Open Collections

UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

Attitudes towards women and perceived marital adjustment among dual career couples Weibelzahl, Timothy James 1994

Your browser doesn't seem to have a PDF viewer, please download the PDF to view this item.

Item Metadata

Download

Media
831-ubc_1994-0186.pdf [ 4.55MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 831-1.0054047.json
JSON-LD: 831-1.0054047-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 831-1.0054047-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 831-1.0054047-rdf.json
Turtle: 831-1.0054047-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 831-1.0054047-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 831-1.0054047-source.json
Full Text
831-1.0054047-fulltext.txt
Citation
831-1.0054047.ris

Full Text

ATTITUDES TOWARDS WOMEN AND PERCEIVED MARITAL ADJUSTMENT AMONG DUAL CAREER COUPLES by TIMOTHY JAMES WEIBELZAHL B.A., SIMON FRASER UNIVERSITY, 1977 A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS in THE FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIES (Department of Counselling Psychology) We accept this thesis as conforming th^ J recp^red standard (Q\ THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA MARCH 1994 ® Timothy James Weibelzahl, 1994 In presenting this thesis in partial fulfilment of the requirements for an advanced degree at the University of British Columbia, I agree that the Library shall make it freely available for reference and study. I further agree that permission for extensive copying of this thesis for scholarly purposes may be granted by the head of my department or by his or her representatives. It is understood that copying or publication of this thesis for financial gain shall not be allowed without my written permission. Department of The University of British Columbia Vancouver, Canada Date 6 (2/88) - ii -ABSTRACT This study sought to examine the relationship between attitudes toward women's contemporary roles and perceived marital adjustment for married couples who were attempting to construct a dual career lifestyle. A purposive sample of sixty-seven partners involved in a dual career marriage was drawn from the lower mainland of British Columbia, Canada. The sample was divided into two groups, distressed and non distressed based on the participants scores on the Dyadic Adjustment Scale. Both the couple and the individual were the units of analysis. Their attitudes toward women were then tested on the Attitudes Toward Women Scale. Participants were mailed two copies of each inventory for husband-wife pairs to be filled out independently. Males were found to be more traditionally oriented in their attitudes toward women's contemporary roles than were females. Males were especially more traditional in respect to their views on women's achievement and family roles. There was also a moderately strong positive correlation (Pearson r) between all of the subjects' scores on the Dyadic Adjustment Scale and their scores on the Attitudes Toward Women Scale. However, there was no support for earlier research on gender role incongruence and marital adjustment. - iii -TABLE OF CONTENTS ABSTRACT Page 11 TABLE OF CONTENTS ill LIST OF TABLES V I LIST OF FIGURES .Vlll ACKNOWLEDGEMENT IX CHAPTER I: INTRODUCTION Statement of the Problem . Objectives of the Study Significance of the Study Definition of Key Terms Limitations Overview of the Study 1 1 5 6 6 8 8 CHAPTER II: REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE . . . . Introduction . . . . . . Two Incomes and Women's Roles: Problems and Pitfalls . . . . Accomodation of Careers to Family Martial Adjustment: Issues in Definition Summary . . . . . . . 10 10 10 29 34 43 - IV -CHAPTER III: METHODOLOGY . . . . . Overview . . . . . . Target Population . . . . Instrumentation. . . . . Data Collection . . . . Data Analysis . . . . . Statistical Null Hypotheses . . Summary . . . . . . CHAPTER IV: RESULTS . . . . . . Sample Characteristics Statistical Analyses of the Hypotheses Summary of Results . . . . CHAPTER V: SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND DISCUSSION Summary . . . . . . Discussion of Findings Methodological Limitations Implications and Suggestions for Further Research Conclusion . . . . . REFERENCES - v -Page APPENDIX A APPENDIX B APPENDIX C APPENDIX D APPENDIX E APPENDIX F APPENDIX G DYADIC ADJUSTMENT SCALE ATTITUDES TOWARD WOMEN SCALE LETTER OF INTRODUCTION LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL . FAMILY BACKGROUND SHEET REQUEST FOR RESEARCH ABSTRACT LETTER OF REMINDER 127 131 137 139 141 145 147 - vi -LIST OF TABLES Table Page 1 Selected Definitions of Marital Adjustment and Allied Concepts . . . . . . . 3 7 2 LERTAP Test Statistics for the Dyadic Adjustment Scale Observed Scores . . . . . . 6 1 3 Frequency (Percent) Distribution of Subjects within Family Background Categories: Family Demographics . . . . . . . . 68 4 Frequency (Percent) Distribution of Subjects within Family Background Categories: Occupational Demographics . . . . . 7 2 5 Frequency (Percent) Distribution of Subjects within Family Background Categories: Ethnic and Religious Demographics . . . . . 7 6 6 Independent Samples t test (Couples' scores) on Attitudes Toward Women Scale (AWS) . . . . 8 1 7 Correlation Coefficients (Spearman r Corrected) for Difference Scores Between Husbands and Wives on Marital Adjustment and Attitudes Toward Women . 83 8 Independent Samples t test (Individuals' scores) on Attitudes Toward Women Scale (AWS) . . . 8 5 9 Distribution of Individuals According to Gender and Marital Adjustment . . . . . 8 6 10 Mean Scores on the Attitudes Toward Women Scale . 87 11 ANOVA: Attitudes Toward Women Scale (Gender by Marital Adjustment) . . . . . . . 8 9 12 ANOVA: Attitudes Toward Women Scale Themes -Vocational, Educational and Intellectual Roles (Gender by Martial Adjustment) . . . . 8 9 - vii -LIST OF TABLES Table Page 13 ANOVA: Attitudes Toward Women Scale Themes -Marital Roles and Obligations (Gender by Marital Adjustment) . . . . . . . . 9 0 14 Correlation Coefficients (Pearson r) Between Marital Adjustment Scores (DAS) and Attitudes Toward Women Scale (AWS) . . . . . . 9 2 - viii -LIST OF FIGURES Figure Page 1 Mean Scores: Attitudes Toward Women Scale (AWS) 87 - ix -ACKNOWLEDGEMENT I would like to express my appreciation to Drs. John Friesen and Harold Ratzlaff for their support, patience and encouragement in the planning, execution and writing of this thesis. I want to especially thank the Department of Counselling Psychology for standing by me and allowing me to return to graduate school after such a long hiatus between when I initially completed my academic studies, and when this thesis was finally defended. I also want to acknowledge my employer, the Ministry of the Attorney General, Corrections Branch, Province of British Columbia for supporting my decision to pursue this degree. Finally I would like to thank the couples who participated and the counsellors who cooperated with securing the sample. Without their involvement, this study could not have been undertaken. Gratitude is insufficient to express how much I feel for the constant support and encouragement given to me by my partner in life, Patrice Weibelzahl. When life became complicated, time transpired and I despaired over completing my degree, she was there for me. In every sense, this thesis is as much her achievement as it is my own. - 1 -CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION A variety of models of marriage have emerged as greater numbers of couples undertake to combine childrearing with employment for both spouses. An equitable distribution of responsibilities and role enactments is requisite for the survival of dual career marriages. The attitude that couples express toward women's roles is a factor needing exploration as to its influence upon the partners level of perceived marital adjustment. Statement of the Problem The last few decades have witnessed a growth of nontraditional family structures concomitant with the influx of married women into the labour force. In 1967, married employed women formed 2 8.3 percent of the Canadian female labour force. By 1977, the number of married women working was 2,430,000 which represented 44.1 percent of married women (Statistics Canada, 1977). Married women's labour force participation grew to 55.7 percent by May 1986 with approximately two thirds of these women working full time and one third part time (Statistics Canada, 1986). But, by - 2 -1993 their participation rate was 63.2 percent (Statistics Canada, 1993) . Historically, most positions held by women have been in the service and clerical sectors at pay levels below that of men having comparable education and work responsibilities. Researchers in the field blame the process of socialization and the accompanying institutional structures of society for the inequities between men and women (Bazin, 1974; Bern and Bern, 1971; Bernard, 1972, Bernard, 1977; Broverman et al., 1972; Freeman, 1971, O'Neil, 1981; Pogrebin, 1980; Regan and Roland, 1985; Rossi, 1971; Scanzoni and Fox, 1980). Considerable pressure from women's groups has developed in an attempt to change the way roles are assigned and supported in contemporary society. One model of marriage wherein both spouses combine employment and family life is the dual career family (Rapoport and Rapoport, 1969). Such families are perceived to have developed the most egalitarian structures and are popularly referred to as a prototype for the family of the future (Hall and Hall, 1979). But just how proximate these family structures are to the ideal of egalitarianism is questionable. Despite gaining prominence in the political, ideological, and economic spheres, women's family roles remain little changed (Berardo, Shehan and Leslie, 1987; Blair and Lichter, 1991; Cocks, 1982; Ferree, 1991; Gilbert - 3 -and Rachlin, 1987; Gronseth, 1978; Hochschild and Machung, 1989; Polama, 1971; Rapoport and Rapoport, 1975; Steil, 1983; Thompson and Walker, 1989) . Generally, egalitarian role models have not been prevalent during the socialization experience of individuals attracted to a dual career family style. As well, few resources have been developed by society to assist such families in maintaining the pattern (Rapoport and Rapoport, 1969; Russo, 1987; Safilios - Rothschild and Dijkers, 1978; Skinner, 1983; Walker, Rozee-Koker and Wallston, 1987). Lacking adequate norms and social supports for undertaking the role sharing demanded of an egalitarian division of labour, dual career couples encounter a good deal of social stigma in reaction to their innovations. Consequential to the pressures, both internally and externally, these couples find themselves adopting watered down versions of an egalitarian family structure (Haas, 1982; Hochschild and Machung, 1989; Rapoport and Rapoport, 1980). Like their traditional family counterparts, it may be that partners in a dual career marriage endorse the pattern of male dominance and tend to allocate roles along traditionally sex sterotypic lines. Although husbands in dual career marriages assist more with domestic and child care duties than do husbands in traditional marriages, wives - 4 -(in addition to carrying on career responsibilities) nevertheless retain the burden of running the household, planning the domestic and social events, and making the major decisions concerning child care (Berardo, Shehan and Leslie, 1987; Blair and Lichter, 1991; Ferree, 1991; Hochschild and Machung, 1989; Leslie, Anderson and Branson, 1991; Nadelson and Nadelson, 1982; Perry-Jenkins and Crouter, 1990; Pleck, 1977; Poloma and Garland, 1971a, 1971b; Stafford et al., 1977; Steil, 1983; Thompson and Walker, 1989; Yogev, 1981). When crises concerning the children occur, or career mobility becomes an issue, it usually is the wives career that is seen as less important in favor of the family needs and her husbands career (Steil, 1983). Therefore, while men and women in dual career marriages ideologically support the notion of an egalitarian family structure, there is little empirical support for the occurrence of egalitarianism in practice (Bengtson and Pina, 1993; Berardo, Shehan and Leslie, 1987; Bernard, 1972; Blair and Lichter, 1991; Bryson and Bryson, 1980; Farber, 1988; Haas, 1982; Kamo, 1988; Mederer, 1993; Nadelson and Nadelson, 1982; Poloma and Garland, 1971a, 1971b; Rapoport and Rapoport, 1975; Yogev, 1981;). Bern and Bern wondered as early as 1971 whether attitudes about egalitarianism may simply provide a veneer which actually helps to preserve the - 5 -notion that a woman's place is in the home rather than in the workplace. Objectives of the Study In view of the foregoing, the purpose of this study is to delineate whether or not there is a relationship between the attitudes dual career couples express toward women's contemporary roles and their perceived marital adjustment. The study attempts to answer the following questions: 1. Do the attitudes shared by couples in dual career relationships toward women's contemporary roles vary according to perceived marital adjustment? 2. Do differences in attitudes expressed by husbands and wives in dual career relationships towards women's contemporary roles vary according to differences in husbands and wives perceived marital adjustment? 3. Do men and women in dual career relationships manifest different attitudes about women's contemporary roles? 4. Does support for women's contemporary roles vary according to the perceived marital adjustment of the partners in a dual career relationship? - 6 -Significance of the Study This study focuses upon the underlying attitudes about women's roles that contradict and militate against the role flexibility necessary in effectively coping with the intensely competitive demands of work and family. It is hoped that research into this dynamic will add to our knowledge regarding blockages to gender equity in the family life of dual career couples (Rapoport and Rapoport, 1982). This research should also provide assistance in the counselling of couples who are contemplating a marriage involving two careers, and to those couples who are currently struggling with the dilemmas inherent in this family life style. Definition of Key Terms The following definitions are critical to this research and to the design of this study: Dual Career Couples: Marital dyads in which both partners have a committment to their employment in income generating work, either on a part time or full time basis. - 7 -Marital Adjustment: Spanier's (1976) construct of dyadic adjustment is used to measure the quality of a relationship. This construct is defined as a process which can be evaluated at any point in time on a continuum from very satisfied to dissatisfied, the outcome of which is determined by the degree of: 1. dyadic satisfaction 2. dyadic consensus 3. dyadic cohesion 4. dyadic affection Traditional Relationships: Marital dyads characterized by a sex role stereotypic division of labour. Egalitarian Relationships: Marital dyads in which there is joint allocation of the domestic, social, child care and income earner roles, rights and privileges. Marital Relationships: Married heterosexual dyads, whether cohabitating or not. - 8 -Group One: Couples and individuals who score less than or equal to 90 on the Dyadic Adjustment Scale, referred to as distressed couples and individuals. Group Two: Couples and individuals who score greater than or equal to 95 on the Dyadic Adjustment Scale, referred to as non distressed couples and individuals. Limitations The participants in this study were not randomly selected, therefore the results are not generalizeable beyond the sample studied. The results are further limited by the canvassing of volunteer couples. Such a sample may have a response set that differs from an involuntary population. Despite the foregoing limitations, the study presents some direction for future research as to the influence men and women's attitudes about women's contemporary roles have upon marital adjustment. Overview of the Study An outline of the thesis has been presented in Chapter - 9 -One. Chapter Two continues the relevant literature and presents the conceptual foundation for the study. The methodology utilized is outlined in Chapter Three followed in Chapter Four and Five by a presentation of the results, a discussion of the implications of the findings and suggestions for further research. - 10 -CHAPTER TWO REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE Introduction The review of the literature is organized around two areas of interest. The first section concerns issues and concepts involving the dual career family and women's contemporary roles. The second section presents the research related to operationalizing the concept of marital adjustment. Two Incomes and Women's Roles: Problems and Pitfalls When Rapoport and Rapoport (1969) first identified the dual career family it was viewed as a deviant, relatively rare pattern of family structure. However, in their later review of the literature, Rapoport and Rapoport (1980) contend that most families are dual worker at some time in their life cycle. By dual worker they broadly refer to all families where both spouses are employed, be that in professions, careers or ordinary jobs. Such patterns of dual worker families are the natural outgrowths of a variety of historical processes involving the family gradually changing its role from a pre-industrial unit of production to a post-industrial unit of consumption (Young and - 11 -Willmont, 1973) . As such, the growth in numbers of dual worker families is an expression of financial need, increased opportunity for women in the labour force, attitude changes concerning the roles of men and women, a declining birth rate and longer lifespan, as well as feminist lobbying for gender equity (Moen, 1983; Skovholt, 1978). As one variety of dual worker family, the dual career family is described by Rapoport and Rapoport (1969) as a partnership with a distribution of labour based on an attitude of equal status between the spouses. How far, in practice, notions of equality between the partners in a dual career marriage actually proceed in role revision is disputed. The literature indicates that dual career women bear the burden of domestic life and parenting despite their employment commitments, while the contribution of dual career men is yet focused primarily on work and secondarily on family life (Gilbert and Rachlin, 1987; Spitze, 1988; Thompson and Walker, 1989). Dual career families are confronted with a unique set of problems in their attempts to balance the demands of two careers and family life. The research concerning this is organized around three areas: health, marital quality and stability; household labour and childcare; dilemmas to be reconciled. - 12 -Health, Marital Quality and Stability. Early studies conflicted over the impact to health status of husbands and wives involved in a dual career marriage. Burke and Weir (1976) found that for husbands, having an employed wife was significantly associated with health problems and a general lack of contentment; the perceived gains economically did not offset the husband's difficulties in coping with the lifestyle. Yet for wives in this sample, working was associated with a better level of personal adjustment. In a replication of Burke and Weir utilizing a more refined methodology, Booth (1977) refutes their conclusions. Instead, he found that both men and women in the study were making satisfactory adjustments to dual careerism. Bebbington (1973) reported that high levels of stress seemed accepted as being intrinsic to the dual career family lifestyle. The couples in Bebbington's study preferred this to the wive's personally felt conflicts over not fulfilling their career needs. Lueptow, Guss and Hayden (1989) add to those observations using data from the General Social Survey conducted between 1974 and 1986. Their analysis revealed that nontraditional sex role ideology is negatively related to marital success for women. In a review of the literature on the impact of combining work and family life to women's health, de Konick (1984) concludes that working outside the - 13 -home means women take on additional responsibilities, the sheer number of which are a threat to women's health status. In a more recent review, Spitze (1988) concluded that employed women are favored over full-time homemakers as to psychological functioning, but a critical issue to that end is how family work is divided, and how equitable that division is (Bengtson and Pina, 1993). In their study of fifty couples, Hochschild and Machung (1989) noted that the accumulation of tasks in managing a career and a household means that women put in an extra month a year as a result. They argue that this represents a "second shift" for these women and describe them as being more torn over household management than their husbands because dual career women see themselves to be primarily responsible for home life despite their career commitments. Where both spouses are highly committed to their careers as opposed to family or supportative roles, this makes for an especially stressful structure; competition between the partners occurs (Booth and Edwards, 1984; Hall and Hall, 1979) and marital quality is compromised (Vannoy and Philliber, 1992) . Related to this study is the research on congruence between sex role beliefs and role enactments as functions of marital quality. Vannoy and Philliber (1992) found that - 14 -wive's experience of a supportative spousal relationship is important to their feelings of higher marital quality. Congruence between husband's sex role beliefs and role enactments is related to wive's marital satisfaction (Bowen and Orthner, 1983; Perry-Jenkins and Crouter, 1990). Where incongruency exists between couple's role expectations, marital adjustment is lower (Lye and Biblarz, 1993) . Furthermore, Bowen and Orthner (1983) found that the relationships with the lowest evaluation of marital quality were those of traditionally oriented husbands who were married to modern thinking wives. But husbands having an egalitarian orientation married to traditionally oriented wives expressed equivalent levels of satisfaction as their more congruent counterparts. McHale and Crouter (1992), in a study of 153 couples composed of nontraditional women with traditional family roles and traditional men with nontraditional family roles, noted that inconsistency between expectations and role enactments was related to greatest vulnerability in relationships and that the occurrence of harmonious family relationships requires a balancing of often conflicting goals and needs. This balancing sometimes results in wives perceiving fairness in role involvements even when traditional role expectations for both wives and husbands are maintained despite dual - 15 -earner status (Blair, 1993). In a replication of Bowen and Orthner (1983) utilizing a sample of 67 university couples Caldwell and Li (1987) found that the relationship between sex role incongruence and marital adjustment is a function both of the magnitude and direction of spousal disagreement about sex roles. That is, the greater the incongruence in the direction of a wife being more egalitarian relative to her husband, the more negative is the estimated impact on marital adjustment. Conversely, the greater the incongruence was found to be in the direction of the husband being more egalitarian, the more positive is the estimated impact on marital adjustment. They noted that the combination involving the lowest level of marital adjustment was found in relationships where there is a traditional husband and an egalitarian wife. When marital strain over wive's employment involvement is left unresolved, the stability of the relationship is threatened (Booth, Johnson, White and Edwards, 1984; Rapoport and Rapoport, 1975) . Using 1970 USA census data, Houseknecht and Spanier (1980) examined marital disruption and high educational attainment. Their examination demonstrated that race, employment status and high earnings contribute to a higher level of marital instability among highly educated women than is the case for women attaining - 16 -to a baccalaureate degree. They suggested four factors were involved: 1) insecure identities on part of males coupled with a sense of status loss for the females largely due to having married down socio-economically; 2) female economic independence; 3) female career salience; 4) non shared support systems. In addition to this, Booth and Edwards (1984) found that wives financial independence facilitated the decision to leave a relationship. Another result to unresolved marital strain means the structural alteration of the couple's lifestyle. This involves the dual career family breaking apart its identity: one spouse terminates their work link to reduce family tension. Women are preconditioned for this alternative (Bern and Bern, 1971; Regan and Roland, 1985). Household Labour and Child Care. With respect to the family division of labour, distinction can be drawn between who participates in domestic and child care duties and which partner is ultimately responsible for enacting these roles. As early as 1971 Poloma and Garland found that wives involvement vocationally had little impact on their family roles. Wives were responsible for the traditionally female tasks of home operation, planning for entertainment and child care, while husbands were primarily responsible for - 17 -providing family status and income. Moreover, wives in this study demonstrated an attitude of unwillingness to relinquish traditional female roles when faced with professional responsibilities, and de-emphasized the importance of their career vis-a-vis their husband's or their family responsibilities. Epstein (1971) reports similar findings in a study of twelve female lawyers who were involved in partnership with their husbands. These women experienced a traditional division of labour both within the firm and within their homes. In a review of the literature on family roles, Hoffman (1977) notes that husbands of working women help more in household and child care tasks than the husbands of non working women. However, this does not produce an equal division of labour. In a study of 250 Greek working women who were married, Safilos-Rothschild and Dijkers (1978) found that husbands feelings of security in respect to having greater occupational status, income and education than wives resulted in more permissive attitudes towards wives financial autonomy. As well, the extent to which a husband is liberated from stereotypic masculine behaviours, is willing to do more, and wives' earning power is increased facilitates greater willingness by husbands to share in family responsibilities (Kamo, 1988; Model, 1982; Safilos-Rothschild and Dijkers, - 18 -1978). When wives work full-time and continuously, the division of labour is more equitable than for couples where wives work part-time (Kamo, 1988; Weingarten, 1978). On the other hand, Berardo, Shehan and Leslie (1987) found no differences in housework contribution when they compared dual career, dual earner, single earner professional and single earner non professional husbands. Numerous researchers find that wives continue to bear the primary responsibility for both domestic functions and child care (Berardo, Shehan and Leslie, 1987; Ferree, 1991; Gilbert and Rachlin, 1987; Hochschild and Machung, 1989; Kingston and Noch, 1985; Mederer, 1993; Spitze, 1988; Thompson and Walker, 1989). But because the management of family life is so much a part of female gender definition, its safeguarding by women works significantly in mens' favor (Mederer, 1993). Just because a husband does not like a domestic task or does it poorly, he is more likely to be excused from doing it (Ferree, 1991). In their study of fifty couples, Hochschild and Machung (1989) noted that after a full day of employment women return to the home only to put in a "second shift" of work. Even when couples in their study shared more equitably, women were still found to do two-thirds of the daily tasks including child care. The jobs that men generally undertook were those less routinely - 19 -required. Aside from bearing responsibility for the home and children however, Kingston and Noch (1985) noted that wives responsibility extends to fitting the family life schedule around their husbands work schedule. Leslie and Anderson (1991) found no support for the notion that men are increasingly involved in child care. Finally, as couples commit more time to employment, women experience their work as interfering with both family and free time, which is contrary to men's experience (Kingston and Noch, 1985). Time budget designs have been helpful in delineating who does what and how much in dual career families. Yogev (1981) found that for a sample of 106 faculty women, there was little evidence of egalitarian marital structures. Husbands devoted more weekly hours to careers than wives did, and much less time than wives to housework and child care. After accounting for professional responsibilities, housework, child care and sleep, wives with children have only 3.8 hours per week left for recreational pursuits. Notably, the subjects in this sample viewed themselves as equals in ability and intelligence with their spouses, thus supporting the notion of an egalitarian relationship in principle, but behaviorally held to a traditional assignment of the household and child care duties. Identity as mother in the family was derived from the workload the women - 20 -undertook, which they did not want nor expect to share equally with their spouses. Meissner, Humphreys, Meis and Schell (1975) found that as wives work hours increased, their hours of regular housework declined without husbands picking up the slack. Moreover, men devoted one-half of their domestic effort to discretionary irregular kinds of work and their total time commitment was less than one quarter of wives. Blair and Lichter (1991) found that even where male partners are contributing many hours to housework and meal preparation, American males would have to reallocate over sixty percent of their family work time to other tasks before gender equality in the division of labour would be achieved. Dilemmas to be Reconciled. While dual commitments to careers and a family life yield many satisfactions (Gilbert and Rachlin, 1987; Rapoport and Rapoport, 1971), the links between family life and work promote a number of strains. Rapoport and Rapoport (1969, 1971, 1976, 1978) outline five dilemmas that dual career couples commonly experience: role overload; conflict between personal and social norms; personal identity and self esteem; social network dilemmas; multiple role conflicts. These dilemmas accrue from the juxtaposition of a family structure dependant upon a flexible sharing of roles to a social environment - 21 -normatively based on the conventional pattern of the husband as the breadwinner and the wife as homemaker. The following is a brief review of these dilemmas: 1. Role Overload This refers to the strains associated with both partners carrying on dual commitments to demanding work roles. Role overload is experienced in the course of attempting to balance the benefits of two careers against the costs of marital conflict over role responsibilities, increased fatigue, limited energy, and psychic tension. For women, this dilemma shows itself as guilt feelings over not being able to fulfill customary role expectations concerning domestic and home life responsibilities; in men, the dilemma is represented as discomforts associated with undertaking new, historically non male roles in addition to those conventionally assumed. Women's attempt to reconcile their career ambitions with the cultural injunction to focus on family is described by Hochschild and Machung (1989) as a "second shift". In their study of fifty families they found that wives were more deeply affected than husbands over combining a career and family life because wives felt themselves to be more responsible for the home and the children than did husbands. In effect, role overload speeds up life because there is no more time available to do the extra tasks involved. Women - 22 -are seen to be juggling three spheres of life: jobs, children and housework. Men work within two spheres the former of which they bear primary responsibility: jobs and children (Hochschild and Machung, 1989). Rapoport and Rapoport (1976) point out that the degree to which overload is felt depends upon four factors: 1) the salience of family life participation for both partners; 2) the degree of aspiration for a high standard of living; 3) satisfaction with task reassignments; 4) the degree to which the sheer number of tasks coupled with the social sanctions against the pattern overwhelm the parties ability to build in tension releasing mechanisms, for example, leisure time. 2. Normative Dilemmas These concern dilemmas that originate out of stereotypic social expectations of men and women. According to Goldenberg and Goldenberg (1984) a social discontinuity exists for well educated women: having been taught that all persons have equal opportunity, a woman pursues career goals only to find that she may be placed in submissive roles and have to deal with sexist bias in the workplace. For example, Epstein (1971) found that competent professional women (lawyers) accepted a division of labour at home that was largely traditional in nature, and received work assignments that were secondary to their spouses. Furthermore, in the work place, Rapoport and Rapoport (1975) - 23 -found that women are double bound by conventional attitudes taken toward work and family, namely, that the male pattern of work is primary with family being secondary. But the traditional feminine quality of nurturance clashes in the work place with the traditionally masculine quality of instrumentality or providership (Rapoport and Rapoport, 1975). Consequently, women are seen to sacrifice career and ambition in order to maintain domestic life (Hochschild and Machung, 1989; Rapoport, 1975). Rapoport and Rapoport (1971) describe three orientations women undertake in reconciling their personal values with societal norms. Some women adopt the conventional strategy of permanently dropping out of the work place in favour of caring for their children full-time. Others interrupt their careers to raise children, later to resume career goals once the children become less dependent. Still others maintain continuous involvement in their careers with minimal interruption by childrearing obligations. Notably, only a small portion of the sample of couples they studied opted for the last strategy. A social discontinuity also exists for men who seek to integrate career and family life (Berger and Wright, 1978). Though socialized to pursue career attainment (O'Neil, 1981), men in becoming husbands and fathers go through a - 24 -shaping process that radically alters their view of role enactments (Cohen, 1987). But society's lack of support for men to move beyond work to become more involved in family life undermines their attempts to enact family roles (Cohen, 1987). For example, Rook, Dooly and Catalano (1991) found the dual career men they studied to be emotionally and instrumentally involved in family roles. However, critical to these mens enactment of their family roles was a work schedule that was flexible enough to accommodate family needs. According to Rapoport and Rapoport (1969), norms collide in three critical areas: transition points in the family life cycle (i.e., birth of the first child, and so forth); transition points in the career life cycle of either partner; critical events in the life of children (i.e., illness, school problems, extra familial and school activities, and so forth). Previously resolved tensions become reactivated at these critical transition points. Gilbert and Rachlin (1987) note that successful maintenance of a dual career family life style requires the occurrence of a mutually supportative spousal relationship, a shared value system, and sophisticated coping strategies. But the tensions promoted by a transition point can foist pressure upon one or both spouses to opt for more traditional courses - 25 -in resolving the conflict (Rapoport and Rapoport, 1969). 3. Personal Identity and Self Esteem Identity problems accrue from individual values concerning work and family, as well as a person's notions about men and women (Rapoport and Rapoport, 1969). Two careers in the family can lead to competition between the spouses with consequent disharmony (Rapoport and Rapoport, 1969). The concept of an identity-tension-line is used by Rapoport and Rapoport (1971, 1975) to describe how far the partners in a dual career marriage are prepared to go in establishing new identities. Beyond a certain point along an individual's tension-line, patterns of life too discrepant from deeply held notions of masculinity or femininity promote defensiveness toward further change. The area of domestic responsibilities is especially subject to conflicts around identity issues. Deviations from the expectations of one's spouse often brings pressure (Safilios - Rothschild and Dijkers, 1978). There is an evident lag in the rate to which men have shifted in gender ideology and role enactment compared to women (Faber, 1988; Gilbert and Rachlin, 1987; Hochschild and Machung, 1989). However, there are distinct benefits and satisfactions to be gained upon the wholehearted entry of men and women into each others' traditional domain. According to Gilbert and Rachlin - 26 -(1987), the following are some of the benefits To women To men 1 2 1 To families 1. increased income; 2. intimacy based on equal power; 3. childrens' enhanced involvement with both parents; opportunity to develop professionally; an enhanced sense of self; freedom from the mantle of financial responsibility; 2. opportunity to be involved more fully in parenting; 3. opportunity to accept women as peers. Rapoport and Rapoport (1975) state that the achievement of sustained and equitable change requires that the tension-lines are worked on constantly. Of necessity is a flexibility in attitude which promotes a kind of psychological ledger balancing whereby a tolerance of less optimal arrangements are worked out over time (Thompson, 1991). 4. Social Network Dilemmas The problem here concerns balancing the desire for personal pursuits versus the wide set of responsibilities and obligations to kin, friends, - 27 -community and work associates. According to Rapoport and Rapoport (1976) dual career couples' absence of slack time due to their family and career commitments force them to be highly selective in extra familial involvements. In order to cope with these deficits in time, dual career couples develop unconventional patterns of relating to people. While conventional relationships typically flow from husband's male business associates with a corresponding segregation of the sexes, the pattern Rapoport and Rapoport (1976) observed for unconventional dual career couple marriages is a tendency to form relationships on a couple basis. These evolve out of friendships cultivated at the wives' work place because of the built in support system that work relationships offer. Finally, as the most sensitive partner to role overload, wives play an additional important role in social network development: she acts as a censor, holding the deciding vote as to whether a particular relationship should form or not be formed. (Rapoport and Rapoport, 197 6). 5. Multiple Role Cycling This dilemma refers to the problems encountered by each party in cycling between the competitive role demands of family and work. These problems become particularly acute when family involvements peak first so as to delay occupational growth, or when career - 28 -involvements peak first and consequently disrupt planning for family (Rapoport and Rapoport, 1969). Hall and Hall (1979) describe the problems related to disynchrony of the career and family life stages of dual career couples, as follows: FAMILY STAGE CAREER STAGE (1) Exploration and trial (2) Getting established and advancing (3) Midcareer: growth, maintenance or decline (4) Late career: disengagement (1) The Couple (2) Expanding Circle (3) Peak Stage (4) Full House (5) Shrinking Circle (6) Empty Nest Conflicts can be generated in matching career and family stages. For example, when both parties are at the same stage along their career trajectories, as in the case of a continuously employed wife, coupled with the family demands of an expanding circle. Or, when the most advanced partner fails to accommodate to the transitional demands involved when the other partner tries out a career path. This later problem occurs when a woman, having a - 29 -conventional or interrupted career trajectory, returns to work with the expectation of balancing the ledger except that her husband is highly invested in his career attainment. Accomodation of Careers to Family The support and commitment of husbands to their wives career is important in resolving the problematic life tasks that dual career couples encounter. Spouses need to communicate openly and contract for explicit agreements about their family role structure (Growler and Legge, 1978). Bailyn (1971) found that the husband's orientation toward combining careers and family life facilitated the wife's resolution of career-family dilemmas in terms of marital satisfaction. Similarly, Weingarten's (1978) intensive interviews of 54 two-profession couples demonstrated that having an interdependent mode of interaction based on a balancing of dependency needs facilitates a couple's ability to accommodate to the stress and strain of their lifestyle. Bailyn (1978) defines the concept of accommodation as follows: ...the degree to which work demands are fitted into family requirements. Then the way each person integrates work and family in his or her life may be - 30 -described by the extent to which this integration is accommodative. The extreme points of this dimension are represented by individuals who integrate family and work requirements by focusing primarily on one or the other of these areas (p.159). Bailyn (1978) theorizes that two principles underly the various patterns that dual career families develop in working out the interrelations between work and family demands. Some families operate according to a principle involving a differential distribution of responsibilities whereby partners become specialists in their area of responsibility with one partner generally exhibiting a more accommodative attitude than the other. However, patterns based on this principle run the risk of becoming unresponsive over time to the developmental needs of the family with attendant disenchantments occurring. Other families operate according to the principle of equally sharing responsibilities where both partners demonstrate equal commitment to work and family, but because of the overloading that arises from undertaking such a degree of dual commitment, more complicated patterns of family life evolve which take special care to maintain. Hall and Hall (1979) describe two further operational principles to be involved. Those couples for whom the individual members are - 31 -both either highly invested in their careers or in their home life articulate a kind of alliance which assists them in minimizing conflict between career and family. But where both partners are highly involved in their careers and only minimally involved in their domestic roles, a more adversarial pattern of family life is articulated. As this later pattern emphasizes a dual priority upon career, an acute sense of competition is born by the couple, neither partner being willing to make sacrifices to the other in order to fulfill career and family responsibilities. Several strategies are useful in managing the stress generated by such patterns. These include: 1) Limiting both partners involvements in family or work by reducing family demands, certain activities or career aspirations (Bailyn, 1978; Gray, 1983; Regan and Roland, 1985); 2) Reducing standards of home care, employing others or recruiting children (Gray, 1983; Jordan, Cobb and McCully, 1989; Regan and Roland, 1985); 3) Staging family and work events to minimize overlap between work and family life cycle peaks (Bailyn, 1978; Hall and Hall, 1979) ; 4) Segmenting and compartmentalizing the partners lives to promote greater sequencing of work and family life - 32 -(Bailyn, 1978; Gray, 1983; Jordan, Cobb and McCully, 1989); 5) Learning techniques to reduce tension, promote power balancing, and improve communication (Farber, 1988; Gilbert and Rachlin, 1987; Glickauf-Hughes, Hughes and Wells, 1986; Goldenberg and Goldenberg, 1984; Jordan, Cobb, McCulley, 1989); 6) Making work a joint venture thereby eliminating one partner's work link (Bailyn, 1978); 7) Building independence into the relationship to increase tolerance of lack of accommodation (Bailyn, 1978; Goldenberg and Goldenberg, 1984); 8) Political and institutional changes that influence employment procedures and practices regarding promotion, working hours, availability of part-time work and improvements in day care (Cohen, 1987; Defrain, 1979) . The degree to which an attitude of accommodativeness will develop may be affected by structures that mediate the interrelations between work and family roles (Pleck, 1977). Two such structures are: 1) sex segregating mechanisms in the workplace which serve to insulate the male roles from changes in the female roles; 2) differentially permeable boundaries between the work and family roles of men and women that alternately permit or defend intrusion of one role into the domain of another. Several researchers argue - 33 -that the family roles of married women have been reduced because of their increased occupational loads, but without corresponding increases in married men's family role participation (Meissner, Humphries, Meis and Schell, 1975; Pleck, 1977; Rapoport and Rapoport, 1975; Yogev, 1981). This lack of accommodation induces role strain and exhaustion in dual career wives as they continue to be primarily responsible for domestic tasks and child care while undertaking careers. Hanson (1987) and Gilbert and Rachlin (1987) believe that deliberate intervention needs to be made into men's lives to expedite the movement toward marital equity. Actual role sharing appears to be a rare phenomena among dual career couples. Using a selected sample of couples involved in genuine role sharing, Haas (1982) described a number of sociological factors that appear to predispose the pattern. However, she suggests that role sharing as a pattern may work only for couples who are in the earliest stages of their family cycle before they become burdened with child care and vocational responsibilities. Indeed, because of the dependence of the current employment and social institutions upon the traditional family structure, dual careerism as a long term pattern, may not be viable. The greater demands for career competence and - 34 -heightened competition in today's employment market militate against its sustained occurrence (Berardo, Shehan and Leslie, 1987; Hunt and Hunt, 1977). A radical restructuring of society and the economic system is needed to promote a more salubrious environment for the growth of the dual career family (Walker, Rozee-Koker and Wallston, 1987), but until the prevailing attitudes concerning gender equity per se are resolved in respect to women's roles both within and without the family, such a redefinition does not seem likely (Rapoport and Rapoport, 1975). Furthermore, as the assumptions we make concerning the roles of women in society are nonconscious, highly durable and very subtle, current attitudes about egalitarianism may provide a veneer which actually helps to preserve the notion that a woman's place is in the home rather than in the workplace (Bern and Bern, 1971). Marital Adjustment: Issues in Definition Marriage is an ancient institution. Research interest into the forces that bind marriages together, or tear them apart has mounted over the last several decades (Hicks and Piatt, 1970; Laws, 1971; Lewis and Spanier, 1979; Spanier and Cole, 1976; Spanier and Lewis, 1980). In their review, Spanier and Lewis (1980) noted that during the 1970's, there - 35 -were 150 published articles which examined quality of marriage, plus 182 American doctoral dissertations that made reference to this variable in the thesis title. Marital quality and its associated variables, "happiness", "adjustment" and "satisfaction" are perhaps the most studied variables in the field (Spanier and Lewis, 1979). Glenn (1990) reviewed the quantitative research on marital quality of the 1980's and noted it to be immense in size but lacking unity. However, the largeness and vagueness of the terminology has undermined progress in the field of marital research, and has resulted in difficulties with operationalization of concepts, problems in measurement, and subsequent difficulties in comparing results (Burnett, 1987; Crane, Allgood, Larson and Griffin, 1990; Glenn, 1990; Lively, 1969; Sabastelli, 1988; Spanier and Cole, 1976). The lack of conceptual clarity afflicting research into marital adjustment has been noted by several investigators (Glenn, 1990; Hicks and Piatt, 1970; Laws, 1971; Lewis and Spanier, 1979; Lively, 1969; Sabastelli, 1988; Spanier and Cole, 1976). A review of 26 marriage and family texts demonstrated that the terms "marital adjustment", "happiness" and "success" were discussed by the authors, but - 36 -that few attempted to define what was meant (Spanier and Cole, 1976). Table 1 provides a selective listing of definitions that have appeared in the literature. Lively (1969) contends that present terminology is a deterrence to the further development of the field because "marital happiness", "marital success" and "marital adjustment" are all highly connotative and ignore marriage as a process. Rather, he argues for a terminology that focuses upon the interactive functioning of the marital dyad. Laws (1971) , although generally critical of marital adjustment research per se, is particularly critical of the definition offered by Locke and Wallace (1959); she believes that more attention needs to be paid to the political implications of marriage for women. Moreover, the confusion of concepts can lead to misinterpretation of data (Glenn, 1990) . For example, "marital success" and "marital quality" are distinguishable as separate concepts. Marital success refers to what happens to a marriage over time while marital quality is often defined as the characteristics of the marriage, or the perspective of the spouses about their relationship at a point in time. But Hicks and - 37 -Table l Selected Definitions of Marital Adjustment and Allied Concepts Study Definition Burgess and Cottrell (1936) Burgess and Cottrell (1939) Locke and Wallace (1959) Orden and Bradburn (1968) Lively (1969) A well adjusted marriage is a marriage in which the attitudes and actions of each of the partners produce an environment which is highly favorable to the proper functioning of the personality structures of each partner, particularly in the sphere of primary relationships (p. 739). ... adjustment is to be defined as the integration of the couple in a union in which the two personalities are not merely merged, or submerged, but interact to compliment each other for mutual satisfaction and the achievement of common objectives. . . . the attitudes and acts of each of the partners produce an environment which is favorable to the functioning of the personality of each, particularly in the sphere of primary relationship (p. 10). ... accommodation of a husband and wife to each other at a given time (p. 251). Marriage happiness may be viewed as a resultant of two independent dimensions, a dimension of satisfactions and a dimension of tensions...Satisfactions are positively related to marriage happiness, and tensions are negatively related to marriage happiness. Tensions and satisfactions are, however, virtually independent of each other (p. 715) . ... the continuing development of the relationship between husband and wife and ... the continuity between them (p.111). (table continues) - 38 -Table 1 (con't) Selected Definitions of Marital Adjustment and Allied Concepts Study Definition Burr (1973) ... a subjective condition in which an individual experienced a certain degree of attainment of a goal or desire (p. 68). Lewis & Spanier (1979) ... a subjective evaluation of a married couples' relationship. The range of evaluations constitutes a continuum reflecting numerous characteristics of marital interaction and marital functioning. High marital quality, therefore, is associted with good judgement, adequate communication, a high level of marital happiness, integration, and a high degree of satisfaction with the relationship. The definition does not cover a fixed picture of descrete categories, ie., a high versus low-quality marriage, but rather suggests the existence of a continuum ranging from high to low (p. 269). Beavers (1985) . . . the qualities of healthy couples found in formal research and clinical study begin with attitudes and thinking patterns, the most important being a benign view of one's own and the spouse's basic nature, and the awareness that human truth is always subjective. Behavioral characteristics include a modest overt power difference, the capacity for clear boundries, focus on the present, and the capacity for making choices. These attributes culminate in skillful negotiating with good humor (p. 82-83) . - 39 -Piatt (1970) noted that stable marriages may in fact be painful marriages that do not breakdown where only the provisional needs are met to the exclusion of an individuals affective needs, and where alternatives are lacking. In his review and critique of contemporary survey instruments used in marital research, Sabastelli (1988) noted the term "marital adjustment" to refer to the processes presumed necessary to achieve a harmonious and functional marriage. Research into those processes involved study of the dyad. "Marital satisfaction" refers to a person's attitudes toward their partner and the relationship (Sabastelli, 1988) . However, research concerning these attitudes focuses upon the individual. Because satisfaction with a relationship is included as a component of adjustment, a blending of the units of analysis occurs. This confounds both the conceptualization and the measurement technique. Sabastelli (1988) and Glenn (1990) note that over the last decade the concept of "marital quality" has increasingly been used by marital researchers. This is a hybrid concept and proports to access both the objective and subjective aspects of a relationship for both the individual and the dyad. Marital quality can also be conceptualized as reflecting a person's more global evaluation of their marriage. Burr (1973) expects that as research into theories of family become more - 40 -sophisticated, reliance on the current terminology will diminish in favor of a better defined terminology. But the conceptual debate that has raged with regard to the operationalization and measurement of the concepts involved in marital research is anticipated to continue for sometime (Glenn, 1990; Sabastelli, 1988; Spanier and Cole, 1976). The position that Spanier and Cole (1976) articulated in regard to the concept of marital adjustment is utilized in this study. They conceptualize marital adjustment as an ever changing process that could be qualitatively evaluated in terms of proximity to good or poor adjustment. However, consistent with previous research, Spanier and Cole (1976) sought to evaluate the quality of the marital relationship within a given time frame and included previously used concepts such as satisfaction, consensus, cohesion and affection. From their view point emerged the following definition: Marital adjustment is a process the outcome of which is determined by the degree of: 1. Troublesome marital differences 2. Interpersonal tensions and personal anxiety 3. Marital satisfaction 4. Dyadic cohesion - 41 -5. Consensus on matters of importance to marital functioning (p. 127-128). Moreover, consistent with Lively (1969), marital adjustment was conceptualized as an interactive process between the spouses, such that increasing adjustment is associated with improvement in the five areas of marital relations. According to Bernard (1972) every marriage has two perspectives on adjustment: his and hers. Her concern was that discrepancy between spouse's points of view demonstrate important and meaningful information about the marriage. Spanier (1972, 1973) Spanier and Cole (1976) Sabastelli (1988) and Glenn (1990) advocate that researchers need to distinguish between marital adjustment as a measure of group functioning, and marital adjustment as a measure of individual functioning. Experimental rigor in the foregoing is important in making inferences and drawing conclusions about married couples when only one partner's score is studied. The Dyadic Adjustment Scale (DAS) was published by Spanier in 1976. It was developed from a pool of 300 items originating from all the items previously utilized in any scale measuring marital adjustment or related concepts. The items were subjected to a rigorous set of procedures to - 42 -assess the adequacy of definition, presence of the hypothesized components of marital adjustment, and to determine which item should be included in the final version of the DAS. Factor analytic procedures established four factorial components: dyadic satisfaction, dyadic cohesion, dyadic consensus, and affectional expression. These four factors were deemed to be conceptually and empirically related to dyadic adjustment (marital adjustment), and comprise the four subscales of the DAS. Spanier and Thompson (1982) critically evaluated the DAS and argue that it is a good measure of global marital functioning. Thompson (1988) and Spanier (1988) reaffirmed this view despite critism of the scale on both methodological and theoretical grounds. (Burnett, 1987; Kazak, Jarmas and Snitzer, 1988; Kazak, Snitzer and Jarmas, 1988; Norton, 1983; Shapley and Cross, 1982). Lewis and Spanier (1979) extend the theoretical underpinning of the DAS and offer an inductive theory of marital quality and stability in the form of 93 propositions based on an exchange of rewards and satisfactions. Lewis and Spanier (1979) chose the more general concept of "marriage quality" to encompass the range of terms which appear in the literature, traditionally used as dependent variables in marital research. The concept focuses upon the qualitative - 43 -dimensions and evaluation of a marriage as the primary determinant of survivability. Lewis and Spanier (1979) define marital quality as: ...a subjective evaluation of a married couple's relationship. The range of evaluations constitutes a continuum reflecting numerous charactistics of marital interaction and marital functioning. High marital quality, therefore, is associated with good judgement, adequate communication, a high level of marital happiness, integration, and a high degree of satisfaction with the relationship. The definition does not cover a fixed picture of discreet categories, ie., a high versus low-quality marriage, but rather suggests the existence of a continuum ranging from high to low (p. 269) . This section reviewed the conceptual and operational difficulties affecting research on marital quality. Lewis and Spanier's (1979) definition of marital quality is presented as encompassing the entire range of terms commonly found in the literature. Therefore, perceived quality of marriage in this study was assessed by the subject's scores on the Dyadic Adjustment Scale. Summary This chapter reviewed the literature relevant to the problems and the pitfalls of managing two careers and married life. The literature relevant to operationalizing marital adjustment was addressed. Attitudes that men and - 44 -women hold toward women's contemporary roles were noted as a critical variable in the accommodation of dual career couples to the diverse array of competing demands produced by this family style. - 45 -CHAPTER THREE METHODOLOGY Overview The study employed a survey approach and investigated the relationship between the variables perceived marital adjustment and expressed attitudes toward women. It involved assigning dual career couples to two groups, distressed and non distressed, based upon their responses to a marital adjustment scale, after which their expressed attitudes towards women's contemporary roles were compared. This chapter presents the characteristics of the target population, instruments used to measure the variables, data collection procedures, procedures utilized in analyzing the data, and the statistical hypotheses to be tested. Target Population Characteristics The target population for this study composes of dual career couples. By definition, these couples represent marital dyads in which the partners express the dual commitments to employment in income generating work and to family life as defined by Rapoport and Rapoport (1969) . The sample was drawn from a large urban area on the lower mainland of British Columbia, Canada and represented unpaid - 46 -volunteers. Instrumentation Dyadic Adjustment Scale (DAS) The Dyadic Adjustment Scale was developed by Graham B. Spanier in 1976. It is a 32 item, Likert-type questionnaire designed for use with either married or cohabiting couples. Scores range from 0 to 151 and reflected marital adjustment. Administration time is approximately 10 minutes. Subscores derive from four subscales: dyadic satisfaction, dyadic cohesion, dyadic consensus, and affectional expression. Partner differences in responding reflect differences in the perception of the functional relationship. Spanier (1976) defines dyadic adjustment as an ever changing process, the outcome of which is determined by the degree of troublesome dyadic differences, interpersonal tensions, dyadic satisfaction and cohesion, and consensus on matters of importance to the couples' functioning. The process of dyadic adjustment has a qualitative dimension which can be evaluated at any point in time on a continuum from well-adjusted to maladjusted. - 47 -Validity Content Validity. The content validity of the DAS was evaluated by three judges using the following criteria (Spanier, 1976) : 1) Relevance to dyadic adjustment for contemporary relationships; 2) Consistent with the nominal definitions suggested by Spanier and Cole (1976) for adjustment and its components (satisfaction cohesion, consensus); 3) Carefully worded with appropriate fixed choice responses. Only items meeting the above criteria were included in the instrument. Criterion-related Validity. The scale was administered to a sample of 218 married and 94 divorced persons. Each item on the instrument correlated significantly with the external criterion of marital status (p<. 001) using a t-test for assessing differences between sample means (Spanier, 1976). The DAS also discriminated effectively between the sample means of married and divorced persons (114.8 and 70.7 respectively) at the p<.001 level of significance. Construct Validity. This instrument was tested for construct validity by determining whether it measured the - 48 -same general construct as another well accepted instrument. Correlation of the DAS with the Lock-Wallace Short Marital Adjustment Scale produced coefficients of .86 among married respondents and .88 among divorced respondents. The total sample correlation was .93 (Spanier, 1976). Factor Analysis The 32 items of the DAS were subjected to factor analysis to further establish the validity of the construct. Four factorial components were established: dyadic satisfaction, dyadic cohesion, dyadic consensus and affectional expression. These four factors were deemed to be conceptually and empirically related to dyadic adjustment, and compose the four subscales that have been outlined (Spanier, 1976) . Shapley and Cross (1982) found one overall factor which they termed "dyadic adjustment", accounting for 73 percent of the variance. Kazak, Jarmas and Snitzer (1988) corroborated Shapley and Cross (1982), noting only weak support for the presence of the four subscale factors identified by Spanier. They noted that gender differences occurred in the factoral structure: for women, general satisfaction items seemed to contribute a more separate component of marital satisfaction than for men; satisfaction items for men loaded either with cohesion or consensus. Subsequent confirmatory factor analysis in Spanier and Thompson (1982) demonstrated the four factorial - 49 -structure to be valid, accounting for 94 percent of the variance among the items. Consensus, satisfaction and cohesion had moderate levels of intercorrelation (r=.42-.60) but not enough to cause the authors to question the existence of separate dimensions. Affectional expression emerged as statistically orthogonal to the other factors, but in the analysis Spanier and Thompson (1982) report that many of the items secondarily loaded onto this factor from the others. Reliability Estimates for the reliability of the DAS are available for the entire scale and each of the subscales. Internal consistency was determined using Cronbach's Coefficient Alpha. The following coefficients were established (Spanier, 1976): Total Dyadic Adjustment Scale r=.96 Dyadic Consensus subscale r=.90 Dyadic Satisfaction subscale r=.94 Dyadic Cohesion subscale r=.86 Affectional Expression subscale r=.73 Spanier and Thompson (1982) report the internal consistency of the DAS to be r=.91 for the total scale using Cronbach's Coefficient Alpha. Shapley and Cross (1982) report internal consistency to be r=.96. Carey, Spector, Lantinga and - 50 -Krauss (1993) reported similarly high internal consistency for the subscales as reported by Spanier (1976) and a total scale internal consistency to be r=.87. Furthermore, the DAS was demonstrated to be stable over a two week duration. Criticism and Suitability for Use Spanier (1976) discusses several methodological issues of relevance to this study in the use of the DAS. Firstly, he does not claim to have adequately dealt with the problems of conventionality and social desirability, suggesting instead that these problems are over-magnified. Secondly, the unit of analysis is not clear. Most items in the scale attempt to assess the respondent's perception of adjustment to the relationship and therefore Spanier (1976) suggests that researchers assume partner differences in responding reflect different perceptions of the relationship. He is cautionary against the use of one partner's data, and the analysis of the results should include scrutiny of partner differences in responding. This issue is addressed in Spanier (1973). Shapley and Cross (1982) report that most of the items in the DAS are unnecessary, stating that a six item scale comprising of items 8, 10, 11, 25, 27 and 28 would provide satisfactory results, while item 31 could serve as a global screen for marital adjustment. Kazak, Jarmas and Snitzer (1988) caution the interpretation of the - 51 -DAS because no normative gender data exists. They also note that validation of the DAS is based on the ability to discriminate between married and divorced, people, and may therefore not be sensitive enough to measure less pronounced ambivalance about marriage. The DAS appears to be a reliable and valid instrument for use with married and non married populations in respect to securing information concerning the quality of a dyadic relationship. It is deemed suited to this study as a measure of marital adjustment among dual career couples. Attitudes Toward Women Scale (AWS) The Attitude Toward Women Scale was developed by Janet T. Spence and Robert Helmreich (1972). It is an instrument proporting to objectively survey the attitudes that members of contemporary society have about the proper roles of women. The AWS is a 55 item scale suitable for ages 14 years or older. A 25 item version is available for younger ages or where time is a premium and the researcher seeks only to discriminate among groups. Scores range from 0 -165 (zero representing the most conservative, traditional attitudes and 165 representing the most liberal, profeminist attitudes) and items are organized as declarative statements, informally categorized into six themes: - 52 -vocational, educational, and intellectual roles; freedom and independence; dating, courtship,and etiquette; drinking, swearing and jokes; sexual behaviors; marital relations and obligations. Validity Construct and Predictive Validity. Spence and Helmreich (1972) report that women score significantly more liberal than men. College women (n=713, mean=98.211) scored significantly higher than college men (n=713, mean=89.261) (p<.001), and significant differences occurred on 47 of the 55 items. Mothers of college students (n=292, mean=86.5) scored significantly higher than fathers of college students (n=232, mean=81.358, p<.001), and significant differences occurred on 30 of the 55 items. Significant differences also occurred between parents and same sex offspring: daughters score more liberal than mothers, and sons score more liberal than fathers (p<.05 for both). Lunnenborg (1974) found that women and men differed significantly on only 9 of the items; women expressed more liberal attitudes on 8 of these. The studies of Albright and Chang (1976), Doyle (1975), Etaugh and Bowen (1976), and Etaugh and Gerson (1974) also report that women score more liberal in attitude than men. - 53 -The AWS is also sensitive to geographic difference in attitudes towards women's roles. Lunnenborg (1974) found significant differences in comparing samples drawn from northern USA, and Spence and Helmreich's normative data which was drawn from a southern state, as expected, with northerners being more liberal in attitude. Several biographical correlates have been related to less traditional attitudes toward women: closeness to father (p<.01); reason for mother's employment (p<.05); higher levels of family income (p<.05); increased years of education (p<.00l), (Etaugh and Gerson, 1974; Etaugh and Bowen, 1976; Stein and Weston, 1976). Liberal attitudes toward women relates to academic emphasis; female business and education majors hold more conservative attitudes than do liberal arts majors (Stein and Weston, 1976). The AWS has also been found sensitive to changes in attitude after a course in women's studies (Lunnenborg, 1974). Criterion Validity. The 25 item short form of the AWS discriminated between members of a feminist group, female college students, and mothers of students. The feminist group members scored significantly higher than both college students and mothers at the p<.001 level (Kilpatrick and Smith, 1974) . The short form of the AWS correlates with the long form r=.968 for male students and r=.969 for female - 54 -students (Spence, Helmreich and Stapp, 1973). Concurrent Validity. To test concurrent validity, the AWS was correlated with the scale for which it was developed--the Feminist-Antifeminist Belief-Pattern Scale (Doyle, 1975) . Males scored more traditionally on each scale (p<.01). The correlation coefficients computed between the scales were .87 for the total sample (n=76), .86 for males (n=37) and .87 for females (n=39). The AWS did not significantly relate to global attitudes toward women as measured by a semantic differential (Bailey, Lees and Harrell, 1992). Factor Analysis Spence and Helmreich (1972) factor analyzed the AWS responses of college men and women, and the responses of their mothers and fathers. Three main factors emerged for college men: traditional notions about masculine superiority and patriarchal family; attitudes concerning social-sexual relationships between men and women; attitudes relating to equal opportunities for women. Two factors emerged from the analysis of college women's responses: equal opportunity and ability vocationally, educationally and right to work; attributes of the "conventional woman" in her relationship with men. For mothers of college - 55 -students, three factors were revealed: traditional beliefs about women's subordinant roles; equality of vocational opportunities; sexual behavior. Four factorial components were established from the responses of fathers: attitude towards the superiority of men in social and economic spheres; attitudes about dating, courtship, and special courtesies to women; men's greater freedom of action and initiative in dating. Spence and Helmreich (1973) report that a factor analysis of the AWS-short form demonstrated it to be unifactoral with the first unrotated factor accounting for 67.7 percent of the variance for females and 69.2 percent of the variance for males. Reliability Estimates for the reliability of the AWS are available for both full scale and the AWS-short form. Test-retest. After an average interval of 3.8 months, product-moment coefficients of correlation were .92 for college males and .93 for college females (Etaugh, 1975) on the full scale. Corrected Split-half. Based on the responses of 297 female college students to the AWS, Stein and Weston (1976) found product-moment coefficients of correlation of .92. On - 56 -the AWS-short form, item total correlations were found to range from .31 to .73 for college students and ranged from .14 to .70 for parents of college students (Spence, Helmreich and Stapp, 1973). Criticism and Suitability for Use Spence and Helmreich (1973) state that the AWS-short form be used for comparisons of individuals in groups on the dimension of traditional or liberal attitudes, while the full instrument is useful to secure information on attitudes concerning each of the six themes. However, it is unclear whether both forms of the scale tap similar factors. A few of the items contain questionable content: item 10, "Both husband and wife should be allowed the same grounds for divorce", does not reflect Canadian Law; item 40, "There should be no greater barrier to an unmarried woman having sex with a casual acquaintance than having dinner with him", may be offensive to religiously oriented persons. However, the AWS appears to be a reliable and valid instrument for use with married and non married populations in respect to securing information concerning attitudes held toward women's roles and rights in contemporary society. It is deemed suited to this study as a measure of egalitarianism in dual career marriages. - 57 -Data Collection Three research criteria guided the inclusion of participant couples in the sample: they had to be married, although the couple could be currently separated; both male and female members of a couple were to be gainfully employed, either part-time or full-time; there had to be at least one dependent child in the home. Participants were secured in a variety of ways. A general appeal for subjects was posted on local cable television stations, as well as through posters left with lawyers, physicians and social service agencies. The researcher made contact with acquaintances and colleagues and asked them to suggest couples who might volunteer their time. To ensure the inclusion of distressed couples in the sample, family court counselling services, marriage counsellors in private practices plus a counselling clinic attached to the Department of Counselling Psychology at the University of British Columbia were approached to request the involvement of potential participants. The subjects received a letter of introduction (Appendix C) followed by a telephone call to request their participation and answer any questions they may have regarding the research. The only exception to this procedure was if the participating couple was involved in marital or conciliation counselling through - 58 -either an agency or private practitioner who wished their client to have total anonymity: the researcher had no personal contact with the couple in this case, and instead relied on the agency or private practitioner to transmit the letter of introduction, and any subsequent materials including follow-up to their clients. Couples who volunteered received by mail a packet containing the following materials: a) A letter of transmittal and instructions (Appendix D); b) Two copies of each instrument, the Dyadic Adjustment Scale and the Attitudes Toward Women Scale coded with a symbol to identify male and female respondents as well as couple membership (Appendices A,B); c) A Family Background sheet, coded as to couple membership (Appendix E); d) A blank sheet of paper upon which the participants could later place their name to request a summary of the results as well as request a debriefing interview; (Appendix H) e) A stamped return envelope with the researcher's address typed on it. The letter of transmittal requested that participants fill - 59 -out the questionnaires independently and return them, by a set date, in the envelope provided. The Family Background sheet could be filled out jointly, or by one of them. Approximately one hour was required of the participants' time. The subjects were also requested not to discuss their responses until after they had completed and returned the material. The names and addresses of participants were kept on a separate, confidential list for reference in the event that a follow-up letter was required to retrieve the data (Appendix G). If the mail reminder was unsuccessful, the participant received a telephone call from the researcher to request the material. Data Analysis After data collection, the researcher had scores on the following variables: 1) Marital Adjustment (perceived) 2) Marital Satisfaction 3) Marital Cohesion 4) Marital Consensus 5) Marital Affectional Expression 6) Attitudes Toward Women 7) Vocational, educational and intellectual roles 8) Freedom and independence - 60 -9) Dating, courtship and etiquette 10) Drinking, swearing and jokes 11) Sexual behaviour 12) Marital relations and obligations 13) Demographic data Couples scores on the variables were computed by summing the partners individual scores and dividing by two. Difference scores were also calculated for husbands and wives on the variables of marital adjustment and attitudes toward women. A positive difference meant that the husband scored higher than the wife on the variable. Using Nelson's (1974) Laboratory of Education Research Test Package (LERTAP), the researcher deduced confidence limits for the individual and couples combined scores in marital adjustment. LERTAP is an item analysis procedure that calculates standard errors of measurement, estimates of test reliability and internal consistency. Table 2 gives the test statistics for this sample. - 61 -Table 2 LERTAP Test Statistics for the Dyadic Adjustment Scale Observed Scores N Hoyt Estimate SEM Cronbach of Reliability Alpha Individuals 641 .96 4.56 .82 Couples 302 .96 7.06 .81 1 LERTAP is an item analysis procedure. In three cases the total scale and subscale scores only were available to the researcher, therefore these subjects were not included in the item analysis. 2 Seven subjects were not included in the LERTAP analysis due to having no partner scores to compute the combined couple score (5) or because of unavailable item scores (2). Spanier's (1976), reported means of 114.8 for married and 70.7 for divorced individuals were combined with the LERTAP computed standard error of measurement to determine the cut off point between distressed and non distressed scores. The cut off point was calculated to equal 92.75 for both couples combined and individual scores in dyadic adjustment. To improve confidence that a particular score was distressed or non distressed the researcher determined that scores less than or equal to 90 would be assigned to Group One while scores greater than or equal to 95 would be - 62 -assigned to Group Two. The aforementioned procedures produced the same result as that arrived at by averaging Spanier's (1979) derived means. Consequential to defining the confidence interval as above, four subjects were eliminated from later statistical analyses because their scores in dyadic adjustment fell between the limits of the interval. Additionally, where the researcher only had one partner's score, couples combined scores in dyadic adjustment could not be computed. This meant that in five cases otherwise distressed individuals were eliminated from later statistical analyses involving couples combined scores. The foregoing procedures were considered legitimate statistical practice for the following reasons. Firstly, although it was assumed that Spanier's (1976) means provided normative comparisons for distressed and non distressed couples, the researcher was concerned that Spanier did not deduce a cut off point for his groups "married" and "divorced" to guide subsequent researchers in interpreting the results of their investigations. Rather, he seems to have simply calculated a total sample mean (101.5) which has come to represent a dividing point. Larson and Griffin (1990) recognized this problem and the subsequent difficulties this presented when comparing the results of - 63 -research using different instruments to measure marital quality. They utilized a regression technique to derive a cut off point for their sample of 3 02 couples. For this research, computing a standard error of measurement emerged as a way of trying to estimate a true score although only a single test score was available for analysis and thereby improve confidence that a particular score qualified as distressed or non distressed. According to generally agreed upon statistical practice (Nelson, 1974) LERTAP assumes that errors of measurement are normally distributed with observed scores falling within + 1 standard error of measurement of an individual's true score 68 percent of the time. Therefore, within the limitations of the usable data, the combining of Spanier's (1976) means in formula with the derived standard error of measurement of the present sample allowed the researcher to deduce the cut off points in marital adjustment for Group One and Group Two with a greater degree of confidence. Statistical Null Hypotheses Hypothesis 1 There is no statistically significant difference in couples' mean scores between distressed and non distressed couples as measured by the Attitudes Toward Women Scale. - 64 -An independent groups t test for the difference between means was used to determine whether there was a statistically significant difference between the two group means at the .05 level of significance. Hypothesis 2 There is no significant correlation (Spearman r) between husbands and wives difference scores on the Dyadic Adjustment Scale and their difference scores on the Attitudes Toward Women Scale. Hypothesis 3 There is no statistically significant difference in mean score between males and females as measured by the Attitudes Toward Women Scale. An independent groups t test for the difference between means was used to determine whether there was a statistically significant difference between the two group means at the .05 level of significance. Not all subjects were matched, hence a dependent group t test could not be utilized for this analysis. Hypothesis 4 There is no statistically significant score interaction - 65 -between the factors gender and marital adjustment as measured by the Attitudes Toward Women Scale. For this hypothesis a two-way analysis of variance was performed utilizing the Statistical Package for Social Sciences, extended version (SPSSX). The independent variables were gender of subject, and marital adjustment (dichotomized into distressed and non distressed) while the dependent variable was attitudes toward women. F tests appropriate to a fixed model (Ferguson, 1981; Winer, 1971) were utilized to test the significance of the interaction and main effects at the .05 level of significance. Hypothesis 5 There is no significant correlation (Pearson r) between the subjects' scores on the Dyadic Adjustment Scale and their scores on the Attitudes Toward Women Scale. Summary Chapter three began with a description of the target population sought for this study. Next, the instruments utilized were described which was followed by the plan for data collection and analysis. Five statistical hypotheses were presented. Chapter four presents the demographics of the actual sample drawn and the results of data analysis. - 66 -CHAPTER FOUR RESULTS The preceding chapter presented the procedure for both data collection and data analysis. This chapter describes the sample characteristics and the results of the analyses for each of the hypotheses. Sample Characteristics A purposive sample of sixty-seven partners in dual career marriages participated in this study. These included thirty-one couples and five separated individuals whose partners declined to be involved. The sample was drawn from a large urban area on the West Coast of British Columbia, Canada and the subjects were unpaid volunteers. Attempts were made to examine demographic factors that might be operating within the sample. This was done to determine if Group One (distressed) and Group Two (non distressed) were similar, and to identify intervening variables that may be impacting the results. To accomplish this, basic demographic data was obtained by means of a Family Background Sheet (Appendix F), and are summarized in Tables 3, 4 and 5. Examination of Table 3 reveals that the largest - 67 -percentage of participants for both groups fell into the 3 0 - 39 year age range (53.3 and 51.9 percent respectively). Participants were well educated with 40 percent of Group One and 2 6.9 percent of Group Two attaining a post graduate education. Eighty percent of Group One couples were married for fifteen years or less, while 61.4 percent of Group Two couples were married for the same period of time. As might be anticipated of distressed couples, 33.3 percent of Group One participants were into their second marriage, while 17.3 percent of non distressed participants had been divorced. Similarly, 40 percent of Group One marriages had a history of marital separation in their current marriage, while in only 7.6 percent of Group Two marriages had this occurred. Group Two marriages largely occurred before the participants thirtieth birthday (80.8 percent), while those in Group One were fairly evenly divided between marrying in their twenties and thirties (46.7 and 53.3 percent respectively), the latter data perhaps suggestive of those participants rate of remarriage. - 68 -Table 3 Frequency (Percent) Distribution of Subjects Within Family Background Categories: Family Demographics Age Group One Wives: Husbands: n 8 7 under 30 0 (0.0) 1(14.3) 30-39 6(75.0) 2(28.6) 40-49 2(25.0) 3 (42.8) 50-59 0 (0.0) 1(14.3) over 60 0(0.0) 0(0.0) Total 15 [6.7) 8(53.5) 5(33.3) (6.7) 0(0.0) Group Two Wives: 26 2(7.7) 16(61.5) 7(26.9) 1 (3.8) 0(0.0) Husbands: 26 2(7.7) 11(42.3) 10(38.5) 3(11.5) 0(0.0) Total 52 4(7.7) 27(51.9) 17(32.7) 4 (7.7) 0(0.0) EDUCATION Group One Group Two Wives: Husbands: Total Wives: Husbands: Total n 8 7 15 26 26 52 High School 0(0.0) 0(0.0) 0(0.0) 8(30.8) 5(19.2) 13(25.9) Colleae 2 (25.0) 0 (0.0) 2(13.3) 2(7.7) 1(3.8) 3(5.8) Tech 1(12, 2 (28. 3 (20. 2 (7. 3(11. 5 (9. .5) .5) .0) .7) .5) ,6) Univer. 3(37.5) 1(14.3) 4 (26.7) 9(34.6) 8(38.8) 17(32.7) Post Grad. 2(25.0) 4 (57.7) 6(40.0) 5(19.2) 9(34.6) 14 (26.9) YEARS MARRIED Under n 5 5-10 More than 11-15 16-20 21-25 25 Group One 10 3(30.0) 1(10.0) 4(40.0) 0 (0.0) 2(20.0) 0(0.0) Group Two 26 5(19.2) 7(26.9) 4(15.3) 8(30.7) 1 (3.8) 1(3.8) (table continues) - 69 -Table 3 (con't) Frequency (Percent) Distribution of Subjects Within Family Background Categories: Family Demographics NUMBER OF MARRIAGES N 3 or more Group One Wives: Husbands: 5 (62.5) 5 (71.4) 3 (37.5) 2 (28.6) 0(0) 0(0) Total 15 10 (66.2) 5 (33.3) 0(0) Group Two Wives: 26 22 (84.6) 4 (15.4) 0(0) Husbands: 26 21 (80.8) 5 (19.2) 0(0) Total 52 43 (82.7) 9 (17.3) 0(0) HISTORY OF MARITAL SEPARATION 1 Month 2 - 6 6 - 1 2 Less than n None or Less Months Months One Year Group One 10 6(60.0) 0(0.0) 2(20.0) 1(10.0) 1(10.0) Group Two 26 24(92.3) 1(3.8) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 1 (3.8) AGE AT MARRIAGE Group One Wives: 8 Husbands: 7 Under 30 5(62.5) 2(28.6) 30-39 3(32.5) 5(71.4) 40-49 0(0.0) 0(0.0) 50-59 0(0.0) 0(0.0) Over 60 0(0.0) 0(0.0) Total 15 7(46.7) 8(53.3) 0(0.0) 0(0.0) 0(0.0) Group Two Wives: 26 23(88.5) 2 (7.7) 1(3.8) 0(0.0) 0(0.0) Husbands: 26 19(73.1) 4(15.4) 2(7.7) 1(3.8) 0(0.0) Total 52 42(80.8) 6(11.5) 3(5.8) 1(1.9) 0(0.0) (table continues) - 70 -Table 3 (con't) Frequency (Percent) Distribution of Subjects Within Family Background Categories: Family Demographics NUMBER OF DEPENDANT CHILDREN Newborn 3-5 6-9 10-13 14-19 Over n 2 Years Years Years Years Years 2 0 Years Group One 18 3(16.7) 4(22.2) 3(16.7) 3(16.7) 4(22.2) 1(5.5) Group Two 48 6(12.5) 7(14.6) 11(22.9) 10(20.8) 13(27.1) 1(2.1) SPOUSAL ROLE RESPONSIBILITIES Group One Training Thera- Sexual Kinship House Child Older Provider peutic Relat. Respons. Keeper Care Children Wives: 2(20) 6(60) 2(20) 5(50) 7(70) 7(70) 5(62.5) Husbands: 4(40) 1(10) 5(50) 2(20) 1(10) 0 (0) 0 (0.0) Shared: 4(40) 3(30) 3(30) 3(30) 2(20) 3(30) 3(37.5) Total 10 10 10 10 10 10 8 Group Two Wives: 0 (0.0) 5(19.2) 1 (3.8) 10(40.0) 15(57.7) 13(50) 8 (3.2) Husbands: 11(42.3) 3(11.5) 8(30.8) 1 (4.0) 0 (0.0) 0 (0) 2 (8.0) Shared: 15(57.7) 18(69.2) 17(65.4) 14(56.0) 11(42.3) 13(50) 15(60.0) Total 26 26 26 25 26 26 25 - 71 -Due to an eligibility criterion, no couple was without children, and both groups tended to have a mix of very young to later adolescent children. Spousal role responsibilities appear to have been allocated along fairly stereotypic lines for Group One couples: wives were responsible for instilling the therapeutic element in their marriages (60 percent), kept up kinship responsibilities (50 percent), undertook child care and training of older children (70 and 62.5 percent respectively) and did the housework (70 percent); the provider role was either allocated to the husband or shared equally (40 percent in both situations). For Group Two couples, although some roles appeared to be more equitably shared, wives still maintained the home (57.7 percent) and cared for children (50 percent) much of the time, while, when not sharing the provider role, husbands were the main breadwinner in 42.3 percent of the couples. Table 4 summarizes the occupational demographics of the couples. Three quarters of Group One wives and 42.9 percent of their husbands took time out from their labour force participation to be home for some duration while their partner worked. This contrasts with 73.1 percent of wives and 19.2 percent of husbands for Group Two. Almost 67 percent of the participants in Group One had been employed - 72 -Table 4 Frequency (Percent) Distribution of Subjects Within Family Background Categories: Occupational Demographics TIME HOME WHILE PARTNER WORKED Group One Less than 1-3 4-7 8-11 12-15 More Than n None 1 Year Years Years Years Years 15 Years Wives: 8 2(25.0) 2(25.0) 2(25.0) 1(12.5) 0(0.0) 0(0.0) 1(12.5) Husbands: 7 4(57.1) 0 (0.0) 3(42.9) 0 (0.0) 0(0.0) 0(0.0) 0 (0.0) Total 15 6(40.0) 2(13.3) 5(33.3) 1 (6.7) 0(0.0) 0(0.0) 1 (6.7) Group Two Wives: 26 7(26.9) 5(19.2) 6(23.1) 4(15.4) 1(3.8)3(11.5) 0(0.0) Husbands: 26 21(80.8) 3(11.5) 2 (7.7) 0 (0.0) 0(0.0) 0(0.0) 0(0.0) Total 52 28(53.8) 8(15.4) 8(15.4) 4 (7.7) 1(1.9) 3(5.8) 0(0.0) YEARS EMPLOYED Group One n Under 5 5-9 10-14 15-19 2 0 or More Wives: 8 1(12.5) 1(12.5) 4(50.0) 1(12.5) 1(12.5) Husbands: 7 0 (0.0) 1(14.3) 2(28.6) 3(42.8) 1(14.3) Total 15 1 (6.7) 2(13.3) 6(40.0) 4(26.7) 2(13.3) Group Two Wives: 26 0 (0.0) 7(26.9) 10(38.5) 6(23.1) 3(11.5) Husbands: 26 0 (0.0) 5(19.2) 5(19.2) 8(30.8) 8(30.8) Total 52 0 (0.0) 12(23.1) 15(28.8) 14(26.9) 11(21.2) (table continues) - 73 -Table 4 (con't) Frequency (Percent) Distribution of Subjects Within Family Background Categories: Occupational Demographics OCCUPATION Group One Entre- Profes- Office Man-n Preneur sional Sales Worker aqer Technical Other Wives: 8 0(0.0) 6(75.0) 0(0.0) 1(12.5) 0(0.0) 1(12.5) 0(0.0) Husbands: 7 0(0.0) 6(85.7) 0(0.0) 0(0.0) 0(0.0) 1(14.3) 0(0.0) Total 15 0(0.0) 12(80.0) 0(0.0) 1(6.7) 0(0.0) 2(13.3) 0(0.0) Group Two Wives: 26 1(3.8) 15(57.7) 1 (3.8) 3(11.5) 1 (3.8) 1 (3.8) 4(15.4) Husbands: 26 1(3.8) 10(38.5) 3(11.5) 0 (0.0) 5(19.2) 6(23.1) 1 (3.8) Total 52 2(3.8) 25(48.1) 4 (7.7) 3 (5.8) 6(11.5) 7(13.5) 5 (9.6) HOURS WORKED PER WEEK: PRIMARY EMPLOYMENT Group One Less than More than n 20 20-29 30-39 40-49 50-59 59 Wives: 8 0 (0.0) 1(12.5) 3(37.5) 4(50.0) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) Husbands: 7 1(14.3) 0 (0.0) 1(14.3) 2(20.6) 2(28.6) 1(14.3) Total 15 1 (6.7) 1 (6.7) 4(26.7) 6(40.0) 2(13.3) 1 (6.7) Group Two Wives: 26 0(0.0) 5(19.2) 10(38.5) 7(26.9) 1 (3.8) 3(11.5) Husbands: 26 0(0.0) 0 (0.0) 7(26.9) 13(50.0) 3(11.5) 3 (1.5) Total 52 0(0.0) 5 (9.6) 17(32.7) 20(38.5) 4 (7.6) 6(11.5) (table continues) - 74 -Table 4 (con't) Frequency (Percent) Distribution of Subjects Within Family Background Categories: Occupational Demographics HOURS WORKED PER WEEK: SECONDARY EMPLOYMENT Group One n 5 or Under 6-10 11-15 16-20 More than 2 0 Wives: 0 0(0.0) 0(0.0) 0(0.0) 0(0.0) 0(0.0) Husbands: 1 0(0.0) 1(14.3) 0(0.0) 0(0.0) 0(0.0) Total 1 0(0.0) 1(6.7) 0(0.0) 0(0.0) 0(0.0) Group Two Wives: 4 1(3.8) 2(7.7) 0(0.0) 0(0.0) 1(3.8) Husbands: 2 0(0.0) 0(0.0) 1(3.8) 1(3.8) 0(0.0) Total 6 1(1.9) 2(3.8) 1(1.9) 1(1.9) 1(1.9) CAREER/JOB ORIENTATION Group One n Career Job Wives: 8 7(87.5) 1(12.5) Husbands: 7 6(85.7) 1(14.3) Total 15 13(86.7) 2(13.3) Group Two Wives: 26 20(76.9) 6(23.1) Husbands: 25 20(80.0) 5(20.0) Total 51 40(78.4) 11(21.6) (table continues) - 75 -Table 4 (con't) Frequency (Percent) Distribution of Subjects Within Family Background Categories: Occupational Demographics APPROXIMATE JOINT INCOME Less than 30,000 40,000 50,000 More than n 29,999 39,999 49,999 59,999 59,999 Group One 10 1(10.0) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 4(40.0) 5(50.0) Group Two 26 0 (0.0) 3(11.5) 5(19.2) 8(30.8) 10(38.5) - 76 -Table 5 Frequency (Percent) Distribution of Subjects Within Family Background Categories: Ethnic and Religious Demographics ETHNIC GROUP AFFILIATION GROUP ONE WIVES HUSBANDS AMERICAN CANADIAN ENGLISH IRISH SCOTTISH GERMAN POLISH FINNISH THAI PHILIPPINE INDIAN DUTCH ICELANDIC CZECHOSLOVAK AUSTRIAN UNKNOWN (12.5) (37.5) (12.5) (25.0) (14.3) (28.5) 1 (14.3) (14.3) (14.3) GROUP TWO WIVES 1 (3.8) 8 (30.8) 5(19.2) 1 (3.8) (3.8) (7.7) (3.8) (3.8) 1 (12.5) 1 (14.3) (3.8) (3.8) (3.8) (3.8) (7.7) HUSBANDS 1 ( 3 . 7 ( 2 6 . 7 ( 2 6 , 2 ( 7 . 2 ( 7 , 1 ( 3 . 1 ( 3 , 1 ( 3 . 8 ) .9 ) .9) .7 ) .7 ) 8) .8 ) 8) 1 (3.8) 3(11.5) Total 8 (100.0) 7(100.0) 26(99.6) 26(99.7) EXTENT OF IMPACT OF ETHNIC GROUP AFFILIATION Group One n Greatly Quite Alot Somewhat Wives: Husbands: 0 (0.0) 2(33.3) 0(0.0) 0(0.0) 5(71.4) 2(33.3) Very Little Not at All 2 (28.6) 1(16.7) 0 (0.0) 1(16.7) Total 13 2(15.4) 0(0.0) 7(53.8) 3(23.1) 1 (7.7) Group Two Wives: Husbands: 26 24 1(3.8) 1(4.16) 4 (15.3) 4(16.66) 5(19.2) 4(16.66) 7(26.9) 5(20.83) 9(34.6) 10(41.66) Total 50 2(4.0) 8(16.0) 9(18.0) 12(24.0) 19(38.0) (table continues) - 77 -Table 5 (con't) Frequency (Percent) Distribution of Subjects Within Family Background Categories: Ethnic and Religious Demographics RELIGIOUS AGNOSTIC ATHEIST GROUP AFFILIATION PROTESTANT R. CATHOLIC BUDDIST UNITARIAN UNKNOWN Total EXTENT OF GrouD One Wife: Husband: Total GrouD Two Wife: Husband: GROUP ONE WIVES 1 (2.5) 4 (50.0) 1 (12.5) 1 (12.5) 1 (12.5) 8(100.0) IMPACT OF RELIGIOUS n 7 6 13 26 24 Greatlv 1 (14.2) 3 (50.0) 4 (30.0) 3 (11.5) 3 (12.5) HUSBANDS 4 (57.1) 1 (14.3) 2 (28.6) 7(100.0) GROUP TWO WIVES 6 (23. 15 (57. 4 (15. 1 (3. 26(100. ; GROUP AFFILIATION Ouite Alot 3 2 5 4 3 (42.9) (33.3) (38.5) (15.3) (12.5) Somewhat 3 0 3 L2 9 (42.9) (0.0) (23.1) (46.2) (37.5) .1) .7) .4) .8) .0) HUSBANDS 1 (3.8) 8 (30.8) 13(50.0) 2 (7.7) 1 (3.8) 1 (3.8) 26 (99.9) Very Little Not 0 0 0 2 3 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 1 (0.0) 1 (7.7) 5 (12.5) 5 at (0 (6 (7. (19. (25. All .0) .6) .0) .2) .0) Total 50 6 (12.0) 7 (14.0) 21 (42.0) 5 (10.0) 11 (22.0) - 78 -for 10 to 20 years. In no case among Group Two participants had anyone been employed for less than five years; within each remaining subcategory, participants were evenly distributed. Occupationally, 80 percent of Group One and a little less than 50 percent of Group Two participants were working in professional fields (Group Two wives were more prevalent than their husbands in this occupational category, 57.7 and 38.5 percent respectively). Two-thirds of Group One participants were employed between 3 0 to 49 hours per week in their primary occupation, and in only one case was any participant from this group employed in a second job. The majority of Group One husband and wives viewed their employment as a career (85.7 and 87.5 percent respectively). Group Two wives and husbands also largely perceived their work as a career endeavour (76.9 and 80 percent respectively) at which 71.2 percent of the participants worked between 30-49 hours weekly. However, 11.5 percent of Group Two participants held down a second job. The entire sample was relatively affluent with 90 percent of Group One and 69.3 percent of Group Two earning more than $50,000.00 family income per year. As to the ethnic and religious categories, Table 5 demonstrates that participants were representative of a diversity of group affiliations with an apparently equally - 79 -variant degree of effect to their personal life. In summary, the sample used in this study tended to be a group of professional couples who were under the age of 40 years and married less than 15 years with joint incomes of more than $50,000.00 per year. All couples were involved in child rearing. They seemed representative of families struggling with the difficulties of balancing the demands of careers for both partners with family life responsibilities. Statistical Analyses of the Hypotheses Hypothesis 1 stated that there is no statistically significant difference in couple's mean score between distressed and non distressed couples as measured by the Attitudes Toward Women Scale. Before the couples' scores could be statistically tested, cut off points in marital adjustment were derived for Group One and Group Two utilizing the LERTAP item analysis procedure. Five subjects were eliminated from the statistical analysis of this hypothesis because they were maritally separated from partners who refused to participate in the research. Each of these subjects reported distressed levels of marital adjustment. The mean for marital adjustment for distressed couples was 64.70 with a standard deviation of 19.66, while for non distressed couples the mean for marital adjustment - 80 -was 110.58 with a standard deviation of 7.05. In analyzing the data, the t test of the difference between means for independent groups was performed with a Type I error probability equal to .05. The two-sample t test of the difference between means assumes the following: 1) population variances are unknown but equal (homoscedasticity); 2) random samples have been obtained from their respective populations; 3) the population distribution of the variables of interest are normally distributed (Kirk, 1978, p. 272). Three comments need to be made in light of the foregoing assumptions. Firstly, as a purposive sample was drawn specifying criteria for inclusion which was later discriminated into two distinct groups (distressed and non distressed), randomness cannot, strictly speaking, be argued. However, demographic information was taken which identifies the representativeness of the samples to the larger population of dual career couples. Secondly, although the t test is not very sensitive to departures from normality and is a robust test (Ferguson, 1981; Kirk, 1978), the size of the sample of distressed couples was small (n=5). It is difficult to say whether the sample fulfilled the assumption of normality. Finally, while the sample size of non distressed - 81 -couples (n=26) was sufficient to test for a large size effect with a power of .80 (1-/3), the sample size for distressed couples was insufficient. The minimum sample size needed was 21 for a one-tailed test or 26 for a two-tailed test of the t distribution (Kirk, 1978). The threat this posed to the test was the increased probability of accepting a false null hypothesis (Type II error). It is arguable whether hypothesis 1 could be satisfactorily tested given the size of the sample. For this test, the null hypothesis was accepted (Table 6). From this finding, it was concluded that the attitudes that distressed couples express toward women's contemporary roles are not significantly different from those of non distressed couples. TABLE 6 Independent samples t test (Couples' scores) on Attitudes Toward Women Scale (AWS) Group n Mean St.Dev. t-value p Distressed 5 122.40 16.01 -0.35 >.05 Non Distressed 26 125.48 18.56 - 82 -Out of the thirty-one couples, five fell into the category distressed and twenty-six were identified as non distressed. Although non distressed couples had a higher mean on attitudes toward women, the difference was not statistically significant. As well, the non distressed group was more variable in their scoring with a standard deviation of 18.56 as compared to the distressed group standard deviation of 16.01. Hypothesis 2 stated that there is no significant correlation (Spearman r) between husbands and wives difference scores on the Dyadic Adjustment Scale and their difference scores on the Attitudes Toward Women Scale. In analyzing the data, Spearman rank correlation coefficients were computed to identify the relationship between the variables for (i) distressed husbands and wives, (ii) non distressed husbands and wives, and (iii) for the total sample of husbands and wives. As the occurrence of tied ranks violates the assumptions underlying the derivation of Spearman r, the ranks were treated as scores, and Pearson product-moment correlation coefficients were calculated. This procedure resulted in Spearman rank correlation coefficients that can be regarded as having been corrected for ties (Kirk, 1979, p. 118). Table 7 examines the correlations so derived. - 83 -Table 7 Correlation Coefficients (Spearman r Corrected) for Difference Scores Between Husbands and Wives on Marital Adjustment and Attitudes Toward Women Group Distressed: H.-W. Non Distressed: H.-W. Total Score: H.-W. n 5 26 31 Observed 0.71 0.11 0.20 Critical 1.000 0.392 0.364 While the correlation for difference scores between distressed husbands and wives on the DAS and AWS was .71, the relationship was not statistically significant. The correlation for difference scores between non distressed husbands and wives on the DAS and the AWS was .11. This was not statistically significant either. Finally, the total sample correlation was .20 and was not a statistically significant result. From these results, it can be concluded that for this sample of dual career couples, there is no monotonic relationship between the variables. Differences between spouses in relation to their attitudes toward women's contemporary roles neither increases nor decreases with differences in how they perceive their marriages. Hypothesis 3 stated that there is no statistically - 84 -significant difference in mean score between males and females as measured by the Attitudes Toward Women Scale, regardless of marital adjustment. In analyzing the data, the t test for independent groups was performed with a Type I error probability equal to .05. As per the previous discussion concerning the assumptions of the t test in hypothesis 1, representativeness of the sample drawn to the larger population of dual career men and women is argued. There is no reason to question the normality of the distribution, and the sample size was sufficiently large to test for a large size effect with a power {1-fi) of .80 or .90 (Kirk, 1978). For this test, the null hypothesis was rejected (Table 8). From this finding it was concluded that females are significantly more liberal in their attitudes toward women's contemporary roles than are males. Females had a mean score of 130.38 on the Attitudes Toward Women Scale which was significantly higher than the male mean score of 119.03. Males were more variable in their scoring with a standard deviation of 21.59 compared to 17.42 for females. - 85 -Table 8 Independent sample t test (Individuals' scores) on Attitudes Toward Women Scale (AWS) Group Males Females n 33 34 Mean 119.03 130.38 St.Dev. 21.59 17.42 t-value -2.38 P <.05 Hypothesis 4 stated that there is no statistically significant score interaction between the factors gender and marital adjustment as measured by the Attitudes Toward Women Scale. Before the subjects' scores could be statistically tested, cut off points in marital adjustment for individuals were derived, as before, for Group One and Group Two utilizing the LERTAP procedure. For the analysis of this hypothesis, the sample size was reduced to 63 through the elimination of four subjects whose scores fell between the cut off points of 90 and 95. Visual inspection of the resultant cell totals suggested that their unequal sizes were a threat to the utility of ANOVA without special treatment (Spatz and Johnson, 1976). Therefore, a chi square was performed to test the adjunct hypothesis that the observed and expected cell frequencies do not depart - 86 -significantly from proportionality (Ferguson, 1971; Spatz and Johnson, 1976). The probability of a Type I error equal to .05 was utilized. The null hypothesis was accepted (Table 9). The cell frequencies were proportionate to column and row totals, and did not require special treatment to deal with the unequal cell sizes (Ferguson, 1981). Total scale means on AWS by the factors gender and marital adjustment are given in Table 10. Graphic representation of the data suggested an interaction between the two independent variables (Figure 1). Table 9 Distribution of Individuals According to Gender and Marital Adjustment (Expected frequencies are in parentheses) Gender Male Female Marital Distressed 5(6.19) 8(6.81) Adj ustment Non Distressed 25(23.81) 25(26.19) Total 30 33 E 13 50 63 Observed chi-square = 0.55 Critical chi-square =3.84 - 87 -Table 10 Mean Score on the Attitudes Toward Women Scale (Gender by Marital Ajustment) Gender Marital Adjustment Distressed Non Distressed Male Female 109.60 130.00 120.00 129.88 Figure 1 Mean Scores: Attitudes Toward Women Scale (AWS) Score 135 130 125 120 115 110 105 (Female) (Male) t -f- 4-Distressed Non distressed - 88 -In analyzing the data, a two-way ANOVA was performed for the total scale scores and each of the six themes with the probability of a Type I error being .05. Using the Bonferroni inequality rule (Glass & Hopkins, 1984; Kirk, 1982) the per contrast Type I error rate was set at .01 (.05 i 7) . Three significant main effects were observed for gender in the following: total scale (AWS) and two themes: vocational, educational, and intellectual roles (VEIR), and marital relations and obligations (MROB) (Tables 11, 12, 13). All other main effects and interactions were statistically nonsignificant. From these findings it was concluded that females were uniformly most liberal in their attitudes toward womens' contemporary roles with distressed males least liberal and non distressed males intermediate. Males held significantly less liberal attitudes toward womens' contemporary roles than did females (mean males = 118.27; mean females = 129.91). But males specifically held less liberal attitudes toward the vocational, educational and intellectual roles of women, (mean males = 42.5; mean females = 46.06), as well as in respect to womens' marital roles and obligations (mean males = 39.4; mean females = 44.7) 89 Table 11 Analysis of Variance: Attitudes Toward Women Scale (Gender by Marital Adjustment) Source Gender Marital Adjustment Interaction Within Group Total SS 2227.41 177.49 273.26 22659.84 25240.60 df 1 1 1 59 62 MS 2227.41 177.49 273.26 384.06 F 5.80 0.46 0.71 P 0.019* 0.494 0.402 Table 12 Analysis of Variance: Attitudes Toward Women Scale Themes Vocational, Educational and Intellectual Roles (Gender by Marital Adjustment) Source Gender Marital Adjustment Interaction Within Group SS 208.30 16.44 21.05 1809.84 df 1 1 1 59 MS 208.30 16.44 21.05 30.68 F 6.79 0.54 0.69 P 0.012* 0.466 0.411 Total 2046.60 62 - 90 -Table 13 Analysis of Variance: Attitudes Toward Women Scale Themes Marital Roles and Obligations (Gender by Marital Adjustment) Source Gender Marital Adjustment Interaction Within Group Total SS 451.32 13.10 61.11 2491.46 3007.07 df 1 1 1 59 62 MS 451. 13, 61. 42. .32 .10 .11 .26 F 10.69 0.31 1.45 P 0.002* 0.580 0.234 Hypothesis 5 stated that there is no significant correlation (Pearson r) between subject's scores on the Dyadic Adjustment Scale and their scores on the Attitudes Toward Women Scale. In analyzing the data, Pearson product-moment correlation coefficients were computed to identify the relationship between the independent and dependent variables for (i) individual's scores and (ii) couples combined scores in both Group One and Group Two, and for (iii) the total sample. The null hypothesis was rejected for the total sample only. Table 14 examines the correlations derived. - 91 -The correlation between DAS and AWS for distressed individuals was -.09, while for non distressed individuals it was -.21. Though the relationship between the two variables for both groups was inverse, in both cases the strength of the relationship between the variables was not statistically significant. The correlation for distressed couples was .12, while for non distressed couples the correlation was -.32. Neither correlation reached significance, and for non distressed couples the relationship between the variables was inverse. The product-moment correlation obtained for the total sample on DAS and AWS was computed to be .58 and this was significant at the .01 level. From this finding it was concluded that a positive but moderate relationship exists between scores on marital adjustment and scores on attitudes toward women. That is, the higher the perceived marital adjustment, the generally more liberal are attitudes toward womens' contemporary roles. - 92 -Table 14 Pearson Correlation Coefficients (Critical r) Between Marital Adjustment Scores (DAS) and Attitudes Toward Women Scores (AWS) (Group) Group Individuals' Scores Couples' Scores Total Sample n 10 5 67 Distressed -.09 .12 n 52 26 Non Distressed -.21 -.32 .58* * p<.01 Summary of Results This study was designed to investigate five hypotheses involving the variables of marital adjustment and attitudes toward women's contemporary roles. The summary presents each hypothesis and the results obtained. Hypotheses 1. There is no significant difference in couple's mean score between distressed and non distressed couples as measured by the Attitudes Toward Women - 93 -Scale. The null hypothesis was accepted. 2. There is no significant correlation (Spearman r) between husbands and wives score differences on the Dyadic Adjustment Scale and their score differences on the Attitudes Toward Women Scale. The null hypothesis was accepted. 3 . There is no statistically significant difference in mean score between males and females as measured by the Attitudes Toward Women Scale regardless of marital adjustment. The null hypothesis was rejected. Females are generally more liberal in their attitudes toward women's contemporary roles. 4. There is no statistically significant score interaction between the factors gender and marital adjustment as measured by the Attitudes Toward Women Scale. The null hypothesis was accepted. 5. There is no significant correlation (Pearson r) between the subjects' scores on the Dyadic Adjustment Scale and their scores on the Attitudes Toward Women Scale. The null hypothesis was rejected. The whole sample (n=67) did reveal a positive correlation (r=.58). No subgroups did. - 94 -CHAPTER FIVE SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND DISCUSSION Summary The dual career family is an increasingly evident variant of non traditional families arising in response to the societal demands, challenges and opportunities of the last few decades. Notwithstanding the satisfactions yielded by dual commitments to careers, strains intrinsic to this model of family life accrue from conflict between a structure requiring a flexible sharing of roles with a social environment normatively based on more traditional notions about men and women. The likelihood that couples' success in resolving those strains seemed related to their notions about men and women's contemporary roles in society formed the impetus to this research. The objectives of this study were to answer the following questions: 1. Do the attitudes shared by couples in dual career relationships towards women's contemporary roles vary according to perceived marital adjustment? 2 . Do differences in attitudes expressed by husbands and wives in dual career relationships towards - 95 -women's contemporary roles vary according to differences in husbands and wives perceived marital adjustment? 3 . Do men and women in dual career relationships manifest different attitudes about women's contemporary roles? 4. Does support for women's contemporary roles vary according to the perceived marital adjustment of the partners in a dual career relationship? Sixty-seven partners in dual career marriages participated in this study. These included thirty one couples and five separated individuals whose partners refused to be involved. They were voluntary subjects recruited throughout the lower mainland of British Columbi Canada. Demographic information provided on the Family Background Sheet, responded to by the participants, suggested that the sample was composed of professional couples who were under the age of 40 years, and married le than 15 years with joint incomes of more than $50,000 per year. All couples were involved in child rearing. The subjects were mailed two self administered inventories, one each for the male and female partner (the Dyadic Adjustment Scale and the Attitudes Toward Women - 96 -Scale) as well as a Family Background Sheet. The participants were given instructions to complete the inventories independently and return the materials to the researcher in a self addressed envelope. Participants were divided into two groups, distressed and non distressed based on their overall marital adjustment score on the Dyadic Adjustment Scale. Cut off points were established through item analysis of the data for both individual's and couple's combined scores. Those participants scoring less than or equal to 90 were assigned to Group One while scores greater than or equal to 95 were assigned to Group Two. Utilizing the foregoing procedures with couples combined scores, five couples were assigned to Group One while twenty six couples comprised Group Two. For the analyses concerning individuals, Group One comprised thirteen subjects (5 males and 8 females) while Group Two comprised fifty subjects (25 males and 25 females). Four individuals were eliminated from later statistical analyses because their scores in marital adjustment fell between the limits of the confidence interval. Additionally, where the researcher only had one partner's score, couples combined scores in marital adjustment could not be computed so that in five cases, otherwise distressed individuals were eliminited from later statistical analyses involving couples - 97 -combined scores. Scores on the Attitudes Toward Women Scale represented the dependent variable of this study. Five hypotheses were tested. Hypothesis one was tested using an independent groups t test for the difference between means to determine whether there was a statistically significant difference between two groups on attitudes toward women. Hypothesis two was tested utilizing Spearman rank correlation coefficients (corrected for tied ranks) to establish the relationship between the variables. Hypothesis three was also tested utilizing an independent groups t test for the difference between means. Hypothesis four was tested using a two-way analysis of variance. The independent variables were gender of subject and marital adjustment (dichotomized into distressed and non distressed) while the dependent variable was attitudes toward women. Hypothesis five was tested utilizing Pearson product-moment correlation coefficients establishing the relationship between the variables. The null was accepted for hypotheses one and two. Support was established for hypotheses three and five. While generally the null for hypothesis four was accepted, three significant main effects occurred in respect to gender of subject. - 98 -Discussion of Findings 1. Hypothesis One: There is no statistically significant difference in mean score between distressed and non distressed couples as measured by the Attitudes Toward Women Scale. Result: The null hypothesis was accepted. The attitudes that distressed couples express toward women's contemporary roles are not significantly different from those of non distressed couples. Discussion: The results question the theoretical rationale behind this hypothesis, namely, that the difficulties dual career couples experience in their marriages is related to their notions about women's contemporary roles in society. Indeed, the result suggest that this hypothesis is untenable. It appears that attitudes toward women do not relate to the marital adjustment of couples attempting to balance the demands of two careers and family life. This result does not support previous research on gender role attitudes and marital adjustment (Bowen and Orthner, 1983; Li and Caldwell, 1987; Leupto, Guss and Hyden, 1989). It should be noted however that this study utilized a different design involving different instrumentation than the previous research. Firstly, the populations targeted in those studies differed; - 99 -62 percent of the couples in Bowen and Orthner (1983) were dual earner (military) couples; Li and Caldwell (1987) had a similar number of dual earner couples. Only 71 percent and 62 percent respectively of these couples had dependent children. Secondly, no study utilized the same instrument to measure gender role attitudes. Bowen and Orthner (1983) developed an 11 item Likert-type scale of short statements proporting to express either "modern" or "traditional" sex role preferences. Lueptow, Guss and Hyden (1989) examined the responses to four gender role oriented items on a national survey. Li and Caldwell (1987) utilized the Parental and Marital subscales of the Sex-Role Egalitarianism Scale (Beere, King, Berre and King, 1984) which is a 19 item Likert-type scale that proports to measure degree of agreement with beliefs about the proper roles of fathers and mothers, men and women. Finally, in only Li and Caldwell (1987) was the Dyadic Adjustment Scale (Spanier, 1976) utilized to measure quality of marriage. Alternatively, the lack of substantiation for the hypothesis may be due to methodological issues in the research design of this study. Firstly, the subject pool of distressed couples was very small (five distressed and 26 non distressed couples) even though the tests - 100 -utilized were appropriate. While use of the standard error of measurement to produce cut off points for marital adjustment was considered a legitimate statistical practice in trying to estimate with a greater level of confidence which scores on DAS were truly distressed and which were not, this was a factor in reducing the sample size. Secondly, the participants were volunteers, and the researcher experienced difficulty in securing dual career couples willingness to be involved. Those who would have been experiencing marital difficulty may have been especially reticent to participate in the research. However, no attempt was made to follow-up those canvassed but who declined involvement at the outset (Hiller and Philliber, 1985). As well, perhaps dual career couples are simply too overworked to expend even the little time this particular study demanded. Research on the married couple population generally is seen to be plagued by a diminished response rate (Hiller and Philliper, 1985) . Randomly sampling a readily identifiable group such as registries for lawyers, physicians, university professors or teachers may have enlarged the sample sufficiently. Thirdly, while averaging individual DAS scores to produce couples combined scores was considered legitimate statistical practice (Spanner, 1971), it is possible that such practice in - 101 -respect to the Attitudes Toward Women Scale may not be tenable, and instead hide real difference in the subjects' responses (Perry-Jenkins, 1989). 2. Hypothesis Two: There is no significant correlation (Spearman r) between husbands and wives difference scores on the Dyadic Adjustment Scale and their difference scores on the Attitudes Toward Women Scale. Results: The null hypothesis was accepted. There is no monotonic relationship between the variables. Differences between spouses in relation to their attitudes toward women's contemporary roles neither increases nor decreases with differences in how they perceive their marital adjustment. Discussion: This hypothesis attempted to identify whether husband-wife pair differences in attitudes toward women and marital adjustment ordered from greatest to least difference on the variables. That is, whether those husband-wife pairs with the greatest incongruence on marital adjustment also demonstrated the greatest incongruence on attitudes toward women and so forth. As with hypothesis one, the result does not support previous research findings. Caldwell and Li (1989) noted that marital gender role incongruence and marital adjustment is a function both of the magnitude and direction - 102 -of spousal disagreement about gender roles. In Caldwell and Li (1989) traditional husbands married to egalitarian wives demonstrated the lowest level of marital adjustment. Bowen and Orthner (1983) found a similar result. However, for this sample of dual career couples, those husband-wife pairs who showed the greatest incongruence in their perceived marital adjustment, did not necessarily show the greatest incongruence in their attitudes toward women's roles. Men and women's attitudes toward women's roles appear to have no relationship with quality of a marriage. 3. Hypothesis Three: There is no statistically significant difference in mean score between males and females as measured by the Attitudes Toward Women Scale, regardless of marital adjustment. Results: The null hypothesis was rejected. Females are significantly more liberal in their attitudes toward women's contemporary roles than are males. Discussion: In testing hypothesis three the construct validity of Spence and Helmreich's Attitudes Toward Women Scale (1972) was replicated. As in their study, men and women were discriminated in terms of their attitudes about the "proper" roles of women. This replication demonstrates support for the theoretical orientation behind the hypothesis, namely, that the sex role training of men and - 103 -women inculcates a nonconscious bias about women's roles (Bern and Bern, 1971). If the AWS can be considered a measure of egalitarianism in marriage, then the males in this study held to more traditional notions, while the females held to more equalitarian notions of marriage. The elevated scores of the present sample relative to Spence and Helmreich (1972) may demonstrate a liberalizing of both men and women's attitudes over the years since the publication of the AWS. However, the apparently larger disparity between males and females scores in this sample (males mean=119.03, females mean=130.332) compared to Spence and Helmreich's (1972) reported scores for male and female college students (mean=89.261 and 98.211 respectively) who would have been cohorts to this sample, might suggest the differential impact that the feminist movement has had to both sexes (Rapoport and Rapoport, 1975). 4. Hypothesis Four: There is no statistically significant score interaction between the factors gender and marital adjustment as measured by the Attitude Toward Women Scale. Results: The null hypothesis was accepted. While females were uniformly most liberal in their attitudes toward women's contemporary roles irregardless of marital adjustment, with distressed males least liberal and non distressed males intermediate, the tendency toward - 104 -interaction was not great enough to reach statistical significance. Three main effects in the factor of gender occurred: males held significantly less liberal attitudes toward women's contemporary roles than did females; males were significantly less liberal as to the vocational, educational and intellectual roles of women; males also held significantly less liberal attitudes than females in respect to women's marital roles and obligations. Discussion: Whereas hypothesis three sought to determine whether the men and women of this study held to different notions of women's contemporary roles, hypothesis four was proposed to better elucidate how the factors of gender of subject and marital adjustment might interact. There was no statistically significant score interaction between the factors. Consistent with the results of hypothesis three, females were significantly more liberal than males, but it is instructive that males were specifically less liberal minded in respect to women's career and academic roles, as well as in their expectations of women's marital and domestic roles and obligations. These later two findings lend support to the rationale behind this hypothesis, namely, that having been brought up in an era during which traditional role prescriptions were predominant, males who entered dual career marriages could - 105 -be expected to retain these notions to some degree in two key areas of their value system: women's achievement and family role involvements (Bern and Bern, 1971; Rapoport and Rapoport, 1975) . 5. Hypothesis Five: There are no significant correlations among all subjects scores on the Dyadic Adjustment Scale and Attitudes Toward Women Scale. Results: The null hypothesis was rejected for the total sample scores only. Scores on marital adjustment are significantly and positively correlated at a moderate level with scores on attitudes toward women. Discussion: This hypothesis attempted to clarify the relationship between attitudes toward women and marital adjustment. When the total scale scores (n=67) were examined irrespective of gender, a moderate but significant level of correlation was achieved (r=.58, p<.01). This suggested that there is a relationship between marital adjustment and attitudes toward women. But when the two groups were compared for individuals and couples, the relationship between the variables changed. Low, inverse and non significant correlations of coefficience were achieved for both Group One (distressed) (r=.-09), and Group Two (non distressed) individuals (r=.-21). A low correlation occurred between marital adjustment - 106 -and attitudes toward women for Group One (distressed) couples (r=.12), while a stronger, but still low and inverse correlation occurred for group two (non distressed) couples (r=-.32). Taken together, these uniformly low correlations suggested that there was little or no relationship between the two variables. Methodological Limitations The subjects involved in this study agreed to participate on a voluntary basis. This limits the generalizability of the findings to the population of dual career couples from which the sample was derived because the subjects may have had a response set that differs from that of the general population. The research design relied wholly on self report techniques and as such the results were influenced by what the subjects were prepared to reveal about themselves. The problem of social desirability was not considered for the Dyadic Adjustment Scale and was not controlled for in the study. A multidimensional design utilizing both self report and observational techniques would have strengthened the data gathered by providing more information on response sets, actual behaviors expressed by the subjects in the operation of their various roles, and provide the researcher - 107 -with an opportunity to probe the difference between reported and observed data (Laws, 1971; Spanier, 1976; Spanier and Lewis, 1980; Perry-Jenkins, 1988). The unit of analysis for this study was both the couple and the individual. However, where responses were not received from an individual spouse, that individual was dropped from analyses involving couples. Use of a couple's score was problematic, and is not recommended to future researchers because it tends to hide real differences that exist within a marital dyad. In identifying the two groups, the sample of distressed participant couples and individuals was smaller than anticipated. A good deal of difficulty was encountered in securing the participation of subjects for this study. Non responders were not canvassed as to the reasons for their unwillingness to participate (Hiller and Philliber, 1985). A much larger sample would have been necessary in order to better assess the differences between the two groups on the variables of interest (Kirk, 1978). Moreover, establishing a confidence interval about a cutoff point to dicotomize marital adjustment impairs examination of the variables. Data is lost in the process. A design which treats marital adjustment as a continuous variable would add rigor to the research. Regression analysis utilizes all of the data and - 108 -could be used to more elegantly correlate the variables and add to predicability (Kirk, 1978; Spatz and Johnson, 1976). Implications and Suggestions for Further Research This study sought to explore the relationship between perceived marital adjustment and attitudes toward women's contemporary roles for dual career couples. The relationship between the variables in question was complicated by a lower representation of distressed couples. This may have been an artifact of the sheer volume of work shouldered by dual career couples in coping with the daily life demands of continuing two vocations and a family life, and deserves further research (Hiller and Philliber, 1985). For this sample of dual career couples, no relationship emerged between perceived marital adjustment and attitudes toward women when the unit of analysis was the couple. Distressed couples were no more traditional or liberal in their attitudes about women's contemporary roles than were non distressed couples. Moreover, no significant results emerged from examination of the differences between husbands and wives attitudes toward women's contemporary roles and marital adjustment. However, when the unit of analysis was the individual, regardless of marital distress, the study established that females were more liberal minded about - 109 -women's roles than were males. Interestingly, the males in this study held to less liberal notions about women's achievement and family role involvements. Moreover, when total sample scores on marital adjustment and attitudes toward women's roles were correlated, a moderate positive correlation was observed between the variables. What does the foregoing mean to marital research and family therapy? While the population of dual career couples is growing, they are unique in their struggles to balance two careers and maintain a family life together. More research that will elucidate the relationship between men and women's gender role attitudes and their accommodation to the requirements of the dual career life style is necessary. Further research which better links men and women's attitudes towards work and family life to actual role enactments, will be useful to family therapists and educators (Perry-Jenkins, 1988). Such research will provide direction for counselling men and women who are attempting to develop a dual career lifestyle. Longitudinal studies will be important in evaluating the implications of a dual career lifestyle to child development and parenting, as well as in measuring the differential accommodations made over the family life cycle. Research that links attitudes toward women, role - 110 -enactments and marital quality will also be important to policy development in business and government. At a societal level, political and business initiatives will be an important element in helping dual career couples to remain a viable family pattern. In the expensive world of the last decade of this century, the demands for two salaries to support family life are ever more requisite. The constructive efforts of social policy makers will be necessary to effect changes in society that will assist dual career families. These include a partnership between government and business in promoting improvements in day care, the expansion of flexible work schedules, a wider and greater availability of parental leaves, and the utilization of home offices wherever practical. Conclusion Whether or not the dual career life style is viable (Berardo, Shehan and Leslie, 1987) it appears that the dual career couple is here to stay. The issues faced by such couples in managing the competing demands of two careers and a family life together are diverse and complicated. The present study has only examined attitudes toward women as one variable impacting the marital adjustment of these couples. While the results were unspectacular, the research identified that there is a correlation between marital - Ill -adjustment and attitudes toward women's roles, and that differences exist between how males and females view women's achievement and family role enactments in contemporary society. More research is needed to better examine these areas. - 112 -REFERENCES Albright, D.G., & Chang, A.F. (1976). An examination of how one's attitudes toward women are reflected in one's defensiveness and self-esteem. Sex Roles. 2(2), 195-198. Aldous, J. (1982). Two Paychecks: Life in dual-earner families. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage. American Psychological Association. (1983) . Publication manual of the American Psychological Association (3rd ed.). Washington, DC: Author. Araji, S.K. (1977). Husbands' and wives' attitude behavior congruence on family roles. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 309-320. Bailey, W.T., Lees, E.A., & Harrell, D.R. (1992). The Attitudes Toward Women Scale (AWS) and global attitudes toward women. The Journal of General Psychology. 119(3), 315-317. Bailyn, L. (1971). Career and family orientation of husbands and wives in relation to marital happiness. In A. Theodore (Ed.), The professional woman (pp. 545-567). Cambridge, MA: Schenkman. Bailyn, L. (1978). Accommodation of work to family. In R. Rapoport and R.N. Rapoport (Eds.), Working couples (pp. 159-174). London, England: Routledge and Kegan Paul. Beavers, W.R. (1985). Successful marriage: A family systems approach to couples therapy. New York: W.W. Norton. Bebbington, A.C. (1973). The function of stress in the establishment of the dual-career family. Journal of Marriage and the Family. 35(3), 530-537. Beere, C.A., King, D.W., Beere, D.B., & King, L.A. (1984). The sex-role egalitarianism scale: A measure of attitudes toward equality between the sexes. Sex Roles. 10, 563-576. - 113 -Bern, S.L., & Bern, D.J. (1970). Case Study of a nonconscious ideology: Training the woman to know her place. In D.J. Bern, Beliefs, attitudes and human affairs. Belmont, CA: Brooks/Cole. Bengtson, V.L., & Pina, D.L. (1993). The division of household labor and wives' happiness: Ideology, employment, and perceptions of support. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 55, 901-912. Berardo, D.H., Sheham, C.L., & Leslie, G.R. (1987). A residue of tradition: Jobs, careers, and spouses' time in housework. Journal of Marriage and The Family, 49, 381-390. Berger, M., & Wright, L. (1978). Divided allegiance: Men, work, and family life. The Counselling Psychologist, 7(4), 50-52. Bernard, J. (1972). The future of marriage. London: Souvenir Press. Blair, S.L. (1993). Employment, family, and perceptions of marital quality among husbands and wives. Journal of Family Issues. 14(2), 189-212. Blair, S.L., & Lichter, D.T. (1991). Measuring the division of household labor: Gender segregation of housework among American couples. Journal of Family Issues, 12(1), 91-113. Booth, A. (1977). Wife's employment and husband's stress: A replication and refutation. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 39(4), 645-650. Booth, A., Johnson, D.R., White, L., & Edwards, J.N. (1984). Women, outside employment, and marital instability. American Journal of Sociology. 90(3), 567-583. Borg, W.R., &Gail, M.D. (1979). Educational research: An introduction. (3rd. ed.). New York: Longman. Bowen, G.L. (1989). Marital sex role incongruence and marital adjustment. Journal of Family Issues. 10(3), 409-417. - 114 -Bowen, G.L., & Orthner, D.K. (1983). Sex-role congruency and marital quality. Journal of Marriage and The Family, 45(1), 223-230. Burgess, E.W., & Cotterell, L.S. (1936). The prediction of adjustment in marriage. American Sociological Review, 1(5), 737-751. Burgess, E.W., & Cotterell, L.S. (1939). Predicting success or failure in marriage. New York: Prentice-Hall. Burke, R.J., & Weir, T. (1976). Relationship of wives' employment status to husband, wife and pair satisfaction and performance. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 38, 279-287. Burnett, P. (1987). Assessing marital adjustment and satisfaction: A review. Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and Development. 20.(3), 113-121. Bryson, J., & Bryson, R. (1980). Salary and job performance differences in dual career couples. In F. Pepitone-Rockwell (Ed.), Dual Career Couples. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage. Caldwell, R.A., & Li, J.T. (1989). Marital sex-role incongruence and marital adjustment. Journal of Family Issues, 10(3), 416-419. Carey, M.P., Spector, I.P., Lantinga, L.J., & Krause, D.J. (1993). Reliability of The Dyadic Adjustment Scale. Psychological Abstracts. 5, 238-240. Cohen, T.F. (1987). Remaking men: Men's experiences becoming and being husbands and fathers and their implications for reconceptualizing men's lives. Journal of Family Issues, 8(1), 57-77. Crane, D.R., Allgood, S.M., Larson, J.H., & Griffin, W. (1990) . Assessing marital quality with distressed and nondistressed couples: A comparison and equivalency table for three frequently used measures. Journal of Marriage and The Family, 52, 87-93. - 115 -Cronbach, L.J. (1951). Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. Psychometrika. 16. 81-105. de Konick, M. (1984) . Double work and women's health. Canada's Mental Health, 32(3), 28-31. Doyle, J.A. (1975). Comparison of Kirkpatrick's and Spence and Helmreich's attitude toward women scales. Psychological Reports, 37(3,ptl), 878. Epstein, C.F. (1971). Law Partners and marital partners. Human Relations. 24(6), 549-564. Etaugh, C. (1975a). Biographical predictors of college students' attitudes toward women. Journal of College Student Personnel. 16, 273-275. Etaugh, C. (1975b). Stability of college students' attitudes toward women during one school year. Psychological Reports, 36.(1)/ 125-126. Etaugh, C , & Bowen, L. (1976). Attitudes toward women: Comparison of enrolled and non enrolled college students. Psychological Reports. 38, 229-230. Etaugh, C , & Gerson, A. (1974). Attitudes toward women: Some biographical correlates. Psychological Reports, 35, 701-702. Farber, R.S. (1988). Integrated treatment of the dual-career couple. The American Journal of Family Therapy. 16(1), 46-57. Ferguson, G. (1971). Statistical analyses in psychology and education. (3rd. ed.). New York: McGraw Hill. Ferree, M. (1991). The gender division of labor in two-earner marriages: Dimensions of variability and change. Journal of Family Issues. 12.(2), 158-180. Forgarty, M.P., Rapoport, R., & Rapoport, R.N. (1971). Sex, career and family. London: George Allen & Unwin. Freeman, J. (1971). The social construction of the second sex. In M.H. Garskof (Ed.), Roles women play: Readings toward women's liberation. Belmont, CA: Brooks/Cole. - 116 -Gilbert, L.A., & Rachlin, V. (1987). Marital health and psychological functioning of dual-career families. The Counseling Psychologist, 15(1), 7-49. Glass, G.V., & Hopkins, K.D. (1984). Statistical methods in education and psychology (2nd ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. Glenn, N.D. (1990) . Quantitative research on marital quality in the 1980's: A critical review. Journal of Marriage and The Family, 52, 818-831. Glickauf-Hughes, C.L., Hughes, G.B., & Wells, M.C. (1986). A developmental approach to treating dual-career couples. The American Journal of Family Therapy. 14(3), 254-263. Goldenberg, I., & Goldenberg, H. (1984). Treating the dual-career couple. The American Journal of Family Therapy. 12(2), 29-37. Gray, J.D. (1983). The married professional woman: An examination of her role conflicts and coping strategies. Psychology of Women Quarterly. 2(3), 235-243. Growler, D., Legge, K. (1978). Hidden and open contracts in marriage. In R. Rapoport, R.N. Rapoport with J.M. Bumstead (Eds.), Working couples, (pp. 47-61). London England: Routledge and Kegan Paul. Haas, L. (1982) . Determinants of role-sharing behavior: A study of egalitarian couples. Sex Roles. 8(7), 747-760. Hall, F.S., & Hall, D.T. (1979). The two-career couple. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley. Hansen, L.S. (1987). Career socialization, social change, prevention: Critical issues for dual-career counseling. The Counseling Psychologist, 15(1), 122-130. Hiller, D.V., & Philliber, W.W. (1982). Predicting marital and career success among dual-worker couples. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 44(1), 53-62. - 117 -Hiller, D.V., and Philliber, W.W. (1985). Maximizing confidence in married couple sample. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 4J7(3) , 729-732. Hochschild, A., & Machung, A. (1989). The second shift. New York: Viking Penguin. Hoffman, L.W. (1977). Changes in family roles, socialization, and sex differences. American Psychologist, 32(8), 644-655. Houseknecht, S.K., & Spanier, G.B. (1980). Marital disruption and higher education among women in the United States. The Sociological Quarterly, 21(3), 375-389. Hoyt, C.L. (1941). Test reliability estimated by analysis of variance. Psychometrika, 6, 153-160. Hunt, J.G., & Hunt, L.L. (1977). Dilemmas and contradictions of status: The case of the dual-career family. Social Problems. 24(4), 407-416. Hunt, J.G., & Hunt, L.L. (1982). Dual-career families: Vanguard of the future or residue of the past? In J. Aldous (Ed.), Two paychecks: Life in dual-career families. Beverly Hill, CA: Sage. Isaac, S. with Michael, W.B. (1971). Handbook in research and evaluation. San Diego, CA: Robert R. Knapp. Jordan, C , Cobb, N. , & McCully, R. (1988) Clinical issues of the dual-career couple. Journal of the National Association of Social Workers, 34(1), 29-32. Johson, C.L., & Johnson, F.A. (1980). Parenthood, marriage, and careers: Situational constraints. In F. Pipitone-Rockwell (Ed.), Dual-career couples, (pp. 143-161). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage. Kamo, Y. (1988) . Determinants of household division of labor: Resources, power, and ideology. Journal of Family Issues, 9(2), 177-200. - 118 -Kazak, A.E., Snitzer, L., & Jarmas, A. (1988). Some broader issues: Clinical relevance, gender sensitivity, and psychometrics. Journal of Family Psychology, 2(1), 101-104. Kazak, A.E., Jarmas, A., & Snitzer, L. (1988). The assessment of marital satisfaction: An evaluation of the Dyadic Adjustment Scale. Journal of Family Psychology, 2(1), 82-91. Kingston, P.W., & Nock, S.L. (1985). Consequences of the family work day. Journal of Marriage and the Family. 47(3), 619-629. Kirk, R.E. (1979). Introductory Statistics. Monterey, CA: Brooks/Cole. Kirk, R.E. (1982). Experimental design: Procedures for the behavioral sciences. (2nd ed., pp. 106-111). Monterey, CA: Brooks/Cole. Kirkpatrick, D.G., & Smith, A.D. (1974). Validation of the Spence-Helmrich Attitudes Toward Women Scale. Psychological Reports, 35, 461-462. Komarovsky, M., & Mayer, E.R. (1984). Consistency of gender attitudes: A research note. Social Forces. 62(4), 1020-1025. Laws, J.L. (1971) . A feminist review of marital adjustment literature: The rape of the Locke. Journal of Marriage and The Family, 33.(3), 483-516. Leslie, L.A., Anderson, E.A., & Branson, M.P. (1991). Responsibility for children: The role of gender and employment. Journal of Family Issues. 12.(2), 197-210. Lewis, R.A., & Spanier, G.B. (1979). Theorizing about the quality and stability of marriage. In W.R. Burr, R. Hill, F.I. Nye, & I.L. Reiss (Eds). Contemporary theories about the family (Vol.1, pp. 268-294). New York: The Free Press. - 119 -Li, J.T., & Caldwell, R.A. (1987). Magnitude and directional effects of marital sex-role incongruence on marital adjustment. Journal of Family Issues, 8(1), 97-110. Lively, E.L. (1969). Toward concept clarification: The case of marital interaction. Journal of Marriage and The Family, 31(1), 108-114. Locke, H.J., & Wallace, K.M. (1959). Short marital-adjustment and prediction test: Their reliability and validity. Marriage and Family Living, 21 (August), 251-255. Lopata, H.Z., Barnewalt, D., & Norr, K. (1980). Spouses contribution to each other's roles. In F. Pepitone-Rockwell (Ed.), Dual-Career Couples, (pp. 111-141). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications. Lueptow, L.B., Guss, M.B., & Hyden, C. (1989). Sex role ideology, marital status, and happiness. Journal of Family Issues, 10(3), 383-400. Lunneborg, P.W. (1974) . Validity of Attitudes Toward Women Scale. Psychological Reports, 34(3, pt.2), 1281-1282. Lye, D.N. & Biblarz, T.J. (1993) . The effects of attitudes toward family life and gender roles on marital satisfaction. Journal of Family Issues, 14(2), 157-188. McHale, S.M., & Crouter, A.C. (1992). You can't always get what you want: Incongruence between sex-role attitudes and family work roles and its implications for marriage. Journal of Marriage and The Family, 54, 537-547. Mainardi, P. (1970). The politics of housework. In R. Morgan (Ed.), Sisterhood is powerful, (pp. 447-454). New York: Random House. Mederer, H.J. (1993). Division of labor in two-earner homes: Task accomplishment versus household management as critical variables in perceptions about family work. Journal of Marriage and The Family, 55, 133-145. - 120 -Meissner, M., Humphreys, E.W., Meis, S.M., & Schell, W.J. (1975). No exit for wives: Sexual division of labour and the cumulation of household demands. Canadian Review of Sociology and Anthropology, 12(4, pt.l), 424-439. Moen, P. (1983). The two-provider family: Problems and potentials. In D.H. Olson and B.C. Miller (Eds.), Family Studies Review Yearbook (Vol. 1, pp. 397-427). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage. Model, S. (1982). Housework by husbands: Determinants and implications. In J. Aldous (Ed.), Two paychecks: Life in dual-career families, (pp. 193-205). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage. Nadelson, C.C., & Nadelson, T. (1980). Dual-career marriages: Benefits and costs. In F. Pepitone-Rockwell, Dual career couples. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage. Nadelson, T., & Nadelson C. (1982). Dual careers and changing male roles. In K. Solomon and N.B. Levy (Eds.), Men in transition: Theory and therapy. New York: Plenum. Nelson, L.R. (1974) . Guide to LERTAP use and interpretation New Zealand: University of Otago Dumedin, Education Department. Norton, R. (1983). Measuring marital quality: A critical look at the dependent variable. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 45.(1), 141-151. Nye, F.I., & Berando, F.M. (1973). The family: Its structure and interaction. New York: MacMillan. O'Neil, J.M. (1981). Male sex role conflicts, sexism, and masculinity: Psychological implications for men, women, and the counseling psychologist. The Counseling Psychologist, 9(2), 61-80. O'Neil, J.M., Fishman, D.M., & Kinsella-Shaw, M. (1987). Dual-career couples' career transitions and normative dilemmas: A preliminary assessment model. The Counseling Psychologist. 15(1), 50-96. - 121 -Orden, S.R., & Bradburn, N.M. (1968). Dimensions of marriage happiness. American Journal of Sociology, 73, 715-731. Perry-Jenkins, M. (1988). Future directions for research on dual-earner families: A young professionals perspective. Family Relations, 37, 226-228. Perry-Jenkins, M., & Crouter, A.C. (1990). Men's provider-role attitudes: Implications for household work and marital satisfaction. Journal of Family Issues, 11(2), 136-156. Pleck, J.H. (1977). The work-family role system. Social Problems, 24(4), 417-427. Pleck, J.H. (1976). The male sex role: Definitions, problems, and sources of change. Journal of Social Issues, 32(3), 155-164. M.M., & Garland, T.N. (1971a). The myth of the egalitarian family: Family roles and professionally employed wife. In A. Theordore (Ed.), The professional woman. Cambridge, MA: Schenkman. M.M., & Garland, T.N. (1971b). The married professional woman: A study in the tolerance of domestication. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 33(3), 531-540. M.M., Pendleton, B.F., & Garland, T.N. (1982). Reconsidering the dual-career marriage. In J. Aldous (Ed.), Two paychecks: Life in dual-earner families. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage. Price-Bonham, S., & Murphy, D.C. (1980). Dual-career marriages: Implications for the clinican. Journal of Marital Family Therapy, 6(2), 181-188. Rachlin, V.C. (1987). Fair vs. equal role relations in dual-career and dual-earner families: Implications for family interventions. Family Relations, 36, 187-192. Poloma, Poloma, Poloma, - 122 -Rapoport, R., & Rapoport, R.N. (1969). The dual career family. Human Relations, 22.(1), 3-30. Rapoport, R., & Rapoport, R.N. (1971). Further considerations on the dual career family. Human Relations, 24(6), 519-533. Rapoport, R., & Rapoport, R.N. (1975). Men, women, and equity. The Family Coordinator, 24(1), 421-432. Rapoport, R., & Rapoport, R.N. (1976). Dual career families re-examined: New integrations of work and family. New York: Harper and Row. Rapoport, R., & Rapoport, R.N. with Bumstead, J.M. (Eds.). (1978). Working couples. London, England: Routledge and Kegan Paul. Rapoport, R., & Rapoport, R.N. (1980). Three generations of dual-career family research. In F. Pepitone-Rockwell (Ed.), Dual-career couples. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage. Rapoport, R., & Rapoport, R.N. (1982). The next generation in dual-earner family research. In J. Aldous (Ed.), Two paychecks: Life in dual-earner families. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage. Regan, M.C., & Roland, H.E. (1985). Rearranging family and career priorities: Professional women and men of the eighties. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 47, 985-991. Rook, K., Dooly, D., & Catalano, R. (1991). An exploratory path analysis of the stress process of dual-career men and women. Journal of Marriage and The Family. 53, 165-177. Rossi, A.S. (1971). Equality between the sexes: An immodest proposal. In M.H. Garskof (Ed.), Roles women play: Readings toward women's liberation (pp. 145-164). Belmont, CA: Brooks/Cole. Russo, N.F. (1987). Dual-career couples: Research, assessment, and public policy issues: The Counseling Psychologist, 15(1), 140-145. - 123 -Sabastelli, R.M. (1988). Measurement issues in marital research: A review and critique of contemporary survey instruments. Journal of Marriage and The Family, 50, 891-915. Safilios-Rothschild, C , & Dijkers, M. (1978). Handling unconventional asymmetries. In R. Rapoport & R.N. Rapoport with J.M. Bumsted (Eds.), Working couples. London, England: Routledge and Kegan Paul. Scanzoni, J., & Fox, G.L. (1980). Sex roles, family and society: The seventies and beyond. Journal of Marriages and the Family, 42(4), 743-756. Schafer, R.B., & Keith, P.M. (1981). Equity in marital roles across the family life cycle. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 43(2), 359-367. Schram, R.N. (1979). Marital satisfaction over the family life cycle: A critique and proposal. Journal of Marriage and the family, 41, 7-12. Sharpley, C.F., & Cross, D.G. (1982). A psychometric evaluation of the Spanier Dyadic Adjustment Scale. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 44 (3), 739-741. Skinner, D.A. (1983). Dual-career family stress and coping: A literature review. In D.H. Olson and B.C. Miller (Eds.), Family Studies Yearbook, (Vol. 1), Beverly Hills, CA: Sage. Skovholt, T.M. (1978). Feminism and men's lives. The Counselling Psychologist, 7(4), 3-9. Spanier, G.B. (1972). Further evidence on methodological weakness in The Locke-Wallace Marital Adjustment Scale and other measures of adjustment. Journal of Marriage and The Family. 34, 403-404. Spanier, G.B. (1973). Whose marital adjustment? A research note. Sociological Inquiry, 43.(1), 95-96. - 124 -Spanier, G.B. (1976). Measuring dyadic adjustment: New scales for assessing the quality of marriage and similar dyads. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 38, 15-28. Spanier, G.B. (1988). Assessing the strengths of the Dyadic Adjustment Scale. Journal of Family Psychology, 2(1), 92-94. Spanier, G.B., & Cole, C.L. (1976). Towards clarification and investigation of marital adjustment. International Journal of Sociology of the Family, 6(Spring), 121-146. Spanier, G.B., Lewis, R.A., & Cole, C.L. (1975). Marital adjustment over the family life cycle: The issue of curvilinearity. Journal of Marriage and The Family, 37, 263-275. Spanier, G.B., & Lewis, R.A. (1980). Marital Quality: A review of the seventies. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 42(4), 825-839. Spanier, G.B., & Thompson, L. (1982). A confirmatory analysis of the Dyadic Adjustment Scale. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 44(3), 731-738. Spatz, C , & Johnson, J.O. (1976). Basic Statistics: Tales of distributions. Belmont, CA: Brooks/Cole. J.T., & Helmreich, R. (1972). The Attitudes Toward Woman Scale: An objective instrument to measure attitudes toward the rights and roles of women in contemporary society. JSAS Catalog of Selected Documents in Psychology, 2, 66-67. J.T., & Helmreich, R.L. (1978). Masculinity and femininity: Their psychological dimensions, correlates, and antecedents. Austin, TX: University of Texas Press. J.T., Helmreich, R., & Stap P.J. (1973). A short version of the Attitudes Toward Women Scale (AWS). Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, 2 (4), 219-220. Spence, Spence, Spence, - 125 -Spitze, G. (1988). Womens' employment and family relations: A review. Journal of Marriage and The Family, 50, 595-618. Staines, G.L., Pleck, J.H., Shepard, L.J., & O'Connor, P. (1978). Wives employment status and marital adjustment: Yet another look. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 3(1), 90-120. Statistics Canada (1977). Women in the labour force: Facts and figures (part 1). Ottawa: Ministry of Supply and Services. Statistics Canada (1986). Labour force activity. Ottawa: Ministry of Supply and Services. Statistics Canada (1993). Labour force activity. (Statistics Canada Publication No. 93-324). Ottawa: Ministry of Supply and Services. J.M. (1983). Marriages: An unequal partnership. In B.B. Wolman and G. Strieker (Eds.), Handbook of Family and Marital Therapy. New York: Plenum. J.M., & Weltman, K. (1991). Marital inequality: The importance of resources, personal attributes, and social norms on career valuing and the allocation of domestic responsibilities. Sex Roles, 24(3/4),161-179. S.L. & Weston, L.C. (1976). Attitudes toward women among female college students. Sex Roles, 2(2), 199-202. Suitor, J.J. (1991). Marital quality and satisfaction with division of household labor across the family life cycle. Journal of Marriage and The Family, 53, 221-230. Thompson, L. (1988). Women, men, and marital quality. Journal of Family Psychology, 2(1), 95-100. Thompson, L. (1991). Family work: Women's sense of fairness. Journal of Family Issues, 12(2), 181-196. - 126 -Thompson, L., & Walker, A.J. (1989). Gender in families: Women and men in marriage, work, and parenthood. Journal of Marriacre and The Family, 51, 845-871. Vannoy, D., & Philliber, W.W. (1992). Wife's employment and quality of marriage. Journal of Marriage and The Family, 54, 387-398. Walker, L.S., Rozee-Koker, P., & Wallston, B.S. (1987). Social policy and the dual-career family. Bringing the social context into counseling. The Counseling Psychologist, 15(1), 97-121. Weingarten, K. (1978a). The employment pattern of professional couples and their distribution of involvement in the family. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 3(1), 43-51. Weingarten, K. (1978b). Interdependence. In R. Rapoport & R.N. Rapoport with J.M. Bumstead (Eds.), Working Couples. London, England: Routledge and Kegan Paul. Winer, B.J. (1971) . Statistical Principals in Experimental Design. New York: McGraw-Hill. Yogev, S. (1981). Do professional women have egalitarian marital relationships? Journal of Marriacre and the Family, 43(4), 865-871. Yogev, S., & Brett, J. (1985). Perceptions of the division of housework and childcare and marital satisfaction. Journal of Marriacre and The Family, 47(3), 609-618. Young, M., & Willmott, P. (1973). The Symmetrical Family. London, England: Routledge and Kegan Paul. - 127 -APPENDIX A Dyadic Adjustment Scale (Spanier, 1976) - 128 -DYADIC ADJUSTMENT SCALE Most persons have disagreements in their relationships. Please indicate below the approximate extent of agreement or disagreement between you and your partner for each item on the following list. (Place a check mark to indicate your answer.) Almost Occa- Fre- Almost Always Always sionally quently Always Always Agree Agree Disagree Disagree Disagree Disagree 1. Handling family finances 2. Matters of Recreation 3. Religious matters 4. Demonstrations of Affection 5. Friends 6. Sex relations 7. Conventionality (correct or proper behavior) 8. Philosophy of life 9. Ways of dealing with parents or in-laws 10. Aims, goals, and things believed important 11. Amount of time spent together 12. Making major decisions 13. Household tasks 14. Leisure time interests and activities IS. Career decisions - 129 -All the time Most of the time More often than not Occa-sionally Rarely Never 16. How often do you discuss or have you considered divorce, separa-tion, or termi-nating your relationship? 17. How often do you or your mate leave the house after a fight? 18. In general, how often do you think that things between you and your partner are going well? 19. Do you confide in your mate? 20. Do you ever regret that you married? (or lived together?) 21. How often do you and your partner quarrel? . How often do you and your mate "get on each others' nerves"? . Do you kiss your mate? Every day All Almost every Most Occa-sionally Some Rarely Very few Never None 24. Do you and your mate engage in outside interests together? How often would you say the following events occur between you and your mate? Never Less than once a month Once or twice a month Once or twice a week Once a day More Often 25. Have a stimulating exchange of ideas - 130 -Less than Once or Once or once a twice a twice a Once a More Never month month week day often 26. Laugh together 27. Calmy discuss something 28. Work together on a project These are some things about which couples sometimes agree and sometimes disagree. Indicate if either item below caused differences of opinions or were problems in your relationship during the past few weeks. (Check yes or no.) Yes No 29. Being too tired for sex. 30. Not showing love. 31. The dots on the following line represent different degrees of happiness in your relationship. The middle point, "happy", represents the degree of happiness of most relationships. Please circle the dot which best describes the degree of happiness, all things considered, of your relationship. Extremely Fairly A Little Happy • Very Extremely Perfect Unhappy Unhappy Unhappy Happy Happy 32. Which of the following statements best describes how you feel about the future of your relationship? Place a check mark on the appropriate line. I want desperately for my relationship to succeed, and would go to almost any length to see that it does. I want very much for my relationship to succeed, and will do all I can to see that it does. I want very much for my relationship to succeed, and will do my fair share to see that it does. It-would be nice if my relationship succeeded, but I can't do much more than I am doing now to help it succeed. It would be nice if it succeeded, but I refuse to do any more than I am doing now to keep the relationship going. My relationship can never succeed, and there is no more that I can do to keep the relationship going. APPENDIX B ATTITUDES TOWARD WOMEN SCALE - 132 -ATTITUDES TOWARD WOMEN The statements listed below describe attitudes toward the role of women in society which different people have. There are no right or wrong answers, only opinions. You are asked to express your feelings about each statement by indicating whether you (A) Agree strongly, (B) Agree mildly, (c) Disagree mildly, or (D) Disagree strongly. Please indicate your opinion by marking the column on the answer sheet which corresponds to the alternative which best describes your personal attitude. Please respond to every item. (Circle the letter to indicate your answer). (A) Agree strongly (B) Agree mildly (C) Disagree mildly (D) Disagree strongly 1. Women have an obligation to be faithful to their husbands. 2. Swearing and obscenity is more repulsive in the speech of a woman than a man. 3. The satisfaction of her husband's sexual desires is a fundamental obligation of every wife. 4. Divorced men should help support their children but should not be required to pay alimony if their wives are capable of working. 5. Under ordinary circumstances, men should be expected to pay all the expenses while they're out on a date. 6. Women should take increasing responsibility for leadership in solving the intellectual and social problems of the day. 7. It is all right for wives to have an occasional, casual, extra-marital affair. 8. Special attentions like standing up for a woman who comes into a-room or giving her a seat on a crowded bus are outmoded and should be discontinued. 9. Vocational and professional schools should admit the best qualified students, independent of sex. 10. Both husband and wife should be allowed the same grounds for divorce. 11. Telling dirty jokes should be mostly a masculine prerogative. 12. Husbands and wives should be equal partners in planning the family budget. - 133 -13. Men should continue to show courtesies to women such as holding open the door or helping them on with their coats. 14. Women should claim alimony not as persons incapable of self-support but only when there are children to provide for or when the burden of starting life anew after the divorce is obviously heavier for the wife. 15. Intoxication among women is worse than intoxication among men. 16. The initiative in dating should come from the man. 17. Under modern economic conditions with women being active outside the home, men should share in household tasks such as washing dishes and doing the laundry. 18. It is insulting to women to have the "obey" clause remain in the marriage service. 19. There should be a strict merit system in job appointment and promotion without regard to sex. 20. A woman should be as free as a man to propose marriage. 21. Parental authority and responsibility for discipline of the children should be equally divided between husband and wife. 22. Women should worry less about their rights and more about becoming good wives and mothers. 23. Women earning as much as their dates should bear equally the expense when they go out together. 2h. Women should assume their rightful place in business and all the professions along with men. 25« A woman should not expect to go to exactly the same places or to have quite the same freedom of action as a man. 26. Sons in a family should be given more encouragement to go to college than daughters. 27. It is ridiculous for a woman to run a locomotive and for a man to darn socks. 28. It is childish for a woman to assert herself by retaining her maiden name after marriage. 29. Society should regard the services rendered by the women workers as valuable as those of men. _ 134 -30. It is only fair that male workers should receive more pay than women even for identical work. 31. In general, the father should have greater authority than the mother in the bringing up of children. 32. Women should be encouraged not to become sexually intimate with anyone before marrige, even their fiances. 33• Women should demand money for household and personal expenses as a right rather than as a gift. 3^. The husband should not be favored by law over the wife in the disposal of family property or income. 35« Wifely submission is an outworn virtue. 36. There are some professions and types of businesses that are more suitable for men than women. 37. Women should be concerned with their duties of childrearing and house-tending, rather than with desires for professional and business careers. 38. The intellectual leadership of a community should be largely in the hands of men. 39- A wife should make every effort to minimize irritation and inconvenience to the male head of the family. 40. There should be no greater barrier to an unmarried woman having sex with a casual acquaintance than having dinner with him. 41. Economic and social freedom is worth far more to women than acceptance of the ideal of femininity which has been set by men. 42. Women should take the passive role in courtship. 43. 0 n "the average, women should be regarded as less capable of contribution to economic production than are men. 44. The intellectual equality of woman with man is perfectly obvious. 4-5. Women should have full control of their persons and give or withhold sex intimacy as they choose. 46. The husband has in gereral no obligation to inform his wife of his financial plans. 47. There are many jobs in which men should be given preference over women in being hired or promoted. - 135 -48. Women with children should not work outside the home if they don't have to financially. 49. Women should be given equal opportunity with men for apprenticeship in the various trades. 50. The relative amounts of time and energy to be devoted to household duties on the one hand and to a career on the other should be determined by personal desires and interests rather than by sex. 51. As head of the household, the husband should have more responsibility for the family's financial plans than his wife. 52. If both husband and wife agree that sexual fidelity isn't important, there's no reason why both shouldn't have extramarital affairs if they want to. 53. The husband should be regarded as the legal representative of the family group in all matters of law. 54. The modern girl is entitled to the same freedom from regulation and control that is given to the modern boy. ^>5> Most women need and want the kind of protection and support that men have traditionally given them. - 136 -Answer Sheet ATTITUDES TOWARD WOMEN (A) Agree strongly (B) Agree mildly (C) Disagree mildly (D) Disagree strongly 1. 2 . 3. 4. 5-6. 7. 8. 9. 10. n. A B G D A B C D A B C D A B C D A B C D A B G D A B C D A B C D A B C D A B C D A B C D 12. 13 . 14 . 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21 . 22. A B C D A B C D A B C D A B G D A B C D A B G D A B G D A B C D A B G D A B G D A B C D 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. 31. 32. 33. A B C D A B C D A B C D A B G D A B C D A B C D A B C D A B G D A B C D A B C D A B C D 3^. 35. 36. 37. 38. 39. 40. 41 . 42. ^3. 44. A B C D A B G D A B C D A B C D A B C D A B C D A B C D A B C D A B C D A B C D A B G D ^5. 46. 47. 48. 49. 50. 51. 52. 53. 5^. 55. A B G D A B C D A B C D A B C D A B C D A B C D A B C D A B G D A B C D A B C D A B C D AWS H W H+W - 137 -APPENDIX C LETTER OF INTRODUCTION - 138 -Dear , I am writing to request your assistance with a research study that I am conducting. This study is under the supervision of Drs. J. Friesen, L. Woolsey, and H. Ratzlaff and constitues the final requirement for a Master of Arts in Counselling Psychology at the University of British Columbia. The purpose of my study is to explore attitudes toward women's roles and marital adjustment in family situations where both spouses have a career. Your participation in this study is voluntary. Should you agree to assist me, confidentiality of the information I receive is guaranteed. On completion of the research, you may request a summary of the findings and, should you so desire, a debriefing will be available. You may telephone me at 888-1580 after 7:00 p.m. to ask any questions you may have about the research. Should you consent to participate, I will require approximately one hour of your time. Thank you in advance for your consideration of my request. Your cooperation will be invaluable to this research which hopefully will add significantly to the growing body of knowledge about families. Sincerely, Timothy James Weibelzahl - 139 -APPENDIX D LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL - 140 -Dear 9568 205 Street Langley, B.C. V1M.1H6 This is to follow up on our recent conversation persuant to my research study on attitudes toward women's roles and marital adjustment. Enclosed please find the forms you are being asked to fill out. These include the Attitudes Toward Women Scale and the Dyadic Adjustment Scale. They have been separated into two groups; one set for the female and one for the male member of the couple. In order to preserve the integrity of the study, please answer the forms in private and do not discuss your answers with your partner during this time. The Family Background Sheet, however, may be completed jointly, or by one of you. Your participation will require approximately one hour. Please return the documents to me in the return envelope provided by . Other phases of this research cannot be carried out until analysis of the data is completed. If you would like to receive a summary of my findings when the thesis has been completed, please indicate your name and address on the enclosed blank sheet, and return it to me separately, and at a later date at the address provided. Debriefing will also be available at your request. Once again, thank you for assisting me with this research project. I greatly appreciate your time and commitment to research. Sincerely, Timothy James Weibelzahl - 141 -APPENDIX E FAMILY BACKGROUND SHEET - 142 -Family Background Sheet Your cooperation in providing all the answers is appreciated. Please be assured of strict confidentiality. 1. Age: Male Female under 30 30 - 39 40 - 4-9 50 - 59 60+ 2. Educational level: Male Female high school college technical university post graduate 3. Number of years married: under 5 5 - 10 11 - 15 16 - 20 21 - 25 26+ 4. Number of marriages: Male Female 5. Has there been any history of separation in your present marriage? Yes No If yes, how long was the separation? Age at Number Which ; marriage of child] spouse is - 143 -(pre sent marriage) Male under 30 30 - 39 40 - 49 50 - 59 60+ cen (at home): Newborn - 2 yrs 3 - 5 6 - 9 10 - 13 14 - 19 20+ primarily responsi Female family roles: Male Female Equal Provider Therapeutic (problem solver, supportative) Sexual relations Kinship relations Housekeeper Child care Training older children Have there been any periods during which either of you remained at home while the other partner worked? Yes No If yes, please indicate the duration: Husband Wife Number of years employed: Husband Wife - 144 -Husband's occupation: hours/week worked Wife's occupation: hours/week worked Does either spouse have a second job? Yes No If yes, please indicate hours/week worked: Husband Wife Some people see themselves having a career, and others see themselves having a job; do you see yourself having a career or a job? Husband Wife Approximate joint income: less than 29,999 30,000 39,999 40,000 49,999 50,000 59,999 more than 59,999 What ethnic designation would you give yourself: Husband Wife To what extent do you feel your ethnic origins affect you: (Husbands please mark 'x'; Wives please mark '/') greatly quite a somewhat very not at lot little all What religious group designation would you give yourself: Husband Wife To what extent do you feel your religious beliefs affect you: (Husbands please mark 'x'; Wives please mark '/') greatly quite a somewhat very not at lot little all - 145 -APPENDIX F REQUEST FOR RESEARCH ABSTRACT 146 T.J. Weibelzahl 9568 205 Street Langley, B.C. VIM 1H6 Re: Abstract of Research Findings ***#***-^-x^-x^*^*****-x^****#**-x^****-x^****** Please mail to: - 147 -APPENDIX G LETTER OF REMINDER - 1/+8 -Dear , Just a friendly reminder that I have not received your completed questionnaires. If you have already completed and returned them, thank you once again for participating. Sincerely, Timothy James Weibelzahl 

Cite

Citation Scheme:

        

Citations by CSL (citeproc-js)

Usage Statistics

Share

Embed

Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                        
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            src="{[{embed.src}]}"
                            data-item="{[{embed.item}]}"
                            data-collection="{[{embed.collection}]}"
                            data-metadata="{[{embed.showMetadata}]}"
                            data-width="{[{embed.width}]}"
                            async >
                            </script>
                            </div>
                        
                    
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:
https://iiif.library.ubc.ca/presentation/dsp.831.1-0054047/manifest

Comment

Related Items