it is of interest that the means of the columns of traditional and equalitarian partners did point in the predicted direction ( ^x ^x on DOM, LOV, and total difference of needs (Tables 10, 4 A logarithmic transformation was computed on the LOV needs population and the total difference of needs population in order to fulfill the homogeneity of variance requisite. ACCURACY OF' PERCEPTION 119 TABLE 10 ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE OF DIFFERENCE SCORES BETWEEN PRE-NUPTIAL PAIRS ON DOMINANCE (DOM) NEED BY FAMILIAL ROLE ATTITUDES AND ACCURACY OF PERCEPTION FAMILIAL ROLE ATTITUDES Traditional Male- Traditional Female Traditional Male* Equalitarian Female or Equalitarian Male- Traditional Female Equalitarian Male- Equalitarian Female Both Cell 11 Cell 12 Cell 13 Partners x » 8.36 x = 8.18 x = 7.43 Accurate n = 28 n = 17 n a 14 One Cell 21 Cell 22 Cell 23 Partner x = 11.50 x = 9.17 X = 10.16 Accurate n a 26 n - - 36 n = 25 Both Cell 31 Cell 32 Cell 33 Partners x = 9.19 x = 7.17 x * 10.89 Inaccurate n s 16 n = 30 n = 18 /x , = 29,05 (x 0 = 24.52 (x , = 28.48 il ifa *0 * x . i h h COMPLETED ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE Sum of Degrees of Mean Source of Variation Squares Freedom Square F F.95 Rows 7.85 2 3.93 1.64 3.89 Columns 4.06 2 2.03 .85 3.89 Interaction 6.10 4 1.53 .64 2.41 Error 201 2.39 Noxxdraoaad x d v k h o d v 120 TABLE 11 ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE OF DIFFERENCE SCORES8 BETWEEN PRE-NUPTIAL PAIRS ON AFFILIATION (L0?) NEED BY FAMILIAL ROLE ATTITUDES AND ACCURACY OF PERCEPTION FAMILIAL ROLE ATTITUDES Traditional Male- Traditional Female Traditional Male- Equalitarian Female or Equalitarian Male- Traditional Female Equalitarian Male- Equalitarian Female Both Cell 11 Cell 12 Cell 13 Partners x = ,884 x = ,812 x = ,856 Accurate n = 28 n = 17 n = 14 One Cell 21 Cell 22 Cell 23 Partner x = .800 x = .807 x = .798 Accurate n = 26 n = 36 n = 25 Both Cell 31 Cell 32 Cell 33 Partners x = ,919 x = .941 x = .695 Inaccurate n = 16 n = 30 n = 18 (x 1 = 2,603 (x 2 = 2.560 (x 3 = 2,349 &.1 <*.2 *X,3 0 Scores have undergone a logarithmic transformation, COMPLETED ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE Sum of Degrees of Mean Source of Variation Squares Freedom Square F F.95 Rows ,005 2 .003 .38 3,89 Columns ,012 2 ,006 ,75 3.89 Interaction ,028 4 ,007 ,88 2.41 Error 201 .008 NOixdaoaad . - t o Aovanoov TABLE 12 121 ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE OF DIFFERENCE SCORES BETWEEN PRE-NUPTIAL PAIRS ON TOTAL DIFFERENCE OF NEEDS SCORES BY FAMILIAL ROLE ATTITUDES AND ACCURACY OF PERCEPTION FAMILIAL ROLE ATTITUDES Traditional Male- Traditional Female Traditional Male- Equalitarian Female or Equalitarian Male- Traditional Female Equalitarian Male- Equalitarian Female Both Cell 11 Cell 12 Cell 13 Partners x = 1.232 x = 1.169 x = 1,156 Accurate n = 28 n = 17 n = 14 One Cell 21 Cell 22 Cell 23 Partner x = 1.210 x = 1.161 x = 1.202 Accurate n = 26 n = 36 n = 25 Both Cell 31 Cell 32 Cell 33 Partners x = 1.229 x = 1.200 x = 1.210 Inaccurate n = 16 n = 30 n = 18 (x l = 3.671 (x 2 = 3.530 (x j = 3.568 £ Scores have undergone a logarithmic transformation. COMPLETED ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE Source of Variation Sum of Squares Degrees of Freedom Mean Square F F.95 Rows .001 2 .001 .25 3,89 Columns .003 2 .002 .50 3.89 Interaction .002 4 .001 .25 2.41 Error 201 .004 122 11, and 12). Furthermore, the means of the columns of traditional, mixed, and equalitarian partners ( • X point in the predicted direction on LOV needs (Table 11). Hypothesis II The difference between the interpersonal needs of pre-nuptial partners varies as a function of the interactional effects of their familial role attitudes and their accuracy of perception. In Hypothesis II it is the interaction variance that is being tested. If the research hypothesis is confirmed, then the interaction between the row and the column components "produces effects which cannot be explained merely by adding the row and the column compo nents. The present hypothesis maintains that the rela tionship between partners' adherence to familial role attitudes and the difference of their needs is affected by the accuracy of perception of the partners. The basic inference is that accurate perception enhances the ability of an ego to choose a partner who can 5Helen M. Walker and Joseph Lev, Statistical Inference (New York: Rinehart and Winston, Incor porated, 1953), p. 351. maximally gratify ego's needs. As in the previous hypothesis, testing is per formed on three need dimensions— DOM, LOV, and total difference of needs. On each of these needs three predictions are made with respect to the interactional effects of familial roles and accuracy of perception: 1. Among those dyads in which both members are able to perceive the other's familial role attitudes accurately, the difference of partners' needs is greatest between tradi- tionals, less between mixed (one member traditional, the other member equalitarian), and least between equalitarians. 2. Among those traditional dyads, the difference of partners' needs is greatest between those members who are mutually able to perceive the other's role attitudes accurately, less between those members in which only one member is able to perceive his mate's role attitudes accurately, and least between those members who are mutually unable to perceive the other's role attitudes accu rately . 3. Among those equalitarian dyads, the differ- * ence of partners' needs is least between 124 those members who are mutually able to perceive the other's role attitudes accu rately, greater between those members in which only one member is able to perceive the other's role attitudes accurarately, and greatest between those members who are mutually unable to perceive the other's role attitudes accurately. Stated symbolically, these same predictions with reference to the DOM, LOV, and total difference of needs dimensions in Tables 10, 11, and 12 (pages 119-121), respectively, are: 1. Cell 11 > cell 12 > cell 13 2. Cell 11 > cell 21 ) cell 31 3. Cell 13 < cell 23 < cell 33 To test the hypothesis, the F ratio is computed on the interaction of each need measure. The F value on each need dimension— the DOM, the LOV, and the total difference of needs— is compared with the F.95 value, and each in turn is not significant. Hence, Hypothesis II is refuted. Because the hypothesis was refuted, no further statistical test between cells could be applied; none theless, it is of interest that the means of the cells of mutually perceptive traditional and equalitarian 125 couples did point in the predicted direction (cell 11^ cell 13) on DOM, LOV, and total difference of needs (Tables 10, 11, and 12 on pages 119-121). Further, the means of the cells of all three mutually perceptive family types did point in the predicted direction on DOM and total difference of needs; (cell 11 ^ cell 12^ cell 13) on DOM and LOV (Tables 10 and 11). Hypothesis III, A and B Hypothesis Ilia— there is a negative correlation between the interpersonal needs of traditional pre nuptial partners. Hypothesis Illb— there is a positive correlation between the interpersonal needs of equalitarian pre nuptial partners. The possibility exists that some studies finding need similarity between partners had unwittingly employed a sample composed of equalitarians, whereas other studies which found complementarity between partners had unknowingly chosen a sample comprised of traditionals. Table 13 presents the correlations between the males’ and the females' DOM and LOV needs for mutually ®See pages 27, 30-31. TABLE 13 CORRELATIONS BETWEEN THE MALES' AND FEMALES' SCORES AMONG SUBSAMPLES AND TOTAL SAMPLE Group N Correlation on DOM Need Correlation on LOV Need Mutually Traditional 70 .21* .04 Mutually Equalitarian 57 .26** -.02 Total Sample 210 .21* .08 ♦Significant at .05 level. ♦♦Significant at .01 level. 127 traditional partners and mutually equalitarian partners. Although no predictions are made for the total sample, this group is shown in the table because it is germane to the conclusions. (The total sample comprised about 35 per cent traditional partners, 25 per cent equali tarian partners, and 40 per cent mixed partners, in which one member was traditional, the other equalitarian.) Noting first the DOM needs, it can be seen that, as predicted in Hypothesis Illb, there is a significant positive relationship between equalitarian partners. However, contrary to the prediction in Hypothesis Ilia, there is a significantly positive relationship between traditional partners too. Likewise, the total sample is significantly positive on the criterion. Next, viewing the LOV needs, it is seen that the correlations are all low, and that the algebraic signs of the traditional and equalitarian groups are pointing in directions opposite from that predicted. Although insignificant, the total sample points in a positive direction. On the basis of the findings, Hypothesis III (a and b) is refuted. In this hypothesis, the "total difference of needs" between partners are not examined. Because this need dimension is predicated upon a difference 128 between partners' scores on DOM, plus the difference between partners' scores on LOV, no correlation is possible. It is to be noted that the data not only dis prove the present hypothesis, they also controvert 7 8 Winch, and Kerckhoff and Davis. Rather than a negative correlation, as the latter two studies would have predicted, the data show that partners select each other homogamously with respect to DOM needs. The results on LOV needs, although insignificant and of a low order correlation, also tend to be positive, thus further contradicting the need complementarity theory. Hence, on the bases that not only has the present study found need homogamy between partners, but that six other studies have found either (1) statistical Q evidence of need homogamy, (2) no statistical evidence 7 See pages 9-13. ®See pages 29-31 and 61-65. 9 See pages 57-58; James A. Schellenberg and Lawrence S. Bee, "A Re-Examination of the Theory of Complementary Needs in Mate Selection," Marriage and Family Living, XXII (August, 1960), 227-232. 129 of need complementarity between partners?-0 (3) sta tistical evidence that need homogamy and marital happiness are related,^ or (4) no statistical evidence that need complementarity and marital happiness are 12 associated, it is becoming increasingly clear that the results of Winch, and Kerckhoff and Davis, occur only under specified conditions. At the present, these specified conditions are still unknown. Hypothesis IV, A and B Hypothesis IVa— there is a positive correlation between the difference of interpersonal needs and See pages 56-57, 58-59, 61; Charles E. Bowerman and Barbara R. Day, "A Test of the Theory of Complementary Needs as Applied to Couples During Courtship," American Sociological Review, XXI (October, 1956), 602-605; Charles W. Hobart and Lauralee Lindholm, "The Theory of Complementary Needs, A Re-Examination," The Pacific Sociological Review, VI (Fall, 1963), 73-79; Irwin Katz, Sam Glucksberg, and Robert Krauss, "Need Satisfaction and Edwards PPS Scores in Married Couples," Journal of Consulting Psychology, XXIV (June, 1960), 205-208. ■^See pages 59-60; John A. Blazer, "Complementary Needs and Marital Happiness,'1 Marriage and Family Living, XXV (February, 1963), 89-95. ^See pages 60-61; Jerold S. Heiss and Michael Gordon, "Need Patterns and the Mutual Satisfaction of Dating and Engaged Couples," Journal of Marriage and the Family, XXVI (August, 1964), 337-339. 130 accuracy of perception of pre-nuptial traditional partners. Hypothesis IVb— there is a negative correlation between the difference of interpersonal needs and accuracy of perception of pre-nuptial equalitarian partners. In Hypothesis IVa it is predicted that among mutually traditional partners the greater ego's accuracy of perception score, then the greater the difference between (1) ego and his mate's DOM needs, (2) ego and his mate's LOV needs, and (3) ego and his mate's total difference of needs. In Hypothesis IVb it is predicted that among mutually equalitarian partners the greater ego's accuracy of perception score, then the smaller the difference between (1) ego and his mate's DOM needs, (2) ego and his mate's LOV needs, and (3) ego and his mate's total difference of needs. Table 14 exhibits the correlations for the mutually traditional and the mutually equalitarian partners. As indicated in this table, each correla tion between the partners' difference of DOM needs and accuracy of perception is not significant. Although equalitarian males and females do point in the predicted negative direction, likewise traditional TABLE 14 CORRELATIONS BETWEEN THE PARTNERS’ DIFFERENCES OF INTERPERSONAL NEED SCORES AND THE ACCURACY OF PERCEPTION SCORES, BY SEX, OF SUBSAMPLES AND TOTAL SAMPLE Group N DOM Differences and Accuracy of Perception LOV Differences and Accuracy of Perception Total Difference of Needs and Accuracy of Perception Mutually Traditional Males 70 -.13 -.08 -.15 Females 70 -.08 .07 -.01 Mutually Equalitarian Males 57 -.03 .11 .07 Females 57 -.17 .10 -.05 Total Sample Males 210 .02 -.05 -.02 Females 210 -.06 .00 -.05 131 132 males and females, contrary to the prediction, also point in the negative direction. The correlations between the partners' differences of LOV needs and accuracy of perception are not significant. Of the four correlations whose algebraic signs are predicted, only one (viz., traditional females) points in the hypothesized direction. In each case, the correlation between the total difference of needs and accuracy of perception is insignificant. In this latter prediction, only one (viz., equalitarian females) points as hypoth esized. Hence, on the basis of the above results, Hypothesis IV (a and b) is refuted. The data did not sustain the contention that, among traditional partners, the more accurate ego is in predicting his mate's roles, the greater the need difference between ego and his mate, whereas, among equalitarian partners, the more accurate ego is in predicting his mate's roles, the smaller the need difference between ego and his mate. Emergent Findings To complete the analysis in this study, two additional findings are presented. The first of these emergent findings examines the relationship between accuracy of perception of 133 dyads for (1) traditional partners, (2) equalitarian partners, and (3) the total sample, irrespective of familial role attitudes. Table 15 reveals that there is a very signifi cant relationship between accuracy of perception for traditional dyads and for the total sample. Thus, for these two groups, the more accurate the one partner is in predicting his mate's familial role attitudes, the more accurate on the same criterion is the other partner. The fact that the total sample, which is comprised of mixed partners as well as mutually tradi tional and mutually equalitarian partners, is more perceptive than the subsample of mutually equalitarians appears anomalous. The findings are interpreted as indicating that equalitarian partners are relatively unable to predict the partners' marital roles because the role expecta tions of these dyads are loosely defined. Not knowing what the limits of his own or the mate's roles are, it is likewise difficult to predict how the partner would respond to the questionnaire. It is further interpreted that the total sample, which includes "mixed" partners, is more keenly aware of the other's attitudes, and that the traditionals are the most aware of all because each would have a stable pattern of expectations. 134 TABLE 15 CORRELATIONS BETWEEN THE MALE'S AND THE FEMALE'S ACCURACY OF PERCEPTION AMONG SUBSAMPLES AND TOTAL SAMPLE Group N Correlation on Accuracy of Perception Mutually Traditional 70 <>45* * Mutually Equalitarian 57 .19 Total Sample 210 .34** **Significant at .01 level. 135 The second of these emergent findings is the relationship between the male's and the female's familial role attitudes for the total sample. It is found that a positive and very significant correlation 13 holds between the mates on this criterion. This result indicates that the higher one member of the sample scores on the Family Typology Scale, the higher his mate tends to score on this same instrument. Summary The first section of this chapter presented the frequency distributions on the Family Typology Scale and the Accuracy of Perception Scale. The second section elaborated upon the hypotheses and their find ings. Because it was believed that Winch, and Kerckhoff and Davis had oversimplified the relationship of inter personal needs in mate selection, a conceptual framework was offered which was to be tested by four hypotheses. Each of these hypotheses was evaluated, and each in turn was refuted. The findings were: Hypothesis I— the difference between the inter personal needs of pre-nuptial partners did not vary as 13 r = .34. 136 a function of their familial role attitudes. The criterion was measured by the column variance in a two-way analysis of variance design; the F tests were insignificant on DOM, LOV, and total difference of needs. Although the hypothesis was refuted, the data exhibited that the means of the scores of traditional partners and equalitarian partners were in the pre dicted directions. Hypothesis II— the difference between the interpersonal needs of pre-nuptial partners did not vary as a function of the interactional effects of their familial role attitudes and their accuracy of perception. The criterion was measured by the inter action variance in the same two-way analysis of variance test noted in Hypothesis I. The F tests were not significant on DOM, LOV, and total difference of needs. Although the hypothesis was refuted, it is of interest that the means of the cells of traditional partners and equalitarian partners did point in the predicted directions. Hypothesis III (a and b)— the interpersonal needs of traditional partners and the interpersonal needs of equalitarian partners were found not to point in antithetical directions, therefore the overall hypothesis was refuted. There was a sig- 137 nificant positive relationship on DOM needs between (1) traditional partners, (2) equalitarian partners, and (3) the total population of partners irrespective of familial role attitudes. LOV needs, although insignificant, were likewise positively correlated between (1) traditional partners and (2) the total population of partners, irrespective of familial role attitudes. The finding that partners tend to select each other on the basis of need homogamy also led to the refutation of the theory of need complementarity. Thus the present study, as was the case with several other studies, has not sustained the findings of Winch, and Kerckhoff and Davis. It was concluded that need complementarity eventuates only upon the fulfillment of certain conditions. To date, these conditions have yet to be discovered. Hypothesis IV (a and b)— -among traditional partners, the correlation between ego's accuracy of perception score and an hypothesized greater need difference of partners was not significant, and among equalitarian partners, the correlation between ego’s accuracy of perception score and an hypothesized smaller need difference of partners also was not significant. 138 An emergent finding was that, among traditional partners, and among the total sample of partners, the more accurate the one partner was in predicting the mate's role attitudes, the more accurate the other mate was on this same criterion. It was suggested that the relationship held among traditional partners and the total sample of partners, but not among equali tarian partners, because the former were engaged in comparatively stable role relationships as contrasted with the latter. A second emergent finding was that, in the sample population, the higher the score of one partner on the Family Typology Scale, the higher his mate tended to be on the same criterion. CHAPTER V SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS This chapter contains a summary of the study, the conclusions, and the implications for future research. Summary The sample consisted of 210 couples who were approached only minutes after they had obtained a license from the Marriage Bureau in the Los Angeles Courthouse. Most of the males in this group were college educated and occupationally engaged in minor professional, administrative, and small business ownership. In general, these 420 persons were in their early twenties, Protestant, engaged for six months, and scheduled to marry within a week. The requisites for sample inclusion were: Caucasian, non-Jewish, and either upper middle or middle class status. In addition to social characteristics derived from a face sheet, a questionnaire completed by each person requested information about his familial role attitudes, his prediction of the mate's responses to the familial role attitude scale, and a check list 139 140 which measured interpersonal needs (or motives). The instruments employed were (1) the Family Typology Scale— a test which discriminates on tradi tional and equalitarian attitudes toward the family, (2) the Accuracy of Perception Scale— a measure of a person's ability to predict accurately his mate's responses to the Family Typology Scale, and (3) the Interpersonal Check List— a measure of interpersonal motivations (or needs). Two statistical techniques were employed: a two-way analysis of variance, and Pearson's coefficient of correlation. In each of the four hypotheses, the .05 level of significance was established. The rationale of the study was viewed primarily within the Parsonsian structural-functional framework.^ Parsons held that cultural meanings become diffused within the social and personality systems. The role Talcott Parsons and Robert F. Bales, Family, Socialization and Interaction Process (Glencoe, Illinois: The Free Press, 1955); Talcott Parsons and Edward A. Shils, Toward a General Theory of Action (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 19527; Talcott Parsons, "Social Structure and the Development of Per sonality," Studying Personality Cross-Culturally, edited by Bert Kaplan (New York: Row, Peterson and Company, 1961); Talcott Parsons, "Psychology and Sociology," For a Science of Social Man, edited by John Gillen (New York: The MacMillan Company, 1954); Talcott Parsons, Essays in Sociological Theory (Glencoe, Illinois: The Free Press, 1954X1 141 expectations of the social system are internalized by the personality, thereby roles incorporate motivational patterns. This is the gist of what Parsons meant by his statement that roles and needs interpenetrate with ond another. Further, Parsons maintained that the differ ence between the personalities of males and females is principally one of their having internalized differential role-expectations in the socialization process. Although the sexes have incorporated both instrumental and expressive role components, the male has internalized more of the former and the female more of the latter role attributes. o Zelditch stated that, in certain respects, the middle class family is characterized by equal allocation of instrumental and expressive roles. However, as the 3 findings of Blood and Wolfe indicated, not all middle class families abide by the expectations set forth by Zelditch. To distinguish between these differential role-expectation patterns, the familial types, the tra ditional and the equalitarian, were employed. These terms were approximations of Burgess and Locke's ideal O Morris Zelditch, Jr., "Role Differentiation in the Nuclear Family: A Comparative Study," in Parsons and Bales, Chapter VI, pp. 307-352. 3See page 22. 142 4 constructs, the institutional and the companionship familial types, respectively. By contrast with their traditional counterparts, the equalitarian male ful filled more expressive role functions and the equali tarian female more instrumental functions. In effect, the roles of the equalitarian partners were converging. Hence, the present writer inferred that the needs associated with these roles of equalitarian partners were likewise coming together. Adapting this rationale to the mate selection process, it was affirmed that the difference between the needs of traditional partners would be greater than the difference between the needs of equalitarian partners. Also noted were the inconsistent findings of prior studies in which both need similarity and need complementarity were confirmed. It was inferred that these discordant results might be synthesized by a hypothesis that found a negative correlation between traditional males and females, and a positive correla tion between equalitarian males and females. Following this line of reasoning, the question was posed as to 5 whether Kerckhoff and Davis' study found the results they did as a function of their selected sample. That 4 See pages 15-17. 5 See pages 30-31. 143 sample population consisted of Duke University sorority women and their respective mates, and thereby might have been a highly traditional group. On the assumption that these were traditional people, it was reasoned that the subsample of partners whose needs were comple mentary naturally made greater progress toward marriage than did the subsample of partners whose needs were similar. The complementary need group, being tradi- tionals, naturally chose, and were gratified by, mates whose needs were unlike their own, whereas the similar need group, being traditionals also, were mismatched and naturally did not make the same degree of progress toward marriage. The independent variable, accuracy of perception, was also introduced. Following Winch, it was assumed that, in the mate selection process, each ego selects that mate who seems to have the greatest potential of providing ego with maximum need gratification. It was also held that an ego who was more accurate in pre dicting his mate's role attitudes would be in a better position to know what gratification he wanted fulfilled. The limitations of the study were: those partners who declined to participate in this research might have been significantly different from those dyads who did; perhaps a high level of euphoria existed among the 144 partners which, if present, would tend to invalidate their responses; there is no known way of distinguishing between a person who was able to predict his mate's familial role attitudes as the result of (1) understand ing his mate's familial role attitudes, or (2) merely projecting his own attitudes onto his mate, and coin cidentally happening to be correct. The hypotheses and their findings were: Hypothesis I— the difference between the inter personal needs of pre-nuptial partners varies as a function of their familial role attitudes. The hypoth esis was refuted as a result of the insignificant column variances on DOM, LOV, and total difference of needs. In general, the means of the columns of traditional partners and equalitarian partners did point in the predicted direction. Hypothesis II— the difference between the interpersonal needs of pre-nuptial partners varies as a function of the interaction between their per ceptual accuracy and their familial roles. The F ratios on the interaction effects on DOM, LOV, and the total difference of needs were insignificant, therefore the hypothesis was refuted. In general, the means of the cells of traditional partners and equalitarian partners did point in the predicted 145 direction. Hypothesis Ilia— there is a negative correlation between the interpersonal needs of traditional pre nuptial partners. Hypothesis Illb— there is a positive correlation between the interpersonal needs of equalitarian pre nuptial partners. The overall hypothesis was refuted since the subhypotheses did not point in the predicted antithetical directions. On DOM needs there were statistically significant positive correlations between partners regardless of familial roles; on LOV needs, although none of the correlations were significant, the data in general pointed in the direction of positive correla tions between partners. It was concluded that the findings refuted the theory of complementary needs. Because the present study, as well as several other studies, have contradicted the findings of Winch, and Kerckhoff and Davis, it is contended that need comple mentarity occurs only under certain limiting conditions. Perhaps future research can determine under what con ditions need complementarity or need horaogamy will eventuate. Hypothesis IVa— there is a positive correlation between the difference of interpersonal needs and 146 accuracy of perception of pre-nuptial traditional partners. Hypothesis IVb— there is a negative correlation between the difference of interpersonal needs and accuracy of perception of pre-nuptial equalitarian partners. Accuracy of perception did not affect the predicted directionality of needs of traditional and equalitarian partners; that is, the hypothesis was not confirmed that with traditional dyads, the greater the accuracy of perception, the greater the need difference, whereas with equalitarian dyads, the greater the accuracy of perception, the smaller the need difference. Two emergent findings were indicated. The first was that for (1) traditional partners and anomalously, (2) the total sample of partners irrespective of familial role attitudes, there was a significant cor relation with accuracy of perception; however, equali tarian partners did not correlate significantly with accuracy of perception. The data were interpreted as indicating that the former role relationships were more stable than the latter one. The second emergent finding was that familial role attitudes of partners were very significantly correlated; i.e., the higher 147 the score of one partner on the Family Typology Scale, the higher the score of his mate on this criterion. Conclusions Since none of the hypotheses were confirmed, it is concluded that there is no evidence that the theoretical framework employed has any relevance to the relationship of partner's needs. Why the data did not support the hypotheses is not self-evident; however, there are several factors which might explain the results. 1. Perhaps the variables employed in this study do not comprise those social characteristics that can discriminate on the need relationship of partners. This conclusion suggests that a more efficient framework be found which, on the bases of specified social char acteristics, could differentiate on the criterion. 2. Perhaps it is not the distinctive social characteristics of the sample that determine whether need homogamy or need complementarity will be found, but rather the methodology of the study. For example, in none of the seven studies (including the present research) that either refuted or rejected the theory of need complementarity has there been one which employed the same need instrument as the studies that 148 supported the theory. Winch used several subjective methods of predicting the interrelationship of needs, among them the Thematic Apperception Test and a "need interview" which was subjectively scored. Kerckhoff and Davis employed Schutz1 FIRO-B scales as their need 7 instrument. But those studies that refuted or rejected need complementarity used either the Edwards Personal Preference Schedule or some facsimile of it, or the g Interpersonal Check List. 3. Perhaps the insignificant findings of this study were the result of having oversimplified Parsons' conceptual framework concerning the relationship between ego's needs and roles. It will be recalled that Parsons referred to the "interpenetration" of internalized needs and institutionalized roles. What had been done in this study was to extract role attitudes toward familial decision making, authority, and personality development, and to assert that these criteria predicted needs. The rationale was legitimate, but it may be that there are intervening variables which, in conjunc tion with the present study's conceptual framework, g See page 12. ^See page 62. ®See pages 56-61, 89-98. 149 would predict needs with greater precision. Parsons himself has been criticized for over simplifying the relationship between social and g personality systems. Baldwin, for example, argued that Parsons had not given sufficient credence to psychological mechanisms which affect ego's response to role models. By ignoring these mechanisms, Baldwin asserted, Parsons overlooked the variability of ego's needs: . . . Parsons defines roles in terms of mutual expectations and tacitly assumes that these expectations are, in fact, the psychological instigators of role-behavior. As a result, he does not distinguish the role-definition from the psychological mechanisms by which people are led, guided, instigated, forced, or rewarded into actually complying with the role-expectation. People do fulfill role requirements, but they fulfill them in a variety of ways, and by way of a variety of psychological mechanisms. Sometimes they fulfill them as instrumental acts to avoid punishment or to gain rewards. Sometimes people fulfill the role requirements because they are motivated to conform; for such people, the presence of a standard is sufficient to instigate conforming behavior. Other people— or the same person at different times— may fulfill role requirements because they feel a moral imperative about the behavior itself. . . . Alfred L. Baldwin, "The Parsonsian Theory of Personality," The Social Theories of Talcott Parsons, edited by Max Black (Englewood ClTFfs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Incorporated, 1964), pp. 153-190. 150 We see that there are many different psycho logical mechanisms that can underlie the same role-behavior. Consequently, the nonsignificant findings of the present research may suggest that knowledge of a dyad's familial role attitudes might have been a necessary but not a sufficient factor in the prediction of the need relationship. It is difficult to appraise either the effi ciency of the variable "accuracy of perception" as employed herein or the symbolic-interactionist frame work from which this was derived. This variable was not conceptualized in the present study so that it could independently predict need similarity or need complementarity of partners; rather, "accuracy of perception" was considered in conjunction with a specified type of familial role attitude that could so predict the criterion. Implications for Future Research As the study of mate selection produces findings which support both the theory of need complementarity and need similarity, it becomes increasingly clear that 10Ibid., pp. 187-188. ^See page 29. 151 the main task of future research is to specify the conditions under which one rather than the other type of need relationship will be found. Three possible factors were given in the con clusions for the nonsignificant findings in this study. Each of these factors is now examined for its implications. Conclusion 1. Perhaps the variables employed are not significant with respect to those social characteristics which could predict the need relation ship . Therefore, another framework is suggested which could discriminate between subsamples with respect to specified social traits. Toman's conceptual framework, for example, seems to be particularly adaptive to the 12 study of interpersonal needs. Toman has developed several hypotheses concerning "who marries whom" on the bases of each mate's birth order in his family of orientation, and the difference of ages and sex of his siblings in that family. Perhaps it is Toman's hypotheses which could explain why some samples of 1 2 Walter Toman, Family Constellation; Theory and Practice of a Psychological Game (New York; Springer Publishing Company, 1961). 152 partners suggest need complementarity and others need similarity. Thus, if the oldest of several siblings selects a mate who likewise was the oldest in his family, then their need relationship might be more alike than if the oldest of several were to choose the youngest of several siblings. Conclusion 2. Perhaps the factors which predict the need relationship can be found in the methodology of the study rather than in the distinctive social characteristics of the sample. In the past, no attention has been given to the effect of the need instrument upon the predicted need relationship. In order to determine its effects, it is suggested, as an initial step, a sample of partners be administered the several role instruments that have resulted in discrepant findings; namely, the Thematic Apperception Test, "need interviews" rated by subjective methods, the Edwards Personal Preference Schedule, Schutz1 FIRO-B scales, and the Interpersonal Check List. Where several samples with varying social character istics have been examined, it can then be determined whether the need instrument confounds the criterion. Another methodological variable which might affect the outcome of the need relationship is that 153 of differential endorsement of socially desirable 13 responses. Contaminant effects might occur if one mate endorses traits which are socially acceptable whereas his partner responds without regard to the impression he is making. Perhaps, too, one entire subsample might be more prone to respond with "proper" answers than would other groups."^ (If these effects had occurred in the present study then it would have confounded the need relationship of the partners.) By controlling for social desirability, this problem would be greatly alleviated. Conclusion 3. Perhaps the theoretical framework employed herein has oversimplified the predicted need relationships. Perhaps, as suggested in the conclusions above, either the present study's interpretation of the 13 Adapted from Kate L. Kogan and Joan K. Jackson, "Perceptions of Self and Spouse: Some Con taminating Factors," Journal of Marriage and the Family, XXVI (February, 1964), 60-64. 14 See Ellis for a discussion of "differential subgroup biases" affecting the results of predictive tests; Albert Ellis, "The Value of Marriage Predictive Tests," Marriage and the Family, edited by Robert F. Winch and Robert McGinnis (New York: Henry Holt and Company, 1952), pp. 501-503. 154 Parsonsian framework, or even Parsons himself, has oversimplified the relationship of roles and needs. It may be that, by injecting specified intervening variables, the approach could be fruitful. One specific suggestion for future research is to interpose the variable "phase development of the family life cycle" within the present framework. The 15 family developmentalists maintain that marriage partners have specific tasks facing them at various stages of the family cycle. If this viewpoint is valid, then it is quite likely that the mutual needs of partners might be more similar or dissimilar during various phases <f familial development. It would appear that needs of couples applying for a marriage license, such as in the present study, are different from those couples who are planning for the arrival of their first child, and different still from the needs of middle age partners who have just launched their eldest child into college. 15 See Hill and Hansen for a theoretical con™ ceptualization of the developmental approach; Reuben Hill and Donald A. Hansen, "The Identification of Conceptual Frameworks Utilized in Family Study," Marriage and Family Living, XXII (November, 1960), 299-311. 155 Other intervening variables which might signifi cantly affect the direction of the criterion are: (1) length of engagement, (2) length of time that the couple knew one another prior to marriage, (3) age at marriage, (4) age differential between the dyad, and (5) race, religion, and class. It has been previously stated that the variable "accuracy of perception" was not conceptualized in this study so that it could independently predict the inter relationship of needs; instead it was used in conjunc tion with the primary independent variable "familial role attitudes." However, in future studies, if the primary independent variable is successfully predictive of need relationships, then "accuracy of perception" might be tested for significance by determining whether it contributes toward finer discriminations between samples. Other than the possibility that the predicted relationship is the result of methodological effects (Conclusion 2), this study has suggested that the sig nificance of the interrelationship of dyadic needs is to be found in institutional patterns of behavior. Perhaps if future research were to point in this direction, it might be found why studies in the past 156 have made so little progress toward disentangling the mysteries of mate selection. B I B L I O G R A P H Y BIBLIOGRAPHY Books Ackerman, Nathan W. The Psychodynamics of Family Life. New York: Basic Books, 1958. Baldwin, Alfred L. "The Parsonsian Theory of Person ality," The Social Theories of Talcott Parsons. Edited by Max Black. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Incorporated, 1964. Bales, Robert F. "The Equilibrium Problem in Small Groups," in Talcott Parsons, et al., Working Papers in the Theory of Action. Glencoe, Illinois: Free Press, 1953. Blalock, Hubert M. Social Statistics. New York: McGraw Hill Book Company, Incorporated, 1960. Blood, Robert 0., Jr., and Robert L. Hamblin. "The Effects of the Wife’s Employment on the Family Power Structure," A Modern Introduction to the Family. Edited by Norman Bell and Ezra F. Vogel. Glencoe, Illinois: The Free Press, 1960. Blood, Robert 0., Jr., and Donald M. Wolfe. Husbands and Wives. Glencoe, Illinois: The Free Press, 1960. Burgess, Ernest W. "The Family in a Changing Society," Selected Studies in Marriage and the Family. Edited by Robert F. Winch and Robert McGinnis. New York: Henry Holt and Company, 1953. _______ , and Harvey J. Locke. The Family: From Institu tion to Companionship. New York: American Book Company, 1953. Burgess, Ernest W., and Paul Wallin. Engagement and Marriage. Philadelphia: J. B. Lippincott Company, 1953. Chance, Erika. Families in Treatment. New York: Basic Books, Incorporated, 1959. 158 159 Ellis, Albert. "The Value of Marriage Predictive Tests," Marriage and the Family. Edited by Robert F. Winch and Robert McGinnis. New York: Henry Holt and Company, 1952. Flugel, John C. Man, Morals and Society. New York: International Universities Press, 1945. Glazer, Nathan, and Daniel Patrick Moynihan. Beyond the Melting Pot. Cambridge: Massachusetts Institute of Technology Press, 1963. Guilford, Joy P. Fundamental Statistics in Psychology and Education. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, 1956. Kenkel, William F. "Observational Studies of Husband- Wife Interaction in Family Decision-Making," Sourcebook in Marriage and the Family. Edited by Marvin B. Sussman. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company, 1963. Kirkpatrick, Clifford. The Family, as Process and Institution. New York: The Ronald Press, 1955. Kluckhohn, Clyde, Henry A. Murray, and David Schneider (editors). Personality in Nature, Society, and Culture. New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1953. Ktsanes, Thomas and Virginia. "The Theory of Comple mentary Needs in Mate-Selection," Selected Studies in Marriage and the Family. Edited by Robert F. Winch and Robert McGinnis. New York: Henry Holt and Company, 1953. Leary, Timothy. The Interpersonal Diagnosis of Person ality . New York: The Ronald Press Company, 15)57. Locke, Harvey J. Predicting Adjustment in Marriage: A Comparison of a Divorced and a Happily Married Group. New York: Henry Holt and Company, 1951. Luckey, Eleanore Braun. "Marital Interaction and Perceptional Congruence of Self and Family Con cepts," Sourcebook in Marriage and the Family. Edited by Marvin B. Sussman. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company, 1963. 160 Murray, Henry A., et^ al. Explorations in Personality. New York: Oxford University Press, 1938. Newcomb, Theodore M. Social Psychology. New York: The Dryden Press, 1S50. Parsons, Talcott. Essays in Sociological Theory. Glencoe, Illinois: The Free Press, 1954. _______ . "Psychology and Sociology," For a Science of Social Man. Edited by John Gillen. New York: The MacMillan Company, 1954. _______ . "Social Structure and the Development of Personality," Studying Personality Cross-Culturally. Edited by Bert Kaplan. New York: Row, Peterson and Company, 1961. _______ , and Robert F. Bales. Family, Socialization and Interaction Process. Glencoe, Illinois: The Free Press, 1955. Parsons, Talcott, and Edward A. Shils. Toward a General Theory of Action. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1952. Peterson, James A. Education for Marriage. New York: Charles Scribner*s Sons, 1956. _______ . Towards Successful Marriage. New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1960. Rose, Arnold M. (editor). Human Behavior and Social Processes: An Interactionist Approach. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company, 1962. Schutz, William C. FIRO: A Three-Dimensional Theory of Interpersonal Behavior. New York: Rinehart and Company, 1958. Sellitz, Claire, et al. Research Methods in Social Relations. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1963. Siegel, Sidney. Nonparametrie Statistics for the Behavioral Sciences. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, Incorporated, 1956. 161 Strauss, Anselm. ’ ’The Ideal and the Chosen Mate," Sourcebook in Marriage and the Family. Edited by Marvin B. Sussman. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company, 1963. Stryker, Sheldon. "Role-Taking Accuracy and Adjustment," Sourcebook in Marriage and the Family. Edited by Marvin B. Sussman. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company, 1963. Toman, Walter. Family Constellation; Theory and Practice of a Psychological Game. New York: Springer Publishing Company, 1961. Walker, Helen M., and Joseph Lev. Statistical Inference. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1953. Waller, Willard, and Reuben Hill. The Family, A Dynamic Interpretation. New York: Dryden Press, 1951. Winch, Robert F. Mate Selection: A Study of Comple mentary Needs. New York: Harper and Brothers, 1958. _______ . The Modern Family. New York: Henry Holt and Company, 1952. Zelditch, Morris. A Basic Course in Sociological Statistics. New York: Henry Holt and Company, 1959. Articles and Periodicals Blazer, John A. "Complementary Needs and Marital Happiness," Marriage and Family Living, XXV (February, 1963), 89-95. Bowerman, Charles E., and Barbara R. Day. "A Test of the Theory of Complementary Needs as Applied to Couples During Courtship," American Sociological Review, XXL (October, 1956), 602-605. Bronfenbrenner, Urie. "The Changing American Child— A Speculative Analysis," Journal of Social Issues, XVII (1961), 6-18. 162 Burgess, Ernest W. , and Paul Wallin. "Homogamy in Personality Characteristics," Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, XXXIX (October, 1944), 475-481. Coombs, Robert H. "Reinforcement of Values in the Parental Home as a Factor in Mate Selection," Marriage and Family Living, XXIV (May, 1962), 155-157. Couch, Carl J. "The Use of the Concept, 'Role,' and Its Derivatives in a Study of Marriage," Marriage and Family Living, XX (November, 1958), 353-357. Cronbach, Lee J. "Processes Affecting Scores on 'Understanding of Others' and 'Assumed Similarity,'" Psychological Bulletin, LII (May, 1955), 177-193. Dyer, William G. "Analyzing Marital Adjustment Using Role Theory," Marriage and Family Living, XXIV (November, 1962), 371-375. _______ , and Dick Urban. "The Institutionalization of Equalitarian Family Norms," Marriage and Family Living, XX (February, 1958), 53-58. Dyraond, Rosalind F. "A Scale for the Measurement of Empathic Ability," Journal of Consulting Psychology, XIII (April, 1949), 127-133. . "The Relation of Accuracy of Perception of the Spouse and Marital Happiness," American Psychologist, VIII (August, 1953), 344. Ehrenwald, Jan. "Family Diagnosis and Mechanisms of Psychosocial Defense," Family Process, II (March, 1963), 121-131. Gage, N. L., and Lee J. Cronbach. "Conceptual and Methodological Problems in Interpersonal Per ception," Psychological Review, LXII (November, 1955), 411-422. Gray, Horace. "Psychological Types in Married People," Journal of Social Psychology, XIX (May, 1949), 189-200. 163 Hastorf, A. H., and I. E. Bender. "A Caution Respecting the Measurement of Empathic Ability," Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, XLVII (April, 1952), 574-576. Heiss, Jerold S., and Michael Gordon. "Need Patterns and the Mutual Satisfaction of Dating and Engaged Couples," Journal of Marriage and the Family, XXVI (August, 1964), 337-339. Hill, Reuben, and Donald A. Hansen. "The Identification of Conceptual Frameworks Utilized in Family Study," Marriage and Family Living, XXII (November, 1960), 299-311. Hobart, Charles W., and Lauralee Lindholm. "The Theory of Complementary Needs, a Re-Examination," The Pacific Sociological Review, VI (Fall, 1963771 73-79. Hollingshead, August B. "Cultural Factors in the Selection of Marriage Mates," American Sociological Review, XV (October, 1950), 619-627. Jacobson, Alver Hilding. "Conflict in Attitudes toward the Marital Roles of Husband and Wife," Research Studies of the State College of Washington, XIX (June, 195177"103-106. _______ . "Conflict of Attitudes toward the Roles of Husband and Wife in Marriage," American Sociological Review, XVII (April, 1952), 146-150. Katz, Irwin, Sam Glucksberg, and Robert Krauss. "Need Satisfaction and Edwards PPS Scores in Married Couples," Journal of Consulting Psychology, XXIV (June, I960), 205-208. Kelly, E. Lowell. "Marital Compatibility as Related to Personality Traits of Husbands and Wives as Rated by Self and Spouse," Journal of Social Psychology, XIII (February, 1941), 193-198. Kerckhoff, Alan C., and Keith E. Davis. "Value Consensus and Need Complementarity in Mate Selec tion," American Sociological Review, XXVII (June, 1962), 295-303. 164 Kernodle, Wayne. "Some Implications of the Homogamy- Complementary Needs Theories of Mate Selection for Sociological Research," Social Forces, XXXVIII (December, 1959), 145-152. Kogan, Kate L., and Joan K. Jackson. "Perceptions of Self and Spouse: Some Contaminating Factors," Journal of Marriage and the Family, XXVI (February, 1964), 60-64. Komarovsky, Mira. "Cultural Contradictions and Sex Roles," American Journal of Sociology, LII (November^ 1946), 184-189. Ktsanes, Thomas. "Mate Selection on the Basis of Personality Type: A Study Utilizing an Empirical Typology of Personality," American Sociological Review, XX (October, 1955), 547-551. LaForge, Rolfe, and Robert F. Suczek. "The Inter personal Dimension of Personality: III. An Inter personal Check List," Journal of Personality, XXIV (September, 1955), 94-112. Leary, Timothy, and Hubert S. Coffey. "Interpersonal Diagnosis: Some Problems of Methodology and Validation," Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, L (January, 1955), TlO-124. Levinson, Daniel J. , and Phyllis E. Huffman,, "Tradi tional Family Ideology and Its Relation to Personality," Journal of Personality, XXIII (March, 1955), 251-273. Lu, Yi-Chuang. "Marital Roles and Marital Adjustment," Sociology and Social Research, XXXVI (July, 1952), 364-368. ________. "Predicting Roles in Marriage," American Journal of Sociology, LVIII (July, 1952), 51-55. Luckey, Eleanore Braun. "Marital Satisfaction and Its Association with Congruence of Perception," Marriage and Family Living, XXII (February, 1960), 49-54. ________. "Marital Satisfaction and Parent Concepts," Journal of Consulting Psychology, XXIV (June, 1960), 195-204. 165 Mangus, A. R. "Family Impacts on Mental Health," Marriage and Family Living, XIX (August, 1957), 256-262. _______ . "Role Theory and Marriage Counseling," Social Forces, XXXV (March, 1957), 200-209. Mills, C. Wright. "Situated Actions and Vocabularies of Motive," American Sociological Review, V (December, 1940), 904-913. Motz, Annabelle Bender. "The Role Conception Inventory: A Tool for Research in Social Psychology," American Sociological Review, XVII (August, 1952), 465-471. Ort, Robert S. "A Study of Role-Conflicts as Related to Happiness in Marriage," Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, XLV (October, 1950), 691-699. Preston, Malcolm, et al. "Impressions of Personality as a Function of Conflict," Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, XLVII (April, 1952), 326-336. Rosow, Irving. "Issues in the Concept of Need-Comple- mentarity," Sociometry, XX (September, 1957), 216- 233. Schellenberg, James A., and Lawrence S. Bee. "A Re-Examination of the Theory of Complementary Needs in Mate Selection," Marriage and Family Living, XXII (August, 1960), 227-232. Schellenberg, James A. "Horaogamy in Personal Values and the 'Field of Eligibles,'" Social Forces, XXXIX (December, I960), 157-162. Spiegel, John P. "The Resolution of Role Conflict Within the Family," Psychiatry, XX (February, 1957), 1-16. Strodtbeck, Fred L. "Husband-Wife Interaction over Revealed Differences," American Sociological Review, XVI (August, 1951), 468-473. Stuckert, Robert P. "Role Perception and Marital Satisfaction— A Configurational Approach," Marriage and Family Living, XXV (November, 1963), 415-419. 166 Turner, Ralph H. "Role Taking, Role Standpoint, and Reference Group Behavior," American Journal of Sociology, LXI (January, 1956), 316-328. _______ . "The Problems of Social Dimensions in Person ality," Pacific Sociological Review, IV (Fall, 1961), 57-62. Winch, Robert F. "The Theory of Complementary Needs in Mate Selection: Final Results on the Test of the General Hypothesis," American Sociological Review, XX (October, 1955), 552-555. _______ , Thomas Ktsanes, and Virginia Ktsanes. "A Theory of Complementary Needs in Mate Selection: An Analytic and Descriptive Study," American Sociological Review, XIX (June, 1954j^ 241-249. Unpublished Material Hollingshead, August B. "Two Factor Index of Social Position." Paper written in 1957. (Mimeographed.) Hurvitz, Nathan. "Marital Roles and Adjustment in Marriage in a Middle-Class Group." Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University of Southern California, 1958. King, Elsie V. "Personality Characteristics— Ideal and Perceived in Relation to Mate Selection." Unpub lished Ph.D. dissertation, University of Southern California, 1961. Kotlar, Sally Lee. "Middle-Class Marital Roles— Ideal and Perceived in Relation to Adjustment in Marriage." Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University of Southern California, 1961. Public Documents U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census. Statistical Abstract of the United States. Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1963. A P P E N D I X SAMPLE SET OF FORMS EMPLOYED IN THIS STUDY 168 UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF SOCIOLOGY This study has been designed for the purpose of learning m ore about the attitudes and values of people who are ju st getting m arried. Any inform ation given for this re search , sponsored by the U niversity of Southern California, is completely con- fidential. No names or identifying statem ents appear on these form s, therefore, please be honest and frank in your answ ers so that this can be a valuable study. 1. B irth Date__________________ 2. Occupation (for example, lathe operator, stock clerk, student)______________________________________ _____ _ _ 3. Highest year of schooling completed (circle one): under 8 9 10 11 12 Y rs. of college: 1 2 3 4 Graduate work: 5 6 7 8 4. Your income only (not your m ate's): not employed ; under $999____ ; $1, 000-$ 2 ,999 i $3,000-$4, 999 $5,000-$6,999____ ; $ 7 ,000-$8, 999____ ; $ 9 ,000-$10,999 ; $11,000-$12,999____ ; over .$l3,000____ . 5. Your father's occupation is (or was):____________________________________________________________________ 6. Race: C hinese/Japanese ; Caucasian (White) ; Negro ; Other (please w rite in)____________ 7. Religious preference: P ro testan t ; Jew ish ; Catholic ; None ; Other (please w rite in)___________ 8. Number of tim es m arried before________ , 9. How long have you been engaged to your present fiance(e): Y ears Months . 10. Did you know your fiance(e) for a long tim e before your engagement? P lease comment: 11. When will you be m arried? 169 Write on each line: if the statement describes you 0 if the statement does not describe you. __ well thought of __ aakes a good impression _____ ahle to give orders __ forceful __ self-respecting _____ independent __ able to take care oi self _ can be indifferent to others can be strict if necessary _ firm but just __ can be frank and honest critical of others __ can complain if necessary __ often gloomy able to doubt others _ frequently disappointed ___ able to criticize self apologetic _ can be obedient _ usually gives in ___ grateful __ admires and imitates others __ appreciative very anxious to be approved of cooperative eager to get along with others friendly affectionate and understanding considerate encourages others helpful big-hearted and unselfish _ often admired __ respected by others good leader __ likes responsibility _ self-confident _____ self-reliant and assertive _ businesslike __ likes to compete with others _____ hard-boiled when necessary __ stern but fair __ irritable _ _ _ straightforward and direct __ resents being bossed __ skeptical _ _ _ hard to impress __ touchy and easily hurt _ easily embarrassed lacks self-confidence __ easily led _ modest often helped by others _ very respectful of authority __ accepts advice readily trusting and eager to please __ always pleasant and agreeable __ wants everyone to like him sociable and neighborly __warm __ kind and reassuring tender and soft-hearted __ enjoys taking care of others _ gives freely of self _ always giving advice __ acts important _____ bossy __ dominating __ boastful _____ proud and self-satisfied __ thinks only of himself __ shrewd and calculating impatient with others mistakes __ self-seeking __ outspoken often unfriendly __ bitter __ complaining jealous __ slow to forgive a wrong __ self-punishing shy __ passive and unaggressive __ meek dependent _ wants to be led _ lets others make decisions , easily fooled _ too easily influenced by friends __ will confide in anyone _ _ fond of everyone _ likes everybody _ forgives anything __ oversympathetic _ generous to a fault _ overprotective of others __ tries to be too successful __ expects everyone to admire hit _____ manages others __ dictatorial __ somewhat snobbish egotistical and conceited __ selfish __ cold and unfeeling sarcastic __ cruel and unkind __ frequently angry hard-hearted __ resentful _ rebels against everything stubborn __ distrusts everybody _ timid always ashamed of self __ obeys too willingly _ spineless hardly ever talks back __ clinging vine __ likes to be taken care of will believe anyone __ wants everyone's love __ agrees with everyone friendly all the time _ loves everyone _ too lenient with others tries to comfort everyone _ too willing to give to others _ spoils people with kindness A P HI NO' BC FG JK L M DE DO L O 170 C H E C K T H E C O L U M N W H I C H M O S T C L O S E L Y EXPRESSES Y O U R FEELINGS A B O U T E A C H S T A T EMENT. strongly agree agree disagree strongly disagree The husband should help with the housework. The wife should take a job if she wants to. If the husband insists, the wife should quit a needed job. If a husband runs around, so can his wife. The husband should decide how to spend any extra money, Husbands should be more strict with their wives, A married woman should not work outside of the home. What a husband does in his spare time is his own business, The husband should decide where to live, Woman's place is in the home, The wife should fit her life to her husband's, The husband's wishes should come first in most things, Marriage is the best career for a woman, The husband should wear the pants. . Marriage should be a full time job for the wife, It's okay for the wife to earn as much as her husband, A wife should let her husband decide most things, Almost all money matters should be decided by the husband, W o m e n who want to remove the word "obey" from the marriage service don't understand what means to be a wife, W o m e n have as much right as men to sow wild oats, The wife should help support the family when it is absolutely necessary, Marriage is a partnership in which the wife should share the responsibility of supporting the ■family with the husband whenever possible, A married woman should work if she is able to and enjoys work, 171 P R E T E N D T H A T Y O U A R E Y O U R F U T U R E M A T E , A N D C H E C K T H E C O L U M N W H I C H W O U L D M O S T C L E A R L Y E XP R E S S Y O U R MATE'S FEELINGS F O R E A C H S T A T E M E N T . R E M E M B E R , A T T E M P T T O GIVE Y O U R MAT E ' S FEELINGS, N O T Y O U R OWN. strongly agree agree disagree strongly disagree The husband should help with the housework. The wife should take a job if she wants to, _If the husband insists, the wife should quit a needed job, If a husband runs around, so can his wife, _The husband should decide how to spend any extra money, Husbands should be more strict with their wives, A married woman should not work outside of the home, What a husband does in his spare time is his own business, The husband should decide where to live, Woman's place is in the home, The wife should fit her life to her husband's, The husband's wishes should come first in most things, Marriage is the best career for a woman, The husband should wear the pants. Marriage should be a full time job for the wife, It's okay for the wife to earn as much as her husband, A wife should let her husband decide most things, Almost all money matters should be decided by the husband, W o m e n who want to remove the word "obey" from the marriage service don't understand what it means to be a wife, W o m e n have as much right as m e n to sow wild oats, The wife should help support the family when it is absolutely necessary, Marriage is a partnership in which the wife should share the responsibility of supporting the family with the husband whenever possible, A married woman should work if she is able to and enjoys work, I U N I V E R S I T Y O F S O U T H E R N C A L I F O R N I A D E P A R T M E N T O E S O C I O L O G Y W taken par couns ello You. w o u l d m o s t lilcely w a n t to k n o w w h a t these results are, therefore, a special m e e t i n g is being a r r a n g e d for jus t this purpose. If y o u can join us, a n d w e certainly ho p e that y o u can, please so indicate on the line below. W e will then notify y o u of the date, time and. place. A n intriguing and. important follow —up study is planned in order to further understand a n d follow your progress in m a r ri a g e, since w re did m e e t at its ver y beginning! i —• — j t o Please be a s s u r e d that all the information y o u have given us is abs olutely confidential. e are m o s t appreciative of y o u r h e l p - T H A N K Y O U . Y o u have t in a research, the results of w h i c h will assist m a r r i a g e rs in their guidance of e n g a g e d couples a n d '1 just m a r r i e d s '1. Inf or m m e of the group m e e t i n g____________ . I w i s h to participate in the follow-up study N a m e ____________________________________________________ (pleas e print) A d d res s_______________________________________________ City_______________________ ______________________________

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

Attitudes Toward Sex In Marriage And Patterns Of Erotic Behavior In Dating And Courtship Before Marriage

PDF

An Investigation Of Complementary Needs Between Marital Partners

PDF

An Analysis Of Factors In The Family'S Withdrawal Of A Patient From A Hospital For The Mentally Retarded

PDF

A Study Of Relationships Between Occupational And Marital Roles And Marital Adjustment

PDF

Role Perception, Empathy, And Marital Adjustment

PDF

An Assessment Of Effects Of A Large, County Wide, Public School Program Of Special Training Classes On Trainable Retarded Children

PDF

The Parameters Of Singleness: An Inquiry Into Some Factors Influencing The Choice Of Singleness Over Marriage As A Way Of Life

PDF

The Influence Of Introductory Experiences On The Cognitive And Affective Outcomes Of Linear Programed Instruction

PDF

An Analysis Of The Positive And Negative Functions In The Contemporary Usage Of An Ancient Rite Of Passage

PDF

Organization, Conflict, And Change: A Test Of A Multivariate Model Within Two Types Of Simulated Social Systems

PDF

Personality Characteristics: Ideal And Perceived In Relation To Mate Selection

PDF

Power Relationships In Marital Discord

PDF

Prediction Of Therapeutic And Intellectual Potential In Mentally Retardedchildren

PDF

On Becoming A Parent: Attitude And Feeling Changes

PDF

Incarceration And A Sense Of The Rules: Strategy Differences Among Juveniles

PDF

Communication Between Engaged Couples

PDF

Dying And Death Role-Expectation: A Comparative Analysis

PDF

Middle-Class Marital Roles - Ideal And Perceived In Relation To Adjustment In Marriage

PDF

Complementarity, Homogeneity, Heterogeneity And Marital Stability

PDF

Acoustic And Associative Variables In The Retention Of Words By Children With Learning Disabilities

Asset Metadata

Creator Miller, Louis Irving (author)

Core Title Familial Role Typology, Accuracy Of Perception, And Mutual Needs Among Pre-Nuptial Partners

Degree Doctor of Philosophy

Degree Program Sociology

Publisher University of Southern California (original), University of Southern California. Libraries (digital)

Tag OAI-PMH Harvest,sociology, individual and family studies

Language English

Contributor Digitized by ProQuest (provenance)

Advisor Peterson, James A. (committee chair), Bloombaum, Milton S. (committee member), Meyers, Charles Edward (committee member)

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c18-187754

Unique identifier UC11359790

Identifier 6603825.pdf (filename),usctheses-c18-187754 (legacy record id)

Legacy Identifier 6603825.pdf

Dmrecord 187754

Document Type Dissertation

Rights Miller, Louis Irving

Type texts

Source University of Southern California (contributing entity), University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses (collection)

Access Conditions The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the au...

Repository Name University of Southern California Digital Library

Repository Location USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus, Los Angeles, California 90089, USA