UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

Maternal adaptation to parenthood in the second year Painter, Susan Lee 1980

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

Item Metadata

Download

Media
831-UBC_1980_A1 P35_6.pdf [ 8.94MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 831-1.0095215.json
JSON-LD: 831-1.0095215-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 831-1.0095215-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 831-1.0095215-rdf.json
Turtle: 831-1.0095215-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 831-1.0095215-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 831-1.0095215-source.json
Full Text
831-1.0095215-fulltext.txt
Citation
831-1.0095215.ris

Full Text

Maternal Adaptation to Parenthood i n the Second Year by Susan Lee Painter M.Aj., Uni v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia, 1978 A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY i n the Department of Psychology We accept t h i s thesis as conforming to the required standard THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA September, 1980 In p r e s e n t i n g t h i s t h e s i s in p a r t i a l f u l f i l m e n t o f the r e q u i r e m e n t s f o r an advanced degree at the U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a , I a g r e e that the L i b r a r y s h a l l make i t f r e e l y a v a i l a b l e f o r r e f e r e n c e and s t u d y . I f u r t h e r agree t h a t p e r m i s s i o n f o r e x t e n s i v e c o p y i n g o f t h i s t h e s i s f o r s c h o l a r l y p u r p o s e s may be g r a n t e d by the Head o f my Department o r by h i s r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s . It i s u n d e r s t o o d that c o p y i n g o r p u b l i c a t i o n o f t h i s t h e s i s f o r f i n a n c i a l g a i n s h a l l not be a l l o w e d w i t h o u t my w r i t t e n p e r m i s s i o n . Psychology Department o f ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ The U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h Co lumbia 2075 Wesbrook Place Vancouver, Canada V6T 1W5 Date October 1, 1980 ABSTRACT The long t r a d i t i o n of research on the parent-child r e l a t i o n s h i p has focused mainly upon the c h i l d ' s development. Even i n studies of parental attitudes and c h i l d r e a r i n g p r a c t i c e s , and i n research on the mother-infant attachment r e l a t i o n s h i p , the ultimate goal has been explanation of c h i l d behavior and development. Much of the research on the parent-child r e l a t i o n s h i p has concentrated on the infancy period and has involved d e t a i l e d descriptions of parent-child i n t e r a c t i v e behavior. In contrast, this study of maternal adaptation to parenthood focuses on the mother's experiences and behavior i n the toddler period. Three issues were addressed: F i r s t , a des c r i p t i o n of the dimensions of maternal adaptation i n the toddler period was sought. Second, the r o l e of maternal confidence and self-esteem, previously shown to be important i n maternal adaptation i n the infancy period, was explored for maternal adaptation i n the toddler period. Third, the mother's own perceptions of her re l a t i o n s h i p s and experiences were compared with behavioral observations made i n the laboratory. Sixty mothers of toddlers provided s e l f - r e p o r t data on t h e i r r e l a t i o n s h i p s with t h e i r c h i l d and husband, t h e i r emotional state, t h e i r a c t i v i t i e s outside the home, th e i r concerns about c o n f l i c t s exper-ienced between t h e i r parental and other r o l e s , and current childcare arrangements. Mother-toddler i n t e r a c t i o n was observed i n a structured laboratory s i t u a t i o n designed to assess the mother's a b i l i t y to a s s i s t her c h i l d with a number of tasks. Factor analyses of the s e l f - r e p o r t data revealed eleven factors comprising f i v e dimensions of maternal adaptation: mother's perception of the maternal r o l e ; the ma r i t a l r e l a t i o n s h i p and experiences of con-f l i c t i n g r o l e demands; the mother's percpetion of support received i i i from her husband and enjoyment shared with her toddler; management of the instrumental or child-care aspects of the parental r o l e ; and the mother's o v e r a l l outlook on l i f e , i n c l u d i n g her confidence and s e l f -esteem both within and outisde the parental r o l e . Laboratory-based observations of maternal behavior were found to be unrelated to s e l f -report data. I t was concluded that the problems posed by parenthood f o r mothers of toddlers are not l i m i t e d to the needs or behavior of the c h i l d , or to the mother-child r e l a t i o n s h i p i t s e l f , but encompass the need to integrate the wide range of roles and experiences that make up the mother's l i f e . i v TABLE OF CONTENTS page Abstract i Table of Contents i v L i s t of Tables v L i s t of Appendices v i i Acknowledgements v i i i CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION .1 Tra n s i t i o n to Parenthood: M a r i t a l S a t i s f a c t i o n and Family Role Systems 3 Parent-Child Relationships i n Context: The Family and the Spouse Relationship 5 Maternal-Infant Bonding: Adjustment i n the P e r i n a t a l Period . . 7 Longitudinal Studies of Adjustment to Parenthood 10 Summary and Prospectus 15 CHAPTER 2: METHODS 17 Subjects 17 Population 17 Recruitment 18 Sample 19 Procedures 20 Maternal-Report Measures 20 Laboratory V i s i t 30 CHAPTER 3: RESULTS 38 Results of the Self-Report Measures 38 Results of the Laboratory Data and Toddler Temperament Report . . 80 CHAPTER 4: DISCUSSION 101 Dimensions of Maternal Adaptation i n the Toddler Period 102 The Role of Maternal Confidence and Self-Esteem i n Adaptation to Parenthood 110 The Relationship of Observed Behavior to Self-Report at the Toddler Period I l l Conclusion 112 REFERENCES 113 APPENDICES V TABLES page 1. Correlations Among Items Assessing Self-Esteem and Confidence,. . . 40 2. Results of Factor Analysis on Correlation Matrix of Items Assessing Self-Esteem and Confidence . . . 41 3. ; S i g n i f i c a n t Correlations Among Items Assessing Emotional State . . 43 4. Results of Factor Analysis on Correlation Matrix of Items Assessing Emotional State . ... . ... ,44 5. S i g n i f i c a n t Correlations Among Items Assessing the Mother-Chi l d Relationship 46 6. Results of Factor Analysis on Co r r e l a t i o n Matrix of Items Assessing the Mother-Child Relationship 47 7. S i g n i f i c a n t Correlations Among Items Assessing the M a r i t a l Relationship 50 8. Results of Factor Analysis on Co r r e l a t i o n Matrix of Items Assessing the M a r i t a l Relationship 52 9. S i g n i f i c a n t Correlations Among Items Assessing the Mother's Role Concerns 54 10. Results of Factor Analysis on Co r r e l a t i o n Matrix of Items Assessing the Mother's Role Concerns 57 11. S i g n i f i c a n t Correlations Among Items Assessing Emotional State and Self-Esteem and Confidence 60 12. S i g n i f i c a n t Correlations Among Items Assessing Emotional State and the Mother-Child Relationship 61 13. S i g n i f i c a n t Correlations Among Items Assessing Emotional State and the M a r i t a l Relationship , 62 14. S i g n i f i c a n t Correlations Among Items Assessing Emotional State and the Mother's Role Concerns 63 15. S i g n i f i c a n t Correlations Among Items Assessing the Mother-Child Relationship and Self-Esteem and Confidence 64 16. S i g n i f i c a n t Correlations Among Items Assessing the M a r i t a l Relationship and Self-Esteem and Confidence 65 17. S i g n i f i c a n t Correlations Among Items Assessing the Mother's Role Concerns and Self-Esteem and Confidence 66 18. S i g n i f i c a n t Correlations Among Items Assessing the M a r i t a l Relationship and the Mother-Child Relationship 67 v i TABLES (Continued) page 19. S i g n i f i c a n t Correlations Among Items Assessing the M a r i t a l Relationship and the Mother's Role Concerns 68 20. S i g n i f i c a n t Correlations Among Items Assessing the Mother-Child Relationship and the Mother's Role Concerns 70 21. Cor r e l a t i o n Matrix of Factor Scores 72 22. Results of Factor Analysis on Cor r e l a t i o n Matrix of Factor Scores 74 23. Items Loading on First-Order Factors 75 24. Descriptive S t a t i s t i c s f o r Clean-Up S i t u a t i o n Scores 81 25. C o r r e l a t i o n Among Laboratory Measures 83 26. Descriptive S t a t i s t i c s f o r Tool-Use Task Ratings 84 27. Repeated Measures t-test s on Tool-Use Task Scores 85 28. Results of Factor Analysis on Cor r e l a t i o n Matrix of Behavioral Measures 87 29. S i g n i f i c a n t C o r r e l a t i o n Among Laboratory Measures and Items Assessing the Mother's Role Concerns 88 30. Descriptive S t a t i s t i c s f o r Cognitive Measures and Correlations with Behavioral Measures 91 31. Descriptive S t a t i s t i c s f o r Toddler Temperament Scales: Present And Standardization Samples . . . 94 32. S i g n i f i c a n t Correlations Among Temperament Subscales and Items Assessing Self-Esteem and Confidence 96 33. S i g n i f i c a n t Correlations Among Temperament Subscales and Items Assessing the Mother-Child Relationship 97 34. S i g n i f i c a n t Correlations Among Temperament Subscales and Items Assessing the M a r i t a l Relationship 98 35. S i g n i f i c a n t Correlations Among Temperament Subscales and Items Assessing the Mother's Role Concerns . . 99 v i i APPENDICES page A. L e t t e r of Introduction to Parents 123 B. Description of Differences Between Drop-Out and Follow-Up Families 124 C. Mothers of Toddlers Questionnaire 134 D. Parent Report Inventory (Parent Confidence Questionnaire) . . . . 149 E. Self-Report Inventory (Self-Esteem Scale) 151 F. Toddler Temperament Scale 156 G. Informed Consent Form . . . . . . 165 H. Coding Scheme for Clean-Up S i t u a t i o n 166 I. Coding Scheme f o r Tool-Use Tasks S i t u a t i o n . . . . 169 J . Diagrams of Tool-Use Tasks Equipment 183 K. Prenatal Questionnaire 184 L. Postpartum Questionnaire 196 M. Mean, Standard Deviation: and Range f o r Mothers of Toddlers Questionnaire Items Used i n Analyses 203 Nt. Discussion of R e l i a b i l i t y f o r Maternal Report Measures 205 v i i i ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS There .are many people who have helped to make this research possible, and who have played important roles i n a l l stages of the work. In p a r t i c u l a r , I would l i k e to thank: Tannis MacBeth Williams, for her support and encouragement every step of the way; Michael Chandler and Park Davidson, f o r t h e i r invaluable assistance at a l l stages; Robert McMahon, for h i s suggestions during the w r i t i n g stage; Elaine Guenet and Natalie Dubanski, f o r t h e i r expert help i n data c o l l e c t i o n , endless hours of videotapes and f r i e n d l y support throughout; V i r g i n i a Green, for her advice and assistance i n data analyses, and f o r making me independent on the computer; Alan Sroufe and Debbie Rosenberg, for making me f e e l welcome at Minnesota. Also, the f a m i l i e s , who f r e e l y gave of t h e i r time and shared a piece of th e i r l i v e s with me; and the.Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada, f o r support during t h i s research. In a more personal vein, I have many people to thank, but there are a few I couldn't have done without: Michael Lewis, who was there at the very beginning; Don Dutton, who was there throughout; and f i n a l l y , t h is thesis i s dedicated to Aphrodite, for waiting so very long. CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION The parent-child r e l a t i o n s h i p i s the basic unit i n our society i n which s o c i a l and emotional development take place. The major focus of theory and research on the parent-child r e l a t i o n s h i p t r a d i -t i o n a l l y has been on the ways i n which c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s and/or behavior of the parent influence p a r t i c u l a r aspects of the c h i l d ' s development (e.g., Becker, 1964; Blank, 1963; Sears, Maccoby, & Levin, 1957). Even i n the study of attachment, when the parent-child r e l a t i o n s h i p i t s e l f (usually, the mother-infant r e l a t i o n s h i p ) has been the object of inquiry, the course of the c h i l d ' s socio-emotional development rather than aspects of the parent's development or experience have been emphasized. This emphasis arose i n part because those who f i r s t studied the nature and o r i g i n of the c h i l d ' s emotional t i e to i t s mother, whether from a s o c i a l learning perspective (e.g., Maccoby & Masters, 1970) or an e t h o l o g i c a l p o s i t i o n (e.g., Bowlby, 1969) began with the assumption that early experience determines l a t e r behavior. Whether or not t h i s proves to be the case, researchers interested i n the attachment r e l a t i o n s h i p have continued to concentrate upon the development of the c h i l d . In p a r t i c u l a r , those working within an et h o l o g i c a l perspective have focused p r i m a r i l y upon the function and process of the infant's t i e to i t s mother. They view the establishment of t h i s t i e as a s p e c i e s - s p e c i f i c process through which the human neonate survives i t s protracted period of helplessness by e l i c i t i n g the continuous attentions of a caregiver, usually i t s b i o l o g i c a l mother (Ainsworth, 1969, 1973; Bowlby, 1969). Because 2 et h o l o g i c a l theory i n general focuses upon the mechanisms, eit h e r behavioral or p h y s i o l o g i c a l , through which i n d i v i d u a l patterns function to ensure species s u r v i v a l , study of the infant-mother attachment bond has concentrated upon patterns of infant behavior that serve to a t t r a c t and hold the mother's attention. Researchers concerned with attachment and infant behavior have provided d e t a i l e d descriptions of infant behavior patterns on both macro- and micro-levels (e.g., Brazelton, Tronick,. Adamson, Als & Wise, 1975; Condon & Sander, 1974; Kaye, 1975; Lamb, 1976; 1977a; Lewis, 1972), and have examined the ways i n which these patterns mesh with adult behavior to produce attachment-related patterns of behavior (.e.g., Ainsworth, B e l l & Stayton, 1974; Lamb, 1977b). In sum, i n most research on the infant-mother attachment bond, the infant's behavior and development have remained the primary focus; maternal behavior patterns and the v a r i a b l e s which mediate them have been seen as necessary adjuncts to those of the i n f a n t , but have not often been studied i n t h e i r own r i g h t . Despite the u n i d i r e c t i o n a l focus of most of the empirical work i n the f i e l d , researchers nevertheless have come to acknowledge that the parent-child r e l a t i o n s h i p i s characterized by r e c i p r o c a l influence (e.g., R.Q. B e l l , 1968; Lewis & Rosenblum, 1974; Martin, 1975). Studies of i n f a n t s ' and children's contribution to t h e i r parents' behavior (e.g., S.M. B e l l & Ainsworth, 1972; Brazelton, et a l . , 1975; Sameroff & Chandler, 1975) have provided evidence for a more balanced model of the parent-child r e l a t i o n s h i p . More recently, researchers have begun examining the c h i l d ' s influence upon the parents, the family, and the m a r i t a l r e l a t i o n s h i p 3 (e.g., Hoffman & Manis, 1978; Lamb, 1978; Lerner & Spanier, 1978). In addition, patterns of r e c i p r o c a l influence between the parent-child and spouse r e l a t i o n s h i p s have received increasing attention (e.g., Parke & O'Leary, 1975; Pedersen, Anderson & Cain, 1977). At the same time, le s s attention has been paid to the parents as people. Despite the notions that psychological development continues throughout adulthood (e.g., Havighurst, 1973; Neugarten, 1968) and that parent-hood i t s e l f may constitute a developmental milestone (Duvall, 1971) or phase (Benedek, 1959), there i s not an extensive l i t e r a t u r e i n which the development of the parents themselves i s the object of study. The research on parenthood reviewed below comes from four sources: s o c i o l o g i c a l studies of the t r a n s i t i o n to parenthood (e.g., Hobbs, 1968; LeMasters, 1957; Rossi, 1968; Ru s s e l l , 1974); investigations of the parent-child r e l a t i o n s h i p i n the context of the family (e.g., Lamb, 1978; Pedersen,et a l . , 1977); research on the development of maternal-infant bonds during the immediate postpartum period (e.g., Klaus & Kennell, 1976); and short-term l o n g i t u d i n a l investigations of parental adjustment to parenthood (Feldman & Nash, 1980; Williams, Painter, Davidson & Joy, 1979). T r a n s i t i o n to Parenthood: M a r i t a l S a t i s f a c t i o n and Family Role Systems So c i o l o g i s t s studying the family have argued whether parenthood should be viewed as a c r i s i s (Hobbs, 19.65''; LeMasters, 1957; Rossi, 1968), or whether the addition of a c h i l d to the spouse r e l a t i o n s h i p i s simply a t r a n s i t i o n that necessitates the reorganization of r o l e -r e l a t i o n s h i p s within the family system (Jacoby, 1969; R u s s e l l , 1974). 4 Researchers adopting both viewpoints have focused mainly upon changes i n the couple's marital s a t i s f a c t i o n over the course of becoming parents. Several researchers have found that f i r s t - t i m e mothers experience a greater decline i n m a r i t a l s a t i s f a c t i o n than do f i r s t -time fathers (Hobbs, 1965; Hobbs & Cole, 1976; Ryder, 1973), probably because mothers experience more substantive changes i n t h e i r day-to-day l i v e s (e.g., many women stop working outside the home when t h e i r f i r s t c h i l d i s born) and because the burden of c h i l d care f a l l s more heavily on them. Whether or not m a r i t a l s a t i s f a c t i o n i s an appropriate or useful measure of the changes experienced by couples having t h e i r f i r s t c h i l d ( c f . , R o l l i n s & G a l l i g a n , 1978, for a review), i t i s c l e a r l y only a si n g l e dimension of experience upon which to measure parental adjustment; v a r i a b i l i t y i n m a r i t a l s a t i s f a c t i o n cannot completely describe the complexities of parenthood. In addition, s o c i o l o g i c a l studies t y p i c a l l y focus on p a r t i c u l a r " t r a n s i t i o n stages" defined by the age of the oldest c h i l d (Duvall, 1971; R o l l i n s & Feldman, 1970). For example, the f i r s t three stages i d e n t i f i e d by researchers are: 1) newly married; 2) oldest c h i l d an i n f a n t ; 3) oldest c h i l d of preschool age. Even i n l o n g i t u d i n a l studies these are the usual data c o l l e c t i o n points. Uniformity of method has provided r e p l i c a t i o n of findings such as the c u r v i l i n e a r (U-shaped) pattern of marital s a t i s f a c t i o n over the family l i f e cycle (e.g., M i l l e r , 1976; Orthner, 1975; R o l l i n s & Cannon, 1974), but . changes i n the family that occur between these stages have not been adequately studied. In sum, the research done within a s o c i o l o g i c a l 5 framework has not included adequate measurement of psychological dimensions, nor does i t provide a continuous p i c t u r e of change over time. In addition, i n part because s o c i o l o g i s t s work within a model i n which the family i s seen as a system of i n t e r a c t i n g r o l e s (e.g., Aldous, 1977; 1978; Parsons & Bales, 1955), they have tended to provide descriptions of the problems (and g r a t i f i c a t i o n s , see Russe l l , 1974) encountered by those who become parents, but not to explore the ways i n which parents a c t u a l l y cope with, or even perceive, these issues. Parent-Child Relationships i n Context: The Family and the Spouse  Relationship The task of exploring the ways i n which parents experience and deal with the issues of parenthood has been undertaken by some developmental psychologists i n an e f f o r t to place what i s known about parent-child r e l a t i o n s h i p s i n context. This body of research i s both a sign of and a contribution to the encouraging move away from concentration on the infant-mother r e l a t i o n s h i p and toward an acknowledgement of the wider s o c i a l network i n which the infan t ' s socioemotional development takes place (e.g., Lamb, 1977b; Weinraub, Brooks & Lewis, 1978)- Research on the fat h e r - i n f a n t r e l a t i o n s h i p (e.g., Lamb, 1976; Parke & Sawin, 1976; Parke, 1979; Pedersen, Yarrow & S t r a i n , 1975; Pedersen, Rubenstein & Yarrow, 1979) has paved the way f o r i n i t i a l studies of s i b l i n g and peer r e l a t i o n s h i p s (e.g., Lewis & Rosenblum, 1975; Mueller & Vandell, 1979). Unfor-tunately, much of t h i s research focuses on the infancy period, i n part 6 due to the assumptions mentioned above that early experience determines l a t e r development, a notion that p e r s i s t s despite the acknowledgement that socioemotional development continues over a longer and more complex course (e.g., Labouvie-Vief, 1978; Lamb, 1978; Rutter, 1977). Pregnancy and the b i r t h of a c h i l d have been found to be accompanied by changes i n the parents' r e l a t i o n s h i p s with t h e i r own parents (Arbeit, 1975), t h e i r older c h i l d r e n (Kendrick & Dunn, 1980) and one another (e.g., H. Feldman, 1971; Soule, 1974). Many parents are r e l a t i v e l y poorly prepared f o r such wide-ranging changes, despite attendance at c h i l d b i r t h and parent preparation classes (Parke & O'Leary, 1975; Wente & Crockenberg, 1976; Williams, et a l . , 1979). L i t t l e i s known about the ways parents adjust to these unanticipated changes i n family r e l a t i o n s h i p s and day-to-day l i f e . There i s some i n d i c a t i o n that pregnancy and parenthood have a "conservatizing" e f f e c t on the ma r i t a l r e l a t i o n s h i p , with each parent more l i k e l y to take on t r a d i t i o n a l sex-role-related tasks a f t e r the b i r t h of the f i r s t c h i l d (Abrahams, S. Feldman & Nash, 1977; Hoffman, 1977; Lamb, 1978; Lynn, 1974). Observational studies of dyadic and t r i a d i c i n t e r a c t i o n among mother, father and infant have involved what Bronfenbrenner terms 'second-order e f f e c t s ' (Bronfenbrenner, 1974). Interactions between father and infant have been found to be rela t e d to the infant's i n t e r a c t i o n s with the mother, and vice-versa (Clarke-Stewart, 1978; Parke & O'Leary, 1975; Pedersen, et a l . , 1977). S i m i l a r l y , the couple's i n t e r a c t i v e behavior has been found to r e l a t e to each parent's r e l a t i o n s h i p with the baby (Pedersen, et a l . , 1977). In addition, 7 d i f f e r e n t s t y l e s of i n t e r a c t i o n i n spouse and parent-child r e l a t i o n -ships have been i d e n t i f i e d and r e l a t e d to infant neurophysiological c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s (Pedersen, 1975) and to parental perceptions of the infant's temperament (Pedersen, et a l . , 1977). In spite of the growing number of studies examining the parent-child r e l a t i o n s h i p i n the f a m i l i a l context, a great deal remains to be learned about the parents and t h e i r own perceptions of t h e i r r o l e s and a c t i v i t i e s . As Lamb pointed out i n h i s recent review (1978), much of the research i n t h i s area has focused on the micro-analytic l e v e l , whereas some of the most i n t r i g u i n g issues concern the macro-analytic l e v e l of parental perception, coping and adjustment. Equally important i s the need for the scope of the research to include stages of family l i f e beyond infancy. Pedersen (1975) has suggested that the nature of the issues around which family i n t e r a c t i o n patterns revolve change with the development of the c h i l d . A f t e r the f i r s t year, parents must cope with the c h i l d ' s developing :motor s k i l l s and exploratory behavior by s e t t i n g l i m i t s and exerting c o n t r o l . Disagreements about c h i l d r e a r i n g issues and methods are more l i k e l y to surface i n the toddler period than i n the infancy period. The ways i n which parents resolve these issues are bound to have implications for continuing harmony i n the m a r i t a l r e l a t i o n s h i p , which- :ln turn r a f f e c t s both mother-child and father-c h i l d relationships.. Maternal-Infant Bonding: Adjustment i n the P e r i n a t a l Period Some of the most c o n t r o v e r s i a l and generative research on the 8 parental side of the mother-infant r e l a t i o n s h i p has been a series of studies on the development of maternal-infant bonds c a r r i e d out i n North and South America and i n Europe (e.g., de Chateau, 1976, 1977; Klaus & Kennell, 1976; Leiderman, 1980; L e i f e r , Leiderman, Barnett & Williams, 1972). This research was motivated i n part by the f i n d i n g that i n populations of infants h o s p i t a l i z e d for the e f f e c t s of --physical abuse or for f a i l u r e to th r i v e i n the absence of organic disease, the proportion of prematurely-born infants was much greater than would be expected on the basis of prematurity rates i n the general population (e.g., Ambuel & Har r i s , 1963; Elmer & Gregg, 1967; K l e i n & Stern, 1971; Shaheen, Alexander, Truskowsky & Barbero, 1968). The reasons for t h i s high incidence of parental dysfunction were not immediately apparent. On the basis of research on patterns of parental behavior i n animals (e.g., Hersher, Richmond & Moore, 1963; Klopfer, 1971; Rosenblatt, 1969), i t was postulated that there i s a s e n s i t i v e period i n humans occurring shortly a f t e r b i r t h during which the mother's emotional bond to her newborn i s established. I t was further hypothesized that mothers who are separated from t h e i r neonates (due to premature d e l i v e r y or neonatal i l l n e s s ) and who therefore do not have the opportunity to es t a b l i s h these bonds are at higher r i s k for parental dysfunction such as c h i l d abuse and neglect (e.g., Kennell, Trause & Klaus, 1975). Research on the development of the mother's emotional t i e to her infant involved manipulation of mother-neonate contact i n the hours aft e r b i r t h , and measurements of maternal and infant behavior were made at i n t e r v a l s up to f i v e years a f t e r the b i r t h (de Chateau, 1976; 9 1977; 1978; Kennell, J e r a u l d , Wolfe, Chester, Kreger, McAlplne, S t e f f a & Klaus, 1974; Klaus & Kennell, 1976; Klaus, et a l . , 1972; L e i f e r , et a l . , 1972; Ringler, Kennell, Garvella, Navojosky & Klaus, 1975; Seashore, L e i f e r , Barnett & Leiderman, 1973). Recent reviews of t h i s l i t e r a t u r e (Campbell & Taylor, 1980; Ledierman, 1980; Painter, 1980) suggest that the e x i s t i n g research does not support the thesis that contact i n the early postpartum period i s responsible for the development of maternal-infant emotional bonds. Reviewers were unanimous i n suggesting that events and experiences within the family i n the months and years a f t e r the b i r t h are of underestimated importance i n the development of attachments among family members. Although i t was encouraging that researchers focused attention upon the parental side of the parent-child r e l a t i o n s h i p , the research i s eventually disappointing because i t s scope i s too narrow. The time period during which events of importance are assumed to take place ( i . e . , the immediate postpartum period) i s too short, and the range of experience tapped i s too l i m i t e d ( i n f a c t , a great deal of the behavior measured i n follow-up studies concerned the c h i l d ' s development). The mother's emotional t i e to her c h i l d i s only one aspect of an o v e r a l l adaptation to the tasks and demands of parenthood that begins during pregnancy and continues through b i r t h , into infancy and beyond. The research on maternal-infant bonding provides no information on the longer course of parenthood and the ways parents adjust to the many events and changes they experience. 10 Longitudinal Studies of Adjustment of Parenthood There are only a few studies concerned with parental adjustment over the course of t r a n s i t i o n from pregnancy to parenthood that use n o n - c l i n i c a l subject populations. Those i n v e s t i g a t i n g change i n a t y p i c a l groups (for example, women or men undergoing psychotherapy, or unmarried women).' tend to have small samples and use more subjective measurement, thereby l i m i t i n g g e n e r a l i z a b i l i t y (e.g., Coleman, 1969; Cowan, Cowan, Coie & Coie, 1978; Loesch & Greenberg, 1962; Zemlick & Watson, 1953). Gladieux (1978) followed 26 middle-class, primiparous couples through pregnancy only. Using s e l f - r e p o r t measures and c l i n i c a l interviews, she found that the course of pregnancy was experienced as a p o s i t i v e event, and that s a t i s f a c t i o n with the pregnancy and anticipated s a t i s f a c t i o n with parenthood was re l a t e d to the extent of the couple's agreement on values concerning family l i f e , s o c i a l change and parenthood, and the extent to which they provided mutual support. Fein (1978) interviewed 30 middle cl a s s couples expecting t h e i r f i r s t c h i l d from pregnancy through s i x weeks postpartum. He was p a r t i c u l a r l y concerned with the men's experiences, and found that high l e v e l s of anxiety i n the prenatal period declined a f t e r the b i r t h as men assumed r e s p o n s i b i l i t y for caregiving, and that agree-ment between spouses about m a r i t a l r o l e s was e s p e c i a l l y important for these men's adjustment to fatherhood. 11 - Shereshefsky & Yarrow (1974) report an extensive l o n g i t u d i n a l study c a r r i e d out by a m u l t i d i s c i p l i n a r y research team. Sixty-two middle-class families were followed from the early prenatal period through the s i x t h postpartum month. Maternal adjustment to pregnancy and parenthood were assessed using interviews, psychological tests and observations of mother-infant i n t e r a c t i o n . Husbands were also interviewed, and psychological assessments and medical examinations of the infants were made. Nearly h a l f the fa m i l i e s were involved i n counselling during the study. The researchers found that acceptance of and adjustment to pregnancy were strongly r e l a t e d to adaptation to the maternal r o l e , and that the q u a l i t y of the marital r e l a t i o n s h i p was an important factor i n postnatal adaptation. In addition, events external to the pregnancy and parental r o l e , e.g., anxiety over f i n a n c i a l s e c u r i t y , severe m a r i t a l disharmony or c r i s e s i n the extended families or s o c i a l support networks, were found to be r e l a t e d to d i f f i c u l t i e s i n adaptation to both pregnancy and parenthood. M. L e i f e r (1977) studied 19 primiparous women throughout pregnancy and u n t i l seven months postpartum. Using s e l f - r e p o r t measures of attitudes toward s e l f , the pregnancy, the i n f a n t , breast-feeding and motherhood, she found that o v e r a l l adjustment to pregnancy was p r e d i c t i v e of adjustment to motherhood i n the postpartum months. 12 Two recent studies are remarkably s i m i l a r i n the samples used and r e s u l t s found. S. Feldman & Nash (1980) studied 31 middle-class couples expecting t h e i r f i r s t c h i l d . S e l f - r e p o r t and interview data were gathered from both wives and husbands at the t h i r d trimester of pregnancy and si x months a f t e r the b i r t h of the baby. The investigators assessed change by using s i m i l a r instruments at each time period; couples provided information on t h e i r moods, ratings of pregnancy and parenthood, a n t i c i p a t i o n and experience of parenthood, experiences of s o c i a l change and s a t i s f a c t i o n with s e l f , spouse and outside i n t e r e s t s . Preliminary r e s u l t s show that the period from pregnancy to parenthood i s a time of both s t a b i l i t y and change. Both wives and husbands reported s a t i s f a c t i o n with and problems during both periods, but rated pregnancy and parenthood as p o s i t i v e experiences. Both women and men reported that parenthood was accompanied by (among other things) emotional and phy s i c a l fatigue, concern about greater r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s and r e s t r i c t i o n s , and loss of l e i s u r e and rec r e a t i o n a l time and time spent with spouses. For wives, e s p e c i a l l y , pregnancy and t r a n s i t i o n to parenthood was characterized by emotion-a l i t y and ambivalence. Women experienced greater change i n t h e i r l i v e s over the 8-month period and were more bothered by these changes. Their r e l a t i o n s h i p s with t h e i r own parents changed i n a p o s i t i v e d i r e c t i o n , but t h e i r m a r i t a l r e l a t i o n s h i p s became l e s s s a t i s f y i n g . Wives were also l e s s able to an t i c i p a t e t h e i r own parental behavior due perhaps to the greater changes they experienced. Mothers' s a t i s f a c t i o n at s i x months derived l a r g e l y from t h e i r r e l a t i o n s h i p s with t h e i r infants and from t h e i r sense of competence and c a p a b i l i t y i n the maternal r o l e . Williams, Painter, Davidson & Joy (1979) followed over 150 middle-class couples expecting t h e i r f i r s t c h i l d i n a study of the development of maternal attachment from the prenatal to the postpartum period.''' Mothers f i l l e d out questionnaires covering eight: areas of concern (e.g., p h y s i c a l health, confidence i n caregiving a b i l i t y , f e e l i n g s toward pregnancy) i n the l a s t trimester of pregnancy, and provided information on analogous measures at the end of the f i r s t postpartum month. Information about the p e r i n a t a l period (e.g., length of labor, type of d e l i v e r y , p e r i n a t a l medication ) was gathered from h o s p i t a l charts. A subset of 86 fa m i l i e s were randomly assigned to one of four treatment groups i n an intervention study that assessed the e f f e c t s of a teaching v i s i t during the f i r s t month af t e r b i r t h . The treatment groups, two experimental and two c o n t r o l , d i f f e r e d as to the number of v i s i t s they received i n t h e : - f i r s t postpartum month. In addition to providing s e l f - r e p o r t data, these mothers f i l l e d out d i a r i e s concerning time spent with t h e i r infants during the h o s p i t a l stay, and were observed at home with t h e i r infants at the end of the f i r s t postpartum month. The researchers focused on the development of maternal attachment from the prenatal to the postpartum period. They found that many events and experiences of the The research reported i n t h i s thesis i s a follow-up to t h i s study. D e t a i l s about the sample, methodology and r e s u l t s are reported i n Chapter 2. 14 prenatal and p e r i n a t a l period, such as whether or not the pregnancy was planned, attendance-at prenatal classes, plans for and experiences during labor and d e l i v e r y , amount of o b s t e t r i c medication and time spent with the infant i n h o s p i t a l , were unrelated to the mother's one-month postpartum report of f e e l i n g s of attachment to the i n f a n t . Rather, the mother's p r e d i c t i o n and report of her competence i n care-giving a b i l i t y were strongly p r e d i c t i v e of her f e e l i n g s of attachment and emotional state at one month postpartum. .Furthermore, mothers showed continuity i n f e e l i n g s of attachment from the prenatal to the postpartum period:. One a d d i t i o n a l f i n d i n g from the Williams, et a l . study i s of i n t e r e s t . Although both d i r e c t observation and more c l i n i c a l ratings of mother-infant i n t e r a c t i o n were made at the one-month postpartum v i s i t , there was no r e l a t i o n s h i p between maternal s e l f - r e p o r t and observed behavior (Painter, 1979). Other researchers have noted the lack of r e l a t h i p s h i p often found between observational data and s e l f -report o r . a t t i t u d i n a l measures (Ramey, 1979; Sroufe, 1980). Further-more, the d i f f e r e n c e between observable behavior and underlying psychological constructs or dimensions has been the subject of a controversy in•the f i e l d of infant attachment for several years (df. Lamb, .,1974; Rosenthal, 1973; Sroufe & Waters, 1977; Weinraub, et a l . , 1977). Whether or not there i s t h e o r e t i c a l j u s t i f i c a t i o n for expecting a r e l a t i o n s h i p between behavior and s e l f - r e p o r t , most studies have paid attention to one or the other, but not both. For example, Schaefer, Bauman, Siegel & Ingram (1978) report an extensive i n v e s t i g a t i o n of the dimensions of maternal attachment i n 15 which mothers were followed from the t h i r d trimester of pregnancy through the f i r s t year a f t e r b i r t h . Although interview data were gathered, only behavioral data have been reported. Despite the fa c t that the e x i s t i n g l i t e r a t u r e on adjustment to parenthood comprises only a few studies, the composite p i c t u r e drawn by the findings of these studies i s f a i r l y consistent. F i r s t , a l l reveal that the t r a n s i t i o n from pregnancy to parenthood, rather than being l a r g e l y a time of upheaval and emotional c r i s i s , as some s o c i o l o g i s t s have tended to believe, appears to be a time of both change and s t a b i l i t y . Second, the q u a l i t y of the marital r e l a t i o n s h i p has been shown to be an important factor i n adjustment to parental r o l e s . Third, mothers' confidence i n t h e i r a b i l i t y to f u l f i l l the maternal r o l e was found to be re l a t e d to maternal adjustment a f t e r the b i r t h . Consistency i n the findings despite the use of varying methods i s an encouraging sign that researchers i n t h i s f i e l d have i d e n t i f i e d at l e a s t some of the s a l i e n t dimensions of adaptation to parenthood i n the infancy period. Summary and Prospectus A number of aspects of parental adaptation remain unexplored. L i t t l e i s known about the dimensions of parental adjustment beyond early infancy. For example, do the issues that appear important i n the early weeks and months a f t e r the b i r t h remain important as parents become more comfortable i n the caregiving role? How do c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of the developing c h i l d a f f e c t patterns of adjustment over time? Along what dimensions do the parents themselves develop over the early course 16 of parenthood? Do parents' own perceptions of the issues they face and the ways they cope with them r e l a t e to observable behavior i n periods beyond infancy, i f not before? The aim of the research reported here i s to begin f i l l i n g these gaps by studying a group of parents whose chi l d r e n are past the infancy period. Sixty of the f a m i l i e s o r i g i n a l l y followed from the prenatal to the postpartum period by Williams, et a l . , were studied when the ch i l d r e n were toddlers. I t was decided to l i m i t the scope of the present research by gathering data from mothers only; the findings w i l l be extended to fathers i n a subsequent study. Mothers provided s e l f - r e p o r t data, and observations were made of mother-toddler i n t e r a c t i o n i n a structured laboratory s i t u a t i o n . The research was intended to be exploratory and d e s c r i p t i v e , and perhaps more focused on hypothesis-generation than on hypothesis-testing. However, an important purpose of this work was to follow up on some of the previously obtained findings. The s p e c i f i c questions asked were: 1. What are the dimensions of maternal adaptation to parenthood i n the toddler period as perceived by the mother? 2. What i s the role of confidence i n maternal adaptation to parenthood? How does confidence i n parenting a b i l i t y r e l a t e to the more general concept of self-esteem; i s parental confidence and/or self-esteem an important f a c t o r i n adaptation to parenthood when children are i n the toddler period? 3. How does observed mother-toddler i n t e r a c t i v e behavior r e l a t e to maternal s e l f - r e p o r t when children are i n the toddler period? 17 CHAPTER 2: METHODS SUBJECTS Population The subjects were drawn from the subsample of 86 families who served as subjects in the previous investigation of maternal attachment from the prenatal to the postpartum period . (Williams, et al., 1979). These families were originally recruited at prenatal tours of two local hospitals, and participated in the previous study by f i l l i n g out questionnaires and receiving home visits from three researchers including the present investigator. Measurement began in that study in the third trimester of pregnancy and continued through the birth and until the end of the first postpartum month, with a follow-up questionnaire administered through the mail at varying times from three to fifteen months after the birth of the infant. At the time of the original study, which began in the Spring of 1977 and continued through the Spring of 1978, the expectant mothers' mean age was 27 years (fathers' mean age was 29 years) and the couples had lived together for a mean of 4 years before the birth of this, their first child. The mothers' mean educational..level was 13.8 years (fathers' was 14.4 years); the mean Hollingshead Socioeconomic rating (Hollingshead, 1957) for mothers was 5.2, and for fathers was 4.9. Forty-one female and forty-five male infants were born in the original study. As might be expected for this relatively advantaged sample, there were no major perinatal complications and, until the first month postpartum (the last point at which information is available on a l l 86 families), no neonatal mortality. At the time of the.data 18 c o l l e c t i o n f o r the present study (October 1979-Februrary 1980), the infants born i n the o r i g i n a l study ranged i n age from 22-31 months. Recruitment For the present study, a l l f a m i l i e s from the o r i g i n a l sample were contacted by l e t t e r (Appendix A), followed by a phone c a l l . I f the family's telephone was disconnected or i f the l e t t e r was returned, an attempt was made to contact the family through the family physician, whose name was a v a i l a b l e from the o r i g i n a l study. Of the o r i g i n a l 86 f a m i l i e s , 12 could not be contacted at a l l , despite intensive e f f o r t s . Of the remaining 74, only 3 refused to p a r t i c i p a t e when contacted. Eleven f a m i l i e s o r i g i n a l l y agreed to p a r t i -cipate, e i t h e r f u l l y (laboratory v i s i t and questionnaires) or by f i l l i n g out questionnaires only, but, i n the end, ei t h e r did not come into the laboratory or did not return the questionnaires mailed to them. Sixty f a m i l i e s p a r t i c i p a t e d i n t h i s follow-up phase of the study. A f u l l d e s c r i p t i o n of group differences between fam i l i e s who dropped out and those who p a r t i c i p a t e d i s included i n Appendix B. There were no differences i n subject a t t r i t i o n associated with sample o r i g i n (hospital at which f a m i l i e s were r e c r u i t e d ' and l a t e r gave b i r t h ) . In the o r i g i n a l study, f a m i l i e s p a r t i c i p a t e d i n an intervention program to assess the e f f e c t s of a teaching v i s i t i n the home. The treatment consisted of home v i s i t s by a nurse-researcher who demonstrated and discussed aspects of infant behavior. (See Davidson, 1979, for a descr i p t i o n of the intervention.) Families i n the two experimental groups received either one or three v i s i t s during the f i r s t month a f t e r 19 b i r t h ; f a m i l i e s i n the f i r s t control group received a placebo v i s i t (no. teaching took place) , and families: .in the second control group did not receive a- home v i s i t during the f i r s t postpartum month. There were no differences i n subject . a t t r i t i o n associated with group assignment i n the o r i g i n a l study.-. . At the time of the follow-up phone c a l l , i t was explained that p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n the study involved v i s i t i n g the laboratory and f i l l i n g out questionnaires. If the family agreed to p a r t i c i p a t e , an appointment was arranged f o r the mother to bring her c h i l d to the Psychology Department at the University of B r i t i s h Columbia. If the mother was employed outside the home or was going to sc'tvodu, weekend appointments were arranged. Questionnaires (Appendices .C£ j,D,fE & F) and informed consent forms (Appendix G) were mailed to the family, and completed questionnaires were returned to the researcher when the mother and c h i l d came to the laboratory session. I f , at the time of the i n i t i a l phone contact, parents were unwilling or unable to come into the laboratory, but wished to p a r t i c i p a t e i n the study, they were asked to f i l l out questionnaires and return them to the researcher by mail. If they consented to do t h i s , a set of questionnaires and consent forms and a stamped, addressed envelope were sent to them. F i f t y - t h r e e f a m i l i e s p a r t i c i p a t e d by f i l l i n g out questionnaires and v i s i t i n g , t h e laboratory; seven f a m i l i e s p a r t i c i p a t e d by completing and returning questionnaires, but did not v i s i t the laboratory. Sample In the f i n a l sample of 60 f a m i l i e s , there were 28 g i r l s and 32 boys. The mothers' mean educational l e v e l was 14 years (range: 8-20 years), and the mean Hollingshead Socioeconomic r a t i n g for mothers 20 who were employed outside the home was 5.5. Twenty-nine mothers l i s t e d t h e i r occupation as "housewife"; 31 l i s t e d occupations c l a s s i -f i a b l e by the Hollingshead scale. A l l but one family had remained i n a t c t ; i n that family, the parents had been separated since the c h i l d was 12 months o l d . In 12 f a m i l i e s , a subsequent c h i l d had been born, and i n 13 f a m i l i e s , the mother was pregnant with a second c h i l d ( in one case, with a t h i r d ) . The toddler's mean age at the time of data c o l l e c t i o n was 24.66 months, with a range of 22-31 months; 79% were between 22 and 24 months o l d . PROCEDURES The procedures used i n the research included development and administration of maternal-report measures, and the laboratory v i s i t . MATERNAL-REPORT MEASURES Mothers provided s e l f - r e p o r t data on three questionnaires. Two of the questionnaires (the Mothers of Toddlers Questionnaire, Appendix Cj and the Parent Confidence Questionnaire, Appendix D) were developed by the present i n v e s t i g a t o r and are described i n d e t a i l below; the t h i r d questionnaire was Epstein's Self-Esteem Scale (The Self-Report Inventory, Appendix E). Mothers also reported t h e i r perception of t h e i r toddler's temperament on F u l l a r d , McDevitt & Carey's Toddler Temperament Scale (1978), (Appendix F ) . Selection and Development of Maternal-Report Measures The present study was designed as a follow-up to e a r l i e r research, so i t was possible to take into account the findings of the 21 e a r l i e r study when constructing and analyzing the s e l f - r e p o r t measures. The s e l f - r e p o r t measures used i n the prenatal (Time 1) and postpartum (Time 2) periods (Prenatal and Postpartum Questionnaires, Appendices J & K) had been designed to include groups of i n d i v i d u a l items hypo-thesized to tap a number of issues thought to be important i n the development of maternal attachment. These issues had been derived from e x i s t i n g l i t e r a t u r e on maternal attachment and maternal-infant bonding (e.g., L e i f e r , et a l . , 1972; Klaus & Kennell, 1976; Robson & Moss, 1970), from our own c r i t i c i s m s of that l i t e r a t u r e ( c f . , Painter, 1978; 1980) and from discussions with parents and other r researchers. The issues of i n t e r e s t included maternal p h y s i c a l con-d i t i o n and emotional state, preparation for and experiences during labor and d e l i v e r y , perceived support of husband, p r e d i c t i o n and report of confidence i n caregiving a b i l i t y , p r e d i c t i o n and report of parent-to-infant and infant-to-parent attachment, and arrangements for infant care. Longitudinal data from the prenatal and early postpartum periods were a v a i l a b l e for the 86 o r i g i n a l l o n g i t u d i n a l subjects and for 92 other..subjects who f i l l e d out questionnaires at Time 1 and Time 2, but d i d not p a r t i c i p a t e i n home v i s i t s . The analyses of these data revealeddthree important groups of i n t e r c o r r e l a t e d items. Each group appeared both i n the prenatal and the postpartum period, and each .: r e f l e c t e d one of the issues hypothesized to be important i n adaptation to parenthood. These groups were: Emotional State, Confidence i n Caregiving A b i l i t y , and Attachment. Furthermore, the pattern of 22 r e l a t i o n s h i p s among groups of items from Time 1 to Time 2 suggested that confidence i n caregiving a b i l i t y plays an important r o l e infcthe development of maternal attachmentt i n the early postpartum period. Whereas the three groups of items were unrelated at the prenatal period, they were strongly related at the postpartum period. In addition, prenatal P r e d i c t i o n of Confidence i n Caregiving A b i l i t y was related to bothhReport of Attachment and Confidence i n Caregiving A b i l i t y at one month postpartum; prenatal P r e d i c t i o n of Attachment was also related to postpartum Reported Attachment. Although causal inferences could not be made from these c o r r e l a t i o n a l data, patterns of c o r r e l a t i o n s within and across time were examined for possible causal pathways among Confidence, Attach-ment, and Emotional State. The pattern of r e l a t i o n s h i p s suggested that prenatal confidence i n caregiving a b i l i t y , rather than pre-existing feelings of attachment, plays the more important r o l e i n the developing attachment frond between a f i r s t - t i m e mother and her young infant (cf. Williams, et a l . , 1979, for a complete de s c r i p t i o n of the o r i g i n a l study). Data c o l l e c t i o n at the toddler period. Data c o l l e c t i o n f or the toddler period (Time 3) was planned to enable further exploration of the r e l a t i o n s h i p s found i n the e a r l i e r data, and to investigate the nature of confidence i n caregiving a b i l i t y i n more d e t a i l by measuring self-confidence i n general, self-esteem, and s p e c i f i c confidence i n caregiving. See Appendix N for a discussion of r e l i a b i l i t y issues for maternal report measures. 23 Self-esteem was measured using the Epstein Self-Esteem Scale, a 78 - item s e l f - r e p o r t measure from which an o v e r a l l score and nine subscales can be obtained. For the purposes of data analyses discussed here, the o v e r a l l score and the Competence subscore w i l l be considered. Confidence was measured i n three ways. F i r s t , the Parent Confidence Questionnaire (Parenting Inventory, Appendix D) was developed as an exploratory measure of confidence i n parenting a b i l i t y . Parents responded to 23 statements i n terms of degree of agreement on a 6-point scale. The items were concerned with such issues as understanding and being able to meet the c h i l d ' s needs, response to problem s i t u a t i o n s , and s a t i s f a c t i o n with aspects of the parent-c h i l d relationship?.., A mean score from the Parent Inventory was used i n the data analyses. Second, two items i n the form of 5-point Likert-type scales were included i n the Mothers of Toddlers Questionnaire. On one, mothers rated t h e i r general self-confidence (possible responses ranged from very self-confident to very unsure), and on the other mothers rated t h e i r s p e c i f i c confidence i n caregiving a b i l i t y (possible responses ranged from very confident to very unsure). The Mothers of Toddlers Questionnaire (MOT; Appendix C) was developed i n order to learn more about the r e l a t i o n s h i p s among confidence, attachment and emotional state found previously, and to obtain information about other issues important for maternal adaptation wheh;children are i n the toddler period. The Mothers of Toddlers Questionnaire was designed to include groups of i n d i v i d u a l items hypothesized to tap s p e c i f i c issues. Several items pertaining to each issue were included 24 so that i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of the data would be based on groups of items rather than on s i n g l e data points. The issues included i n the MOT are l i s t e d below. Some of the issues were dictated by the r e s u l t s of the e a r l i e r study. Others were added on the basis of e x i s t i n g l i t e r a t u r e (e.g., Belsky, 1979) and discussions with other researchers and parents of toddlers. Mothers of Toddlers Questionnaire Issues: A. P h y s i c a l Health of Mother and Toddler; B. Emotional State of Mother; C. M a r i t a l Relationship; D. Mother's Outside A c t i v i t i e s ; E. Childrearing Arrangements; F. Relationship with Toddler; G. Confidence i n Parenting A b i l i t y ; H. Maternal Role Concerns; I. S o c i a l Support Some of the items on the Mothers of Toddlers Questionnaire were i n the form of 4- or 5-point, Likert-type scales; each point of the scale was labeled. Some of the items followed a forced-choice format, with the al t e r n a t i v e s forming an o r d i n a l scale. Some items were dichoto-mous (to be answered yes or no) and some were open-ended. Items included i n the data analyses to be discussed here were a l l i n t e r v a l or o r d i n a l scales. In general, a l l scale items on the MOT were scaled such that the most p o s i t i v e responses (e.g., most confident, l e a s t s t r e s s f u l , f e e l i n g of greatest emotional closeness) received the lowest score. Four areas were of p a r t i c u l a r i n t e r e s t because of t h e i r conceptual r e l a t i o n s h i p to the findings of the e a r l i e r phase of the 25 research: Emotional State, Relationship with Toddler, Maternal Role Concerns and M a r i t a l Relationship. (In the following discussion, each l i s t of questionnare items includes the item d e s c r i p t i o n and/or scale end-point l a b e l s , along with the item code name which w i l l be used intthe text and tables.) Five items comprised the group concerned with maternal Emotional State; a l l were 5-point scales on which the mother rated her current f e e l i n g s : a) very energetic very tined (Energetic/Tired) b) very depressed very elated (Depressed/Elated) c) very content very discontent (Content/Discontent) d) very happy very unhappy (Happy/Unhappy) e) very relaxed very anxious (Relaxed/Anxious) Six items comprised the group concerned with the Mother-Child Relationship. These were: a) How close would you say you f e e l to your c h i l d now: very close very distant (Motherss Emotional Tie) b) How s a t i s f i e d would you say you are with your r e l a t i o n s h i p with your toddler: very s a t i s f i e d very u n s a t i s f i e d (Relationship to Toddler) c) Some ch i l d r e n seem very attached to t h e i r parents, while others seem more independent. How would you describe your toddler: (4 points) strongly attached — highly independent (Toddler's Attachment) d) O v e r a l l , how do you enjoy t h i s stage of your c h i l d ' s l i f e as compared to when he or she was an i n f a n t : a great deal more a great deal less (Prefer Toddler Stage)_ e) How would you say you are f e e l i n g about your a b i l i t y to cope with l i f e at home with your toddler these days: usually f e e l I can handle whatever may come up most of the time I f e e l very unsure about the way I am handling things ( A b i l i t y to Cope with Toddler) f) How many of the following s i t u a t i o n s and c h i l d behaviors (from a c h e c k - l i s t of 16 items) constitute d i s c i p l i n e issues for you and your toddler (Number of D i s c i p l i n e Issues) The Mother's Role Concerns comprised the t h i r d important group of items. The r e l a t i v e neglect of the mother as a person i n the l i t e r a t u r e on mother-child r e l a t i o n s h i p s makes these items e s p e c i a l l y noteworthy. I n t u i t i v e l y , the mother's perception of her own l i f e and the impact her role s as parent and spouse have upon her l i f e would seem to be e s p e c i a l l y important aspects of her adaptation to parenthood Our e a r l i e r f i n d i n g that the majority of new parents seemed unprepared for the e f f e c t t h e i r new infant had upon t h e i r l i v e s Ccf., Williams, et a l . , 1979) supports the i n t u i t i o n that t h i s i s an important issue. Many parents had s p e c i f i c a l l y mentioned being affected by the loss of freedom and change i n t h e i r day-to-day l i v e s experienced as a r e s u l t of the demands made upon them by t h e i r i n f a n t s ' needs for care and attention. A t o t a l of 14 items were devised to tap the issues involved i n the mother's view of her own l i f e when her c h i l d i s i n the toddler period and her perception of the ways i n which the demands of parenthood a f f e c t , and are affected by, the demands of other role s she might play. Thirteen items were i n the form of 4-point scales upon which the mother indicated the extent of her agreement with each of the following statements: a) I have too many household r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s (Household r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s ) b) Having a c h i l d i n t e r f e r e s with my s o c i a l l i f e or outside a c t i v i t i e s (Interference/Social L i f e ) c) Having a c h i l d i n t e r f e r e s with my sex l i f e (Interference/ Sex L i f e ) 27 d) Having a c h i l d i n t e r f e r e s with my career or work responsi-b i l i t i e s (Interference/Career) e) I am concerned about f i n a n c i a l matters (Worry About Finances) f) I worry about the future (Worry About Future) g) I'm not getting enough time to myself (Lack of Time for Self) h) I don't have enough time to spend with my c h i l d (Lack of Time for Child) it) I don't have enough time to spend with my husband/partner (Lack of Time for Husband) j ) I am unsure about how to handle or care for a toddler (Unsure About Toddler Care) k) I worry about being a good mother (Worry About Being Good Mother) 1) I f e e l "trapped" — I don't have enough freedom (Feel Trapped) m) I f e e l pressure for greater" commitment to my family (Feel Pressure for Commitment) The f i n a l item i n t h i s group was a 5-point scale: n) Some fa m i l i e s report that the f i r s t years a f t e r t h e i r f i r s t c h i l d ' s b i r t h are very s t r e s s f u l times, while others do not. see any difference between this time and any other time. How would you say the f i r s t years a f t e r your c h i l d ' s b i r t h were f o r your family: not at a l l s t r e s s f u l extremely s t r e s s f u l (Stress OvertTwo Years) The f i n a l set of items of s p e c i a l i n t e r e s t concerned the M a r i t a l Relationship. On the basis of both the recent l i t e r a t u r e on family i n t e r a c t i o n patterns (e.g., Lerner & Spanier, 1978) and discussions with the f a m i l i e s p a r t i c i p a t i n g i n t h i s research, i t seemed important to include some assessment of the m a r i t a l r e l a t i o n s h i p and the r e c i p r o c a l impact of the m a r i t a l and parent-child r e l a t i o n s h i p s . Although items regarding the husband had been included i n previous questionnaires, these items were mainly concerned with the husband's support and 28 p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n infant caregiving, rather than -bemng assessments of the mother's perception of the^imarital r e l a t i o n s h i p i t s e l f . On the MOT, nine items tapped several dimensions of the m a r i t a l r e l a t i o n s h i p , as perceived by the mother. a) How s a t i s f i e d would you say you have been with your r e l a t i o n s h i p with your husband or partner over the past two years: very s a t i s f i e d - — very u n s a t i s f i e d (Marital S a t i s f a c t i o n Over Two Years) b) How s a t i s f i e d would you say you are with your r e l a t i o n s h i p with your husband or partner r i g h t now: very s a t i s f i e d • very u n s a t i s f i e d (Marital S a t i s f a c t i o n Now)_ c) To what extent would you say that having a c h i l d has affected your r e l a t i o n s h i p with your husband or partner: a great deal, i n a p o s i t i v e way^ --- a great deal, i n a negative way (Child's E f f e c t on Marriage) d) To what extent do you and your husband /partner agree about when (for what reasons) and how to d i s c i p l i n e your toddler: A l l of the time r a r e l y (Partners Agree on D i s c i p l i n e ) e) Some mothers f e e l that the mother's r o l e i n c h i l d r e a r i n g i s very s i m i l a r to the father's, that i s , that they have s i m i l a r concerns, perform s i m i l a r tasks, p a r t i c i p a t e i n ; s i m i l a r a c t i v i t i e s with the c h i l d ; other mothers f e e l that the mother's r o l e and father's r o l e are more unique, that they have d i f f e r e n t concerns, do d i f f e r e n t tasks, etc. How would you say you f e e l about the s i m i l a r i t y of mothers' and fathers' r o l e s : (Appoints) very s i m i l a r —_ x<very d i f f e r e n t (Maternal and Paternal Roles Similar) f) How do you and your husband/partner divide the tasks of childrearing? O v e r a l l , do you do: more than 75% less than 25% (Share Childcare Overall) g) When.you and your husband /partner are both home, how do you divide c h i l d r e a r i n g tasks? Do you do: more than 75% l e s s than 25% (Share Childcare When Both Home) h) To what extent do you r e l y upon your husband/partner i f you have concerns about your c h i l d or f e e l the need r to talk about things re l a t e d to c h i l d r e a r i n g : a great deal r a r e l y (Discuss c h i l d with Husband) 29 i ) To what extent do you r e l y upon your husband/partner i f you have concerns about other aspects of your l i f e (your marriage, your work or outside a c t i v i t i e s , your personal problems, e t c . ) : a great deal r a r e l y (Discuss Personal L i f e with Husband) The Toddler Temperament Scale A measure of c h i l d temperament was desired because the present research was undertaken with the view that the parent-child system i s one of b i - d i r e c t i o n a l influence, and that maternal adaptation i s a function not only of the mother's adjustment to her r o l e as parent and to the demands of her other r o l e s , but also of the p a r t i c u l a r 'stimulus package' presented by her c h i l d . A parent-report measure was used to provide a measure of parental perception of the c h i l d ' s temperament, rather than an objective r a t i n g . I t should be noted, however, that there i s evidence (Bates, Bennett, Freeland & Lounsbury, c i t e d i n Pedersen, Zaslow, Cain & Anderson, 1980; Billman & McDevitt, 1980) that parent report of in f a n t temperament i s rel a t e d to an objective observer's ratingsaof the i n f a n t s ' and pre-schoolers' behavior patterns. The Toddler Temperament Scale was constructed by F u l l a r d et a l . , (1978) to avoid two sources of bias that might reduce the value of the scale as a r e f l e c t i o n of parental perception: s o c i a l d e s i r a b i l i t y and response set. F i r s t , on the basis of Carey's (1970) f i n d i n g that parents have a tendency to portray t h e i r infant as having an easy or mild temperament i f asked f or a global r a t i n g of the ch i l d ' s temperament, items on the Toddler Temperament Scale were constructed so that parents were asked how frequently t h e i r toddler exhibited s p e c i f i c behavior i n p a r t i c u l a r s i t u a t i o n s , e.g., "The c h i l d stays with a routine task 30 (dressing, picking up toys) f o r f i v e minutes or more", "The c h i l d sleeps poorly ( r e s t l e s s , wakeful) i n new places f o r the f i r s t 2 or 3 times." Second, items were written so that parents must sometimes rate t h e i r c h i l d ' s behavior at the upper end of the 6-point scale (e.g., 'Frequently' of 'Almost always') and sometimes at the lower end (Rarely', 'Almost Never') i n order to make a consistent report about the c h i l d ' s behavior. The 97-item scale i s designed to y i e l d scores on nine subscales derived from the work of Thomas, Chess, and Birch (1968). These subscales are:. a) a c t i v i t y : Kigh-low (Active) b) rhythm: arrhythmic-very rhythmic '(Rhythm) c) approach/withdraw: withdrawing-approaching (Approach) d) a d a p t a b i l i t y : slowly adapting-very adaptable (Adapt) e) i n t e n s i t y : intense-mild (Intense) f) mood: negative-positive (Mood) g) persistence: low persistence-high persistence (Persist) h) d i s t r a c t i b i l i t y : high d i s t r a c t i b i l i t y - l o w d i s t r a c t i b i l i t y (Distract) i ) threshold: low-high (Threshold) LABORATORY VISIT F i f t y - t h r e e mother-toddler pa i r s v i s i t e d the laboratory. Mother-toddler i n t e r a c t i o n was observed and videotaped during a three part semi-structured s i t u a t i o n , and two tests of the toddlers' cognitive development were administered. Observation of Mother-Toddler Interaction The observation period consisted of a free-play session (10 minutes), a clean-up session (8 minutes) and a set of three tool-using tasks (maximum 30 minutes). The free-play session was used as a warm-up period and was not scored. Behavior i n the Clean-up and Tool-use sessions was coded from videotapes and analyzed. Mothers brought t h e i r toddlers to the Psychology Department at the Un i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia where a large conference room was converted into playroom and waiting room areas by d i v i d e r s . The playroom area was 12' by 15', and contained a chair for the mother, a b a s k e t - f u l l of age-appropriate toys f o r the c h i l d , and a s h e l f . In the corner opposite the mother's chair, a b l i n d concealed a videotape camera. The entire session was videotaped with the mother's knowledge and consent. Before the session began, the researcher talked with the mother, explaining what would take place and answering the mother's questions. Mothers were t o l d that the session consisted of three parts: a 10-minute play period that served as a warm-up, a clean-up session, and three tool-using tasks. Instructions to the mother were as follows: The session w i l l consist of three parts. The f i r s t part w i l l be a free-play time; you may play with your c h i l d or allow him (or her) to play on his (or her) own; do whatever you would l i k e . However, please remain i n the playroom during the e n t i r e session. At the end of 10 minutes, I w i l l s i g n a l you by knocking on the wall (researcher demonstrated three knocks).'. At t h i s time, we would l i k e you to t r y and get your c h i l d to clean up the toys by putting them on the shelf. We are interested i n seeing how well children of t h i s age cooperate, so we would l i k e 32 you to do t h i s i n the same way you would do i t at home. At the end of t h i s time, I w i l l come i n and bring i n , one at a time, three tiooit-using tasks f o r your c h i l d to do. These tasks are graduated i n d i f f i c u l t y , and we know that some of them are too hard f o r c h i l d r e n of t h i s age to do on t h e i r own. We are interested i n seeing what ch i l d r e n of t h i s age do when they are faced with a problem that they are unable to solve by themselves. What we ask you to do i s to l e t your c h i l d work on the problem on h i s (or her) own f o r a b i t , and then give him (or her) what-ever help you think he (or she) needs to solve the problem. Clean-up session. Maternal and toddler behavior i n the Clean-up session was assessed from videotapes using a coding system developed by Sroufe (Appendix H). Matas, Arend & Sroufe (1978) have presented data on the r e l i a b i l i t y of t h i s coding system. The coding system i s based on the assumption that the mother i s i n t e r f e r i n g with the ch i l d ' s desires to continue playing by requesting that he or she stop playing and put the toys away. It i s further assumed that the mother's task i n the s i t u a t i o n i s to make her own wishes p r e v a i l , fcftatiis, to get the c h i l d to clean up the play area, while at the same time preventing the c h i l d from becoming so upset, f r u s t r a t e d , or negative that the mother must eit h e r use force (physical or psychological) to make the c h i l d comply, or give up altogether. In t h i s coding system, eighteen d i s c r e t e maternal behavior patterns are coded, and on the basis of these, o v e r a l l maternal behavior during the 8-minute clean-up period i s rated on a 5-point scale. The two main dimensions of the Mother Scale are: 1) setting and maintaining l i m i t s , and 2) a f f e c t i v e involvement with the c h i l d . Both dimensions are involved i n ra t i n g the mother's behavior i n the clean-up task. "Setting and maintaining l i m i t s " means that the mother i s clear and consistent i n her demands, i . e . , that she makes her expectations 33 known by giving c l e a r d i r e c t i v e s and following up on them. In order to receive a r a t i n g of 5, 4, or 3, the mother must set and maintain l i m i t s for the c h i l d . Mothers who receive lower ratings may either f a i l to maintain l i m i t s , i . e . , r e l i n q u i s h c o n t r o l of the s i t u a t i o n by allowing the c h i l d to ignore her requests, or may make the l i m i t s so narrow that the c h i l d i s not allowed any f l e x i b i l i t y i n his/her response. The second dimension, " a f f e c t i v e involvement", means that the mother i s responsive to her c h i l d , and considerate of his/her desires and behavior i n the s i t u a t i o n . She i s f l e x i b l e i n her demands and encourages her c h i l d to meet her demands by p a r t i c i p a t i n g i n the task and/or giving reinforcement for cooperative behavior. Ratings of 5, 4, or 3 ind i c a t e that the mother's behavior i s characterized by a f f e c t i v e involvement to at l e a s t some degree; lower ratings are r e f l e c t i v e of maternal withdrawal, inconsiderateness and/or abusiveness. Six d i s c r e t e toddler behavior patterns are coded from videotapes of the clean-up session, from which three other ratings are made. The f i r s t r a t i n g i s made on a 4-point scale of Degree of the Child's Compliance with the mother's d i r e c t i v e s , ranging from generally compliant (4) to non-compliant (1). I t i s also possible to rate a c h i l d as overly compliant, that i s , responding to the mother's requests with unnaturally compliant behavior; i n such a case, data from that scale are not included i n analyses. The second r a t i n g i s of the C h i l d ' s A f f e c t during the clean-up s i t u a t i o n . This r a t i n g i s made on a 5-point scale from predominantly p o s i t i v e a f f e c t (5) to predominantly negative a f f e c t (1). 34 F i n a l l y , the o v e r a l l Experience i n the Clean-up s i t u a t i o n i s rated on a 5-point scale ranging from excellent (5) to very poor (1). This r a t i n g i s based upon two dimensions of the i n t e r a c t i o n between mother and c h i l d ; f i r s t , the extent to which the c h i l d learns to control h i s or her own impulses i n response to the mother's l i m i t -s e t t i n g ; and second, the degree of cooperation and smoothness of i n t e r a c t i o n between mother and c h i l d . Tool-using tasks. Following the clean-up session, three tool-using tasks developed by Charlesworth at the U n i v e r s i t y of Minnesota were presented. Since the purpose of using these tasks was to provide assessments of maternal assistance, the three tasks were developmentally graded so that they ranged from a task the c h i l d could e a s i l y solve on h i s or her own, through a more d i f f i c u l t task,=to a task the c h i l d would be unable to solve without assistance from the mother. Charlesworth (1979) has indicated that the range of tasks used i n the present i n v e s t i g a t i o n i s appropriate for the age-range of the children i n the study. (Diagrams of tool-use materials are included i n Appendix-J.) In the f i r s t task s the c h i l d i s required to use a s t i c k to push a small p l a s t i c toy out of one end of a long (16') , narrow p l e x i g l a s s tube. The second task i s s i m i l a r to the f i r s t , but requires that the c h i l d f i t two s t i c k s end-to-end i n order to make one s t i c k long enough to push the toy out of the same p l e x i g l a s s tube. The t h i r d task consists of .a large (37" x 19" x 17") p l e x i g l a s s box with a board inserted at one end, forming a lever. A reward i s placed at the end of the board in s i d e the box. The c h i l d must place a wooden 35 block on the outside end of the lever i n order to r a i s e the other end up through a hole i n the top surface of the box. For the f i r s t two tasks, two d i f f e r e n t toys (small p l a s t i c animals or cars) were used as lures; f o r t t h e t h i r d task, a treat (usually a small p l a s t i c bag of r a i s i n s ) was the lur e . The c h i l d was allowed to keep a l l rewards whether or not the.problem was solved. Maternal behavior during the tool-using tasks was scored from videotapes of the session according to a coding system developed by Matas, Sroufe & Rosenberg (Appendix I ) . Matas, dt a l . (,1978) have presented data on the r e l i a b i l i t y of t h i s coding system. Two main maternal v a r i a b l e s were scored: "Quality of Assistance", or the extent to which the help provided by the mother enables the c h i l d to success-f u l l y solve the problem, and "Supportive Presence" or the degree to which the mother provides an emotional atmosphere conducive to accomplishing the s o l u t i o n to the problem. The following excerpt from the coding manual describes the. dimensions underlying the two types of r a t i n g s : The two aspects, supportive presence and q u a l i t y of assistance, pertain to the mother's contributions to the i n t e r a c t i o n . When these variables are scored, i t i s important to attempt r a t i n g the mother without l e t t i n g the c h i l d ' s contributions to the : s i t u a t i o n bias the score. This i s not always completely possible because the rated s i t u a t i o n i s an i n t e r a c t i o n ; the mother reacts to the c h i l d and the s i t u a t i o n a l demands, j u s t as the c h i l d reacts to the mother and the problem- at hand. A c h i l d who i s being d i f f i c u l t or upset obviously w i l l need a d i f f e r e n t type of i n t e r a c t i o n with the mother than the c h i l d who i s very invested i n and excited about the task. It i s important to remember, though, that a d i f f i c u l t or distraught c h i l d does not always mean the mother should receive low scores. The ratingss are meant to characterize the q u a l i t y with which the mother deals with a given c h i l d at a given point i n time i n a s p e c i f i c s i t u a t i o n . Each c h i l d w i l l vary i n t i t s contribution to the 36 i n t e r a c t i o n ; the highest scores are meant f o r the mothers who react to t h e i r c h i l d ' s behaviors i n the best possible ways. This may sometimes be firm, d i r e c t i v e , and even p h y s i c a l l y involved, or i t may be interested and en t h u s i a s t i c , but non-involved i n a ph y s i c a l or d i r e c t i v e sense. The appropriateness of the mother's behavior i s of prime consideration. The two aspects of t h e ^ s i t u a t i o n which are rated are d i f f e r e n t , but not always mutually exclusive. Quality of assistance pertains to the s k i l l and s e n s i t i v i t y waith which the mother helps the c h i l d solve the problem asdwell as maximizes the c h i l d ' s chance to learn r e l a t i o n s h i p r ules and concepts which, at some point, could be generalized to other problems. Supportive- presence involves the emotional support with which the mother helps the c h i l d have a p o s i t i v e and enjoyable learning experience, no matter how d i f f i c u l t the task. I t i s assumed that a two-year old l i k e s to work autonomously when he/she can but s t i l l needs the caretaker&s involvement and support i f he/she comes up against a problem which exceeds his/her develop-mental l e v e l . Therefore, supportive presence may be characterized by the balance of encouragement of autonomous work through the provision of a secure base by the caretaker and a l e v e l of involvement which ensures that the c h i l d w i l l obtain emotional or i n s t r u c t i v e assistance when needed. Scores are derived on the basis of ratings made f o r two major c r i t e r i a and several s u b c r i t e r i a for each score; these c r i t e r i a are judged as d e f i n i t e l y met, minimally met, or not met at a l l . The scoring manual gives a d e t a i l e d r a t i o n a l e f o r making the judgement fo r each c r i t e r i o n and s u b c r i t e r i o n . On the basis of the pattern of jj.udgements, the mother's behavior i s assigned a score from 1 (the least supportive or the lowest quality) to 7 (the most supportive or the highest q u a l i t y ) . Interobserver agreement. A l l videotapes were coded and scored by a research assistant who was unaware of the hypotheses of the study. The present inve s t i g a t o r was trained i n Dr. Sroufe's laboratory at U n i v e r s i t y of Minnesota, I n s t i t u t e of C h i l d Development, to use the coding systems f o r both the clean-up and the tool-use sessions. She then trained with the research assistant using videotapes of p i l o t subjects to a c r i t e r i o n of .90 interobserver agreement for a l l scoring categories before coding of videotapes began. (Interobserver agreement was calculated as the number of agreements per category divided-by the number of agreements + the number of disagreements per category.) Interobserver agreement was maintained throughout the period during which the tapes were coded by having the present . investigator code and score a random 20% of the videotapes; the research a s s i s t a n t was unaware of which tapes were being selected for r e l i a b i l i t y coding. When interobserver agreement was calculated as occurring only when observers' ratings were exactly the same, agreement ranged from .50 to .90, with 5 categories having over .80 agreement, 2 having .70 agreement and the remaining 3 ranging between .50 and .60. When agreement was calculated as occurring when', the observers' ratings were within one point of each other, agreement was 1.00 for 8 categories and above .80 f o r the remaining 2 categories. Assessment of Toddler's Cognitive Development Following the play, clean-up and tool-use tasks sessions, a research assistant administered the Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test and the Stanford Binet I n t e l l i g e n c e Scale, Form L-M to the c h i l d while the mother talked with the researcher i n another room. Both scales y i e l d Mental Age and I.Q. scores. A l l cognitive t e s t i n g was done by two research assistants trained by an experienced test e r . There were no systematic differences i n the cognitive test scores due to tester. CHAPTER 3: RESULTS RESULTS OF THE SELF-REPORT MEASURES The s e l f - r e p o r t measures provided a large body of data i n the form of answers to i n d i v i d u a l questionnaire items (from the Mothers of Toddlers Questionnaire - MOT) and summary scores (from the Epstein Self-Esteem Scale and the Parent Confidence Questionnaire). Analyses were designed to reduce t h i s information i n t o a smaller number of more manageable units that would provide a summary desc r i p t i o n of maternal experience i n the toddler period. The f i r s t question addressed by the analyses concerned the coherence of each of the conceptually-based groups of items ( i . e . , self-esteem, confidence, emotional state, mother-child r e l a t i o n s h i p , m arital r e l a t i o n s h i p and maternal r o l e concerns). That i s , how were i n d i v i d u a l items, which were developed to tap a p a r t i c u l a r aspect of maternal experience, related to one another? Factor analyses were car r i e d out on the Pearson product-moment c o r r e l a t i o n matrices of each conceptual group of items to determine whether the group described a single dimension of maternal adaptation. The second question concerned the pattern of r e l a t i o n s h i p s between the various groups of items. A factor analysis was c a r r i e d out on the c o r r e l a t i o n matrix of factor scores from the f i r s t set of factor analyses. A l l factor analyses were done using a p r i n c i p a l axes solu t i o n followed by a varimax (orthogonal) r o t a t i o n . The number of factors was determined i n each case by a scree test on the plot of eigenvalues associated with each factor (Gorsuch, 1974). A l l extracted factors had eigenvalues of greater than i.OQ. Means, standard deviations and ranges for a l l items involved i n the 3 analyses are included i n Appendix N. Self-Esteem, Self-Confidence & Confidence i n Caregiving A b i l i t y S t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t c o r r e l a t i o n s among the f i v e scores or items assessing self-esteem (Epstein scale score and Competence Subscore), general self-confidence (one item from MOT) and confidence i n caregiving a b i l i t y (one item from MOT and o v e r a l l score from the Parent Confidence Questionnaire) are presented i n Table 1. Signs of the c o r r e l a t i o n s have been r e f l e c t e d where necessary so that a p o s i t i v e c o r r e l a t i o n indicates agreement between two scores or items. The f i v e measures are well i n t e r c o r r e l a t e d , with a l l c o r r e l a t i o n s above .30 and s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t beyond the 205 l e v e l . Although the c o r r e l a t i o n s are s u b s t a n t i a l , an examination of the variance accounted for by each ( i . e . , the square of the correlation) suggests that for four of the f i v e (excluding the Competence subscale, which i s part of the o v e r a l l Self-Esteem score), these are not e n t i r e l y redundant measurements. For example, only 41% of the variance i n the Parent Confidence score i s shared with the Self-Esteem score. However, the factor analysis on the c o r r e l a t i o n matrix of items assessing s e l f -esteem and confidence yielded only one factor which accounted for 48.6% of the variance i n t h i s group of items. The Self-Esteem score and Parent Confidence score had the highest loadings on t h i s factor (see Table 2), but the general self-confidence and confidence i n caregiving items also showed sub s t a n t i a l loadings. Thus, i t was not 3 No differences associated with intervention group assignment i n the o r i g i n a l study (see p. 18) were found. Table 1 -Correlations Among Items Assessing Self-Esteem and Confidence Items Assessing Self-Esteem and Confidence Parent Competence Confidence Confidence/ Caregiving. S e l f -Confidence Self-Esteem 85** 64** 39* 44** Competence 54** 35* 39* Parent Confidence 49** 46** Confidence/ Caregiving 33* Note: Decimals have been omitted. *p < .05 **p < .01 41 Table 2 Results of Factor Analysis on Correlation Matrix of Items Assessing Self-Esteem and Confidence Item Loading A f t e r Varimax Rotation Self-Esteem .7555 Parent Confidence .8309 Self-Confidence .5923 Confidence/Caregiving .5753 Percentage of Variance Accounted For: 48.6 possible, on the basis of these analyses, to separate o v e r a l l s e l f -confidence or self-esteem from s p e c i f i c confidence i n parental or caregiving a b i l i t y . The single factor was named Self-Assurance, and i t was t e n t a t i v e l y concluded that the four items forming the factor describe a confidence/self-esteem dimension of maternal experience when t h e i r c h i l d r e n are at the toddler period. Emotional State The s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t c o r r e l a t i o n s among the f i v e items concerned with maternal emotional state are shown i n Table 3. Except f o r the item labeled Energetic/Tired, a l l are i n t e r c o r r e l a t e d . The factor analysis on the c o r r e l a t i o n matrix of t h i s group of items yielded two factors which together accounted f o r 59% of the t o t a l -variance i n Emotional State items (see Table 4). The items Content/ Discontent, Happy/Unhappy and Depressed/Elated loaded on the f i r s t f a c t o r , with the f i r s t two items having the highest loadings. The item Energetic/Tired loaded only on the second f a c t o r , and the item Relaxed/Anxious loaded almost equally on both factors. I t appears that the f i v e items designed to r e f l e c t Emotional State r e f l e c t two dimensions rather than one. The items concerning content-ment, happiness, and depression/elation seem to tap maternal emotional state, whereas the item concerning f e e l i n g s of energy versus fatigue seems to r e f l e c t the mother's tempo or vigor. The f e e l i n g of relax-ation versus anxiety appears to be rel a t e d to both emotional state and tempo. The f i r s t factor was named Contentment, and the second was named Energy. Table 3 S i g n i f i c a n t Correlations Among_Iterns Assessing Emotional State Items Assessing Emotional State Depressed/ Content/ Happy/ Relaxed/ Elated Discontent Unhappy Anxious Energetic/ Tired -- — — 32** Depressed/ Elated 44** 52** 33** Content/ Discontent 71** 27* Happy/ Unhappy 51** Note: Decimals have been omitted. *p < .05 **p < .01 — non-significant c o r r e l a t i o n 44 Table 4 Results of Factor Analysis on Correlation Matrix of Items Assessing Emotional State Item Loadings A f t e r Varimax Rotation Factor I Factor II Content/Discontent .8049 -.0686 Happy/Unhappy .8691 .2535 Depressed/Elated .5873 .0909 Relaxed/Anxious .4573 .4097 Energetic/Tired .0169 .8644 Percentage of Variance Accounted For: 39.2 19.8 Percentage of Total Variance Accounted For: 59.0 Mother-Child Relationship The pattern of s i g n i f i c a n t c o r r e l a t i o n s among the s i x items concerned with the mother-toddler r e l a t i o n s h i p i s shown i n Table 5. The fact that only a few of the co r r e l a t i o n s among these items are s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t and that none are large, suggests that the mother-toddler r e l a t i o n s h i p comprises more than a s i n g l e dimension. The mother's feel i n g s of attachment to her toddler (Mother's Emotional Tie) and her s a t i s f a c t i o n with her r e l a t i o n s h i p with her toddler (Relationship to Toddler) were correlated, and both were . ".: correlated with her report of being able to cope with her toddler ( A b i l i t y to Cope With Toddler). Oneone item (Prefer Toddler Stage) mothers were asked whether they preferred the infant or toddler stage of t h e i r c h i l d ' s development. The mean on t h i s item (1.66) indicated that most mothers preferred the l a t t e r , but responses were not related to the strength of the mother's emotional t i e to her c h i l d ( i . e . , to either Mother's Emotional T i e or Relationship to Toddler). The mother' perception of the c h i l d ' s attachment.(Toddler Attachment) also was not s i g n i f i c a n t l y correlated with her own fee l i n g s of attachment, enjoyment or a b i l i t y to cope with her toddler. The f i n a l item among those concerned with the mother-child r e l a t i o n s h i p dealt with the number of situ a t i o n s and c h i l d behaviors that constitute d i s c i p l i n e issues for parent and c h i l d (Number D i s c i p l i n e Issues); t h i s item was not s i g n i f i c a n t l y correlated with other items i n the group. The f a c t o r analysis c a r r i e d out on the c o r r e l a t i o n matrix of t h i s group of items yielded two factors that together accounted for 46 Table 5 S i g n i f i c a n t Correlations Among Items Assessing the Mother-Child Relationship Items Assessing the Mother-Child Relationship Relationship to Toddler Prefer Toddler . . Toddler Attachment Stage A b i l i t y to Cope w/ Toddler Number D i s c i p l i n e Issues Mother's Emotional Tie 47** — 28* — Relationship to Toddler — 28* — Toddler Attachment Prefer Toddler Stage A b i l i t y to Cope w/ Toddler Note: Decimals have been omitted *p < .05 **p < .01 — non-significant c o r r e l a t i o n 47 Table 6 Results of Factor Analysis on Cor r e l a t i o n Matrix of Items Assessing the Mother-Child Relationship Item Loading A f t e r Varimax Rotation Factor I Factor II Relationship to Toddler ,7021 .2006: Mother's Emotional Tie .6646 -.0369 A b i l i t y to Cope With Toddler .4481 -.0306 Toddler Attachment -.1971 .6093 Prefer Toddler Stage 1522 .5574 Number D i s c i p l i n e Issues -.1520 .0215 Percentage of Variance Accounted For: 20.3 12.1 Tot a l Percentage of Variance Accounted For: 32.4 48 32.3% of the t o t a l variance (see Table 6). Motheris Emotional T i e , Relationship to Toddler and A b i l i t y to Cope with Toddler a l l load on t h i s f a c t o r , with the f i r s t two having the highest loadings. The fact that these items load on the same factor suggests that events occurring between parent and c h i l d (that i s , s i t u a t i o n s that c a l l f o r the mother to cope with her c h i l d ' s behavior) are r e c i p r o c a l l y r e l a t e d to the mother's f e e l i n g s of attachment to her c h i l d . Either the strength of her emotional t i e allows her to cope better with d i f f i c l t s i t u a t i o n s , or her a b i l i t y to handle those s i t u a t i o n s contributes to her f e e l i n g s of attachment to her toddler, or, most l i k e l y , the two issues a f f e c t one another i n turn. The second factor a r i s i n g from analysis of the group of items concerned with the mother-child r e l a t i o n s h i p seems to be concerned with at t r i b u t e s of the c h i l d as perceived by the mother, rather than with the mother's feelings toward the c h i l d ; Prefer Toddler Stage and Toddler Attachment both load on t h i s f a c t o r . (The item, Number/Discipline Issues, does not load on eit h e r factor.) Taken together, these data suggest that the mother's emotional t i e to her toddler and her perception of the c h i l d ' s c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s or f e e l i n g s of attachment are d i s t i n c t from one another.^ •^It should be noted that the item concerned with the c h i l d ' s f e e l i n g s of attachment was worded i n a way that may have clouded the issue of whether maternal attachment and c h i l d attachment are rel a t e d . The terms 'attached-independent' were chosen instead of 'attached-unattached' i n the hope that s o c i a l l y desirable responses would be avoided; i t was f e l t that few mothers would describe t h e i r c h i l d as unattached to them. The terms used were chosen instead of 'dependent-independent' because, although s o c i a l learning t h e o r i s t s (e.g., Maccoby & Masters, 1970; Sears, et a l . , 1957) have used the concept of dependency i n much the same way that ethologists have used the concept of attachment, we f e l t the terms were not interchangeable to the lay public. Hindsight i n d i c a t e s , however, that parents could well perceive t h e i r c h i l d r e n as both strongly attached and highly independent, and several mothers d i d mention t h i s when they discussed the questionnaire during t h e i r v i s i t to the laboratory. 49 The f i r s t factor was named Maternal Attachment, and the second was named Toddler C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s . M a r i t a l Relationship The s i g n f i c a n t c o r r e l a t i o n s among the nine items designed to tap aspects of the^marital r e l a t i o n s h i p are presented i n Table 7. The number of s i g n i f i c a n t correlations exceeds the number to be expected by chance, and the pattern of i n t e r c o r r e l a t i o n s indicates that there are sub-groups of r e l a t e d items within the o v e r a l l group. For example, the mother's s a t i s f a c t i o n with her marriage over the two years since the b i r t h of her f i r s t c h i l d (Marital S a t i s f a c t i o n over Two Years) i s rela t e d to four of the remaining eight items, whereas the items concerning parental agreement on d i s c i p l i n e issues (Partners Agree on D i s c i p l i n e ) and s i m i l a r i t y of parental roles (Maternal and Paternal Role Similar) each are rela t e d to only one other item. The f a c t o r analysis on the c o r r e l a t i o n matrix of items assessing the M a r i t a l Relationship yielded three factors which together accounted for 50% of the t o t a l variance i n t h i s group of items (see Table 8). The f i r s t factor concerns the mother's perception of the mari t a l r e l a t i o n s h i p and how i t has been affected by having a c h i l d ; the items M a r i t a l S a t i s f a c t i o n Over Two Years, M a r i t a l S a t i s f a c t i o n Now and the Child's E f f e c t on Marriage a l l load on t h i s f a c t o r , named M a r i t a l Quality. The second factor concerns the extent to which mothers report talkorng to t h e i r husbands about t h e i r concerns regarding the c h i l d and about other aspects of t h e i r l i v e s ; the items Discuss Child with Husband and Discuss Personal L i f e with Husband are the only two Table 7 S i g n i f i c a n t Correlations Among Items Assessing the M a r i t a l Relationship Items Assessing the M a r i t a l Relationship M a r i t a l S a t i s f a c t i o n Now Child's E f f e c t on Marriage Discuss Child w/ Husband Discuss Personal L i f e w/ Husband Partners Agree on D i s c i p l i n e _Maternal/ Paternal Roles Similar M a r i t a l S a t i s f a c t i o n Over 2 Years M a r i t a l S a t i s f a c t i o n Now Child's E f f e c t on Marriage Discuss C h i l d w/ Husband Discuss Personal L i f e w/ Husband Partners Agree on D i s c i p l i n e Maternal/ Paternal Roles Similar Share _ Ch i l d Care Ov e r a l l 73** 33*" 30^ 29* 39** -30* 28* 73** cont'd .Note: Decimals have been omitted *p < .05 ** P < .01 — non-significant c o r r e l a t i o n Table 7 (Continued) Intercorrelations Among Items Assessing the M a r i t a l Relationship Items Assessing the M a r i t a l Relationship Share Child Care Overall Share Chi l d Care Both Home Mar i t a l S a t i s f a c t i o n Over 2 Years Ma r i t a l _ _^ S a t i s f a c t i o n Now -Child's E f f e c t on -- — Marriage Discuss Child _ w/ Husband Discuss Personal L i f e w/ Husband Partners Agree on — 26* D i s c i p l i n e Maternal/ Paternal Roles Similar Share Child Care Overall Note: Decimals have been omitted. *p < .05 **p'< .01 — no n - s i g n i f i c a n t c o r r e l a t i o n Table 8 Results of Factor Analysis on Cor r e l a t i o n Matrix of Items Assessing the M a r i t a l Relationship Item Loading Af t e r Varimax Rotation Factor I Factor II Factor I I I Ma r i t a l S a t i s f a c t i o n Over Two -Years .8464 .0572 -.0123 M a r i t a l S a t i s f a c t i o n Now ,7896 -.1175 .0763 Child's E f f e c t on Marriage .5486 -.0347 .0500 Discuss C h i l d w/ Husband -.0533 ,8853 -.0091 Discuss Personal L i f e w/ Husband .0034 .8406 -.0374 Share Ch i l d Care Both Home -.1056 .0456 ,7423 Share Ch i l d Care Overal l -.0889 -.0118 .5643 Maternal/Paternal Roles Similar -.2941 1422 -:4798 Partners Agree on D i s c i p l i n e ,2504 1669 -.1582 Percentage of Variance Accounted For: 20.1 17.4 12.5 Percentage of Total Variance Accounted For: 50.0 53 items that load on t h i s f a c t o r , but the loadings are sub s t a n t i a l . This factor was named M a r i t a l Support. The t h i r d factor concerns the more fu n c t i o n a l aspects of the spouse r e l a t i o n s h i p , namely, the sharing of c h i l d care and the parental r o l e . The items, Share Child Care O v e r a l l , Share Ch i l d Care When Both Home and Maternal & Paternal Roles Similar load on t h i s factor, which was named Share Ch i l d Care. It i s noteworthy that the item Maternal & Paternal Roles Similar has a negative loading while the other two have p o s i t i v e loadings. This indicates that maternal perception that mothers' and fathers' r o l e s are d i f f e r e n t i s related to less sharing of c h i l d care between wife and husband o v e r a l l and when both, parents are at home. In sum, there are three dimensions to the group of items concerned with fcheimarital r e l a t i o n s h i p . / One concerns the mother's feelings about the q u a l i t y of the r e l a t i o n s h i p , the second concerns the closeness and sharing of thoughts between wife and husband, and the t h i r d i s related to the sharing of tasks related to parenthood. Role Concerns The s i g n f i c a n t c o r r e l a t i o n s among the group of 14 items designed to assess the mother's r o l e concerns are presented i n Table 9. Some s p e c i f i c sets of cor r e l a t i o n s within t h i s r e l a t i v e l y well-correlated group of items are of i n t e r e s t . F i r s t , although mothers indicated that the two years since the b i r t h of t h e i r f i r s t c h i l d had been at lea s t somewhat s t r e s s f u l (the mean f o r the item, Stress over Two Years, -cr Table 9 Significant Correlations Among Items Assessing the Mother's Role Concerns Items Assessing the Mother's Role Concerns Household Responsibilities Parenthood Interferes w Social Life Parenthood / Interferes Sex Life Parenthood w/ Interferes w/ Career Worry About Finances Worry About Future Unsure How to Care for Toddler Stress Over Two Years — — 38* — — ~ Household Responsibilities — 25* — 35** — — Parenthood Inter./Social 55** 43** — — — Parenthood Inter./Sex 26* 34** — — Parenthood Inter./Career — — Worry About 55* — Finances Worry About Future Unsure How to Care for Toddler Worry About Being Good cont'd . . . Mother Lack of Time for Self Lack of Time for Child Lack of Time ^ for Husband Feel Pressure for Commitment Note: Decimals have been omitted. *p < .05 **p < .01 — non-significant correlation in Table 9 (Continued) Items Assessing the Mother's Role Concerns Worry About Being Good Mother Lack of Time Lack of Time for Self Lack of Time for Child Lack of Time for Husband Feel Pressure for Commitment Feel Trapped Stress Over Two Years — — 30* Household Responsibilities — — 49** Parenthood Inter./Social -- 42** — 28* Parenthood Inter./Sex Life — 32** — — 38** 34** Parenthood Inter./Career — 39** 31* 40** 39** 25* Worry About Finances 29* — 32** Worry About Future 32** — unsure How to Care for Toddler Worry About Being Good Mother Lack of Time for Self Lack of Time for Child Lack of Time for Husband Feel Pressure for Commitment 30* 37** 55** 34** 24* 44** 58** 35** Note: Decimals have been omitted. *p < .05 **p < .01 — non-significant correlation 56 was 2.77), perceived stress l e v e l over the previous two years i s not p a r t i c u l a r l y w e ll-correlated with other, more current concerns. I t i s also noteworthy that the mother's concern over how to handle or care for a toddler i s not correlated with any of the other items i n the group, and her concern about being a good mother i s correlated with only three other items (whereas most of the items are correlated wifehhat least four of f i v e others and some are correlated with as many as seven or eight),. This r e l a t i v e lack of c o r r e l a t i o n suggests that concerns about the maternal r o l e may be somewhat d i s t i n c t from concerns about the other roles the mother plays. The f a c t o r analysis c a r r i e d out on the c o r r e l a t i o n matrix of items assessing the mother's Role Concerns yielded three factors that together accounted f o r 39.1% of the t o t a l variance i n t h i s group of items (see Table 10). • -The f i r s t f a c t o r , with the greatest number of items loading on i t , i s concerned with c o n f l i c t s experienceddby mothers of toddlers due to the many roles they play. Concerns about interference between the parental r o l e and other r o l e s such as spouse or employee (Interference with S o c i a l L i f e , Interference with Sex L i f e , Interference with Career), about a l l o c a t i o n of time (Lack of Time for S e l f , Lack of Time f o r C h i l d , Lack of Time f o r Husband), and about f e e l i n g s of loss of freedom (Feel Trapped, F e e l Pressure for Commitment) a l l load on t h i s f a c t o r , which was named Role C o n f l i c t s . The second factor dealing with maternal Role Concerns has three items loading on i t : Worry About Finances, Worry About Future, and Household R e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s , although the l a s t item has a small loading. This factor appears to be 57 Table 10 Results of Factor Analysis on Correlation Matrix of Items Assessing the Mother's Role Concerns Item Loading A f t e r Varimax Rotation Factor I Factor II Factor I II Parenthood Interferes w/ Soc i a l L i f e Feel Pressure for Commitment Lack of Time for Self Parenthood Interferes w/ Career Lack of Time for Husband Feel Trapped Parenthood Interferes w/ Sex L i f e Lack of Time for C h i l d Worry About Finances Worry About Future Household R e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s Worry About Being Good Mother Unsure How to Care for Toddler Stress Over Two Years .6643 .6456 .6084 .6043 .5559 .5370 .5169 .5039 .0185 .0066 .1128 .0674 .0771 .2717 .0256 .0935 .1388 .0065 .1421 .0832 .2723 .2784 .8324 .7304 .2964 .2785 .0081 -.1650 .2387 .2814 .1567 .0149 -.1275 .2832 .2566 -.3268 ,0368 .1101 -.0255 .6255 .3393 .2971 Percentage of Variance Accounted For: 20.1 '11,6 7,4 Percentage of To t a l Variance Accounted For: 39,1 58 concerned with the current and/or future family s i t u a t i o n rather than with the parental r o l e , and was named Family S i t u a t i o n . The t h i r d factor i s concerned with performance i n , and t r a n s i t i o n to, the parental r o l e , and has three items loading on i t : Worry About Being a Good Mother, Unsure About Toddler Care and Stress Over Two Years. The f i r s t item s has the largest loading, while the l a t t e r two have smaller loadings. This factor was named Maternal Role. In sum, the fourteen items designed to tap concerns about the mother's various role s tap three dimensions rather than one. Two of these are d i r e c t l y concerned with the parental r o l e ; thelother i s related more to concerns about the family i n general. Relationships Among Dimensions of Maternal Adaptation The second question addressed by analyses of the s e l f - r e p o r t data concerned the r e l a t i o n s h i p s among the various dimensions of maternal adaptation revealed by factor analyses of the o r i g i n a l questionnaire items. Although the most obvious approach to t h i s question would be a factor analysis on the e n t i r e group of o r i g i n a l items, the subject-to-variable r a t i o was considered inappropriate for t h i s approach (60 subjects: 38 v a r i a b l e s ) . Instead, a higher-order f a c t o r analysis was done, using factor scores formed on the basis of the eleven factors that emerged from the f i r s t - o r d e r factor analyses. This higher-order factor analysis was undertaken as an exploratory approach designed to discover possible r e l a t i o n s h i p s among dimensions of maternal adapt-ation and to begin uncovering p r i n c i p l e s that might underly these dimensions. This hypothesis-generation approach, i n which factor scores 59 from a number of d i f f e r e n t c o r r e l a t i o n matrices are put into a factor a n a l y s i s , d i f f e r s from the more usual higher-order factor analysis i n which the factors from a sing l e matrix are analyzed (Gorsuch, 1974) The eleven factor scores and the o r i g i n a l item-groups were: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Self-Assurance (Self-esteem/confidence) Contentment (Emotional state) Energy (Emotional state) Maternal Attachment (Mother-child r e l a t i o n s h i p ) Toddler C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s (Mother-child r e l a t i o n s h i p ) M a r i t a l Quality (Marital r e l a t i o n s h i p ) M a r i t a l Support (Marital r e l a t i o n s h i p ) Share Child Care (Marital r e l a t i o n s h i p ) Role C o n f l i c t s (Role concerns) Family S i t u a t i o n (Role concerns) Maternal Role (Role concerns) The s i g n i f i c a n t c o r r e l a t i o n s among i n d i v i d u a l items are presented i n Tables 11 through 20. The s i g n i f i c a n t c o r r e l a t i o n s among the eleven factor scores are presented i n Table 21, and the s t a t i s t i c a l d e t a i l s of the higher-order factor analysis are presented i n Table 22. The f i v e factors that emerged from the analysis accounted for 48.9% of the t o t a l variance i n the group of factor scores. A l i s t of o r i g i n a l items associated with the factor scores i s presented i n Table 23. The two factor scores concerned with the mother's parental r o l e , Maternal Attachment and Maternal Role, both load on the f i r s t f a c t o r . The mother's s a t i s f a c t i o n with her r e l a t i o n s h i p to her toddler, Table .11 S i g n i f i c a n t Correlations Among Items Assessing Emotional State and SelfTEsteem and Confidence Items Assessing Items Assessing Self-Esteem and Confidence  Emotional S e l f - Parent Confidence/ S e l f -State Esteem Competence Confidence Caregiving Confidence Energetic/ Tired 35** 30* 28* Depressed/ Elated Content/ Discontent — — — 26* Happy/ Unhappy — — 46** 26* 48** Relaxed/ Anxious 33** — 38** — 37** Note; Decimals have been omitted. *p < .05 **p < .01 — non-significant c o r r e l a t i o n Table 12 S i g n i f i c a n t Correlations Among Items Assessing Emotional State and the Mother-Child Relationship Items Assessing T i. . „ ^. - 0j_ . , . „ r Items Assessing Emotional State the Mother- &  C h i l d Relation- Energetic/ Depressed/ Content/ Happy/ Relaxed/ ship T i r e d Elated Discontent Unhappy Anxious Mother's Emotional Tie — — 24* Relationship to Toddler — -- 35* 27* 24* Toddler Attachment — *-- — — — Prefer Toddler Stage A b i l i t y to Cope w/ — 28* Toddler Number D i s c i p l i n e — — — 27* — Issues Note: Decimals have been omitted. *p < .05 **p < .01 — non-significant c o r r e l a t i o n Table 13. S i g n i f i c a n t Correlations Among Items Assessing Emotional State and the M a r i t a l Relationship Items Assessing Items Assessing Emotional State  the M a r i t a l Energetic/ Depressed/ Content/ Happy/ Relaxed/ Relationship T i r e d Elated Discontent Unhappy Anxious M a r i t a l S a t i s f a c t i o n — 32* 32* 27* Over 2 Years M a r i t a l S a t i s f a c t i o n — 30* 40** 49** 29* Now Child's E f f e c t on — — 25* — 25* Marriage Discuss C h i l d w/ Husband — ••— " " " Discuss Personal L i f e w/Husband — — — " Partners Agree on D i s c i p l i n e — — — " Maternal/ Paternal — — " Roles Similar Share C h i l d Care Overall -— — - ' " Share C h i l d Care When Both Home Note: Decimals have been omitted. *p < .05 **p < .01 1 — non-significant c o r r e l a t i o n 63 Table 14 S i g n i f i c a n t C o r r e l a t i o n Among Items Assessing Emotional State and the Mother's Role Concerns Items Assessing T. . „ . . c. . , ° Items Assessing Emotional State  the Mother s Energetic/ Depressed/ Content/ Happy/ Relaxed/ Role Concerns T i r e d Elated Discontent Unhappy Anxious Stress Over Two Years — — 28* 26* Household Re s p o n s i b i l i t y <— —^ — Parenthood I n t e r . / S o c i a l ••— — — -— Parenthood Inter./Sex — — -*- -— —-Parenthood Inter./Career — — 32* — Worry About Finances — — — — '— Worry About Future 39** — — — 26* Unsure'HowJ to Care for -- -- 29* 27* Toddler Worry About Being Good Mother Lack of Time for Self — — 25* — 26* Lack of Time for C h i l d Lack of Time for Husband — — — — Feel Pressure for Commitment — — 25* Feel Trapped — — 40** 33** Note: Decimals have been omitted. *p <,".05 **p < .01 — non-significant c o r r e l a t i o n 64 Table 15 S i g n i f i c a n t Correlations: Among Items Assessing the Mother C h i l d Relationship and Self-Esteem and Confidence Items Assessing the Mother-Child Relationship Items Assessing Self-Esteem and Confidence S e l f - Parent Confidence/ Esteem , Competence Confidence Caregiving S e l f -Confidence Mother's Emotional Tie Relationship to Toddler Toddler Attachment Prefer Toddler Stage 29* A b i l i t y to Cope w/ Toddler -29* -23 38** 40** Number of D i s c i p l i n e Issues 37** Note: Decimals have been omitted. *p < .05 **p < .01 — non-significant c o r r e l a t i o n 65 Table'16 S i g n i f i c a n t Correlations Among Items Assessing the M a r i t a l Relationship and Self-Esteem and Confidence Items Assessing Items Assessing Self-Esteem and Confidence  the M a r i t a l S e l f - Parent Confidence/ S e l f -Relationship Esteem Competence Confidence Caregiving Confidence M a r i t a l S a t i s f a c t i o n — — — — Over Two Years M a r i t a l •Satisfaction — — — — — Now Child's E f f e c t on Marriage — — — — -28* Discuss Child w/ Husband — — — — Discuss Personal L i f e w/Husband 1 Partners Agree on D i s c i p l i n e — — — — Maternal/ Paternal Roles Similar Share C h i l d Care Overa l l — 24* Share Ch i l d Care When Both Home — — — — Note: Decimals have been omitted. *p < .05 **p <, .01 — non-significant c o r r e l a t i o n Table 17 S i g n i f i c a n t Correlations Among Items Assessing the Mother's- Role Concerns- and Self-Esteem and Confidence Items Assessing " Items Assessing Self-Esteem and Confidence -the Mother's S e l f - Parent Confidence/ S e l f -Role Concerns Esteem Competence Confidence Caregiving Confidence — , — , — i . • . 1 • i " i Stress Over Two Years ^- r - — 29* ^ Household R e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s — — *— — x-Parenthood Inter . / S o c i a l — — — Parenthood Inter./Sex — — Parenthood Inter./Career — — — r-Worry About Finances ,:r31* — — ™ -~ Worry About Future -32** — — 32** 30* Unsure How to Care for — — — 41** 30* Toddler Worry About Being Good ^46* -46** -46** 37** 36* Mother Lack of Time for S e l f — - — — 26* Lack of Time fo r C h i l d — <f Lack of Time for Husband — — — _ T- ^~ Feel Pressure for Commitment '— — — Feel Trapped -24* N te: Decimals have been omitted. *p < .05 **p < .01 — non-significant c o r r e l a t i o n Table 18 S i g n i f i c a n t Correlations Among Items Assessing the Mar i t a l and Mother-Child Relationships Items Assessing the M a r i t a l Relationship Mother's Emotional Tie Items Assessing the Mother-Child Relationship Relationship to Toddler Toddler Attachment Prefer Toddler Stage A b i l i t y to Cope with Toddler Number of D i s c i p l i n e Issues M a r i t a l S a t i s f a c t i o n Over Two Years M a r i t a l S a t i s f a c t i o n Now Child's E f f e c t on Marriage Discuss Child w/ Husband Discuss Personal L i f e w/ Husband Partners Agree on D i s c i p l i n e Maternal/ Paternal Roles Similar Share C h i l d Care Overall Share Ch i l d Care When Both Home -27* Note: Decimals have been omitted. *p < .05 — non-significant c o r r e l a t i o n 68 Table 19 S i g n i f i c a n t Correlations Among Items Assessing the M a r i t a l Relationship and the Mother's Role Concerns Items Assessing Items Assessing the M a r i t a l Relationship the Mother's M a r i t a l M a r i t a l Child's Discuss Role Concerns S a t i s f a c t i o n S a t i s f a c t i o n E f f e c t C h i l d Over 2 Years Now on Marriage w/ Husband Stress Over Two Years — — 40** Household Res p o n s i b i l i t y — — — — Parenthood Inter.'/Social — 35** 47** Parenthood Inter ."/Sex — 32* 31* 27* Parenthood Inter./Career — 28* Worry About Finances — — — 26* Worry About Future — — — Unsure How to Care for — — Toddler Worry About Being Good — — -— — Mother Lack of Time fo r Self — 27* Lack of Time for C h i l d Lack of Time for Husband — 28* — 29* Feel Pressure for Commitment -— 25* — — Feel Trapped — 34** 27* Note: Decimals have been omitted. cont'd . . . *p < .05 **p <, .01 -— non-significant c o r r e l a t i o n 69 Table 19 (Continued) S i g n i f i c a n t C orrelation Among Items Assessing the M a r i t a l Relationship and the Mother's Role Concerns Items Assessing^ Items Assessing the M a r i t a l Relationship  the Mother's Discuss Partners Maternal/ Share Share Ch i l d Role Concerns Personal L i f e Agree on Paternal C h i l d Care Care When w/ Husband D i s c i p l i n e Roles Similar O v e r a l l Both Home Stress Over Two Years Household R e s p o n s i b i l i t y Parenthood I n t e r . / S o c i a l Parenthood Inter./Sex Parenthood Inter./Career Worry About Finances Worry About Future Unsure How to Care f o r Toddler Worry About Being Good Mother Lack of Time for Self Lack of Time for C h i l d Lack of Time for Husband Feel Pressure for Commitment Feel Trapped — non-significant c o r r e l a t i o n Table ,20 ..Significant Correlations Among Items Assessing the 'Mother-Child Relationship and the Mother's Role Concerns Items Assessing the Mother's Role Concerns _ Items Assessing the Mother-Child Relationship Mother's " Prefer Emotional Relationship Toddler Toddler Tie to Toddler Attachment Stage Stress Over Two Years Household Re s p o n s i b i l i t y Parenthood I n t e r . / S o c i a l Parenthood Inter./Sex Parenthood Inter./Career Worry About Finances Worry About Future Unsure How to Care f o r Toddler Worry About Being Good Mother Lack of Time f o r Self Lack of Time for C h i l d Lack of Time for Husband Feel Pressure for Commitment Feel Trapped 26* -26* -27* 36** 31* 24* 30* 22* 29* Note: Decimals have been omitted. *p < .05 P < -01 — non-significant c o r r e l a t i o n cont'd Table 20 (Continued) S i g n i f i c a n t Correlations Among Items Assessing the Mother-Child Relationship and the Mother's Role Concerns Items Assessing Items Assessing the Mother-Child Relationship the Mother's ~~ A b i l i t y to Number of Role Concerns Cope with D i s c i p l i n e Toddler Issues Stress Over Two Years Household R e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s — — Parenthood I n t e r . / S o c i a l — -24* Parenthood Inter./Sex — Parenthood Inter./Career — — Worry About Finances — 40** Worry About Future — 44* Unsure How to Care for 27* Toddler Worry About Being Good Mother 24* Lack of Time for Self Lack of Time for C h i l d Lack of Time for Husband — — Feel Pressure for Commitment — Feel Trapped Note: Decimals have been omitted. *p < .05 **p < .01 — non-significant c o r r e l a t i o n 11 Table 21 S i g n i f i c a n t Correlations Among Factor Scores Factor Scores Content-ment Energy Maternal Attachment Toddler Characteris t i c s M a r i t a l Quality M a r i t a l Support Share Child Care Self-Assurance 32* 38** 27* — — — — Contentment <=-- 25* — 45** — — Energy — __ - — — Maternal Attachment — — — Toddler C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s — — — M a r i t a l — — Quality M a r i t a l Support Share C h i l d Care cont'd . . . Role C o n f l i c t s Family S i t u a t i o n Note: Decimals have been omitted. *p < .05 **p < .01 - T - n o n - s i g n i f i c a n t c o r r e l a t i o n Table 21 (Continued) S i g n i f i c a n t Correlations Among Factor Scores '•— Factor Scores - Role C o n f l i c t s Family Situ a t i o n Maternal Role Self-Assurance 26 28* 41** Contentment 36** 25 Energy — 27* — Maternal Attachment 29* -27* 24 Toddler Characteristics — — — M a r i t a l 34* Quality Marital Support Share Child Care Role C o n f l i c t s Family Situation Note: Decimals have been omitted. *!p ^ .05 A l l others: p <.10 — non-sigriificant c o r r e l a t i o n **p < .01 74 Table 22 Results of Factor Analysis on Correlation Matrix of Factor Scores Factor Score •  Loading A f t e r Varimax Rotation Factor I Factor II Factor I II Factor IV Factor V Maternal Role Maternal Attachment Family Sit u a t i o n S e l f -Assurance Energy M a r i t a l Quality Content-ment Role C o n f l i c t s Toddler Character-i s t i c s M a r i t a l Support Share Chi l d Care .6255 .5363 -.3001 .5489 .0386 -.0073 .5155 .2285 .1016 -.1621 -.2683 .2208 .0065 .7179 .6284 .5084 ,0375 .0674 1732 -.1391 .0877 -.1734 -,1634 .2287 -.0106 .1073 .0482 .8221 .5441 .4727 -.0615 -.0531 -.0113 -.2137 .0516 -.0197 .1745 -.1446 -.2193 -.0624 .1039 .6717 .3965 -.0173 .1129 -.2323 .2091 .0399 -.2596 -.0765 -.0883 -.1047 .0902 .2278 .5817 Percentage Variance Acct'd. For: 13.0 11.6 11.8 7.0 Percentage of Total Variance Accounted For: 5.9 48.9 75 Table 23 Items Loading on First-Order Factors Factor Items Loading on Factor Maternal Role Unsure How to Care f o r Toddler Worry About Being Good Mother Maternal Attachment Family S i t u a t i o n Self-Assurance Energy M a r i t a l Quality Contentment Role C o n f l i c t s Toddler Character-i s t i c s Mother's Emotional Tie Relationship to Toddler A b i l i t y to Cope with Toddler Worry About Future Worry About Finances Household R e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s Self-Esteem Score Parent Confidence Score Self-Confidence Confidence i n Caregiving Energetic/Tired Relaxed/Anxious* M a r i t a l S a t i s f a c t i o n Over Two Years M a r i t a l S a t i s f a c t i o n Now Child's E f f e c t on Marriage Happy/Unhappy Content/Discontent Depressed/Elated Re1axed/Anxious * Parenthood Interferes w/ S o c i a l L i f e Parenthood Interferes w/ Sex L i f e Parenthood Interferes w/ Career Lack of Time for S e l f Lack of Time f o r C h i l d Lack of Time f o r Husband Feel Pressure for Commitment Feel Trapped Toddler Attachment Prefer Toddler Stage cont'd Item loads equally on two factors Table 23 (Continued) Items Loading on First-Order Factors Factor Items Loading on Factor M a r i t a l Support Discuss Ch i l d w/ Husband Discuss Personal L i f e w/ Husband Share Ch i l d Care Share Ch i l d Care Over a l l Share Ch i l d Care When Both Home Maternal/Paternal Roles Similar 77 the strength of her emotional t i e to her c h i l d , and her reported a b i l i t y to cope with her c h i l d are related to her concern over being a good mother and being able to handle a toddler. These f i v e items, although o r i g i n a l l y from two d i f f e r e n t item-groups, more appropriately belong to the same dimension of maternal experience. I t i s noteworthy that Self-Assurance also has a high loading on t h i s f i r s t f a c t o r , although i t s highest loading i s on the second, and that Contentment loads equally on the f i r s t and t h i r d f a c t o r s . This suggests that the mother's fe e l i n g s about her r e l a t i o n s h i p with her c h i l d and her concern over being a good parent are, to some extent, t i e d up with her emotional f e e l i n g s , her general self-esteem and self-confidence, and with her confidence i n the caregiving r o l e . The scores loading on the second f a c t o r , Self-Assurance, Energy, and Family S i t u a t i o n , a l l seem to r e f l e c t a general outlook on l i f e that i s not nec e s s a r i l y r e l a t e d to the parental r o l e , although c e r t a i n l y i t may a f f e c t , and be affected by, experiences i n the parental r o l e . I t makes sense that these scores are rel a t e d to one another. A person who i s not e s p e c i a l l y worried about f i n a n c i a l matters or about the future i s more l i k e l y to f e e l energetic, relaxed, and self-assured o v e r a l l , while a person who i s concerned about f i n a n c i a l matters, e s p e c i a l l y someone with young child r e n , i s l i k e l y to be worried about the future, to f e e l t i r e d and anxious, and to be les s confident and assured. An a l t e r n a t i v e explanation f o r these findings i s that they are i n d i c a t i v e of a halo e f f e c t i n response to questionnaire items. However, i f that were the case, one would expect that the halo e f f e c t 78 would extend to the e n t i r e questionnaire, and that the scores loading on the second factor would, instead, load more equally on a l l f a c t o r s . The t h i r d factor r e f l e c t s r e l a t i o n s h i p s among Contentment, M a r i t a l Quality and Role C o n f l i c t s . The f a c t that the Role C o n f l i c t s score i s related to the mother's perception of the q u a l i t y of her marital r e l a t i o n s h i p rather than the q u a l i t y of her r e l a t i o n s h i p with her c h i l d suggests that the m a r i t a l r e l a t i o n s h i p bears the brunt of c o n f l i c t i n g role-demands experienced by the mother. That i s , when there are r o l e c o n f l i c t s , they negatively a f f e c t the marriage more than a c t i v i t i e s or events r e l a t i n g to the c h i l d . The fourth factor r e l a t e s M a r i t a l Support to perceived Toddler C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s . The common thread running through the items making up these two factors i s the mother's perception of closeness of enjoyment herXhusband and c h i l d provide for her, rather than what she provides for them i n her roles of spouse or mother. From her husband she gets emotional support, whereas from her c h i l d she reaps some of the benefits of her two years as parent; she can now share experiences with her toddler, who i s beginning to be somewhat independent. Only one factor score loads on the f i f t h factor i n this analysis, and i t deals with the instrumental, or child-care aspects of the spouse r e l a t i o n s h i p . I t i s i n t e r e s t i n g that t h i s score i s not r e l a t e d , i n a l i n e a r sense, at l e a s t , to other dimensions of maternal adaptation i d e n t i f i e d i n these analyses. One could imagine that the work rela t e d to c h i l d care might have an impact on the mother's r e l a t i o n s h i p with 79 her toddler, or that the issues involved i n arranging to share c h i l d care might have a noticeable impact on the marital r e l a t i o n s h i p . These r e s u l t s suggest, however, that the work involved i n being a parent i s perceived by the mother to be independent of the matrix of emotional r e l a t i o n s h i p s within the family. 80 RESULTS OF THE LABORATORY DATA AND TODDLER TEMPERAMENT REPORT Behavioral Observations Behavioral data f o r the Clean-Up and Tool-Use sessions were obtained for 53 mother-toddler p a i r s . Clean-up session.. Mother-toddler i n t e r a c t i o n during the Clean-Up session was rated on four scales: Mother Scale, Degree of Compliance by the c h i l d , Child's A f f e c t and Quality of the Experience, o v e r a l l (see Chapter 2 for a complete de s c r i p t i o n of the scale; a copy of the coding manual i s included i n Appendix H). A complete set of de s c r i p t i v e s t a t i s t i c s for the clean-up session i s presented i n Table:'24. Nearly one-fourth of the mothers (24%) were rated as Excellent on the Clean-Up; 37% were rated as Good; 13% were rated as F a i r , and 26% as Poor. No mother was given the lowest r a t i n g (Very Poor). Nearly two-thirds of the children were rated as either Generally Compliant (44%) or Often Compliant (28%); 15% were rated as Sometimes Compliant, and 13% were rated as Noncompliant. One c h i l d was categorized as Overcompliant, i n d i c a t i n g that he responded i n an unnaturally compliant manner to hi s mother's request to stop playing and clean-up the toys. For t h e i r behavior during the clean-up session, 43% of the toddlers were rated as expressing "Predominantly P o s i t i v e " a f f e c t , 30% were rated as having "Generally P o s i t i v e " a f f e c t , 19% were rated as "Neutral" or equally p o s i t i v e and negative, and .9% of the c h i l d r e n were rated as showing a f f e c t that was "Negative" i n tone. No c h i l d was rated as being "Predominantly Negative" or aggressive toward the mother. F i n a l l y , f o r 37% of the mother-child p a i r s , the o v e r a l l Experience during the Clean-Up was rated as Excellent; f o r another 24%, Experience was 81 Table 24 Descriptive S t a t i s t i c s f o r Clean-Up S i t u a t i o n Scores Score X s.d. Percentage of Mother-Child Pairs per Category Excellent Good F a i r Poor Very Poor (5) - (4) - (-3) (2) (1) Mother * — Scale 3.59 1.13 24 37 13 26 0 Generally Often Sometimes Non-Compliant Compliant Compliant Compliant (4) (3) (2) - (1) , Degree of . ^ Chi l d 3.04 1.07 44 28 15 13 Compliance P o s i t i v e Generally Predom. P o s i t i v e P o s i t i v e Neutf.al Negative Negative - (5) • (4) (3) (2) • (1) Child's A f f e c t 4.04 .99 43 30 19 Excellent Good F a i r Poor Very Poor (5) (4) (3) (2) C D O v e r a l l Exper- 3.72 1.25 37 24 11 28 0 ience 82 rated as Good, for 11%, F a i r and i n 28% of the cases the Experience was rated as Poor. None of the p a i r s was given the lowest r a t i n g . The c o r r e l a t i o n s among the Clean-Up variables are presented i n Table 25. The Mother Scale, Degree of Compliance, A f f e c t and Experience ratings were a l l well i n t e r c o r r e l a t e d . Tool-using Tasks. Maternal behavior during the Tool-Use session was rated on two 7-point scales for each of three tasks. Although the f i r s t task was considered to be a warm-up, data from the f i r s t task appear to be systematically d i f f e r e n t from data from the second and t h i r d tasks; these differences show up when data from the Tool-Use session i s compared with other measures (see below). Therefore, data from a l l three tasks are reported. (A complete d e s c r i p t i o n of the scales used to rate maternal behavior on the Tool-Use tasks i s found i n Chapter 2; the coding manual i s included i n Appendix I.) Descriptive s t a t i s t i c s for the Tool-Use measures are presented i n Table 26; c o r r e l a t i o n s among Tool-Use scores are shown i n Table 25-. Scores for Supportive Presence were correlated for a l l three tasks, as were scores for Quality of Assistance. However, there was a s i g n i f i c a n t drop i n the mean scores from Task 1 to Task 2 and from Task 2 to Task 3. These s t a t i s t i c s are presented i n Table 27 . Two aspects of the r e s u l t s of the behavioral measures seem noteworthy. F i r s t , although the four Clean-Up scores were highly i n t e r c o r r e l a t e d and the six Tool-Use scores were highly i n t e r c o r r e l a t e d , there was l i t t l e c o r r e l a t i o n across the two sets of s c o r e s . . O n l y the Mother Scale score was s i g n i f i c a n t l y correlated with Quality of Assistance and Supportive Presence on the f i r s t task. A factor analysis was c a r r i e d out on the c o r r e l a t i o n matrix of behavioral measure scores..-. Two factors emerged which together accounted for 66.6% of the. t o t a l variance i n this set of scores. Tool-Use scores loaded on the f i r s t f a c t o r , and Clean-Up Table 25. Correlations Among Laboratory Measures Clean-Up Tool-Using Tasks Degree of Child's Overall Support Quality Support Quality Support Quality Compliance A f f e c t Experience I I II II III I I I Clean-Up Mother Scale 63** 56** 88** 33* 46** 19 23 14 21 Degree of 8 4 A A 7 4 ; S.* 1 9 29 03 05 05 08 Compliance C 1 ^ d ' s 66** 18 33* 20 05 21 13 A f f e c t O v e r a l l 2 4 3 3 A Q 8 Q 8 Q 6 1 Q Experience Tool-Using Tasks Support I 73** 69** 49** 67** 50** Quality I 49** 56** 48** 67** Support II 61** 78** 54** Quality II 51** 74** Support I I I 55** Mote: Decimals have been omitted. *p < .05 **p < .01 A l l others n o n - s i g n i f i c a n t . Table 2.6 Descriptive S t a t i s t i c s for Tool-Use Task Ratings Score X s.d. Percentage of Mother-Child Pairs per Rating Category (7) (6) (5) (4) (3) (2) (1) Task I Supportive Presence Quality of Assistance Task II Supportive Presence Quality of Assistance Task I I I Supportive Presence Quality of Assistance 44 38 53 48 53 53 5.75 .94 5.42 1.22 5.04 1.06 4.96 1.30 4.75 1.22 4.24 1.47 16 15 56 41 33 24 24 11 20 21 13 35 17 31 20 31 20 22 17 11 17 17 33 3 Table 27 Repeated Measures t-test s on Tool-Use Task Scores Comparison X t df £ Support I 5.75 Support II 5.04 6.37 42 ** Support II 5.04 Support III 4.75 2.68 52 * Support I 5.75 Support I I I 4.75 7.25 42 ** Quality I 5.42 Quality II 4.96 3.86 37 ** Quality II 4.96 Quality III 4.24 4.45 52 ** Quality I 5.42 Quality III 4.24 7.14 37 ** *p < .01 **p< .001 86 scores loaded on the second factor .(see Table 28).. '; The f i n d i n g that scores from the Tool-Use session are r e l a t e d p r i m a r i l y to Mother Scale scores (but not other scores) from the Clean-Up session i s consistent with r e s u l t s found by the researchers who developed these observational measures (Sroufe, 1980); however, the fa c t that t h i s i s the case for only the f i r s t task was unexpected. The drop i n Tool-Use scores over the three tasks also deserves comment. It i s not c l e a r how these r e s u l t s should be interpreted. It may be that mothers were les s competent at helping t h e i r toddlers with the more d i f f i c u l t tasks. Another p o s s i b i l i t y i s that they became t i r e d and le s s e f f e c t i v e with time, i r r e s p e c t i v e of the l e v e l of the task. It also does not seem un l i k e l y that the toddlers were getting t i r e d or f r u s t r a t e d by the t h i r d task, having been i n the laboratory f o r more than 30 minutes at that point, and were more d i f f i c u l t to a s s i s t for even the most s e n s i t i v e and responsive mothers. A f i n a l a l t e r n a t i v e explanation i s that, having been t o l d by the researcher that the tasks were graduated i n d i f f i c u l t y , mothers may have perceived the two more d i f f i c u l t tasks as being more l i k e an i n t e l l i g e n c e t e s t , and thought they should help t h e i r c h i l d r e n l e s s with these. Since no check was made on the mother's perception of her r o l e i n the Tool-Using Tasks, there i s no way to know whether the mothers were responding to some demand c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of the laboratory s i t u a t i o n . Relationship between observed behavior and maternal s e l f - r e p o r t  measures. Scores from the Clean-Up and Tool-Use s i t u a t i o n s were not s i g n i -f i c a n t l y correlated with the groups of MOT items concerned with Self-Esteem, Confidence, Relationship to C h i l d , Emotional State or M a r i t a l Relationship. A" s l i g h t r e l a t i o n s h i p was found f o r some Role Concern items, (see Table-29). F a c t o r analyses c a r r i e d out on the c o r r e l a t i o n matrix o f : s e l f - r e p o r t Table 28 Results of Factor Analysis on Cor r e l a t i o n Matrix of Behavioral Measures Measure Loading After. Varimax Rotation Factor I Factor II Support I .7941 .0173 Quality I .6480 .2089 Support II .7781 .0532 Quality II .8263 .0890 Support I II .7441 .1177 Quality I I I .6928 .1157 Mother Scale .2299 .7844 Degree of Compliance .1132 .8944 Child's A f f e c t .0837 .8982 Overal l Experience .0390 .9556 Percentage of Variance Accounted For: 34.5 32.1 Percentage of Total Accounted For: Variance 66.6 88 Table 29 S i g n i f i c a n t Correlations Among Behavioral Measures and Items Assessing the Mother's Role Concerns Items Assessing the Mother's Role Concerns Clean-Up Mother Scale Degree of Compliance Child's A f f e c t Overall Experience Tool-Use Tasks Support Quality I I Stress Over' Two Years Household R e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s Parenthood I n t e r . / S o c i a l Parenthood Inter./Sex Parenthood Inter./Career Worry About Finances Worry About Future Unsure How to Care for Toddler Worry About Being Good Mother Lack of Time for Self Lack of Time for C h i l d Lack of Time for Husband Feel Pressure for Commitment Feel Trapped -31* -32* -27* -28* -48** -37* 36* Note: Decimals have been omitted. fcp < .05 P < .01 — non-significant c o r r e l a t i o n cont'd . . Table 29 (Continued) S i g n i f i c a n t Correlations Among Behavioral Measures and Items Assessing the Mother's Role Concerns Items Assessing the Mother's Role Concerns Tool-Use Tasks Support II Quality II Support I I I Quality I I I Stress Over Two Years — Household R e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s Parenthood I n t e r . / S o c i a l —-Parenthood Inter./Sex Parenthood Inter./Career Worry About Finances Worry About Future — Unsure How to Care f o r Toddler Worry About Being Good Mother Lack of Time fo r Self Lack of Time for Child Lack of Time For Husband — Feel Pressure for Commitment — Feel Trapped Note: Decimals have been omitted. *p < .05 **p < .01 — non-significant c o r r e l a t i o n 90 and behavioral factor scores produced a non-simple-structure s o l u t i o n which could not be interpreted. 1 I t was concluded that there was no l i n e a r r e l a t i o n s h i p between s e l f - r e p o r t and observed behavior. Cognitive Testing Both the Stanford Binet I n t e l l i g e n c e Scale and the Peabody Pic t u r e Vocabulary Test were administered to each toddler following the clean-up and tool-using tasks. Due perhaps to the length of the laboratory v i s i t (about two hours, on average), and/or the length of the journey from home to the laboratory (some f a m i l i e s l i v e d as f a r as an hour's drive away), some of the toddlers were s u f f i c i e n t l y uncooperative that they could not be tested. As a r e s u l t , Stanford-Binet scores are a v a i l a b l e f o r only 44 chi l d r e n , and PPVT scores are a v a i l a b l e f o r 31. There were no s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t differences between the c h i l d r e n who were tested and those who were not on Clean-Up or Tool-Use scores. On temperament subscales, only one s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e was found: c h i l d r e n who could not be tested on the PPVT had scores i n d i c a t i n g greater Intensity than those who were tested on the PPVT; there were no differences between children tested on the Binet and those who were not. I t was concluded that the c h i l d r e n who could not be tested were not systematically d i f f e r e n t from those who cooperated with the tester i n the laboratory. Descriptive s t a t i s t i c s f o r the cognitive measures are presented i n Table 30. As might be expected f or a group of chi l d r e n from middle-class f a m i l i e s , the mean mental age was higher than the mean chronological age.. On the Stanford-Binet, mean MA was 34.39, mean CA was 24.11; on the PPVT, mean MA was 30.16, mean CA was 24.68,.. The difference between Stanf ord-Binet and PPVT mental age scores was s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t (t=4.9446, df=28, p <.Q01). This d i f f e r e n c e may r e f l e c t the fac t that the Peabody was usually administered a f t e r the Stanford-Binet, when the children were getting t i r e d Table 30 Descriptive S t a t s t i c s f or Cognitive Test Scores and S i g n i f i c a n t Correlations Between Cognitive Scores and Laboratory Scores N Chronological Mental Age i n Months Measure Age i n Months •— (Mean) X s.d Range Stanford Binet 44 24.11 34.39 3.97 25-42 Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test 31 24.68 30.16 4.65 23-41 Correlations With Laboratory Scores Stanford Binet PPVT Laboratory Scores Mental Age Mental Age Clean-Up Mother Scale Degree of Compliance Child's A f f e c t O v e r a l l Experience Tool-Use Tasks Support I Quality I Support II Quality II Support III Quality I I I 31* 38* 38* 33* Note: Decimals have been omitted. *p < .05 — non-significant c o r r e l a t i o n 92 or r e s t l e s s . G i r l s scored higher than boys on the Stanford-Binet (.36,1 months MA, versus 33.2 months f o r boys, ^t=2.45, df=43, p_ <.05). There was no sex difference for the PPVT scores. Relationship between cognitive scores and other measures. Scores on the cognitive measures were only s l i g h t l y r e l a t e d to scores from the Clean-Up and Tool-Use measures (see Table 36). PPVT mental age was s i g n i f i c a n t l y correlated with C h i l d A f f e c t and Quality of Assistance by the mother on Task 2; Stanford-Binet mental age was s i g n i f i c a n t l y correlated with Supportive Presence on Task 1 and Quality of Assistance on Task 3. The f a c t that the mothers of c h i l d r e n with lower l e v e l s of verbal a b i l i t y tended to provide poorer q u a l i t y assistance whereas mothers whose ch i l d r e n had higher l e v e l s of verbal a b i l i t y provided better q u a l i t y assistance suggests that i t may be more d i f f i c u l t to give c l e a r i n s t r u c t i o n s to a c h i l d whose verbal s k i l l s are l e s s well-developed. This f i n d i n g supports the i n i t i a l r a t i o n a l e f o r including assessments of the children's cognitive a b i l i t y . However, the pattern of c o r r e l a t i o n s i s not consistent or strong enough to conclude that a s u b s t a n t i a l portion of the v a r i a b i l i t y i n maternal behavior assessed by the observational measures i s accounted for by i n d i v i d u a l differences i n the toddlers' cognitive development. Cognitive scores were not s i g n i f i c a n t l y correlated with groups of MOT items concerned with Self-Esteem, Emotional State, or the M a r i t a l Relation-ship. The PPVT mental age score was correlated with maternal confidence i n caregiving a b i l i t y at the toddler period (r=.52, p <.01), and with maternal report of a b i l i t y to cope with her toddler (r=.35, p <.05). The Binet mental age score was correlated with maternal f e e l i n g s of pressure for greater commitment to her family (r=.34, p <.05). In these three cases, lower mental age scores were associated with more negative concern and lower confidence. However, these were the only s i g n i f i c a n t c o r r e l a t i o n s between 93 cognitive scores and groups of s e l f - r e p o r t measures, and given the number of correlations computed, these may have occurred by chance. The lack of re l a t i o n s h i p suggests that the c h i l d ' s cognitive l e v e l i s not a major factor i n maternal adaptation as revealed by s e l f - r e p o r t measures at the toddler period. Toddler Temperament Report A measure of the mother's perception of her toddler's temperament was obtained from the Toddler Temperament Scale (see Chapter 2 for a description of the scale; the questionnaire i s included i n Appendix F). Descriptive s t a t i s t i c s f o r the present sample and those from the standard-i z a t i o n sample provided by the authors are presented i n Table 31. The means and standard deviations on subscales from the present sample are s i m i l a r to those f o r the standardization group. Relationship between toddler temperament and other measures. The rel a t i o n s h i p s between maternal perception of toddler temperament and both maternal behavior as observed i n the laboratory and s e l f - r e p o r t measures were examined. The number of s i g n i f i c a n t c o r r e l a t i o n s found between Toddler Temperament subscales and behavior as observed i n the laboratory was much smaller than the number that could be expected by chance alone (one out of 72 possible correlations was s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t ) ; likewise, only one of 18 possible correlations between temperament subscales and cog-n i t i v i e measures was s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t . I t was concluded that there was no l i n e a r r e l a t i o n s h i p between maternal perception of toddler temperament and eit h e r observed behavior or cognitive a b i l i t y as assessed by the PPVT or Stanford-Binet t e s t s . The temperament subscales were not s i g n i f i c a n t l y correlated with groups of MOT items concerned with Emotional State. The number of 94 Table 31 Descriptive S t a t i s t i c s f o r Toddler Temperament Scale: Present and Standardization Samples X s.d. X s.d. A c t i v i t y 3.83 .80 3.99 .86 Rhythm 2.74 .85 2.78 .77 Approach 2.59 1.03 2.91 1.04 Adaptable 2.91 .75 3.04 .79 Intensity 3.77 .95 4.06 .82 Mood 2.75 .66 2.90 .65 Persistence 3.12 .80 2.82 .75 D i s t r a c t a b i l i t y 4.44 .66 4.20 .73 Threshold 4.15 .74 4.43 .87 95 s i g n i f i c a n t c orrelations between temperament subscales and items assessing Self-Esteem and Confidence, the Mother-Child Relationship, the M a r i t a l Relationship and the mother's Role Concerns was less than or equal to the number expected by chance. (These c o r r e l a t i o n s are presented i n Tables 32 through 35.) There i s one group of s i g n i f i c a n t c o r r e l a t i o n s that are of i n t e r e s t , however. Children rated as more independent on the MOT item r a t i n g c h i l d attachment/independence (Toddler Attachment) were perceived.by t h e i r mothers as being more arrhythmic, more with-drawing, more highly p e r s i s t e n t and as characterized by a more negative mood; whereas ch i l d r e n rated as more attached were perceived as being more rhythmic, more approaching, less persistent and having a more p o s i t i v e mood. Because "attachment" and "independence" are not opposite poles of a sin g l e dimension, these characterizations i n the form of temperament ratings may be h e l p f u l i n understanding what parents mean when they rate t h e i r c h i l d r e n as being more independent or more attached. Children rated as more independent tended to be seen as being somewhat more d i f f i c u l t to handle; with the exception of Persistence, a l l of the subscales correlated with ratings of independence f a l l w ithin the diagnostic c l u s t e r of the D i f f i c u l t C h i l d (Carey &McDevitt, 1979; Thomas, et a l . , 1963). Table 32 S i g n i f i c a n t Correlations Among Temperament Subscales and Items Assessing Self-Esteem and Confidence Items Assessing Temperament Subscales Self-Esteem & Confidence A c t i v i t y Rhythm Approach Adaptable Intense Mood P e r s i s t D i s t r a c t Threshold Self-Esteem — — — -26* Competence — — -- -27* — -31* Parent Confidence ~ — 27* 28* — 37** Confidence/ Caregiving — — — — — S e l f -Confidence — -32** Note: Decimals have been omitted. *p < .05 **p < .01 — non - s i g n i f i c a n t c o r r e l a t i o n -Table 33 Si g n i f i c a n t Correlations Among Temperament Subscales and Items Assessing the Mother-Child Relationship Items Assessing Temperament Subscales the Mother-Child ~ — ' — Relationship _Activity Rhythm Approach Adaptable Intense Mood P e r s i s t D i s t r a c t Threshold Mother's Emotional Tie — — — -"^  ~~ " Relationship to Toddler Toddler Attachment — -27* -38** — — -25* 26* Prefer Toddler Stage ~ — — ^ A b i l i t y to Cope w/ Toddler Number D i s c i p l i n e Issues — — — — 30* Note: Decimals have been omitted. *p < .05 **p < .01 — non - s i g n i f i c a n t c o r r e l a t i o n Table 34 S i g n i f i c a n t Correlations Among Temperament Subscales and Items Assessing the M a r i t a l Relationship Items Assessing the M a r i t a l Relationship Temperament Subscales A c t i v i t y Rhythm Approach Adaptable Intense Mood P e r s i s t D i s t r a c t Threshold M a r i t a l S a t i s f a c t i o n Over 2 Years M a r i t a l S a t i s f a c t i o n Now Child's E f f e c t on Marriage Discuss C h i l d w/ Husband Discuss Personal L i f e w/ Husband Partners Agree on D i s c i p l i n e Maternal/Paternal Roles Similar Share Ch i l d Care Overal l Share Child Care Both Home -35** 29* 43** 32* -26* Note: Decimals have been omitted. *p < .05 **p < .01 — n o n - s i g n i f i c a n t c o r r e l a t i o n OS Table 35 -Significant Correlations Among Temperament Subscales and Items Assessing the Mother's Role Concerns Items Assessing the Mother's Temperament Subscales Role Concerns A c t i v i t y Rhythm Approach Adaptable Intense Mood P e r s i s t D i s t r a c t Threshold -Stress Over Two Years Household Re s p o n s i b i l i t y 30* 31* Parenthood Interferes w/ S o c i a l L i f e -26* Parenthood Interferes w/ Sex L i f e 36** 38** Parenthood Interferes w/ Career Worry About Finances 31** 34** 37** 25* 30* Worry About Future 39** 27* Unsure How to Care for Toddler Cont'd , , , Note: Decimals have been omitted. *p < ,05 **p < .0.1 -- n o n - s i g n i f i c a n t c o r r e l a t i o n o o Table 35 (Continued) S i g n i f i c a n t Correlations Among Temperament Subscales and Items Assessing the Mother's Role Concerns Items Assessing _ Temperament Subscales the Mother's • ~~ ~ *T Role Concerns " A c t i v i t y Rhythm Approach Adaptable Intense Mood P e r s i s t D i s t r a c t Threshold Feel Pressure for Commitment Feel Trapped 35** ,— 49** Worry About Being Good — -— — Mother Lack of Time for Self Lack of Time for C h i l d — — — — 37** Lack of Time for Husband •— — — «— -— 27* 23* — 44** 26* -27* Note: Decimals have been omitted. *p < .05 **p< .01 — no n - s i g n i f i c a n t c o r r e l a t i o n 101 CHAPTER 4: DISCUSSION The purposes of t h i s study were to explore the dimensions of maternal adaptation to parenthood i n the toddler period, to learn more about the rol e s of maternal confidence and self-esteem i n maternal adaptation to parenthood, and to assess the r e l a t i o n s h i p between observed maternal_behavior'in a laboratory s i t u a t i o n and mothers' own perceptions of the issues involved i n adjustment to the parental r o l e . A preliminary note of caution i n i n t e r p r e t i n g the data presented here i s i n order. The s i z e of the sample i s s u b s t a n t i a l i n comparison with other studies of parenthood; for example, Gladieux (1978) studied 26 couples, M. L e i f e r (1977) studied 19 women, Feldman & Nash (1980) followed 31 couples, and Shereshefsky & Yarrow (1974) studied 62 f a m i l i e s . I t i s a r e l a t i v e l y small sample, however, for the use of factor a n a l y t i c techniques. Even though precautions were taken to ensure an appropriate subject-to-variable r a t i o , because such techniques are generally employed with data from large samples of one hundred subjects or more, i t i s possible that the r e s u l t s found i n this study would not be completely r e p l i c a t e d on another sample. Repl i c a t i o n would c l e a r l y be a p r i o r i t y for future research. Related to t h i s i s the issue of when to stop fac t o r i n g the data. I t would have been possible to continue carrying ;aut higher-order factor analyses and reducing the data to a smaller number of f a c t o r s . Only one l e v e l of higher-order analysis was conducted i n t h i s study, i n part because the number of a v a i l a b l e subjects was l i m i t e d . In addition, the research was intended to be exploratory i n nature, rather than designed to test s p e c i f i c hypotheses. I t would therefore have been inappropriate to wander too f a r from the data i n 102 attempts at Interpretation. Dimensions of maternal adaptation i n the toddler period Five dimensions of maternal adaptation were uncovered through factor analyses of s e l f - r e p o r t data gathered from s i x t y mothers of toddlers. These "dimensions r e f l e c t the matrix of emotional r e l a t i o n s h i p s within the family (the mother-child and spouse r e l a t i o n s h i p s ) , the instrumental aspects of parenthood (the work involved i n c h i l d care) , and the mothers' perception of issues that a f f e c t the family but are not d i r e c t l y r e l a t e d to the parental r o l e . More s p e c i f i c a l l y , the f i v e dimensions concern the maternal r o l e ; the m a r i t a l r e l a t i o n s h i p and experiences of c o n f l i c t i n g r o l e demands; the mother's perception of support received from her husband and enjoyment shared with her c h i l d ; the management of c h i l d r e a r i n g duties; and the mother's o v e r a l l outlook on l i f e , i n c l u d i n g her self-assurance both within and outside the parental r o l e . The f i v e dimensions that emerged from the factor analyses did not p r e c i s e l y mirror the structure of the f i v e conceptually-based groups of items hypothesized to be important i n the toddler period, and around which the s e l f - r e p o r t measures were designed (maternal confidence and self-esteem; emotional state; mother-toddler r e l a t i o n s h i p ; m a r i t a l r e l a -tionship; and maternal r o l e concerns). The f i v e empirical dimensions constituted a clear-cut structure with the same content but a d i f f e r e n t conceptual organization. A number of aspects of the pattern of adaptation found at the toddler period deserve further comment. The f i r s t concerns the mother-toddler r e l a t i o n s h i p . The two factors that emerged from the f a c t o r analyses on the c o r r e l a t i o n matrix of items concerning the mother-child r e l a t i o n s h i p 103 accounted for only 32% of the t o t a l variance i n that group of items (factors were Maternal Attachment and Toddler C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s ) . That \ t h i s was the smallest proportion of variance accounted for i n any of the factor analyses suggests that the items developed to tap the mother-c h i l d r e l a t i o n s h i p f a l l short of accounting for the complexity of that r e l a t i o n s h i p . Other dimensions of t h i s r e l a t i o n s h i p need to be explored. For example, discussions"-.with mothers during the laboratory v i s i t i ndicated mothers' preference for the toddler over the infant stage of t h e i r c h i l d ' s development was based upon the f a c t that the toddler's increased language f a c i l i t y and phy s i c a l mobility made communication and p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n ta v a r i e t y of a c t i v i t i e s more enjoyable for the parents, rather than because the mother's emotional bonds with her c h i l d had strengthened over the two-year period. Indeed, the item "Prefer Toddler Stage" was un-c o r r e c t e d with items concerned with the emotional t i e s between mother and c h i l d . Discussions of interviews with mothers might be a good source of other possible dimensions of the mother-toddler r e l a t i o n s h i p to explore i n future research. A second point a r i s i n g from the pattern of maternal adaptation found at the toddler period i s re l a t e d to the group of items developed to tap the mother's r o l e concerns. These items r e l a t e to a wide range, of issues, only a few of which concern the c h i l d or the mother-child r e l a t i o n s h i p . In general, mothers found these issues to be at l e a s t somewhat problematic: of the thirte e n statements of concern, there were only two (Unsure How to Care for Toddler, and Feel Pressure for Commitment) for which at l e a s t one mother did not express a strong degree of concern (see Appendix M). The range of issues measured i n t h i s study by no means exhausts the problems or c o n f l i c t s with which mothers of toddlers might have to contend. However, the degree of concern expressed by the mothers i n t h i s sample 104 suggests that i t i s important f o r researchers studying parent-child r e l a t i o n s h i p s to acknowledge the broad matrix within which that r e l a t i o n -ship e x i s t s . For too long, researchers i n the s o c i a l sciences have worked with the unspoken assumption that, upon t r a n s i t i o n to parenthood, people who had before been multi-dimensional beings became . unidimensional creatures whose only c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of i n t e r e s t revolve around the parental r o l e and behavior r e l a t e d to t h e i r c h i l d r e n . These assumptions l i m i t our v i s i o n of parenthood and mask what may w e l l be the most d i f f i c u l t aspect of parenthood, the balancing of the parental r o l e with other important l i f e r o l e s . The data gathered i n t h i s study makes i t clear.that the mother's r e l a t i o n s h i p s , concerns and a c t i v i t i e s outside the parental r o l e comprise a s u b s t a n t i a l proportion of her experience. The richness of t h i s experience was only p a r t i a l l y tapped i n the present study. Informal interviews with the mothers revealed a v a r i e t y of ways parents found to cope with the i n d i v i d u a l s i t u a t i o n s they faced. One problem i n research such as t h i s i s that investigators must often choose between gathering q u a n t i f i a b l e data and gathering data more revea l -ing of i n d i v i d u a l experience. The task of reducing interview or open-ended questionnaire data i s onerous. Nevertheless, i t w i l l be imporant for future researchers studying parenthood to f i n d a way to b r i n g the insig h t s of i n d i v i d u a l experience to bear upon the normative data c o l l e c t e d . The t h i r d noteworthy aspect of the pattern of adaptation that emerged i n t h i s study concerns the r o l e of the m a r i t a l r e l a t i o n s h i p . Of the several d i f f e r e n t issues tapped by items pertaining to the spouse relationship, that of marital s a t i s f a c t i o n appears to be the most c e n t r a l . The number of s i g n i f i c a n t c o r r e l a t i o n s with items r e f e r r i n g to m a r i t a l s a t i s f a c t i o n was higher than f o r any of the other items i n that item-group. 105 Some s o c i o l o g i s t s have found that m a r i t a l s a t i s f a c t i o n declines over the early childbearing years (e.g., Hobbs, 1968; LeMasters, 1957; Rossi, 1968; Ryder, 1973). The research reported here cannot speak d i r e c t l y to t h e - i s s u e of change, since marital s a t i s f a c t i o n was assessed only at the two-year period. However, ma r i t a l s a t i s f a c t i o n was r e l a t i v e l y high for t h i s sample. For both items concerned with m a r i t a l s a t i s f a c t i o n , over 80% of the mothers reported being e i t h e r s a t i s f i e d or very s a t i s -f i e d , l e s s than 2% reported being u n s a t i s f i e d , and no mother reported being very u n s a t i s f i e d . There are a number of possible explanations f o r the high l e v e l of s a t i s f a c t i o n reported here. The most obvious i s a s e l f - .selection bias i n the sample of fa m i l i e s who p a r t i c i p a t e d i n the toddler-period data c o l l e c t i o n . The fam i l i e s who provided data at two years may have been happier or more well-adjusted to begin with. Analyses revealed there were some: in d i c a t i o n s of better adjustment i n responses to Prenatal or Postpartum Questionnaire items between mothers who p a r t i c i p a t e d i n the follow-up study and those who did not (see Ap-pendix B). A l t e r n a t i v e l y , the pressure to respond i n a s o c i a l l y desirable manner may have made mothers reluctant to report d i s s a t i s f a c t i o n with t h e i r marriages. Whatever the reasons for the high l e v e l of ma r i t a l s a t i s f a c t i o n found i n this study, two findings r e l a t e d to t h i s issue are of i n t e r e s t . F i r s t i s the way the mother's r o l e concerns are related to aspects of the marital r e l a t i o n s h i p . The mother's concerns about her c o n f l i c t i n g roles were rel a t e d to va r i a t i o n s i n responses to items concerning the marital r e l a t i o n s h i p rather than to items concerning the mother-child r e l a t i o n s h i p . That i s , the score Role C o n f l i c t s loaded on the same factor as M a r i t a l Quality, but not on the factors i n v o l v i n g Maternal Attachment, Maternal Role or Toddler C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s . This occurred 106 despite the f a c t that several of the items i n the Role C o n f l i c t s factor s p e c i f i c a l l y stated that "having a c h i l d i n t e r f e r e s with my ( s o c i a l , l i f e , sex l i f e , career)". This f i n d i n g suggests that when r o l e pressures create c o n f l i c t s that are d i f f i c u l t to resolve, i t i s the spouse r e l a t i o n -ship rather than the needs of the c h i l d that i s modified. This may be an underlying cause of the drop i n marital s a t i s f a c t i o n over the early childbearing years discussed e a r l i e r . C l e a r l y , i f wife and husband must repeatedly r e l i n q u i s h g r a t i f i c a t i o n within t h e i r own r e l a t i o n s h i p i n favor of the needs of the c h i l d or the pressures of t h e i r work l i v e s , the marital r e l a t i o n s h i p must eventually s u f f e r . The second noteworthy point r e l a t e d to the issue of m a r i t a l s a t i s -f a c t i o n i s the f a c t that the instrumental aspects of the spouse r e l a t i o n -ship, that i s , the extent to which wife and husband arrange to share the duties of c h i l d care, seem to be d i s t i n c t from what could be considered to be the emotional aspects of the r e l a t i o n s h i p , that i s , the degree of marital s a t i s f a c t i o n reported by mothers; the-factor scores pertaining to these two aspects load on d i f f e r e n t factors i n the higher-order factor analysis. In l i g h t of the f a c t that the l i t e r a t u r e on the parent-child r e l a t i o n s h i p i n the family context (e.g., Clarke-Stewart, 1978; Parke & O'Leary, 1975; Pedersen, et a l . , 1977) suggests that the spouse and parent-child r e l a t i o n s h i p s are r e c i p r o c a l l y r e l a t e d , t h i s f i n d i n g i s somewhat s u r p r i s i n g . A r e l a t e d f i n d i n g i s that the instrumental aspects of the spouse r e l a t i o n s h i p are also d i s t i n c t from the mother's report of both her r e l a t i o n s h i p with her toddler and her perception of the toddler's a t t r i b u t e s . That i s , the scores Maternal Attachment, Maternal Role, and Toddler C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s did not load on the same factor as the score Share Ch i l d Care. In general, then, the emotional aspects of the mother's close relationships with her c h i l d and husband seem to e x i s t i n a separate 107 domain from the management of the work that accompanies parenthood. This d i s t i n c t i o n may work to help preserve emotional r e l a t i o n s h i p s with-i n the family i n face, of the fatigue and f r u s t r a t i o n often associated with caring for young children. The a b i l i t y to make such a d i s t i n c t i o n between the v i c i s s i t u d e s of day-to-day l i f e with a c h i l d and the basic emotional bonds between parent and c h i l d may be an important component of adaptation to the r o l e of parent, since i t may be a way f o r parents to keep from being overwhelmed by the r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s engendered by parenthood. Some support for this notion can be found i n the l i t e r a t u r e . Frodi & Lamb (1980) found that whereas nonabusive parents responded d i f f e r e n t i a l l y to the aversive stimulus of an infant crying and the pleasant stimulus of an infant smiling, abusive parents did not show d i f f e r e n t i a l responses (either p h y s i o l o g i c a l or s e l f - r e p o r t ) to the two types of infant behavior. In other words, the parents with a h i s t o r y of f a i l u r e to adapt su c c e s s f u l l y to the parental r o l e were unable to d i s t i n -guish between the kinds of behavior that require caregiving and the kinds that i n v i t e s o c i a l i n t e r a c t i o n or a f f e c t i o n a t e responses. Although the measures used i n the present study were not applied to the problem of distinguishing between successful and unsuccessful adaptation to parent-hood, the data gathered here, i f replicated,•might serve as the basis for measures designed to i d e n t i f y parents who are having d i f f i c u l t y ad-j u s t i n g to the r o l e and r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s of parenthood. The marital r e l a t i o n s h i p also may benefit from the d i s t i n c t i o n between the tasks of parenthood and the emotional t i e s w i t h i n the family. I t i s notable that the report of greater m a r i t a l s a t i s f a c t i o n was related to less sharing of c h i l d care and greater d i f f e r e n t i a t i o n between maternal and paternal role s (see Table 7). One might expect that greater sharing of the duties of c h i l d care would be r e l a t e d to greater m a r i t a l 108 s a t i s f a c t i o n , rather than the other way around. However, one of the d i f f i c u l t i e s mothers may experience when attempting to perform both the spouse and parental roles i s that these role s often e n t a i l c o n f l i c t i n g demands. I f the p r i o r i t i e s for f u l f i l l i n g these demands are made e x p l i c i t , there may be less c o n f l i c t . The data gathered i n t h i s study indi c a t e that, i n fa m i l i e s making a greater d i s t i n c t i o n between maternal and paternal r o l e s , the mother assumes the greater proportion of c h i l d care duties. To the extent that t h i s arrangement i s agreed upon by both wife and husband, the management of work associated with c h i l d care apparently need not cause c o n f l i c t within the spouse r e l a t i o n s h i p . The separation of the instrumental from the emotional aspects of the m a r i t a l r e l a t i o n s h i p , then, may serve to f a c i l i t a t e m a r i t a l harmony. I t would be important to investigate t h i s notion further, however, and, i n p a r t i c u l a r to compare the responses of a sample of employed mothers with a sample of mothers who do not work outside the home. Less sharing of c h i l d care and greater d i f f e r e n t i a t i o n between maternal and paternal roles may be r e l a t e d to greater m a r i t a l s a t i s f a c t i o n among the l a t t e r and les s s a t i s f a c t i o n among the former. The number of other young c h i l d r e n i n the family may be another relevant v a r i a b l e ; i t has been found that mothers assume a greater proportion of c h i l d care r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s as the family-grows i n s i z e .(Hoffman &: Manis, 1978). I t should be noted that the lack of d i r e c t emphasis on fathers i n th i s study of adaptation to parenthood does not imply that t h e i r parental r o l e i s considered to be unimportant. Rather i t was necessary to set l i m i t s f o r the scope of t h i s research. Cle a r l y , the questions and issues examined with respect to maternal adaptation to parenthood must also be explored for fathers. 109. In sum, the pattern of maternal adaptation to parenthood as revealed by analyses of the s e l f - r e p o r t data suggests that the mother's experience beyond the mother-child r e l a t i o n s h i p plays a major part i n her adaptation to the r o l e of parent. I t w i l l be imporant to include assessments of th i s larger context i n future investigations of the net-work of family r e l a t i o n s h i p s . Psychologists have argued that the tasks of parenthood change with the developmental course of the c h i l d (Pedersen, 1975). We know that, i n the f i r s t year, a major developmental task of the infant i s the establishment of a secure emotional base from which to explore the world (Ainsworth, 1973; Bowlby, 1969; Sroufe & Waters, 1977). The task of the parent at that time i s to provide an emotionally secure environment, a predictable world i n which the in f a n t learns that h i s or her needs w i l l be attended to with promptness, consistency and warmth (e.g., B e l l & Ainsworth, 1972; Lewis & Goldberg,1969). In terms of actual caregiving behavior t h i s translates i n t o two things: learning to read i n f a n t signals accurately, and being able to e s t a b l i s h stable caregiving routines. Findings from the infancy phase of t h i s l o n g i t u d i n a l study indicated that the parent's success i n accomplishing these tasks had implications for the establishment of strong emotional bonds among mother, father and in f a n t ( c f , , Williams, 1979). Other researchers have found that a temperamentally d i f f i c u l t i n f a n t , or an in f a n t with ph y s i c a l problems, may thwart the parent's attempt to read signals and e s t a b l i s h routines; the d i f f i c u l t y i n caring f o r an infant such as t h i s i s often translated i n t o a strained emotional r e l a t i o n s h i p between parent and c h i l d . (Goldberg, 1977). By the toddler period, the parent^child r e l a t i o n s h i p begins to look quite d i f f e r e n t , and mothers i n th i s study indicated that they found being the parent of a toddler very d i f f e r e n t from being the parent of an 110 i n f a n t . For one thing, the developmental task of the toddler i s the establishment of autonomy and of mastery over the p h y s i c a l world; t h i s means that the parent must learn to provide both a "free r e i n " to explore the world and s e n s i t i v e assistance when i t i s needed. For another thing, the data gathered i n t h i s study i n d i c a t e that the world of the parent .arid toddler i s considerably expanded from that of the parent and i n f a n t . By the time the c h i l d r e n i n t h i s study were toddlers, some mothers were once again employed outside the home, some were pregnant with a second c h i l d , and most had begun other a c t i v i t i e s engaged i n for the s a t i s f a c t i o n of t h e i r own needs. The toddler spends increasing amounts of time with other people, including h i s or her father, and caregivers outside the family. Just as these changes create a' d i f f e r e n t experience f o r the c h i l d , so do they change and expand the mother's focus. And, j u s t as autonomy comes only with e f f o r t f o r the c h i l d , maternal autonomy also appears to come with a struggle; the mothers' greatest source of concern engendered by c o n f l i c t i n g r o l e demands was the amount of time they had to themselves. Perhaps one of the sources of adult development wi t h i n the framework of parenthood i s the need for parents to reassert t h e i r own i n d i v i d u a l i t y a f t e r i t has been submerged i n the a l l - i n v o l v i n g tasks of caring f or a young i n f a n t . In any case, i t i s important that future research attempt to uncover other aspects of the mother's experience both within and outside the parental r o l e that contribute to her own and her c h i l d ' s development. The r o l e of maternal confidence and self-esteem i n adaptation to  parenthood The data gathered i n t h i s study ind i c a t e that confidence i n care-giving or parental a b i l i t y , and o v e r a l l self-esteem comprise a coherent I l l dimension of self-assurance i n mothers of toddlers. Although s e l f -assurance was most strongly r e l a t e d to aspects of maternal experience that were not d i r e c t l y involved i n parenthood (that i s , the score S e l f -Assurance had i t s highest loading on the factor with the'scores Family Situ a t i o n and Energy), i t also loaded on the factor that includes Maternal Role and Maternal Attachment. Confidence and self-esteem do apparently play a part i n maternal adaptation at the toddler period, but less c e n t r a l l y so than during infancy, when confidence i n caregiving a b i l i t y was found to contribute to developing mother-infant attachment bonds. A question that cannot be addressed by the c o r r e l a t i o n a l data gathered i n t h i s study concerns the d i r e c t i o n of e f f e c t s i n matters re-lated to parental self-assurance. That i s , do experiences i n the parental r o l e feed back into o v e r a l l l e v e l s of confidence or self-esteem, thereby a f f e c t i n g other domains, of adult experience? The r e l a t i o n s h i p of observed behavior to s e l f - r e p o r t at the toddler period Maternal perception of the dimensions of adaptation to parenthood were not r e f l e c t e d i n behavior as observed i n the laboratory. I t i s often argued that s e l f - r e p o r t presents a biased view and that observed , behavior i s a more objective measure; those who hold that view would be V l i k e l y to discard the s e l f - r e p o r t data and focus on the behavioral data gathered i n th i s study. There i s some evidence, however, that behavior reported on questionnaires accurately r e f l e c t s actual behavior (e.g., Sbbell STSobell, 1978) . Furthermore, there are some areas for which s e l f - r e p o r t measures seem best suited. For example, emotional fee l i n g s and perception of s a t i s f a c t i o n with emotional r e l a t i o n s h i p s are not amenable to study with observational techniques, 112 Within the f i e l d of s o c i a l psychology, i t i s well-documented that measurements of attitudes or self-perceptions are not n e c e s s a r i l y congruent with observed behavior (e.g., Bern, 1970; Lapiere, 1937). The data gathered i n t h i s study do not allow us to conclude, however, that maternal behavior i s always unrelated to maternal self-perception. Had mothers been asked about t h e i r behavior rather than t h e i r a t t i t u d e s , concerns, etc., a r e l a t i o n s h i p between s e l f - r e p o r t and observational data might have been found. I t i s also possible that a d i f f e r e n t laboratory s i t u a t i o n might have provided data that would be r e l a t e d to maternal s e l f — r e p o r t . A problem that always e x i s t s i n an exploratory study such as t h i s one i s that variance between methods may be greater than the variance within any one Imeasure: or within any set of conceptually-based measurements. In any case, these findings indicate that researchers interested i n parenthood w i l l not obtain a complete p i c t u r e of the experience of parenthood i f they focus on only observable behavior or s e l f -report. Conclusion Adaptation has been defined by Charlesworth (1977) as the c o l l e c t i o n of solutions to the problems posed by the environment. The data gathered i n this study of maternal adaptation to parenthood at two years suggest that the problems posed by parenthood for mothers of toddlers are not l i m i t e d to the needs or behavior of the c h i l d , or to the mother-child r e l a t i o n s h i p i t s e l f , but encompass the need to integrate the wide range of roles and experiences that make up the mother's l i f e . 113 References Abrahams, B., Feldman, S. S., & Nash, S. C. Sex-role self-concept and sex-role a t t i t u d e s : Enduring personality c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s or adaptations to changing l i f e s ituations? Developmental  Psychology, 1978, 14, 393-400. Ainsworth, M. D. S. Object r e l a t i o n s , dependency and attachment: A t h e o r e t i c a l review of the mother-infant r e l a t i o n s h i p . C h i l d Development, 1969, 40, 969-1025. Ainsworth, M. D. S. The development of infant-mother attachment. In B. M. Caldwell and H. N. R i c c i u t i (Eds.), Review of c h i l d  development research (Vol.1). Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1973. Ainsworth, M.D.S., B e l l , S.M., & Stayton, D-J., Infant-mother attachment and s o c i a l development. In M.P.M. Richards (Ed.), The integ r a t i o n of a c h i l d into a s o c i a l world. -London: Cambridge University : Press, 1974. " _ ." . , Aldous, J . Family i n t e r a c t i o n pattern. Annual Review of Sociology, 1977, 3_, 105-135. Aldous, J. Family careers: Developmental change i n f a m i l i e s . New York- Wiley, 19.78. Ambuel, J., & Harris, B. F a i l u r e to th r i v e : A study of f a i l u r e to grow i n height or weight. Ohio Journal of Medicine, 1963, 59, 997-1001. Arbeit, S. A. A study of women during t h e i r f i r s t pregnancy. Unpublished doctoral d i s s e r t a t i o n , Yale University, 1975. Becker, W. C. Consequences of d i f f e r e n t kinds of parental d i s c i p l i n e s . In M. Hoffman and L. W. Hoffman (Eds.), Review of c h i l d  development research (Vol. 1). New York: R u s s e l l Sage, 1964. B e l l , R. Q. A r e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of the d i r e c t i o n of e f f e c t s i n studies of s o c i a l i z a t i o n . Psychological Review, 1968, 75., 81-95. B e l l , S. M., & Ainsworth, M. D. S. Infant crying and maternal responsiveness. C h i l d Development, 1972, 43, 1171-1190. Belsky, J. The i n t e r e l a t i o n of parenting, spousal i n t e r a c t i o n and infant competence: A suggestive analysis. Paper presented at the meeting of the Society for Research i n Ch i l d Development, San Francisco, March 1979. 114 Bern, D. J . B e l i e f s , Attitudes and Human A f f a i r s . Belmont, C a l i f o r n i a : Brooks, Cole, 1970. Benedek, T. Parenthood as a developmental phase. Journal of American Psychoanalytic Association, 1959, 7:8, 389-417. Billman, J . , & McDevitt, S. C. Convergence of parent and observer ratings of temperament with observations of peer i n t e r a c t i o n i n nursery school. C h i l d Development, 1980, 51_, 395-400. Blank, M. The mother's r o l e i n infant development: A review. Journal of the American Academy,of Ch i l d Psychiatry, 1963, 3, 89-105. Brazelton, T. B., Tronick, E., Adamson, L., A l s , H., & Wise, S. Early mother-infant r e c i p r o c i t y . In Parent-infant i n t e r a c t i o n . Symposium presented at the meeting of the CIBA Foundation, Amsterdam: E l s e v i e r , 1975. Bronf enbrenner, U. Deve lopme'n t a l research, p u b l i c p o l i c y , and the ecology of childhood. C h i l d Development, 1974, 45, 1-5. Bowlby, J . Attachment and loss (Vol. 1). New York: Basic Books, 1969. Campbell, S. B. G., & Taylor, P. M. Bonding and attachment: Theoretical issues. In P. Taylor (Ed.), Parent-infant relationships. New York: Grune & Stratton, 1980. Carey, W. B. A s i m p l i f i e d method for measuring infant temperament. Journal of P e d i a t r i c s , 1970, 7J_, 188-194. Carey, W. B., & McDevitt, S. C. Continuitv and d i s c o n t i n u i t y of_ temperament i n ch i l d r e n . Paper presented at the F i f t h B i e n n i a l Conference of the International Society for the Study of Behavioral Development, Lund, Sweden, June 1979. Charlesworth, W. R. Human i n t e l l i g e n c e as adaptation: An et h o l o g i c a l approach. Paper presented at American Educational Research Association, Chicago, A p r i l 1974. Charlesworth, W. R. Personal communication, July, 1979. Clarke-Stewart, K.A.And daddy makes three: The father's impact on mother and young c h i l d . C h i l d Development, 1978, 49_, 466-478. Coleman, A.D. Psychological state during f i r s t pregnancy. American  Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 1969, 39, 788. Condon, W. S., & Sander, L. W. Neonate movement i s synchronized with adult speech: I n t e r a c t i o n a l p a r t i c i p a t i o n and language a c q u i s i t i o n . Science, 1974, 183, 99-101. 1.15 Cowan, CP., Cowan, P.A., Coie, L., & Coie, J.D. Becoming a family: The impact of a f i r s t c h i l d ' s b i r t h on the couple's r e l a t i o n -ship. In W.B. M i l l e r & L.F. Newman (Eds.), The f i r s t c h i l d  and family formation. Chapel H i l l , North Carolina: Carolina Population Center, 1978. Davidson, S.M. An experiment i n teaching parenting s k i l l s . In T. Williams (Chair), The development of maternal attachment: A l o n g i t u d i n a l study. Symposium presented at Annual Meeting of Society f o r Research i n Ch i l d Development, San Francisco, 19 79. de Chateau, P. Neonatal care routines: Influences on maternal and infant behavior and on breast feeding. Thesis. Umea  University Medical Di s s e r t a t i o n s , New Series #20. Umea, Sweden, 1976. Duvall, E.M. Family development.(4th ed.). P h i l a d e l p h i a : L i p p i n c o t t , 1971. Elmer, E., & Gregg, G.S. Developmental c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of abused c h i l d r e n . P e d i a t r i c s , 1967, 40, 596-602. Fein, R.A. Men's entrance to parenthood. Family Coordinator, 1976, 25, 341-350. Feldman, H. The e f f e c t s of ch i l d r e n on the family. In A. Michel (Ed.), Family issues of employed women i n Europe and America. Leden, The Netherlands: B r i l l , 1971. Feldman, S.S. & Nash, S.C. The t r a n s i t i o n from expectancy to parent-hood: Impact of the f i r s t b o r n c h i l d on men and women. Unpublished manuscript, 1980. Frodi, A.M. & Lamb, M.E. Ch i l d abusers' responses to in f a n t smiles and c r i e s . C h i l d Development, 1980, 51_, 238-242. F u l l a r d , W., McDevitt, S.C. & Carey, W.B. Toddler temperament scale. P h i l a d e l p h i a : Temple University and Univ e r s i t y of Pennsylvania Medical School, 1978. Gladieux, J.D. Pregnancy and the t r a n s i t i o n to parenthood. In W.B. M i l l e r & L.F. Newman (Eds.), The f i r s t c h i l d and family f o r - mation . Chapel H i l l , North Carolina: Carolina Population Center, 1978. Goldberg, S. S o c i a l competence i n infancy: A model of parent-infant i n t e r a c t i o n . Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 1977, 23_, 163-178. Gorsuch, R.L. Factor a n a l y s i s . P h i l a d e l p h i a , W.B. Saunders, 1974/ 116 Havighurst, R. J. History of developmental psychology: S o c i a l i z a t i o n and personality development through the l i f e span. In P. B. Baltes and K. W. Schaie (Eds.), Life-span developmental psychology. New York: Academic Press, 1973. Hersher, L., Richmond, J. B. & Moore, A. U. Maternal behavior i n sheep and goats. In H. L. Rheingold (Ed.), Maternal behavior  i n animals. New York: Wiley, 1963. Hobbs, D. F. Parenthood as c r i s i s : A t h i r d study. Journal of  Marriage and the Family, 1965, 27_, 367-372. Hobbs, D. F. , &(:Cole, S. P. T r a n s i t i o n to parenthood: A decade r e p l i c a t i o n . Journal of Marriage and the Family, 1976, J38, 723-732. Hoffman, L. W. Changes i n family r o l e s , s o c i a l i z a t i o n and sex dif f e r e n c e s . American Psychologist, 1977, _3_2 (8), 644-657. Hoffman, L. W., & Manis, J. D. Influences of c h i l d r e n on m a r i t a l i n t e r a c t i o n s and parental s a t i s f a c t i o n s and d i s s a t i s f a c t i o n s . In R. Lerner and G. B. Spanier (Eds.), C h i l d influences i n  ma r i t a l and family i n t e r a c t i o n . New York: Academic Press, 1978. Hollingshead, A. B. Two-factor index of s o c i a l p o s i t i o n . Unpublished manuscript, 1957. Jacoby, A.P. T r a n s i t i o n to Parenthood: A reassessment. Journal  of Marriage and the Family, 1969, .31_, 720-727. Kaye, K. Gaze d i r e c t i o n as the infant's way of c o n t r o l l i n g h i s mother's teaching behavior. Paper presented at the meeting of the Society f or Researcn i n C h i l d Development, Denver, March 1975. Kendrick, C , & Dunn, J. Caring for a second baby: E f f e c t s of in t e r a c t i o n s between nother and f i r s t b o r n . Developmental  Psychology, 1980, 16, 303-311. Kennell, J. H. , Jerauld, R., Wolfe, H. , Chester, D., Kreger, N. C , McAlpine, W., S t e f f a , M., & Klaus, M. H. Maternal behavior one year a f t e r early and extended postpartum contact. Developmental Medicine and C h i l d Neurology, 1974, J J ) , 172-179. Kennell, J. H., Trause, M. A., & Klaus, M. H. Evidence for a s e n s i t i v e period i n the human mother. In Parent-child i n t e r a c t i o n . Symposium presented at the meeting of the CIBA Foundation, Amsterdam: E l s e v i e r , 1975. 117 Klaus, M. H., Jerauld, R., Kreger, N., McAlpine, W., S t e f f a , M., & Kennell, J. H. Maternal attachment: Importance of the f i r s t postpartum days. New England Journal of Medicine, 1972, 286, 460-463. Klaus, M. H., & Kennell, J. H. Maternal-infant bonding. St. Louis: C. V. Mosby Co., 1976. Kl e i n , M., & Stern, L. Low b i r t h weight and the battered c h i l d syndrome. American Journal of Diseases of the C h i l d , 1971, 122, 15-18. Klopfer, P. Mother love: What turns i t on? American S c i e n t i s t , 1971, 49, 404-407. Labouvie-Vief, G. Personality and s o c i a l i z a t i o n i n l a t e r l i f e . In M. E. Lamb (Ed.), S o c i a l and personality development. New York: Holt Rinehart and Winston, 1978. Lamb, M. E. A defense of the concept of attachment. Human Development, 1974, 1_7, 376-385. Lamb, M. E. Interaction between eight month old chi l d r e n and t h e i r fathers and mothers. In M. E. Lamb (Ed.), The r o l e of the father i n c h i l d development. New York: Wiley, 1976. Lamb, M. E. Father-infant and mother-infant i n t e r a c t i o n i n the f i r s t year of l i f e . C h i l d Development, 1977, 48, 167-181(a). Lamb, M. E. A re-examination of the infant s o c i a l world. Human Development, 1977, 20, 65- 85, Lamb, M. E. Influence of the c h i l d on marital q u a l i t y and family i n t e r a c t i o n during the prenatal, p e r i n a t a l and infancy periods. In R. M. Lerner and G. B. Spanier (Eds.), C h i l d influences  on m a r i t a l and family i n t e r a c t i o n : A l i f e span perspective. New York: Academic Press, 1978. La Piere, R. T. Attitudes versus actions. S o c i a l Forces, 1934, 13, 230-237. Leiderman, P. H. Human mother to infant s o c i a l bonding: Is there a s e n s i t i v e phase? In K. Immelmann and G. Barlow, et a l . , (Eds.), Ethology and c h i l d development. Cambridge: Cambridge Un i v e r s i t y Press, 1980. L e i f e r , A. D., Leiderman, P. H., Barnett, C. R., & Williams, J. A. E f f e c t s of mother-infant separation on maternal attachment behavior. C h i l d Development, 1972, 43, 1203-1218. 118 L e i f e r , M. Psychological changes accompanying pregnancy and motherhood. Genetic Psychology Monographs, 1 9 7 7 , 95^, 5 5 - 9 6 . Le Masters, E. Parenthood as c r i s i s . Marriage and Family L i v i n g , 1 9 5 7 , 1 9 , 3 5 2 - 3 5 3 . Lerner, R., & Spanier, G. (Eds.), C h i l d influence on m a r i t a l and  family i n t e r a c t i o n . New York: Academic Press, 1 9 7 8 . Lewis, M. State as an infant - environment i n t e r a c t i o n : An analysis of mother-infant behavior as a function of sex. M e r r i l l Palmer Quarterly, 1 9 7 2 , J J 5 , 9 5 - 1 2 1 . Lewis, M., & Goldberg, S. Perceptual - cognitive development i n infancy: A generalized expectancy model as a function of the mother-infant i n t e r a c t i o n . M e r r i l l Palmer Quarterly, 1 9 6 9 , 15 ( 1 ) , 8 1 - 1 0 0 . Lewis, M., & Rosenblum, L. The e f f e c t of the infant on i t s caregiver.  The o r i g i n s of behavior, Vol. 1 . New York: Wiley, 1 9 7 4 . Lewis, M., & Rosenblum, L. Friendship and peer r e l a t i o n s . Origins  of behavior, Vol. 4 . New York: Wiley, 1 9 7 5 . Loesch, J. G., & Greenberg, N. H. ""'Some s p e c i f i c areas of c o n f l i c t observed during pregnancy: A comparative study of married and unmarried pregnant women. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 1 9 6 2 , 3 2 , 6 2 4 - 6 3 6 . Lynn, D. B. The father: His r o l e i n c h i l d development. C a l i f o r n i a : Brooks-Cole, 1 9 7 4 . Maccoby, E., & Masters, J. C. Attachment and dependency. In P. Mussen (Ed.), Carmichael's manual of c h i l d psychology, (Vol I I ) . New York: Wiley, 1 9 7 0 . Martin, B. Parent - c h i l d r e l a t i o n s . In F. D. Horowitz (Ed.), Review  of research i n c h i l d development (Vol. 4 ) . Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1 9 7 5 . Matas, L., Arend, R. A., & Sroufe, L. A. Continuity of adaptation i n the second year: The r e l a t i o n s h i p between q u a l i t y of attachment and l a t e r competence. Ch i l d Development, 1 9 7 8 , 4 9 , 5 4 7 - 5 5 6 . M i l l e r , B. C. A mul t i v a r i a t e developmental model of m a r i t a l s a t i s f a c t i o n . Journal of Marriage and the Family, 1 9 7 6 , 3 8 , 6 4 3 - 6 5 8 . 119 Mueller, E. C , & Vandell, D. Infant-infant i n t e r a c t i o n . In J. Osofsky (Ed.), Handbook of infant development. New York: Wiley, 1979. Neugarten, B. L. Adult personality: Toward a psychology of the l i f e c ycle. In B. L. Neugarten (Ed.), Middle age and aging. Chicago: Uni v e r s i t y of Chicago Press, 1968. Orthner, D. K. Leisure a c t i v i t y patterns and marital s a t i s f a c t i o n over the m a r i t a l career. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 1975, 37, 91-104. Painter, S. L. A methodological i n v e s t i g a t i o n of maternal infant  bonding. Unpublished masters' the s i s , U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia, 1978. Painter, S. L. The measurement of maternal attachment: Attachment versus attachment behavior. In T. Williams (Chair), The development of maternal attachment: A l o n g i t u d i n a l study. Symposium presented at the meeting of Society for Research i n C h i l d Development, San Francisco, 1979. Painter, S. L. Bonding and attachment: Uncovering the myths. Maternal Health News, 1980, _4. Parke, R. Perception i n father-infant i n t e r a c t i o n . In J. Osofsky (Ed.), Handbook of infancy. New York: Wiley, 1979. Parke, R. D., & O'Leary, S. E. Family i n t e r a c t i o n i n the ewborn period: some findings, some observations, and some unresolved issues. In K. Riegel and J. Meacham (Eds.), The developing  i n d i v i d u a l i n a changing world (Vol I I ) . S o c i a l and Environmental  Issues. The Hague: Mouton, 1975. Parke, R. D., & Sawin, D. B. The father's r o l e i n infancy: A r e -evaluation. The Family Coordinator, 1976, 25, 365-371. Parsons, T., & Bales, R. F. Family, s o c i a l i z a t i o n and i n t e r a c t i o n process. Chicago: Free Press, 1955. P 4 < i w i < w v , F. A. Mother, father,, and infant as an i n t e r a c t i v e system. Paper presented at Fathers and in f a n t s . Symposium presented at meeting of Americam Psychological Association, Chicago, 1975. Pedersen, F. A., Anderson, B. J . , & Cain, R. L. An approach to understanding linkages between the parent-infant and spouse r e l a t i o n s h i p s . In The f a m i l i y system: Networks of in t e r a c t i o n s among mother, father and i n f a n t . Symposium presented to the Society f o r Research i n C h i l d Development, New Orleans, March 1977. 120 Pedersen, F. A., Rubenstein, J. L, & Yarrow, L. J . Infant development i n father-absent f a m i l i e s . Journal of Genetic  Psychology, 1979, 135, 51-61. Pedersen, F. A., Yarrow, L. H., & St r a i n , B. A. Conceptualization of father influences and i t s implication f o r an observational methodology. Paper presented at the meeting of the International Society f o r the Study of Behavioral Development, Guildford, England, July 1975. Pedersen, F. A., Zaslow, M., Cain, R. L., & Anderson, B. J . A methodology for assessing parent perception of baby temperament. Unpublished manuscript, 1980. Ramey, C. Personal communication, December, 1979. Ringler, N. M., Kennell, J. H., J a r v e l l a , R., Navojosky, B. C , & Klaus, M. H. Mother to c h i l d speech at 2 years - e f f e c t s of early postnatal contact. Journal of P e d i a t r i c s , 1975, 86^, 141-144. Robson, K. S., & Moss, H. A. Patterns and determinants of maternal attachment. Journal of P e d i a t r i c s , 1970, Tl_, 976-985. R o l l i n s , B. C , & Cannon, K. F. M a r i t a l s a t i s f a c t i o n over the family l i f e cycle: A re-evaluation. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 1974, 36, 271-282. R o l l i n s , B. C., & Feldman, H. M a r i t a l s a t i s f a c t i o n over the family l i f e cycle. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 1970, 32^ , 20-27. R o l l i n s , B. C , & Galligan, R. The developing c h i l d and marital s a t i s f a c t i o n of parents. In R. M. Lerner and G. B. Spanier (Eds.), C h i l d  influences on ma r i t a l and family i n t e r a c t i o n . New York: Academic Press, 1978. Rosenblatt, J . S. The development of maternal responsiveness i n the r a t . American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 1969, 39, 36-56. Rosenthal, Miriam. Attachment and mother-infant i n t e r a c t i o n : Some research impasse and a suggested change i n o r i e n t a t i o n . Journal  of C h i l d Psychology and Psychiatry, 1973, JL4, 201-207. Rossi, A. S. T r a n s i t i o n to parenthood. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 1968, 30, 26-39. Rutter, M. Maternal deprivation 1972-1977: New findings, new concepts, new approaches. Paper presented at the meeting of the Society for the Research i n C h i l d Development, New Orleans, March 1977. 121 Ryder, R. G. Longitudinal data r e l a t i n g m a rital s a t i s f a c t i o n and having a c h i l d . Journal of Marriage and the Family, 1973, 3_5_, 604-607. Rus s e l l , C. T r a n s i t i o n to parenthood: Problems and g r a t i f i c a t i o n s . Journal of Marriage and the Family, 1974, 36, 294-300. Sameroff, A. J . , & Chandler, M. J. Reproductive r i s k and the continuum of caretaking casualty. In F. D. Horowitz (Ed.), Review of research  i n c h i l d development (Vol. 4). Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1975. Schaefer, E. S., Bauman, D. E., Siegel, E., & Ingram, D. Maternal attachment behavior: Concepts, measures, s t a b i l i t y and c o r r e l a t e s . In L. Yarrow (Chair), Concepts, measures and research on maternal attachment to the infant. Symposium presented at the meeting of the American Psychological Association, Toronto, August 1978. Sears, R., Maccoby, E., & Levin, H. Patterns of c h i l d rearing. Evanston, I l l i n o i s : Row, Peterson, 1957. Seashore, M. H., L e i f e r , A. D., Barnett, C. R., & Leiderman, P. H. The e f f e c t s of denial of early mother-infant i n t e r a c t i o n on maternal self-confidence. Journal of Personality and S o c i a l Psychology, 1973, 26, 369-378. Shaxeen, E., Alexander, D., Truskowski, M., & Barbers,, G. F a i l u r e to t h r i v e : A retrospective p r o f i l e . C l i n i c a l P e d i a t r i c s , 1968, ]_, 255-261. Shereshefsky, P. M., & Yarrow, L. J. Psychological aspects of a  f i r s t pregnancy and early postnatal adaptation. New York: Raven Press, 1974. Sobell, L. C., & Sobell, M. B. V a l i d i t y of s e l f - r e p o r t s i n three populations of a l c o h o l i c s . Journal of Consulting and C l i n i c a l  Psychology, 1978,.46, 901-907. Soule, B. The pregnant couple. Paper presented at the meeting of the American Psychological Association, New Orleans, August 1974. Sroufe, L. A., & Waters, E. Attachment as an organizationaL.construct. Ch i l d Development, 1977, 48, 1184-1199. Sroufe, L. A. Personal communication, August 1980. Thomas, A., Chess, S., B i r c h , H. G., Hertzig, M. E., & Korn, S. Behavioral i n d i v i d u a l i t y i n early childhood. New York: New York University Press, 1963. 122 Weinraub, M., Brooks, J . , & Lewis,. M. The s o c i a l network: A reconsideration of the concept of attachment. Human Development, 1978, Wente, A. S., & Crockenberg, S. T r a n s i t i o n to fatherhood: Lamaze preparation, adjustment d i f f i c u l t y and the husband-wife r e l a t i o n s h i p . The'; Family Coordinator, 1976, 23, 351-358. Williams, T. M., Painter, S. L., Davidson, S. M., & Joy, L. A. The development of maternal attachment: A l o n g i t u d i n a l study. Symposium presented at the meeting or the society tor Research i n C h i l d Development, San. Francisco, March. 1979. Zemlick, J . H., & Watson, R. I. Maternal attitudes of acceptance and r e j e c t i o n during and a f t e r pregnancy. American Journal of  Orthopsychiatry, 1953, 23, 570-584. 124 APPENDIX B Differences Between Drop-Out and Follow-Up Families on Prenatal, P e r i n a t a l and Postpartum Measures Item X F o l l o w - U p . X Drop-Out Demographic Length of Common Residence .(months) 56.9 Mother's Occupation (Hollingshead scale) 5.5 Prenatal Questionnaire Number phys i c a l problems 2.14 Pregnancy planned 1.92 Mother's fee l i n g s toward pregnancy at f i r s t 1.58 Desire to have a partner during labor & delivery 1.10 So c i a l support during pregnancy 26.10 Anticipated s o c i a l support f o r postpartum period 28.68 P e r i n a t a l Period Neonate gestational age (weeks) 40.61 Apgar score at 5 min. a f t e r b i r t h 9.40 Number hours mother-neonate separation a f t e r b i r t h 6.00 34.5 4.7 2.85 2.74 2.19 1.44 22.63 25.44 40.16 9.04 9.70 3.65 1.83 1.93 2.35 2.99 2.32 2.21 1.86 1.97 2.17 2.52 .07 •k* .06 Postpartum Questionnaire Number infant p h y s i c a l problems 1.08 Feeling of energetic/ t i r e d 3.66 Feeling of content/ discontent 2.36 1.63 3.11 1.81 2.42 2.46 2.35 Postpartum Observed Behavior Infant cry/fuss (# of 15-second periods) .05 .01 29.35 40.75 2.43 (Cont'd) Differences Between Drop-Out and Follow-Up Families on Prenatal, P e r i n a t a l and Postpartum Measures (Continued) Item X Follow-Up X Drop-Out Postpartum Rating Scales Perception of Baby 7.32 Delight with Baby 6.80 Acceptance of Baby 7.76 Att i t u d e To Baby 6.47 A v a i l a b i l i t y to Baby 7.81 Amount of Interaction 6.71 Frequency of Play 5.68 Postnatal Research Inventory Subscales Ignore 12.26 Respond 18.81 6.54 5.85 6.9.6 5.50. 7.15 5.77 4.67 13.42 20.32 2.20 2.07 2.56 2.30 2.37 2.04 2.03 2.09 1.88 *p .05 APPENDIX B 126 Group differences — Drop-out vs. Follow-up Of the 86 o r i g i n a l f a m i l i e s who p a r t i c i p a t e d i n the f i r s t phase of the study, 60 fam i l i e s p a r t i c i p a t e d i n the follow-up phase at 2 years. Although there were no differences i n terms of treatment group (Experimental I or I I , Placebo or Control), or sample o r i g i n ( h o s p i t a l where fam i l i e s were r e c r u i t e d ) , there were a number of differences found i n the f i r s t phase data between those who participated: i n data c o l l e c t i o n at two years and those who did not. Data were analyzed i n two ways. F i r s t , t - t e s t s and appropriate non-parametric s t a t i s t i c a l tests were done to uncover differences between the Follow-up and Drop-out groups. Second, the Drop-out group was further, divided into two groups: the f i r s t group consisted of those fa m i l i e s we were unable to contact at a l l ( l e t t e r s were returned, telephones disconnected, and a telephone c a l l to the family physician yielded no information on the family's whereabouts) — there were 12 fam i l i e s i n t h i s No Contact group; the second group consisted of f a m i l i e s we were able to contact but who were unable or unwilling to p a r t i c i p a t e i n the Follow-up phase of the study. This group of fourteen f a m i l i e s , the Contact group, included three f a m i l i e s who refused to p a r t i c i p a t e when telephoned, and eleven other f a m i l i e s . Six of these women agreed to f i l l out questionnaires, but never returned the questionnaires or responded to a follow-up l e t t e r s and f i v e were w i l l i n g to come into the laboratory but who e i t h e r broke appointments or who were never able to make an appointment. Analyses of variance and Scheffe comparisons were done to uncover differences among these two Drop-out groups (No Contact and Contact) and the Follow-up group. In general, differences between the Follow-up and Combined Drop-out groups w i l l be 127 discussed where relevant. Demographic variables There were group differences found for two demographic variables as measured at the time of the prenatal v i s i t (during the t h i r d trimester of pregnancy) — length of time the couple had l i v e d together before the b i r t h of t h e i r f i r s t baby, and the mother's occupational l e v e l . Couples i n the Follow-up group had l i v e d together considerably longer than those i n eit h e r the Drop-out groups — nearly 57 versus 34.5 months. One possible i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of t h i s f i n d i n g i s that the length of the couple's r e l a t i o n s h i p may have contributed to a s t a b i l i t y or degree of organization that allowed mothers to be able to arrange an appointment and keep i t . There i s some anecdotal evidence to support t h i s i n t e r p r e t a t i o n . As mentioned, of the 12 Contact mothers who indicated a willingness to p a r t i c i p a t e when they were f i r s t contacted about the follow-up phase of the study, 6 said they were w i l l i n g to come into the laboratory, but never a c t u a l l y did so. A v a r i e t y of reasons were given: parental or c h i l d i l l n e s s (2), b i r t h of the second baby (1), or a seeming i n a b i l i t y to make or meet a scheduled appointment (3). Possibly less well-organized family routines i n these f a m i l i e s made i t d i f f i c u l t for these mothers to come into the laboratory despite t h e i r apparent willingness to do so. Marginal group differences were found for Mother's occupation. 128 This v a r i a b l e was coded according to the Hollingshead scale (1957); a lower numerical rating indicates a higher-status occupation. For example, a r a t i n g of 6 indicates a " l e s s e r p r o f e s s i o n a l " (accountant, l i b r a r i a n ) or business manager; a r a t i n g of 4 indicates a technician or c l e r i c a l or sales worker. The Follow-up group had the lowest-status occupational r a t i n g (5.5), while the Contact group had the next higher r a t i n g (4.9), and the No contact group had the highest occupational status (4.4). I t i s possible that the Follow-up mothers were the l e a s t career-oriented and, therefore, more l i k e l y to be staying home with t h e i r c h i l d r e n and were thus a v a i l a b l e to come into the laboratory. However, there were no group differences i n those women who reported that they were working at the time a Follow-up questionnaire was sent to f a m i l i e s at 3-17 months postpartum. In addition, of the 53 mothers who did come into the laboratory, 25, or 47% of them were working outside the home or attending school f u l l or part-time. I t appears, then, that career-orientation i s not n e c e s s a r i l y r e l a t e d to the mother's willingness to come into the laboratory. I t i s possible, however, that those f a m i l i i e s who moved out of the area or could not be contacted moved because of the wife's career, but the information to support t h i s notion i s not a v a i l a b l e . There were some group differences from the Prenatal and Postpartum s e l f - r e p o r t measures and observational data which further help to describe the differences between those f a m i l i e s who p a r t i c i p a t e d i n the Follow-up phase of the study and those who did not. Although a number of s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t differences could be expected by chance alone, those that were found appeared to be conceptually related to one another and therefore meaningful. See Table for a summary of the differences found. 129 Prenatal Period Although no group differences were found on the prenatal questionnaire items re l a t e d to parental or infant attachment, or to self-confidence i n caregiving a b i l i t y , the differences that were found suggest that those families who did not p a r t i c i p a t e i n the Follow-up phase may have experienced a somewhat more d i f f i c u l t prenatal period. Both the number of ph y s i c a l problems (e.g., nausea, high blood pressure, etc.) experienced by the combined drop-out groups exceeded those experienced by the Follow-up group. Women i n the Follow-up group were more l i k e l y than women i n the two Drop-out groups to report that t h e i r pregnancies had been planned rather than unexpected and that they had f e l t very p o s i t i v e about the pregnancy upon f i r s t learning of i t . Follow-up group mothers had the most p o s i t i v e f e e l i n g s toward issues regarding the impending p e r i n a t a l period. That i s , they were more l i k e l y than mothers i n the Drop-out groups to want a partner (usually the husband) with them during labor and del i v e r y . Women i n the combined drop-out groups were marginally less l i k e l y to consult, or an t i c i p a t e consulting with, outside sources (e.g., husband, parents, f r i e n d s , physician) about t h e i r pregnancy, or, once the baby had been born, about c h i l d r e a r i n g issues or problems. Taken together, the data from the prenatal period suggests that thos women who did not p a r t i c i p a t e i n the Follow-up phase of the study were somewhat more i s o l a t e d from those around them — l e s s l i k e l y to want t h e i r partners with them during the p e r i n a t a l period, and l e s s l i k e l y to consult outside sources despite the fact that they were experiencing more ph y s i c a l problems i n the t h i r d trimester of pregnancy. I t may be 130 that the women who dropped out of the study would have been les s l i k e l y , also, to want contact with a research group, or to wish to put them-selves i n a p o s i t i o n where they would be sharing t h e i r f e e l i n g s or experiences with a stranger, i . e . , the researcher. P e r i n a t a l Period During the p e r i n a t a l period, data were gathered from h o s p i t a l charts and from d i a r i e s the mother f i l l e d out during t h e i r h o s p i t a l stay. Differences between Drop-out and Follow-up groups showed up i n only three variables from t h i s period. Follow-up infants were s l i g h t l y younger i n gestational age and had higher Apgar scores at 5 minutes. Although these differences are s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t , both the gestational age and Apgar scores were w e l l within normal ranges. The most s t r i k i n g difference from the p e r i n a t a l period between the two groups was the number of hours that mothers were separated from t h e i r newborns a f t e r the b i r t h : mothers and infants i n the Follow-up group were separated from one another for 6.0 hours, whereas those i n the Drop-out groups were separated for 9.7 hours. I t i s not clear what i n t e r -p retation should be made of t h i s f i n d i n g . A d d i t i o n a l information from the diary, although not s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t , indicates that mothers i n the Follow-up group reported spending more time with t h e i r infants during the day-time hours throughout t h e i r h o s p i t a l stay. However, re s u l t s of the f i r s t phase of the study showed no e f f e c t s of the amount of contact or length of separation i n the p e r i n a t a l period. Postpartum Period There were several group differences found i n postpartum questionnaire 131 data. Many of the differences found favor the Follow-up group, but some favor the contact group. Mothers i n the Follow-up group reported that t h e i r infants had the fewest physical problems i n the f i r s t postpartum month and that they had been out of the home by themselves ( i . e . , while someone else cared for the babies) a great deal more often than mothers i n the combined Drop-out groups (average ranks were: Follow-up = 39.57, Drop-outs = 52.09, Mann-Whitney U = 564.5, p <.05). Thus, mothers i n the Follow-up group appear to have had a somewhat easier postpartum s i t u a t i o n and to have been adjusting better than mothers i n the other two groups. In contrast to these findings, mothers i n the Drop-out groups showed more p o s i t i v e s e l f - r a t i n g s on scales assessing fe e l i n g s of energy and contentment. However, when the three groups were compared, contact mothers were more l i k e l y to report that feeding was progressing smoothly (feeding: No Contact = 2.42, Contact = 1.26, Follow-up = 1.95; F = 4.6, df = 2.83, p <.01) and that they were able to t e l l what t h e i r infants needed or wanted (No Contact = 1.83, Contact = 1.67, Follow-up = 2.19, F = 2.97, df = 2.83, p = .06) and that t h e i r husbands f e l t strongly attached to the infant at one month postpartum (no Contact: = 2.00, Contact = 1.13, Follow-up = 1.51, F = 3.35, df = 2.83, p <.05). Thus, mothers i n the Contact group had somewhat more p o s i t i v e emotional feel i n g s and feel i n g s of confidence i n two aspects of caregiving, and were somewhat more l i k e l y to f e e l close to t h e i r infant and to see the infant as attached to the father (though not to themselves) at one month postpartum than were mothers i n either the No Contact or the Follow-up group. 132 As had been found i n the r e s u l t s of the f i r s t phase, these s e l f - r e p o r t data are not consistent with the findings from the behavioral data. There were no s i g n i f i c a n t group differences found i n the maternal observationall.categories, either the i n d i v i d u a l behaviors or more global composites ( c f . , Painter, 1979 for a d e s c r i p t i o n of behavioral data analyses); however, infants from the Drop-out group were observed to cry and fuss more often during the one-hour home observation at one month postpartum. In contrast, group differences were found for seven of the eighteen Maternal Care Rating Scales. Mothers i n the Follow-up group had higher, more p o s i t i v e ratings on the scales for Perception of Baby, Delight with Baby, Acceptance of Baby, Attitude toward Baby, A v a i l a b i l i t y to Baby, Amount of Interaction offered and Frequency of Play i n t e r a c t i o n . For a l l the remaining scales, the tendency was for Follow-up mothers to receive higher scores, although these findings were non-significant. A possible explanation of these findings i s that mothers who were given higher ratings on the Maternal Care Ratings Scales because they appeared to be more "tuned-in" to t h e i r i n f a n t s ' rhythms and needs were also more s o c i a l l y adept i n general. They, therefore, may have had a more p o s i t i v e i n t e r a c t i o n with the researcher at the time of the one-month v i s i t and were thus more l i k e l y to be w i l l i n g to have a continued association with the research project. This notion may be t e n t a t i v e l y supported by the findings from the Prenatal Questionnaire discussed above, i . e . , that the women who did not come into the laboratory for the Follow-up phase appear to be more s o c i a l l y i s o l a t e d i n general. 133 On the other hand, there i s also some support for the notion that the Follow-up mothers as a group were a c t u a l l y more s e n s i t i v e than those who dropped out: there were s i g n i f i c a n t group differences on two of the ten PNRI subscales which are derived from a s e l f - r e p o r t measure f i l l e d out by the mothers at one month postpartum. Follow-up mothers had lower (more po s i t i v e ) scores on the Ignore and Respond subscales, i n d i c a t i n g that they were l e s s l i k e l y to agree with statements i n d i c a t i n g that infants should not be handled much or were not appropriate partners for s o c i a l i n t e r a c t i o n , and more l i k e l y to report that they responded quickly to t h e i r infant's needs for food, diaper change, etc. In summary, some differences i n f i r s t phase data have been found between those fa m i l i e s who p a r t i c i p a t e d i n the Follow-up phase and those who did not. The differences found, though not overwhelmingly i n d i c a t i v e that a s p e c i a l i z e d group was a v a i l a b l e for the Follow-up phase, does mean that the Follow-up group i s more homogeneous and, therefore, data gathered at two years may have les s within^-group variance. 134 APPENDIX C PARENT-INFANT PROGRAM QUESTIONNAIRE FOR MOTHERS OF TODDLERS B U M H u s b a n d / P a r t n e r ' s Hame O l d e s t C h i l d ' s Name O l d e s t C h i l d ' s B l r t h d a t e A d d r e s s Phone E d u c a t i o n ( h i g h e s t l e v e l r e a c h e d ) O c c u p a t i o n E t h n i c B a c k g r o u n d T o d a y ' s D a t e day month y e a r I n t h i s q u e s t i o n n a i r e , we a r e I n t e r e s t e d i n t h e way y o u s e e a number o f a s p e c t s o f p a r e n t h o o d . P l e a s e a n s w e r a l l t h e q u e s t i o n s t h a t a p p l y t o y o ^ When a n s w e r i n g q u e s t i o n s t h a t a s k y o u t o r a t e y o u r f e e l i n g s o r o p i n i o n s o n a S - p o i n t o r 4 - p o i n t s c a l e , p l e a s e c i r c l e t h e p o i n t w h i c h b e s t d e s c r i b e s y o u r f e e l i n g s o r a t t i t u d e s . When a n s w e r i n g q u e s t i o n s t h a t a s k f o r y o u r comments o r d e s c r i p t i o n s o f e v e n t s o r y o u r f e e l i n g s , p l e a s e g i v e a s d e -t a i l e d and p r e c i s e a n a n s w e r a s p o s s i b l e . 1 . Have y o u h a d any m a j o r i l l n e s s e s o r m e d i c a l c o n d i t i o n s s i n c e t h e b i r t h o f y o u r f i r s t c h i l d ? _No Y e s : D e s c r i b e : D u r a t i o n o f i l l n e s s o r c o n d i t i o n : H e r e y o u h o s p i t a l i z e d ? Ho J f e s : F o r how l o n g ? Has y o u r f i r s t c h i l d h a d a m a j o r i l l n e s s o r m e d i c a l c o n d i t i o n s i n c e b i r t h ? No _ Y e s : D e s c r i b e : D u r a t i o n o f i l l n e s s o r c o n d i t i o n : Was h e o r s h e h o s p i t a l i z e d ? No _ Y e s : F o r how l o n g ? O f f i c e Use 1 - 3 4 1 5 - 6 01 7 1 8 - 9 1 0 - 1 1 1 2 - 1 3 1 4 - 1 5 16 _ 17 18 _ 1 9 - 2 0 2 1 - 2 3 24 _ [25-27 28 _ 2 9 - 3 0 3 1 - 3 3 34 _ 135-37 135 - 2 -A r e y o u p l a n n i n g t o h a v e a n o t h e r b a b y ? Y e s , I a l r e a d y h a v e a n o t h e r c h i l d : B i r t h d a t e : _ day month y e a r Age now:_ J f e s ? I am p r e g n a n t now: Due d a t e : _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ day month _ Y e s , I hope t o become p r e g n a n t w i t h i n t h e n e x t y e a r y e a r Y e s , I p l a n t o h a v e a n o t h e r b a b y w i t h i n y e a r s 4 . 5 . S o , I am n o t p l a n n i n g t o h a v e - a n o t h e r ' b a b y How many c h i l d r e n , i n a l l , w o u l d y o u l i k e t o h a v e ? D i d y o u b r e a s t - f e e d y o u r f i r s t b a b y ? No Y e s : How l o n g d i d y o u c o n t i n u e ? _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ c h i l d r e n months When y o u s t o p p e d , what w e r e y o u r r e a s o n s ? _ D i d y o u r f i r s t b a b y h a v e c o l i c ? No Y e s : When d i d i t s t a r t and how l o n g d i d i t l a s t ? _ 38 3 9 - 4 0 4 1 - 4 2 " 4 3 - 4 4 4 5 - 4 6 _ 4 7 - 4 8 4 9 - 5 0 _ 5 1 - 5 2 _ 53-54_ 5 5 - 5 6 57 58-59_ 6 0 - 6 1 62 7 . D i d y o u h a v e t h e " b a b y b l u e s " o r p o s t p a r t u m d e p r e s s i o n a f t e r t h e b i r t h j o f y o u r f i r s t b a b y ? No When d i d i t s t a r t and how l o n g d i d i t l a s t ? Y e s : Have y o u h a d any o t h e r p e r i o d s o f d e p r e s s i o n s i n c e t h e b i r t h o f y o u r f i r s t b a b y ? No Y e s : When d i d i t s t a r t and how l o n g d i d i t l a s t ?  9 . A l t h o u g h y o u r f e e l i n g s p r o b a b l y c h a n g e f r o m day t o d a y , o v e r a l l , how w o u l d y o u s a y y o u a r e f e e l i n g c u r r e n t l y ( o v e r t h e p a s t few m o n t h s ) ? -I v e r y e n e r g e t i c f a i r l y e n e r g e t i c a b o u t a v e r a g e f a i r l y t i r e d v e r y t i r e d v e r y s e l f - c o n f l d e n t f a i r l y s e l f - c o n f l d e n t a b o u t a v e r a g e f a i r l y u n s u r e v e r y u n s u r e •i v e r y d e p r e s s e d somewhat d e p r e s s e d a b o u t a v e r a g e somewhat e l a t e d v e r y e l a t e d v e r y c o n t e n t f a i r l y c o n t e n t a b o u t a v e r a g e f a i r l y d i s c o n t e n t v e r y d i s c o n t e n t 4— v e r y h a p p y f a i r l y happy a b o u t a v e r a g e f a i r l y u n h a p p y v e r y u n h a p p y v e r y a n x i o u s somewhat n a x i o u s a b o u t a v e r a g e f a i r l y r e l a x e d v e r y r e l a x e d 63-64 6 5 - 6 6 " 67 68-69_ 7 0 - 7 1 72 73-74_ 7 5 - 7 6 77 78_ 79 8 0 1-3 4 " 5 - 6 01 7. 2 136 3 -1 0 . Some f a m i l i e s r e p o r t t h a t t h e f i r s t y e a r s a f t e r t h e i r f i r s t c h i l d ' s b i r t h a r e v e r y s t r e s s f u l t i m e s , w h i l e o t h e r s do n o t s e e any d i f f e r e n c e b e t w e e n t h i s t i m e and any o t h e r t i m e . How w o u l d y o u s a y t h e f i r s t y e a r s a f t e r y o u r c h i l d ' s b i r t h w e r e f o r y o u r f a m i l y ? 10 e x t r e m e l y s t r e s s f u l q u i t e s t r e s s f u l somewhat s t r e s s f u l n o t v e r y s t r e s s f u l n o t a t a l l s t r e s s f u l 1 1 . What a r e y o u r l i v i n g a r r a n g e m e n t s now? _ L i v i n g w i t h h u s b a n d / p a r t n e r and c h i l d / c h i l d r e n J L i v i n g w i t h h u s b a n d / p a r t n e r , c h i l d / c h i l d r e n and f r i e n d s o r r e l a t i v e s ] J L i v i n g w i t h c h i l d / c h i l d r e n o n l y _ L i v i n g w i t h c h i l d / c h i l d r e n and f r i e n d s o r r e l a t i v e s O t h e r ( P l e a s e e x p l a i n ) : 1 2 . 1 3 . I f y o u a r e n o t l i v i n g w i t h y o u r h u s b a n d o r p a r t n e r , how l o n g h a v e y o u b e e n s e p a r a t e d ? months 11 12 I f y o u a r e n o t l i v i n g w i t h y o u r h u s b a n d o r p a r t n e r , d o e s h e h a v e c o n t a c t w i t h y o u r c h i l d ? No Y e s : How o f t e n ? 1 3 - 14 !15_ 16 1 4 . I n g e n e r a l what i s y o u r o p i n i o n a b o u t women w o r k i n g o r g o i n g t o s c h o o l when t h e y h a v e y o u n g c h i l d r e n ? c o m p l e t e l y a p p r o v e somewhat a p p r o v e m i x e d f e e l i n g s somewhat ' c o m p l e t e l y d i s a p p r o v e d i s a p p r o v e 1 5 . A r e y o u w o r k i n g o r g o i n g t o s c h o o l now? _No: SKIP TO QUESTION 21 _ Y e s , I h a v e r e t u r n e d t o my p r e v i o u s j o b J f e s , I h a v e t a k e n a new j o b _ Y e s , I h a v e r e t u r n e d t o my p r e v i o u s s c h o o l p r o g r a m J f e s , I h a v e b e g u n a new s c h o o l p r o g r a m _ 0 t h e r ( e x p l a i n ) 1 6 . liow do y o u f e e l a b o u t w o r k i n g o r g o i n g t o s c h o o l ? c o m p l e t e l y e n t h u s i a s t i c somewhat e n t h u s i a s t i c m i x e d f e e l i n g s somewhat u n e n t h u s i a s t i c c o m p l e t e l y u n e n t h u s i a s t i c 1 7 . I f y o u a r e w o r k i n g o r g o i n g t o s c h o o l now, d e s c r i b e y o u r j o b o r s c h o o l p r o g r a m : 0.8-19 137 1 8 . I f y o u a r e w o r k i n g o r g o i n g t o s c h o o l now, how many h o u r s a week? h o u r s / w e e k a t w o r k h o u r s / w e e k a t s c h o o l 1 9 . 2 1 . I f y o u a r e w o r k i n g o r g o i n g t o s c h o o l , what a r e y o u r c h i l d c a r e a r r a n g e m e n t s f o r t h e t i m e y o u a r e away f r o m home? ( F i l l I n a s many a s a p p l y u n d e r R e g u l a r o r O c c a s i o n a l a r r a n g e m e n t s ) _Day c a r e c e n t e r _ F a m i l y day c a r e _ P l a y g r o u p / n u r s e r y s c h o o l _ P a r t n e r / b a b y ' s f a t h e r _Baby s i t t e r / r e l a t i v e " O t h e r : ( f i l l i n ) REGULAR* _hours/week _hours/week h o u r s / w e e k OCCASIONAL ( s p e c i f y how o f t e n ) _h o u r s / w e e k _hours/week h o u r s / w e e k 2 0 . Do y o u h a v e r e g u l a r c h i l d c a r e a r r a n g e m e n t s f o r t i m e s o t h e r t h a n when y o u a r e i n s c h o o l o r a t work? ( e . g . , e v e n i n g s , w e e k e n d s , " f r e e t i m e " ) _No ~Yes : h o u r s / w e e k What a r e t h e s e a r r a n g e m e n t s ? When do y o u h a v e t h e s e a r r a n g e m e n t s ? I f y o u a r e n o t w o r k i n g o r g o i n g t o s c h o o l , what c h i l d c a r e a r r a n g e -m e n t s do y o u u s u a l l y h a v e ? ( F i l l i n a s many a s a p p l y u n d e r R e g u l a r o r O c c a s i o n a l ) _Day c a r e c e n t e r _ F a m i l y d a y c a r e J P l a y g r o u p / n u r s e r y s c h o o l P a r t n e r / b a b y ' s f a t h e r _Baby s i t t e r / r e l a t i v e " O t h e r : ( f i l l i n ) REGULAR _ h o u r s / w e e k _ h o u r 8 / w e e k _ h o u r s / w e e k _ h o u r s / w e e k _ h o u r s / w e e k h o u r s / w e e k OCCASIONAL ( s p e c i f y how o f t e n ) 2 2 . T o what e x t e n t a r e y o u s a t s i f i e d w i t h y o u r r e g u l a r c h i l d c a r e a r r a n e e m e n t s ? v e r y p l e a s e d s a t i s f i e d d i s s a t i s f i e d v e r y d i s s a t s i f l e d m i x e d f e e l i n g s 2 3 . To what e x t e n t a r e y o u s a t i s f i e d w i t h y o u r o c c a s i o n a l c h i l d c a r e a r r a n g e m e n t s ? v e r y p l e a s e d s a t i s f i e d m i x e d f e e l i n g s d i s s a t i s f i e d v e r y d i s s a t i s f i e d 20-21_ 22-23_ 24 25-26_ 27 2 8 - 2 9 30 31-32 33 34-35_ 36 3 7 - 3 8 39 4 0 - 4 1 _ 42 43-44_ 45 46 47 4 8 - 4 9 _ 50 5 1 - 5 2 _ 53 5 4 - 5 5 _ 56 5 7 - 5 8 _ 59 6 0 - 6 1 _ 62 6 3 - 6 4 _ 65 66 - 5 -2 4 . What i n p a r t i c u l a r a r e y o u e i t h e r p l e a s e d o r d i s p l e a s e d a b o u t ( o r b o t h ) , w i t h r e g a r d t o y o u r c h i l d c a r e a r r a n g e m e n t s ? 2 5 . Does y o u r c h i l d g o r e g u l a r l y t o d a y c a r e ( f u l l o r p a r t - t i m e ; c e n t e r o r f a m i l y d a y c a r e ) ? N o : Do y o u a n t i c i p a t e s e n d i n g h i m o r h e r t o d a y c a r e i n t h e f u t u r e ? No Y e s : a t what a g e , o r when? Y e s 2 6 . 2 7 . NOTE: I F YOUR CHILD DOES NOT GO REGULARLY TO DAY CARE, SKIP TO QUESTION 32 I f y o u r c h i l d r e g u l a r l y g o e s t o day c a r e ( f u l l o r p a r t - t i m e ; c e n t e r o r f a m i l y day c a r e ) , how d i d y o u f i n d o u t a b o u t t h e p r o g r a m ? a d v e r t i s i n g — n e w s p a p e r o r n o t i c e s Day C a r e I n f o r m a t i o n C e n t e r (Human R e s o u r c e s ) r e f e r r e d b y a f r i e n d , n e i g h b o r o r r e l a t i v e O t h e r : How o l d was y o u r c h i l d when h e o r s h e f i r s t s t a r t e d g o i n g r e g u l a r l y d a y c a r e ? months 2 8 . When y o u r c h i l d i n i t i a l l y e n t e r e d t h e d a y c a r e p r o g r a m , d i d t h e s t a f f p r o v i d e any o f t h e f o l l o w i n g s e r v i c e s ? i n i t i a l p a r e n t - t e a c h e r i n t e r v i e w t o d i s c u s s d a y - c a r e p h i l o s o p h y and p a r e n t c o n c e r n s g r a d u a l e n t r y i n t o p r o g r a m ( i n i t i a l s h o r t v i s i t s g e t t i n g l o n g e r o v e r t i m e ) a s s i g n m e n t o f a p a r t i c u l a r s t a f f member t o y o u r c h i l d f o r t h e I n i t i a l e n t r y p e r i o d i n t r o d u c t i o n o f y o u and y o u r c h i l d t o o t h e r p a r e n t s , s t a f f and c h i l d r e n o t h e r : 2 9 . I f any o f t h e a b o v e s e r v i c e s w e r e p r o v i d e d , t o what e x t e n t d i d t h e y make y o u f e e l c o n f i d e n t and c o m f o r t a b l e a b o u t h a v i n g y o u r c h i l d e n r o l l e d i n t h a t p a r t i c u l a r d a y c a r e s i t u a t i o n ? v e r y c o m f o r t a b l e somewhat c o m f o r t a b l e m i x e d somewhat v e r y f e e l i n g s u n c o m f o r t a b l e u n c o m f o r t -a b l e 3 0 . I s y o u r c h i l d now g o i n g t o t h e same d a y c a r e s e t t i n g i n w h i c h y o u f i r s t e n r o l l e d h i m o r h e r ? Y e s N o : What w e r e y o u r r e a s o n s f o r c h a n g i n g ? 6 7 - 6 8 69 70 71-72 73 t o 7 4 - 7 5 76 77 78 79 80 1-3 4 1_ 5-6 0 1 7 3 1 0 - 1 1 139 - 6 3 1 . I n a d d i t i o n t o c a r i n g f o r y o u r c h i l d , t h e r e may b e some s e r v i c e s i n a day c a r e s e t t i n g i n t e n d e d f o r t h e p a r e n t . I n t h e f o l l o w i n g l i s t , c h e c k o f f i n t h e f i r s t c o l u m n t h o s e s e r v i c e s y o u f e e l a day c a r e p r o g r a m s h o u l d o f f e r ; i n t h e s e c o n d c o l u m n , c h e c k o f f w h e t h e r t h o s e s e r v i c e s a r e o f f e r e d b y y o u r day c a r e p r o g r a m . SHOULD ABE BE OFFERED OFFERED R e f e r r a l s t o h e a l t h c a r e s p e c i a l i s t s P a r e n t - t e a c h e r m e e t i n g s ( a l l p a r e n t s a s a g r o u p R e g u l a r p a r e n t - t e a c h e r i n t e r v i e w s I n f o r m a t i o n a b o u t communi ty s u p p o r t s e r v i c e s L e n d i n g l i b r a r y o f b o o k s on c h i l d d e v e l o p -ment and p a r e n t i n g N e w s l e t t e r s a b o u t a c t i v i t i e s g o i n g o n i n t h e d a y c a r e p r o g r a m P a r e n t - c h i l d r e n s o c i a l g a t h e r i n g s ( e . g . , p i c n i c s ) O p p o r t u n i t i e s t o meet o t h e r p a r e n t s o f y o u n g c h i l d r e n O p p o r t u n i t i e s f o r i n f o r m a l c o n v e r s a t i o n s w i t h t h e s t a f f O t h e r : ( P l e a s e e x p l a i n ) 3 2 . How d o e s y o u r c h i l d u s u a l l y r e s p o n d t o r e g u l a r s e p a r a t i o n s f r o m y o u ; t h a t I s , what i s h i s o r h e r u s u a l b e h a v i o r when y o u go t o w o r k , t o s c h o o l , o r when a b a b y s i t t e r comes , e t c ? 3 3 . Have y o u h a d t h e o c c a s i o n t o b e away f r o m y o u r c h i l d f o r more t h a n 24 h o u r s ? No X e s : I I o w o f t e n h a s t h i s h a p p e n e d ?  F o r what r e a s o n s d i d t h i s o c c u r ? ( F i l l i n a s many a s a p p l y ) OCCASION LENGTH OF C H I L D ' S WHO CARED SEPARATION AGE FOR CHILD H o l i d a y H o s p i t a l i z a t i o n _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ( Y o u r s ) H o s p i t a l i z a t i o n ( C h i l d ' s ) B u s i n e s s t r i p _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ O t h e r : ( f i l l i n ) 12_ 13 14~ 15~ 16_ 17_ 18_ 19_ 20_ 21 22 23 24-25_ 26 2 7 - 2 8 2 9 - 3 0 " 31 ~ 32 33-34_ 3 5 - 3 6 37 Z 38 . 3 9 - 4 0 41-42~ 43 44 4 5 - 4 6 _ 4 7 - 4 8 140 34 . What was y o u r c h i l d ' s r e s p o n s e t o t h e s e p a r a t i o n ? ( I f s e p a r a t i o n o f more t h a n 24 h o u r s h a s o c c u r r e d on more t h a n one o c c a s i o n , and I f y o u r c h i l d ' 8 r e s p o n s e d i f f e r e d e a c h t i m e , u s e t h e b a c k o f t h e page i f y o u n e e d more s p a c e t o d e s c r i b e h i s o r h e r r e a c t i o n s t o o t h e r s e p a r a t i o n s . ) a . How d i d he o r s h e r e s p o n d when y o u d e p a r t e d ? b . How d i d h e o r s h e r e s p o n d d u r i n g y o u r a b s e n c e ? c . How d i d he o r s h e r e s p o n d when y o u r e t u r n e d ? d . How d i d y o u f e e l a b o u t t h i s s e p a r a t i o n ? _ e . How d i d y o u f e e l a b o u t t h e r e u n i o n w i t h y o u r c h i l d ?_ 49 50 5 1 - 5 2 5 3 - 5 4 " 55 56-57_ 58-59_ 6 0 - 6 1 _ 62-63_ 6 4 - 6 5 3 5 . Do y o u t h i n k t h a t y o u r o u t s i d e a c t i v i t i e s a f f e c t y o u r c h i l d and y o u r r e l a t i o n s h i p w i t h h i m o r h e r ? ( C h e c k one a l t e r n a t i v e f o r e a c h t y p e o f o u t s i d e a c t i v i t y t h a t a p p l i e s t o y o u ) WORK: _A g r e a t d e a l ( p o s i t i v e ) - I f e e l t h a t i t i s good f o r my c h i l d t h a t I w o r k and t h a t my w o r k i n p e n h a n c e s o u r r e l a t i o n s h i p jSomewhat ( p o s i t i v e ) — I f e e l t h a t my work h a s a g e n e r a l l y p o s i t i v e e f f e c t on my c h i l d and on o u r r e l a t i o n s h i p V e r y l i t t l e — M y work n a s l i t t l e o r .no i n f l u e n c e o n my c h i l d and o u r r e l a t i o n s h i p Somewhat ( n e g a t i v e ) — I am sonewhat c o n c e r n e d t h a t my"work may h a v e a n e g a t i v e e f f e c t on my c h i l d and o u r r e l a t i o n s h i p A g r e a t d e a l ( n e g a t i v e ) — I am q u i t e c o n c e r n e d t h a t my work may h a v e a n e g a t i v e e f f e c t on my c h i l d and o u r r e l a t i o n s h i p SCHOOL: A g r e a t d e a l ( p o s i t i v e ) — I f e e l t h a t i t i s good f o r my c h i l d t h a t I go t o s c h o o l , and t h a t rty g o i n g t o s c h o o l e n h a n c e s o u r r e l a t i o n s h i p Somewhat ( p o s i t i v e ) — I f e e l t h a t my g o i n g t o s c h o o l h a s a g e n e r a l l y p o s i t i v e e f f e c t on my c h i l d and o u r r e l a t i o n s h i p V e r y l i t t l e — M y g o i n g t o s c h o o l h a s l i t t l e o r no i n f l u e n c e on my c h i l d and o u r r e l a t i o n s h i p Somewhat ( N e g a t i v e ) - - I am somewhat c o n c e r n e d t h a t my g o i n g t o s c h o o l may h a v e a n e g a t i v e e f f e c t o n my c h i l d and o u r r e l a t i o n s h i p A g r e a t d e a l ( n e g a t i v e ) — I am q u i t e c o n c e r n e d t h a t my g o i n g t o s c h o o l may h a v e a n e g a t i v e e f f e c t on my c h i l d and o u r r e l a t i o n s h i p HOBBY/ACTIVITY OF YOUR OWN: A g r e a t d e a l ( p o s i t i v e ) — I f e e l t h a t i t i s good f o r my c h i l d t h a t I h a v e my h o b b y o r o u t s i d e a c t i v i t y and t h a t my a c t i v i t i e s ! e n h a n c e o u r r e l a t i o n s h i p Somewhat ( p o s i t i v e ) — I f e e l t h a t my h o b b y o r o u t s i d e a c t i v i t i e s ' h a v e a g e n e r a l l y p o s i t i v e e f f e c t on my c h i l d and o u r r e l a t i o n s h i p V e r y l i t t l e — M y hobby o r o u t s i d e a c t i v i t y h a s l i t t l e o r no I n -f l u e n c e on my c h i l d and o u r r e l a t i o n s h i p CONTINUED Oil NEXT PAGE 66 67 168 141 3 6 . - 3 -HOBBY/ACTIVITY OF YOUR OWN: Somewhat ( n e g a t i v e ) — I am somewhat c o n c e r n e d t h a t my h o b b y o r o u t s i d e a c t i v i t y may h a v e a n e g a t i v e e f f e c t on my c h i l d and o u r r e l a t i o n s h i p A g r e a t d e a l ( n e g a t i v e ) — I am q u i t e c o n c e r n e d t h a t my h o b b y o r o u t s i d e a c t i v i t y may h a v e a n e g a t i v e e f f e c t on my c h i l d and o u r r e l a t i o n s h i p How o r i n what ways do y o u f e e l t h a t y o u r o u t s i d e a c t i v i t i e s a f f e c t ] y o u r c h i l d and y o u r r e l a t i o n s h i p w i t h h i m o r h e r , i n e i t h e r a p o s i t i v e o r a n e g a t i v e w a y , o r b o t h ? (Use o t h e r s i d e i f n e c e s s a r y ) ) WORK: SCHOOL: HOBBY/ACTIVITY OF YOUR OWN: 3 7 . Do y o u t h i n k y o u r o u t s i d e a c t i v i t i e s a f f e c t y o u and y o u r l i f e a t home? ( C h e c k one a l t e r n a t i v e f o r e a c h t y p e o f o u t s i d e a c t i v i t y t h a t a p p l i e s t o y o u . ) WORK: _A g r e a t d e a l ( p o s i t i v e ) — m y w o r k e n h a n c e s my l i f e a t home o r h e l p s me t o c o p e w i t h t h i n g s b e t t e r t h a n I m i g h t w i t h o u t i t JSomewhat ( p o s i t i v e ) — m y w o r k a d d s s o m e t h i n g p o s i t i v e t o my l i f e a t home _ V e r y l i t t l e — m y w o r k h a s l i t t l e o r no I n f l u e n c e on my l i f e a t home _Somewhat ( n e g a t i v e ) — m y w o r k i n t e r f e r e s a b i t w i t h my l i f e a t home _A g r e a t d e a l ( n e g a t i v e ) — m y w o r k i n t e r f e r e s o r c a u s e s p r o b l e m s w i t h my l i f e a t home SCHOOL: _A g r e a t d e a l ( p o s i t i v e ) — s c h o o l e n h a n c e s my l i f e a t home o r h e l p s me t o c o p e w i t h t h i n g s b e t t e r t h a n I m i g h t w i t h o u t them _Somewhat ( p o s i t i v e ) — s c h o o l a d d s s o m e t h i n g p o s i t i v e t o my l i f e a t home _Very l i t t l e — s c h o o l h a s l i t t l e o r n o i n f l u e n c e on my l i f e a t home _Somewhat N e g a t i v e ) — s c h o o l i n t e r f e r e s a b i t w i t h my l i f e a t home _A g r e a t d e a l ( n e g a t i v e ) — s c h o o l i n t e r f e r e s o r c a u s e s p r o b l e m s w i t h my l i f e a t home HOBBY/ACTIVITY OF YOUR OWN: A g r e a t d e a l ( p o s i t i v e ) — m y hobby o r o u t s i d e a c t i v i t y e n h a n c e s my l i f e a t home o r h e l p s me t o c o p e w i t h t h i n g s b e t t e r t h a n I m i g h t w i t h o u t i t Somewhat ( p o s i t i v e ) — m y hobby o r o u t s i d e a c t i v i t y a d d s some-t h i n g p o s i t i v e t o my l i f e a t home V e r y l i t t l e — m y h o b b y o r o u t s i d e a c t i v i t y h a s l i t t l e o r no i n f l u e n c e on my l i f e a t home 69-70_ 71-72_ 7 3 - 7 4 75 76 77 CONTINUED ON NEXT PAGE 142 - 9 -3C. 4 2 . HOBBY/ACTIVITY OF YOUR OWN: Somewhat ( n e g a t i v e ) — m y h o b b y o r o u t s i d e a c t i v i t y i n t e r f e r e s a b i t w i t h my l i f e a t home A g r e a t d e a l ( n e g a t i v e ) — m y h o b b y o r o u t s i d e a c t i v i t y i n t e r -f e r e s o r c a u s e s p r o b l e m s w i t h ray l i f e a t home How o r i n what ways d o y o u r o u t s i d e a c t i v i t i e s a f f e c t y o u and y o u r l i f e a t home, i n e i t h e r a p o s i t i v e o r a n e g a t i v e way, o r b o t h ? ( U s e o t h e r s i d e i f n e c e s s a r y ) WORK: SCHOOL: HOBBY/ACTIVITY OF YOUR OWN: 7 8 - 8 0 b l a n k 1-3 4~ 5-6 8-9 10-11_ 1 2 - 1 3 3 9 . Do y o u f e e l t h a t b e i n g t h e p a r e n t o f a t o d d l e r i s d i f f e r e n t f r o m b e i n g t h e p a r e n t o f a n i n f a n t ? &4 _No J f e s : How o r i n what ways?_ 0.5-16 4 0 . To what e x t e n t d o y o u s e e y o u r c h i l d a s b e i n g s i m i l a r o r d i s s i m i l a r t o y o u r s e l f ? V e r y s i m i l a r Somewhat s i m i l a r S i m i l a r I n some w a y s , d i f f e r e n t i n o t h e r s Somewhat d i s s i m i l a r V e r y d i s s i m i l a r 4 1 . I n what ways do y o u f e e l t h a t y o u r c h i l d i s e i t h e r s i m i l a r o r d i s s i m i l a r , o r b o t h , t o y o u r s e l f ? 117 How c l o s e w o u l d y o u s a y y o u f e e l t o y o u r c h i l d now? v e r y c l o s e f a i r l y c l o s e n i x e d f e e l i n g s somewhat d i s t a n t v e r y d i s t a n t ! 4 3 . How c o n f i d e n t d o y o u f e e l a b o u t t a k i n g c a r e o f y o u r c h i l d t h e s e d a y s ? v e r y c o n f i d e n t somewhat c o n f i d e n t m i x e d f e e l i n g s somewhat u n s u r e * v e r y u n s u r e ! 0.8-19 to 21 01 143 4 4 . 10 We a r e i n t e r e s t e d i n t h e q u a l i t i e s o r c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s t h a t p a r e n t s w o u l d l i k e t h e i r c h i l d r e n t o h a v e when t h e y grow u p . Can y o u d e -s c r i b e t h e k i n d o f p e r s o n y o u w o u l d l i k e y o u r c h i l d t o become? 4 5 . O v e r a l l , how do y o u e n j o y t h i s s t a g e o f y o u r c h i l d ' s l i f e a s com-p a r e d t o when h e o r s h e was a n i n f a n t ? a g r e a t d e a l more a l i t t l e more a b o u t t h e same a l i t t l e l e s s a g r e a t d e a l l e s s 4 6 . 4 7 . What a r e t h e a s p e c t s o f t h i s s t a g e o f y o u r c h i l d ' s l i f e t h a t y o u e n j o y o r d i s l i k e a s compared t o when h e o r s h e was an i n f a n t ? T o what e x t e n t do y o u r e l y u p o n t h e f o l l o w i n g s o u r c e s i f y o u h a v e c o n c e r n s a b o u t y o u r c h i l d o r f e e l t h e n e e d t o t a l k a b o u t t h i n g s r e l a t e d t o c h i l d r e a r i n g ? P l e a s e c i r c l e one a l t e r n a t i v e f o r e a c h i t e m . a g r e a t d e a l o f t e n s o m e t i m e s r a r e l y n e v e r 1 1 1 1 1 _ h u s b a n d / p a r t n e r j own p a r e n t s i n - l a w s f r i e n d s r e l a t i v e s p h y s i c i a n n u r s e / h e a l t h c a r e w o r k e r c o u n s e l l o r c h i l d ' s t e a c h e r / b a b y s i t t e r o t h e r : ( f i l l i n ) 4 8 . T o what e x t e n t do y o u r e l y upon t h e s e s o u r c e s i f y o u h a v e c o n c e r n s a b o u t o t h e r a s p e c t s o f y o u r l i f e ( y o u r m a r r i a g e , y o u r work o r o u t -s i d e a c t i v i t i e s , y o u r p e r s o n a l p r o b l e m s , e t c . ) ? P l e a s e c i r c l e one a l t e r n a t i v e f o r e a c h i t e m . h u s b a n d / p a r t n e r own p a r e n t s i n - l a w s f r i e n d s r e l a t i v e s p h y s i c i a n n u r s e / h e a l t h c a r e w o r k e r c o u n s e l l o r O t h e r : ( f i l l i n ) a g r e a t d e a l o f t e n s o m e t i m e s r a r e l y n e v e r - T T T T T 1 I i 4 T 1 T 1 1 ; 1 - - T 1 T 1 T • 1 £ 1 1 1 22-26 27 28-29 30 31~ 32~ 3 3 " 34~ 35 36 37~ 38~ 38~ 39~ 40 b l a n k 41 42" 43 4 4 " 45~ 46~ 47_ 48 49~ f 144 - 11 -4 9 . A r e t h e r e any b o o k s o r o t h e r s o u r c e s ( m a g a z i n e a r t i c l e s , n e i g h b o r -h o o d d r o n A n c e n t e r s , s p e c i f i c p r o f e s s i o n a l s , e t c . ) t h a t Y Q U feel h a v e c o n t r i b u t e d t o y o u r u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f c h i l d r e n and c h i l d r e a r i r i j ti 50-51 5 0 . F o r many p a r e n t s , l i f e w i t h a t o d d l e r i s a s e r i e s o f ups and downs — t h e r e a r e good d a y s and t h e r e a r e b a d d a y s . How w o u l d y o u s a y y o u a r e f e e l i n g a b o u t y o u r a b i l i t y t o c o p e w i t h l i f e a t home t h e s e d a y s ? ( C h e c k one) 1 u s u a l l y f e e l t h a t I c a n h a n d l e w h a t e v e r may come up 1 f e e l I c a n h a n d l e t h i n g s most o f t h e t i m e I t ' s m i x e d — s o m e d a y s t h i n g s go w e l l , b u t some d a y s I d o n ' t f e e l l i k e I ' m c o p i n g v e r y w e l l w i t h t h i n g s _ 1 o f t e n f e e l t h a t I am n o t h a n d l i n g ; t h i n g s as w e l l a s I m i g h t M o s t o f t h e t i m e I f e e l v e r y u n s u r e o f t h e way I am h a n d l i n r t h i n g s ^ 5 1 . E v e r y t h i n g c o n s i d e r e d , how s a t i s f i e d w o u l d y o u s a y y o u a r e w i t h y o u r r e l a t i o n s h i p w i t h y o u r t o d d l e r ? I I — j j , 52 53 V ? r L , s a t i s f i e d m i x e d u n s a t i s f i e d v e r y 8 a t l 8 f l e d f e e l i n g s u n s a t i s f i e d 5 2 . How s a t i s f i e d w o u l d y o u s a y y o u h a v e b e e n w i t h y o u r r e l a t i o n s h i p w i t h y o u r h u s b a n d o r p a r t n e r o v e r t h e p a s t two y e a r s ? • i — 1— - i j t 54 v e r y s a t i s f i e d m i x e d u n s a t i s f i e d v e r y 8 a t l 8 f i e d f e e l i n g s u n s a t i s f i e d 5 3 . How s a t i s f i e d w o u l d y o u s a y y o u a r e w i t h y o u r r e l a t i o n s h i n w i t h y o u r h u s b a n d o r p a r t n e r r i g h t now? •3E — - j — j j 55 v e r y s a t i s f i e d m i x e d u n s a t i s f i e d v e r y 8 a t i 8 f i e d f e e l i n g s u n s a t i s f i e d 5 4 . How o r i n what ways d o y o u f e e l e i t h e r s a t i s f i e d o r u n s a t i s f i e d ( o r b o t h ) w i t h y o u r r e l a t i o n s h i p w i t h y o u r h u s b a n d o r p a r t n e r now? 56-57 >8 5 5 . T o what e x t e n t w o u l d y o u s a y t h a t h a v i n g a c h i l d h a s a f f e c t e d y o u r r e l a t i o n s h i p w i t h y o u r h u s b a n d o r p a r t n e r ? A g r e a t d e a l — i n a p o s i t i v e way S o m e w h a t — I n a p o s i t i v e way V e r y l i t t l e o r n o t a t a l l • S o m e w h a t — i n a n e g a t i v e way A g r e a t d e a l — i n a n e g a t i v e way 145 - 12 -5 6 . How o r i n what ways d o y o u f e e l t h a t h a v i n g a c h i l d h a s a f f e c t e d y o u r r e l a t i o n s h i p w i t h y o u r h u s b a n d o r p a r t n e r — i n a p o s i t i v e o r a n e g a t i v e way , o r b o t h ? 5 7 . T o what e x t e n t d o y o u now h a v e t h e f o l l o w i n g c o n c e r n s ? STRONGLY SLIGHTLY SLIGHTLY STRONGLY AGREE AGREE DISAGREE DISAGREE I h a v e t o o many h o u s e h o l d r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s I am u n s u r e a b o u t how t o h a n d l e o r c a r e f o r a t o d d l e r H a v i n g a c h i l d i n t e r f e r e s w i t h my s o c i a l l i f e o r o u t s i d e a c t i v i t i e s H a v i n g a c h i l d i n t e r f e r e s w i t h my s e x l i f e H a v i n g a c h i l d i n t e r f e r e s w i t h my c a r e e r o r w o r k r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s I am c o n c e r n e d a b o u t f i n a n c i a l m a t t e r s I ' m n o t g e t t i n g enough t i m e t o m y s e l f I f e e l " t r a p p e d " - I d o n ' t h a v e enough f r e e d o m I f e e l p r e s s u r e f o r g r e a t e r commitment t o my f a m i l y I w o r r y a b o u t b e i n g a good m o t h e r I w o r r y a b o u t t h e f u t u r e I d o n ' t h a v e enough t i m e t o s p e n d w i t h my c h i l d I d o n ' t h a v e enough t i m e t o s p e n d w i t h my h u s b a n d / p a r t n e r O t h e r ( f i l l I n ) 5 9 - 6 0 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68_ 69 70 71 72 73 74 7 5 - 8 0 b l a n k 1 5 8 . - 1 3 -I n most f a m i l i e s , p a r e n t s make r u l e s o r s e t g u i d e l i n e s f o r t h e i r c h i l d r e n and somet imes h a v e t o d i s c i p l i n e t h e i r c h i l d r e n i f t h e y mis-b e h a v e . W h i c h o f t h e f o l l o w i n g a r e d i s c i p l i n e i s s u e s f o r y o u and y o u r t o d d l e r ? _ b e d t i m e _ n a p t i m e _ f o o d p r e f e r e n c e s _ e a t i n g what h a s b e e n p r e p a r e d _ t a b l e manners _ c l o t h i n g (what t o w e a r ) _ s h a r i n g t o y s , e t c . _ s o c i a l g a t h e r i n g s _ o t h e r : o t h e r : _ w a k i n g up d u r i n g n i g h t _ p l a y i n g w i t h o t h e r c h i l d r e n _ t o i l e t t r a i n i n g _ t e m p e r t a n t r u m s _ p l a y i n g w i t h f o r b i d d e n o b j e c t s _ m a s t u r b a t i o n _ p r o b l e m s w i t h i n f a n t s i b l i n g J b e h a v i o r w h i l e s h o p p i n g _ o t h e r : o t h e r : 5 9 . To what e x t e n t do y o u and y o u r h u s b a n d / p a r t n e r a g r e e a b o u t when ( f o r what r e a s o n s ) and how t o d i s c i p l i n e y o u r t o d d l e r / a l l o f t h e t i m e most o f t h e t i m e some o f t h e t i m e n o t v e r y o f t e n i _ r a r e l y 6 0 . When y o u d i s a g r e e , what do y o u d i s a g r e e a b o u t ? 6 1 . I s y o u r t o d d l e r t o i l e t - t r a i n e d now? n o t a t a l l d a y t i m e o n l y p a r t i a l l y ( b l a d d e r o r b o w e l o n l y c o m p l e t e l y 6 2 . I f y o u r t o d d l e r , i s t r a i n e d , how l o n g d i d i t t a k e t o a c c o m p l i s h t h i s ? D a y t i m e : P a r t i a l l y : C o m p l e t e l y : 6 3 . I f y o u r t o d d l e r i s n o t t r a i n e d , when do y o u e x p e c t t h a t t h i s w i l l b e a c c o m p l i s h e d ? D a y t i m e : P a r t i a l l y : C o m p l e t e l y : _ 1-3 4 5-6 7 01 10_ 11 12 13~ 14 1 5 " 16 17~ 18 19~ 20 21~ 22 23" 24 25" 26 27~ 28 2 9 - 3 0 31 32-33_ 3 4 - 3 5 _ 3 6 - 3 7 38-39_ 4 0 - 4 1 _ 4 2 - 4 3 147 - 1 4 -64. How much t i m e w o u l d y o u s a y y o u s p e n d c a r i n g f o r y o u r c h i l d e a c h day? h o u r s / d a y 6 5 . How do y o u and y o u r h u s b a n d / p a r t n e r ' d i v i d e t h e t a s k s o f c h i l d r e a r i n g ? O v e r a l l , do y o u d o : more t h a n 75% a b o u t 75% _about 50% " a b o u t 25% " l e s s t h a n 25% 6 6 . When y o u and y o u r h u s b a n d / p a r t n e r a r e b o t h home, how do y o u d i v i d e c h i l d r e a r i n g t a s k s ? Do y o u d o : more t h a n 75% _about 75% " a b o u t 50% " a b o u t 25% " l e s s t h a n 25% 6 7 . Some m o t h e r s f e e l t h a t t h e m o t h e r ' s r o l e i n c h i l d r e a r i n g i s v e r y s i m i l a r t o t h e f a t h e r ' s , t h a t i s , t h a t t h e y h a v e s i m i l a r c o n c e r n s , p e r f o r m s i m i l a r t a s k s , p a r t i c i p a t e i n s i m i l a r a c t i v i t i e s w i t h t h e c h i l d ; o t h e r m o t h e r s f e e l t h a t t h e m o t h e r ' s r o l e and f a t h e r ' s r o l e a r e more u n i q u e , t h a t t h e y h a v e d i f f e r e n t c o n c e r n s , do d i f f e r e n t t a s k s , e t c . How w o u l d y o u s a y y o u f e e l a b o u t t h e s i m i l a r i t y o f m o t h e r s ' and f a t h e r s ' r o l e s ? v e r y s i m i l a r somewhat s i m i l a r somewhat d i f f e r e n t v e r y d i f f e r e n t ! 68 . I n what ways do y o u s e e m o t h e r s ' and f a t h e r s ' r o l e s i n c h i l d r e a r i n g a s e i t h e r s i m i l a r o r d i f f e r e n t , o r b o t h ? 6 9 . Some c h i l d r e n seem v e r y a t t a c h e d t o t h e i r p a r e n t s , w h i l e o t h e r s seem more i n d e p e n d e n t . How w o u l d y o u d e s c r i b e y o u r t o d d l e r ? / t r o n g l y a t t a c h e d somewhat a t t a c h e d somewhat i n d e p e n d e n t h i g n l y i n d e p e n d e n t 7 0 . How w o u l d y o u d e s c r i b e y o u r c u r r e n t r e l a t i o n s h i p w i t h y o u r m o t h e r ? v e r y good good f a i r i— p o o r 1 — v e r y p o o r 7 1 . How w o u l d y o u d e s c r i b e y o u r r e l a t i o n s h i p w i t h y o u r m o t h e r when y o u were a c h i l d ? i v e r y good good f a i r p o o r v e r y p o o r 4 4 - 4 5 46 47 48 4 9 - 5 0 51 52 53 148 -15-72. How w o u l d y o u d e s c r i b e y o u r c u r r e n t r e l a t i o n s h i p w i t h y o u r f a t h e r ? i * — i : v e r y good good f a i r p o o r 1 — v e r y p o o r 73 • How w o u l d y o u d e s c r i b e y o u r r e l a t i o n s h i p w i t h y o u r f a t h e r when y o u were a c h i l d ? ' v e r y good good f a i r p o o r v e r y p o o r 54 55 B 6 - 8 0 b l a n k APPENDIX D PARENTING INVENTORY FOR FATHERS OF TODDLERS NAME P l e a s e i n d i c a t e w h e t h e r you a g r e e o r d i s a g r e e w i t h the f o l l o w i n g s t a t e m e n t s by c i r c l i n g t h e p o i n t t h a t b e s t d e s c r i b e s y o u r r e a c t i o n t o e a c h s t a t e m e n t . 1. 2. 3 . 6. 8 . 9 . 1 0 . 1 1 . 1 2 . 1 3 . 1 4 . I c a n u n d e r s t a n d what my c h i l d ' s n e e d s a r e . I am c o n c e r n e d a b o u t how I d i s c i p l i n e my c h i l d . I make the r i g h t d e c i s i o n s a b o u t c h i l d r e a r i n g and t h i n g s r e l a t e d t o my c h i l d . I t h i n k o t h e r p a r e n t s do a b e t t e r j o b o f b r i n g i n g up t h e i r c h i l d r e n t h a n I do w i t h m i n e . I f e e l c o n f i d e n t t h a t I c a n f u l f i l l my c h i l d ' s n e e d s . I am c o n t e n t w i t h how warm and a f f e c t i o n a t e I am w i t h my c h i l d . I l o s e c o n f i d e n c e when I am f a c e d w i t h a c h i l d -r e a r i n g s i t u a t i o n I am n o t s u r e how t o h a n d l e . When my c h i l d s t a r t s a c t i n g u p , I am a b l e t o k e e p f r o m b l a m i n g m y s e l f f o r my c h i l d ' s b e h a v i o r . I f e e l c o n f i d e n t i n my a b i l i t y t o be a p a r e n t . I w o r r y a b o u t how I w i l l h a n d l e t h i n g s t h a t m i g h t come up w i t h my c h i l d i n t h e f u t u r e . I t h i n k I am c o p i n g w e l l w i t h t h e demands o f r a i s i n g a t o d d l e r . I am n o t as p a t i e n t w i t h my c h i l d a s I o u g h t t o b e . I f e e l I am d o i n g t. good j o b o f b r i n g i n g up my c h i l d / c h i l d r e n . I t b o t h e r s me when ray o p i n i o n s a b o u t c h i l d r e a r i n g a r e d i f f e r e n t f r o m t h o s e o f o t h e r p a r e n t s I know. 150 1 5 . I b e l i e v e I d i d a good j o b as a p a r e n t when my c h i l d was an i n f a n t . 1 6 . I am n o t s a t i s f i e d w i t h t h e g o a l s I have f o r r a i s i n g my c h i l d . x x x x x x j 23 1 7 . I have b e e n u n a b l e t o l i v e up t o my own s t a n d a r d s o f p a r e n t h o o d . x x x x x x j 24 I 1 8 . I f e e l c o n f i d e n t t h a t I w i l l be a b l e t o p r o v i d e what my c h i l d n e e d s as he o r she grows u p . x x x x x x ! 25 1 9 . I am n o t as c o n f i d e n t and r e l a x e d a b o u t h a n d l i n g my c h i l d as I s h o u l d b e . x x x x x x | 26 2 0 . When I c a n ' t g e t my c h i l d t o do what I w a n t , I l o s e c o n f i d e n c e i n my a b i l i t y t o be a good p a r e n t , x x x x x x I 27 2 1 . I f e e l I come c l o s e t o my i d e a o f t h e i d e a l p a r e n t . x x x x x x j 28 2 2 . As a p a r e n t I w o u l d s a y t h a t I am: ( c i r c l e o n e ) e x c e l l e n t v e r y good good f a i r p o o r v e r y p o o r I 29 2 3 . Compared t o o t h e r p a r e n t s , I w o u l d s a y t h a t , as a p a r e n t , I am: ( c i r c l e o n e ) a g r e a t d e a l m o d e r a t e l y s l i g h t l y s l i g h t l y m o d e r a t e l y a g r e a t b e t t e r b e t t e r b e t t e r worse worse d e a l worse I 30 151 APPENDIX E SELF-REPORT INVENTORY FOR MOTHER OF TODDLERS NAME AGE TODAY'S DATE 1-3 4 5-6 7 month day y e a r We w o u l d l i k e t o g e t a p i c t u r e o f how y o u s e e y o u r s e l f . I n f i l l i n g I n 8 - 9 t h i s s c a l e , p l e a s e c i r c l e one number a t t h e r i g h t o f e a c h i t e m t o I n d i c a t e l O - l l " how a c c u r a t e o r i n a c c u r a t e t h a t s t a t e m e n t w o u l d b e a s a d e s c r i p t i o n of y o u . 1 2 - 1 3 " Work r a p i d l y ; f i r s t i m p r e s s i o n s a r e f i n e . 1 4 - 1 5 -1 . I am q u i c k t o l e a r n new t h i n g s . 2 . I h a v e b e e n endowed w i t h a s t r o n g and h e a l t h y b o d y . 3 . My e m o t i o n s r a r e l y g e t o u t o f h a n d . 4 . I h a v e a n I n f e r i o r i t y c o m p l e x . 5 . I am w e l l c o o r d i n a t e d p h y s i c a l l y . 6. I c a n h a n d l e a l m o s t any I m p o r t a n t p r o b l e m I am f a c e d w i t h . 7 . I h a v e more p h y s i c a l e n d u r a n c e t h a n m o s t . 8 . I am a g r e a t b i g n o b o d y . 9 . I am n o t e a s i l y d o m i n a t e d b y o t h e r s . 1 0 . I r e g a r d m y s e l f a s a h i g h l y e t h i c a l p e r s o n . 1 1 . I do n o t l i k e t h e way I l o o k . 1 2 . I s o m e t i m e s d o u b t t h a t a n y o n e who r e a l l y m a t t e r e d t o me c o u l d l o v e a e t h e way I am. 1 3 . I am a c a p a b l e p e r s o n . 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 A 4 4 4 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 . . . / p l e a s e t u r n o v e 16 17 18 19 20 21 . 22 23 . 24 . 25 . 26 _ 27 . 28 1 4 . I am b o t h e r e d b y my l a c k o f s e l f -c o n t r o l . . 1 5 . Mo o n e l o v e s o r c a r e s a b o u t me. 1 6 . I g e t p h y s i c a l l y r u n down e a s i l y . 1 7 . A l l i n a l l , I ' m q u i t e s a t i s f i e d w i t h who I am. 1 8 . I h a v e ( o r am c o n f i d e n t t h a t someday I w i l l h a v e ) a c l o s e , warm r e l a t i o n -s h i p w i t h someone who u n d e r s t a n d s me. 1 9 . I l i k e t h e way I l o o k . 2 0 . I f e e l a s i f n o t h i n g I d o i s v e r y g o o d . 2 1 . I o f t e n w o r r y a b o u t my p h y s i c a l h e a l t h . 2 2 . I t e n d t o assume t h a t p e o p l e w i l l n o t l i k e me. 2 3 . I am n o t a w e l l - c o o r d i n a t e d p e r s o n . 2 4 . I h a v e l i t t l e r e s p e c t f o r m y s e l f . 2 5 . I t e n d t o b e g o o d a t p h y s i c a l a c t i v i -t i e s , s u c h a s d a n c i n g o r s p o r t s . 2 6 . I f r e q u e n t l y d o t h i n g s t h a t I l a t e r f e e l g u i l t y a b o u t . 2 7 . I g i v e i n t o o t h e r s t o o e a s i l y . 2 8 . I n g e n e r a l , I d o n ' t h a v e t o w o r r y a b o u t my h e a l t h . 2 9 . My v a l u e s n e e d s t r a i g h t e n i n g o u t . 3 0 . I do n o t l e t p e o p l e p u s h me a r o u n d . 3 1 . I h a v e a l o w o p i n i o n o f m y s e l f . 3 2 . When I p u t my mind t o s o m e t h i n g , I a l m o s t a l w a y s s u c c e e d . 153 3 3 . I am a n I n d e p e n d e n t p e r s o n . 3 4 . T h e r e a r e v e r y few t h i n g s t h a t I c a n h o n e s t l y s a y I am g o o d a t . 3 5 . I ' m n o t good a t i n f l u e n c i n g p e o p l e . 3 6 . I l a c k f i r m g u i d i n g p r i n c i p l e s . 3 7 . I f e e l t h a t I am a p h y s i c a l l y a t t r a c -t i v e p e r s o n . 3 8 . I am v e r y s e n s i t i v e t o d i s a p p r o v a l , 3 9 . S e l f - c o n t r o l i s no p r o b l e m f o r me. 4 0 . I n g e n e r a l , I h a v e a h i g h o p i n i o n o f m y s e l f . 4 1 . I am n o t a n i c e p e r s o n . 4 2 . I o f t e n f e e l w o r n o u t f o r no a p p a r e n t r e a s o n . , 4 3 . I am n o t a c a p a b l e p e r s o n . 4 4 . I h a v e a t l e a s t a s much s e l f - c o n t r o l a s most p e o p l e . 4 5 . I am n o t v e r y good a t g e t t i n g p e o p l e t o do a s I w i s h . 4 6 . M o s t p e o p l e l i k e me. 4 7 . I l e t t o o many p e o p l e t a k e a d v a n t a g e o f me. 4 8 . I l i k e m y s e l f . 4 9 . My i n a b i l i t y t o r e s i s t t e m p t a t i o n i s a B o u r c e o f c o n c e r n f o r me. 5 0 . I s o m e t i m e s w o r r y a b o u t l o s i n g c o n t r o l o f m y s e l f . 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 TT 5 | 4 5 48 4 5 49 4 5 50 4 5 51 4 5 52 4 5 53 4 5 54 4 5 55 4 5 56 4 5 57 4 5 58 4 5 59 4 5 60 4 5 61 5 62 4 5 63 4 5 64 4 5 «5 . / p l e a s e t u r n o v e r 5 1 . I h a v e a f i r m s e n s e o f what i s r i g h t and w r o n g , and a c t a c c o r d i n g l y . 1 5 2 . I f e e l t h a t I am a p e r s o n o f w o r t h . 1 5 3 . I ' m a n e a s y p e r s o n t o l i k e . 1 5 4 . I t e n d t o be awkward i n most p h y s i c a l a c t i v i t i e s . 1 5 5 . I am l a c k i n g i n w i l l p o w e r . 1 5 6 . I ' m n o t a v e r y l i k e a b l e p e r s o n . 1 5 7 . I o f t e n f e e l I n c o m p e t e n t o r i n a d e q u a t e . 1 5 8 . I g e n e r a l l y h a v e a s e n s e o f p h y s i c a l w e l l - b e i n g . 1 5 9 . O t h e r s o f t e n f o l l o w my l e a d . 1 T h e r e a r e p e o p l e who l o v e me v e r y much . 1 I am o f t e n a f r a i d t o s a y what I t h i n k . 1 I t h i n k I am a t l e a s t a s g o o d l o o k i n g a s most p e o p l e . 1 S e l f d i s c i p l i n e i s a p r o b l e m f o r me. 1 6 4 . I f e e l good a b o u t m y s e l f , who I am and what I ' m l i k e . 1 6 5 . I r e g a r d m y s e l f a s b a s i c a l l y a good and d e c e n t p e r s o n . 1 6 0 . 6 1 . 6 2 . 6 3 . 6 6 . C o n t r o l l i n g my e m o t i o n s i s n o t a p r o b l e m f o r me. _ 6 7 . I become 111 q u i t e e a s i l y . 1 155 / / V ^  / <Y 1 I 2 I 3 I 4 | 5 I 6 8 . I somet imes w i s h I w e r e someone e l s e . 1 2 3 4 5 10 6 9 . I do n o t h a v e a c l e a r s e n s e o f v a l u e s . 1 2 3 4 5 11 7 0 . I h a v e a l o t o f w i l l p o w e r . 1 2 3 4 5 12 7 1 . I am p l e a s e d w i t h my s e n s e o f v a l u e s . 1 2 3 4 5 13 7 2 . I f I were r e a l l y t o b e m y s e l f , p e o p l e w o u l d n ' t t h i n k w e l l o f me. 1 2 3 4 5 14 7 3 . I o f t e n f e e l u n a t t r a c t i v e . 1 2 3 4 5 15 74. I s u c c e e d a t most t i l i n g s I a t t e m p t . 1 2 3 4 5 16 7 5 . P e o p l e l i k e b e i n g w i t h me. 1 2 3 4 5 17 7 6 . I am ashamed o f my p h y s i c a l a p p e a r -a n c e . 1 2 3 4 5 18 7 7 . I t e n d t o h a v e a s t r o n g i n f l u e n c e on p e o p l e . 1 2 3 4 5 19 7 8 . I h a v e a f i r m s e t o f v a l u e s . 1 2 3 4 5 20 \ APPENDIX F TODDLER TEMPERAMENT SCALE - FOR MOTHERS 1-4 Name 5_6 C h i l d ' 8 Name 7 C h i l d ' s Age months C h i l d ' s S e x : ( c i r c l e ) M F 8_9 _ T o d a y ' 8 D a t e _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 1 0 - 1 _ day month y e a r 12-13_ 1 4 - 1 5 We w o u l d l i k e t o g e t a p i c t u r e o f y o u r c h i l d ' s t e m p e r a m e n t — w h a t he o r s h e i s g e n e r a l l y l i k e , how he o r she r e s p o n d s t o v a r i o u s s i t u a t i o n s , and what y o u r i m p r e s s i o n s o f y o u r c h i l d a r e . The a t t a c h e d s c a l e h a s two p a r t s . T h e f i r s t c o n s i s t s o f 97 q u e s t i o n s a b o u t y o u r c h i l d ' 8 b e h a v i o r o r t y p i c a l r e s p o n s e i n a number o f s p e c i f i c s i t u a -t i o n s , t h e s e c o n d p a r t i s a s e t o f 12 more g e n e r a l q u e s t i o n s a b o u t y o u r i m p r e s s i o n s o f y o u r c h i l d ' s t e m p e r * m s n t . I n o r d e r f o r u s t o g e t t h e most a c c u r a t e p i c t u r e p o s s i b l e , p l e a s e o b s e r v e t h e f o l l o w i n g g u i d e l i n e s when f i l l i n g o u t b o t h p a r t s o f t h e s c a l e : 1 . B a s e y o u r r a t i n g , o n t h e c h i l d ' s r e c e n t a n d c u r r e n t b e h a v i o r ( t h e l a s t f o u r t o s i x w e e k s ) . C o n s i d e r o n l y y o u r own i m p r e s s i o n s and o b s e r v a t i o n s o f y o u r c h i l d . R a t e e a c h q u e s t i o n i n d e p e n d e n t l y . Do n o t p u r p o s e l y a t t e m p t t o p r e s e n t a c o n s i s t e n t p i c t u r e o f y o u r c h i l d . 4 . U s e e x t r e m e r a t i n g s ( t h e e n d s o f t h e s c a l e ) w h e r e a p p r o p r i a t e . A v o i d r a t i n g o n l y n e a r t h e m i d d l e o f t h e s c a l e . 5 . R a t e e a c h i t e m q u i c k l y . I f y o u c a n n o t d e c i d e q u i c k l y how t o a n s w e r a n i t e m , s k i p i t and come b a c k t o i t l a t e r . 6 . R a t e e v e r y I t e m . C i r c l e t h e number o f a n y i t e m t h a t y o u a r e u n -a b l e t o a n s w e r due t o l a c k o f i n f o r m a t i o n , o r a n y i t e m t h a t d o e s n o t a p p l y t o y o u r c h i l d . 2. 3 . T o d d l e r Temperament S c a l e C o p y r i g h t Q 1978 b y W i l l i a m F u l l a r d , Ph D S e a n C M c D e v i t t , P h . D . , and W i l l i a m ^ . C a r e y , M . D . T e m p l e U n . v e r s l t ; a n d U n i v e r s i t y o f P e n n s y l v a n i a M e d i c a l S c h o o l . u n i v e r s i t y a n d USING THE SCALE SHOWN BELOW, PLEASE MARK AND " X " IN THE SPACE THAT T E L L S HOW OFTEN THE C H I L D ' S RECENT AND CURRENT BEHAVIOR HAS BEEN L I K E THE BEHAVIOR DESCRIBED BY EACH I T E M . A l m o s t R a r e l y U s u a l l y U s u a l l y F r e q u e n t l y A l m o s t a l w a y s n e v e r d o e s n o t d o e s 1 2 3 4 6 1 . The c h i l d g e t s s l e e p y a t a b o u t t h e same t i m e e a c h e v e n i n g ( w i t h i n 1/2 h o u r ) . a l m o s t n e v e r 1 2 3 4 5 : a l m o s t 6 a l w a y s Ifi 2 . The c h i l d f i d g e t s d u r i n g q u i e t a c t i v i t i e s a l m o s t ( s t o r y t e l l i n g , l o o k i n g a t p i c t u r e s ) . n e v e r ' T~ ~ 2 ~ ~ ~ 5 " : a l m o s t 6 a l w a y s 17 3 . T h e c h i l d t a k e s f e e d i n g s q j i e t l y w i t h m i l d e x p r e s s i o n o f l i k e s and d i s l i k e s . a l m o s t n e v e r T~ ~2~ ~ ~T~ ; a l m o s t 6 a l w a y s I B 4 . The c h i l d i s p l e a s a n t ( s m i l e s , l a u g h s ) when f i r s t a r r i v i n g i n u n f a m i l i a r p l a c e s . a l m o s t n e v e r T~ T~ ~T ~T~ : a l m o s t 6 a l w a y s 1 9 5 . A c h i l d ' s i n i t i a l r e a c t i o n t o s e e i n g t h e d o c t o r i s a c c e p t a n c e . a l m o s t n e v e r l 2 3 4 5 a l m o s t 6 a l w a y s 2 0 6 . T h e c h i l d p a y s a t t e n t i o n t o a game w i t h t h e p a r e n t f o r o n l y a m i n u t e o r s o . a l m o s t n e v e r T~ ~2~ ~ 3 ~ T~ T~ a l m o s t 6 a l w a y s 2 1 7. T h e c h i l d ' s b o w e l movements come a t d i f -f e r e n t t i m e s f r o m d a y t o d a y ( o v e r o n e h o u r d i f f e r e n c e ) . a l m o s t n e v e r l 2 3 4 5 a l m o s t 6 a l w a y s 22 8 . T h e c h i l d i s f u s s y o n w a k i n g up ( f r o w n s , c o m p l a i n s , c r i e s ) . a l m o s t n e v e r • l 2 3 4 5 a l m o s t 6 a l w a y s 2 3 9 . T h e c h i l d ' s i n i t i a l r e a c t i o n t o a new b a b y s i t t e r i s r e j e c t i o n ( c r y i n g , c l i n g i n g t o m o t h e r , e t c . ) a l m o s t n e v e r I 2 3 4 5 a l m o s t 6 a l w a y s 24 1 0 . T h e c h i l d r e a c t s t o a d i s l i k e d f o o d e v e n i f i t i s m i x e d w i t h a p r e f e r r e d o n e . a l m o s t n e v e r I 2 3 4 5 a l m o s t 6 a l w a y s 2 5 1 1 . The c h i l d a c c e p t s d e l a y s ( f o r s e v e r a l m i n u t e s ) f o r d e s i r e d o b j e c t s o r a c t i v i t i e s ( s n a c k s , t r e a t s , g i f t s ) . a l m o s t n e v e r I 2 3 4 5 a l m o s t 6 a l w a y s 2 6 1 2 . T h e c h i l d moves l i t t l e ( s t a y s s t i l l ) when b e i n g d r e s s e d , a l m o s t n e v e r l 2 3 4 5 a l m o s t 6 a l w a y s 27 1 3 . T h e c h i l d c o n t i n u e s a n a c t i v i t y I n s p i t e o f n o i s e s I n t h e same r o o m . a l m o s t n e v e r l 2 3 4 5 a l m o s t 6 a l w a y s 28 1 4 . T h e c h i l d shows s t r o n g r e a c t i o n s ( c r i e s , s tamps f e e t ) t o f a i l u r e . a l m o s t n e v e r l 2 3 4 5 a l m o s t 6 a l w a y s 2 9 1 5 . T h e c h i l d p l a y s c o n t i n u o u s l y f o r more a l m o s t t h a n 1 0 m i n u t e s a t a t i m e w i t h a f a v o r i t e t o y . n e v e r l 2 3 . 4 5 a l m o s t 6 a l w a y s 3 0 1 6 . T h e c h i l d i g n o r e s t h e t e m p e r a t u r e o f f o o d , w h e t h e r h o t o r c o l d . a l m o s t n e v s r l 2 3 4 5 a l m o s t 6 a l w a y s 3 1 ....12 158 - 2 -A l m o s t R a r e l y U s u a l l y U s u a l l y F r e q u e n t l y A l m o s t n e v e r d o e s n o t d o e s a l w a y s 1 2 3 4 5 6 1 7 . The c h i l d v a r i e s f r o m day t o day i n w a n t - a l m o s t : : : : : a l m o s t •>? > i n g a b o t t l e o r s n a c k b e f o r e b e d t i m e a t n i g h t , n e v e r 1 2 3 4 5 6 a l w a y s 1 8 . The c h i l d s i t s s t i l l w h i l e w a i t i n g f o r a l m o s t : : : : : a l m o s t f o o d . n e v e r 1 2 3 4 5 6 a l w a y s 1 9 . T h e c h i l d I s e a s i l y e x c i t e d b y p r a i s e a l m o s t : : : : : a l m o s t ( l a u g h s , y e l l s , j u m p s ) . n e v e r 1 2 3 4 5 6 a l w a y s 2 0 . The c h i l d c r i e s a f t e r a f a l l o r bump. a l m o s t : s : : : a lmost3>__ n e v e r 1 2 3 4 5 6 a l w a y s 2 1 . T h e c h i l d a p p r o a c h e s and p l a y s w i t h u n - a l m o s t : : : : : a l m o s t ^6 f a m i l i a r p e t s ( s m a l l d o g s , c a t s ) . n e v e r 1 2 3 4 5 6 a l w a y s 2 2 . T h e c h i l d s t o p s e a t i n g and l o o k up when a l m o s t : : : : : a l m o s t 37 a p e r s o n w a l k s b y . n e v e r 1 2 3 4 5 6 a l w a y s 2 3 . T h e c h i l d seems unaware o f d i f f e r e n c e s i n a l m o s t : : : : : a l m o s t i s t a s t e o f f a m i l i a r l i q u i d s ( t y p e o f m i l k , n e v e r 1 2 3 4 5 6 a l w a y s d i f f e r e n t j u i c e s ) . 2 4 . The c h i l d moves a b o u t a c t i v e l y when h e / a l m o s t : : : : : a l m o s t ^q s h e e x p l o r e s new p l a c e s ( r u n s , c l i m b s o r jumps) n e v e r 1 2 3 4 5 6 a l w a y s 2 5 . T h e c h i l d f u s s e s o r w h i n e s when b o t t o m a l m o s t : : : : : a l m o s t 4 _ _ c l e a n e d a f t e r b o w e l movement . n e v e r 1 2 3 4 5 6 a l w a y s 2 6 . T h e c h i l d s m i l e s when p l a y e d w i t h b y u n - a l m o s t : : : : : a l m o s t _ i f a m i l i a r a d u l t s . n e v e r 1 2 3 4 5 6 a l w a y s 2 7 . T h e c h i l d l o o k s up f r o m p l a y when m o t h e r a l m o s t : : : : : a l m o s t L? e n t e r s t h e r o o m . n e v e r 1 2 3 4 5 6 a l w a y s 2 8 . The c h i l d s p e n d s o v e r an h o u r r e a d i n g a a l m o s t : : : : : a l m o s t , i b o o k o r l o o k i n g a t t h e p i c t u r e s . n e v e r 1 2 3 4 5 6 a l w a y s 2 9 . T h e c h i l d r e s p o n d s i n t e n s e l y ( s c r e a m s , a l m o s t : : : : : a lmost4_4_ y e l l s ) t o f r u s t r a t i o n . n e v e r 1 2 3 4 5 6 a l w a y s 3 0 . T h e c h i l d e a t s a b o u t t h e same amount o f a l m o s t : : : : : a l m o s t 45 s o l i d f o o d a t m e a l s f r o m d a y t o d a y . n e v e r 1 2 3 4 5 6 a l w a y s 3 1 . T h e c h i l d r e m a i n s p l e a s a n t when h u n g r y a l m o s t : : : : '• a l m o s t 4___ and w a i t i n g f o r f o o d t o be p r e p a r e d . n e v e r 1 2 3 4 5 6 a l w a y s 3 2 . T h e c h i l d a l l o w s f a c e w a s h i n g w i t h o u t a l m o s t : : : : : a l m o s t _ _ p r o t e s t ( s q u i r m i n g , t u r n i n g a w a y ) . n e v e r 1 2 3 4 5 6 a l w a y s 3 3 . T h e amount o f m i l k o r j u i c e t h e c h i l d a l m o s t : : : : : a l m o s t 4 j _ t a k e s a t m e a l t i m e i s u n p r e d i c t a b l e f r o m m e a l n e v e r 1 2 3 4 5 6 a l w a y s t o m e a l ( o v e r 2 o z . d i f f e r e n c e ) . 159 - 3 -A l m o s t n e v e r 1 R a r e l y 2 U s u a l l y does n o t 3 U s u a l l y does 4 F r e q u e n t l y A l m o s t a l w a y s 6 34 . The c h i l d p r a c t i c e s p h y s i c a l a c t i v i t i e s ( c l i m b i n g , j u m p i n g , p u s h i n g o b j e c t s ) f o r u n d e r 5 m i n u t e s . 3 5 . The c h i l d v i g o r o u s l y r e s i s t s a d d i t i o n a l f o o d o r m i l k when f u l l ( s p i t s o u t , c l a m p s mouth c l o s e d , b a t s a t s p o o n , e t c . ) 3 6 . T h e c h i l d p l a y s a c t i v e l y ( b a n g s , t h r o w s , r u n s ) w i t h t o y s i n d o o r s . 3 7 . T h e c h i l d i g n o r e s v o i c e s when p l a y i n g w i t h a f a v o r i t e t o y . 3 8 . The ( h ' . l d a p p r o a c h e s (moves t o w a r d ) new v i s i t o r s a t home. 3 9 . The c h i l d p l a y s o u t s i d e o n h o t o r c o l d d a y s w i t h o u t s e e m i n g t o n o t i c e d i f f e r e n c e s i n t e m p e r a t u r e . 4 0 . The c h i l d c o n t i n u e s p l a y i n g w i t h o t h e r c h i l d r e n f o r u n d e r f i v e m i n u t e s and t h e n goes e l s e w h e r e . 4 1 . The c h i l d c o n t i n u e s t o l o o k a t a p i c t u r e b o o k i n s p i t e o f d i s t r a c t i n g n o i s e s ( c a r h o r n s , d o o r b e l l ) . 4 2 . The c h i l d w a n t s a s n a c k a t a d i f f e r e n t t i m e e a c h day ( o v e r one h o u r d i f f e r e n c e ) . 4 3 . The c h i l d I s p l e a s a n t ( s m i l e s ) , when p u t down f o r n a p o r a t n i g h t . 4 4 . T h e c h i l d t a k e s s e v e r a l d a y s t o g e t u s e d t o (show u s u a l b e h a v i o r i n ) new s i t u a t i o n s away f r o m p a r e n t ( p l a y g r o u p , day c a r e c e n t e r , s i t t e r . ) 4 5 . T h e c h i l d s p e a k s ( o r v o c a l i z e s ) r i g h t away t o u n f a m i l i a r a d u l t s . 4 6 . T h e c h i l d r e a c t s s t r o n g l y ( c r i e s o r s c r e a m s ) when u n a b l e t o c o m p l e t e a p l a y a c t i v i t y . 4 7 . T h e c h i l d e n j o y s games w i t h r u n n i n g a i d j u m p i n g o v e r games done s i t t i n g down. 4 . The c h i l d n o t i c e s wet c l o t h i n g , a n d w a n t s t o be c h a n g e d r i g h t away. a l m o s t : : : : : a l m o s t 49 n e v e r 1 2 3 4 5 6 a l w a y s a l m o s t : : : : : a l m o s t 50 n e v e r 1 2 3 4 5 6 a l w a y s a l m o s t _ : : _ : : : a l m o s t 51 n e v e r 1 2 3 4 5 6 a l w a y s a l m o s t : : _ _ _ : : : a l m o s t 52 n e v e r 1 2 3 4 5 6 a l w a y s a l m o s t : : : : : a l m o s t 53 n e v e r 1 2 3 4 5 6 a l w a y s a l m o s t : : : : : a l m o s t 54 n e v e r 1 2 3 4 5 6 a l w a y s a l m o s t _ : : : : : nlmrror 5 5 n e v e r 1 2 3 4 5 6 a l w a y s a l m o s t : _ _ _ : : : : a l m o s t 56 n e v e r 1 2 3 4 5 6 a l w a y s a l m o s t : : : : : a l m o s t 57 n e v e r 1 2 3 4 5 6 . a l w a y s a l m o s t : : : : : a l m o s t 5 g _ n e v e r 1 2 3 4 5 6 a l w a y s a l m o s t ; : : : : a l m o s t 59 n e v e r 1 2 3 4 5 6 a l w a y s a l m o s t : : : : : a l m o s t 60 n e v e r 1 2 3 4 5 6 a l w a y s a l m o s t : : : : : a l m o s t 61 n e v e r 1 2 3 4 5 6 a l w a y s a l m o s t : : : : : a l m o s t 62 n e v e r 1 2 3 4 5 6 a l w a y s a l m o s t : : : : : a l m o a t 63 n e v e r 1 2 3 4 5 6 a l w a y s 160 - 4 -A l m o s t R a r e l y U s u a l l y U s u a l l y F r e q u e n t l y A l m o s t n e v e r d o e s n o t d o e s a l w a y s 1 2 3 4 5 6 4 9 . T h e c h i l d I s f u s s y o r moody t h r o u g h o u t a c o l d o r an i n t e s t i n a l v i r u s . a l m o s t n e v e r 1 2 3 4 5 a l m o s t 6 a l w a y s 64 5 0 . T h e c h i l d i g n o r e s p a r e n t ' s f i r s t c a l l w h i l e w a t c h i n g a f a v o r i t e T . V . p r o g r a m . a l m o s t n e v e r 1 2 3 4 5 a l m o s t 6 a l w a y s nS 5 1 . A c h i l d l o s e s i n t e r e s t i n a new t o y o r game w i t h i n a n h o u r . a l m o s t n e v e r 1 2 3 4 5 a l m o s t 6 a l w a y s 66 5 2 . The c h i l d r u n s t o g e t w h e r e h e / s h e w a n t s t o g o . a l m o s t n e v e r 1 2 3 4 5 a l m o s t 6 a l w a y s 67 5 3 . F o r t h e f i r s t few m i n u t e s i n a new p l a c e ( s t o r e , home o r v a c a t i o n p l a c e ) t h e c h i l d i s w a r y ( c l i n g s t o m o t h e r , h o l d s b a c k ) . a l m o s t n e v e r 1 2 3 4 5 a l m o s t 6 a l w a y s 68 5 4 . The c h i l d t a k e s d a y t i m e n a p s a t d i f f e r i n g t i m e s ( o v e r 1/2 h o u r d i f f e r e n c e ) f r o m day t o d a y . a l m o s t n e v e r 1 2 3 4 5 a l m o s t 6 a l w a / s 69 5 5 . The c h i l d r e a c t s ml l i l y ( f r o w n o r s m i l e ) when h i s / h e r p l a y i s i n t e r r u p t e d by p a r e n t . a l m o s t n e v e r 1 2 3 4 5 i a l m o s t 6 a l w a y s 70 5 6 . The c h i l d a c c e p t s b e i n g d r e s s e d and u n -d r e s s e d w i t h o u t p r o t e s t . a l m o s t n e v e r 1 2 3 4 5 a l m o s t 6 a l w a y s 71 5 7 . The c h i l d i s o u t g o i n g w i t h a d u l t s t r a n g e r s o u t s i d e t h e home. a l m o s t n e v e r 1 2 3 4 5 : a l m o s t 6 a l w a y s 72 5 8 . T h e c h i l d r u n s a h e a d when w a l k i n g w i t h t h e p a r e n t . a l m o s t n e v e r 1 2 3 4 5 a l m o s t 6 a l w a y s 73 5 9 . The c h i l d ' s p e r i o d o f g r e a t e s t p h y s i c a l a c t i v i t y comes a t same t i m e o f d a y . a l m o s t n e v e r 1 2 3 4 5 : a l m o s t 6 a l w a y s 74 6 0 . T h e c h i l d c a n b e c o a x e d o u t o f a f o r -b i d d e n a c t i v i t y . a l m o s t n e v e r 1 2 3 4 5 : a l m o s t 6 a l w a y s 75 61. T h e c h i l d s t o p s p l a y and w a t c h e s when someone w a l k s b y . a l m o s t n e v e r 1 2 3 4 5 : a l m o s t 6 a l w a y s 76 6 2 . The c h i l d g o e s b a c k t o t h e same a c t i v i t y a f t e r b r i e f i n t e r r u p t i o n ( s n a c k , t r i p t o t o i l e t ) . a l m o s t n e v e r 1 2 3 4 5 : a l m o s t 6 a l w a y s 77 6 3 . T h e c h i l d l a u g h s o r s m i l e s when m e e t i n g o t h e r c h i l d r e n . a l m o s t n e v e r 1 2 3 4 5 : a l m o s t 6 a l w a y s 78 6 4 . T h e c h i l d s i t s s t i l l w h i l e w a t c h i n g TV o r l i s t e n i n g t o m u s i c . a l m o s t n e v e r 1 2 3 4 5 : a l m o s t 6 a l w a y s 79 6 5 . The c h i l d w i l l a v o i d r e p e t i t i o n o f m i s - a l m o s t a l m o s t 80 b e h a v i o r i f p u n i s h e d f i r m l y o n c e o r t w i c e . n e v e r 1 2 3 4 5 6 a l w a y s ....15 161 A l m o s t n e v e r 1 R a r e l y 2 U s u a l l y d o e s n o t 3 - 5 -U s u a l l y d o e s 4 F r e q u e n t l y 5 A l m o s t a l w a y s 6 l - 4 _ 5-6_ 7 6 6 . T h e c h i l d c o n t i n u e s t o p l a y w i t h a t o y i n s p i t e o f s u d d e n no Ises f r o m o u t d o o r s ( c a r h o r n , s i r e n , e t c . ) . 6 7 . T h e c h i l d i g n o r e s d i r t o n h i m s e l f / h e r s e l f . 6 8 . The c h i l d ' s t i m e o f w a k i n g i n t h e m o r n -i n g v a r i e s g r e a t l y (by 1 h o u r o r more) f r o m d a y t o d a y . 6 9 . The c h i l d was moody o r " o f f " d a y s when h e / s h e i s f u s s y a l l d a y . 7 0 . T h e c h i l d r e a c t s m i l d l y ( f r o w n o r s m i l e ) when a n o t h e r c h i l d t a k e s h i s / h e r t o y . 7 1 . T h e c h i l d s t a y s w i t h a r o u t i n e t a s k ( d r e s s i n g , p i c k i n g up toyp)_ f o r 5 m i n u t e s o r m o r e ) . 7 2 . The c h i l d s t o p s e a t i n g and l o o k s when h e / s h e h e a r s a n u n u s u a l n o i s e ( t e l e p h o n e , d o o r b e l l ) . 73 . T h e c h i l d s i t s s t i l l (moves l i t t l e ) d u r i n g p r o c e d u r e s l i k e h a i r b r u s h i n g o r n a i l c u t t i n g . 7 4 . The c h i l d shows much b o d i l y movement ( s t o m p s , w r i t h e s , s w i n g s arms) when u p s e t o r c r y i n g . 7 5 . T h e c h i l d i s p l e a s a n t ( s m i l e s , l a u g h s ) d u r i n g f a c e w a s h i n g . 7 6 . T h e c h i l d ' s i n i t i a l r e a c t i o n a t home t o a p p r o a c h b y s t r a n g e r s i s a c c e p t a n c e ( l o o k s a t , r e a c h e s o u t ) . 7 7 . T h e c h i l d i s h u n g r y a t d i n n e r t i m e . 78 . T h e c h i l d c o n t i n u e s t o g e t i n t o f o r -b i d d e n a r e a s o r o b j e c t s i n s p i t e o f p a r e n t s ' r e p e a t e d w a r n i n g s . 7 9 . T h e c h i l d s t o p s t o e x a m i n e new o b j e c t s t h o r o u g h l y (5 m i n u t e s o r m o r e ) . 8 0 . T h e c h i l d i g n o r e s o d o r s ( c o o k i n g , smoke, p e r f u m e ) w h e t h e r p l e a s a n t o r n o t . a l m o s t : : : : : a l m o s t s n e v e r 1 2 3 4 5 6 a l w a y s a l m o s t : : : : : a l m o s t q n e v e r 1 2 3 4 5 6 a l w a y s a l m o s t : : : : : a l m o s t i n n e v e r 1 2 3 4 5 6 a l w a y s a l m o s t : : : : : a l m o s t i1 n e v e r 1 2 3 4 5 6 a l w a y s a l m o s t : : : a l m o s t l 2 n e v e r 1 2 3 4 5 6 a l w a y s a l m o s t : : : : : a l m o s t 13 n e v e r 1 2 3 4 5 6 a l w a y s a l m o s t : : : : : a l m o s t _ _ n e v e r 1 2 3 4 5 6 a l w a y s a l m o s t : : : : : a l m o s t 15 n e v e r 1 2 3 4 5 6 a l w a y s a l m o s t : : : : : a l m o s t 16 n e v e r 1 2 3 4 5 6 a l w a y s a l m o s t : : : : : a l m o s t 17 n e v e r 1 2 3 4 5 6 a l w a y s e l u o s t : : : : : f l n o s t 18 n e v e r 1 2 3 4 5 6 a l w a y s a l m o s t : : : : : a l m o s t 19 n e v e r 1 2 3 4 5 6 a l w a y s a l m o s t : : : : : a l m o s t 20 n e v e r 1 2 3 4 5 6 a l w a y s a l m o s t : : : : : a l m o s t 21_ n e v e r 1 2 3 4 5 6 a l w a y s a l m o s t : : : : : a l m o s t 22 n e v e r 1 2 3 4 5 6 a l w a y s / 6 162 A l m o s t R a r e l y U s u a l l y U s u a l l y F r e q u e n t l y A l m o s t n e v e r d o e s n o t 1 2 3 d o e s 4 5 a l w a y s 6 8 1 . T h e c h i l d l o o k s up f r o m a n a c t i v i t y when h e / s h e h e a r s t h e s o u n d s o f c h i l d r e n p l a y i n g . a l m o s t n e v e r 1 2 3 4 5 : a l m o s t 6 a l w a y s r\ 8 2 . The c h i l d f a l l s a s l e e p a t a b o u t t h e same l e n g t h o f t i m e a f t e r b e i n g p u t t o b e d . a l m o s t n e v e r 1 2 3 4 5 : a l m o s t 6 a l w a y s 24 8 3 . The c h i l d g r e e t s b a b y s i t t e r l o u d l y w i t h much e x p r e s s i o n o f f e e l i n g w h e t h e r p o s i t i v e o r n e g a t i v e . a l m o s t n e v e r 1 2 3 4 5 : a l m o s t 6 a l w a y s 25 84 . The c h i l d i s moody f o r more t h a n a few m i n u t e s when c o r r e c t e d o r d i s c i p l i n e d . a l m o s t n e v e r 1 2 3 4 5 a l m o s t 6 a l w a y s 26 8 5 . The c h i l d s i t s s t i l l ( l i t t l e s q u i r m i n g ) w h i l e t r a v e l i n g i n c a r o r s t r o l l e r . a l m o s t n e v e r 1 2 3 4 5 : a l m o s t 6 a l w a y s 27 8 6 . T h e c h i l d w a t c h e s TV f o r u n d e r 10 m i n -u t e s , t h e n t u r n s t o a n o t h e r a c t i v i t y . a l m o s t n e v e r 1 2 3 4 5 : a l m o s t 6 a l w a y s 28 8 7 . The c h i l d i s s h y (turnE away o r c l i n g s t o m o t h e r ) o n m e e t i n g a n o t h e r c h i l d f o r t h e f i r s t t i m e . a l m o s t n e v e r 1 2 3 4 5 : a l m o s t 6 a l w a y s 29 8 8 . The c h i l d i s s t i l l wary o f s t r a n g e r s a f t e r 15 m i n u t e s . a l m o s t n e v e r 1 2 3 4 5 : a l m o s t 6 a l w a y s 30 8 9 . The c h i l d f r e t s o r c r i e s when f i r s t l e a r n i n g a new t a s k ( d r e s s i n g s e l f , p i c k i n g up t o y s ) . a l m o s t n e v e r 1 2 3 4 5 : a l m o s t 6 a l w a y s 31 9 0 . The c h i l d s i t s q u i e t l y i n t h e b a t h . a l m o s t n e v e r 1 2 3 4 5 : a l m o s t 6 a l w a y s 32 9 1 . T h e c h i l d p r a c t i c e s a new s k i l l ( t h r o w -i n g , p i l i n g , d r a w i n g ) f o r 10 m i n u t e s o r m o r e . a l m o s t n e v e r 1 2 3 4 5 : a l m o s t 6 a l w a y s 33 9 2 . T h e c h i l d i g n o r e s d i f f e r e n c e s i n t a s t e o r c o n s i s t e n c y o f f a m i l i a r f o o d s . a l m o s t n e v e r 1 2 3 4 5 : a l m o s t 6 a l w a y s 34 9 3 . T h e c h i l d s l e e p s p o o r l y ( r e s t l e s s , w a k e f u l ) i n new p l a c e s f o r f i r s t 2 o r 3 t i m e s . a l m o s t n e v e r 1 2 3 4 5 : a l m o s t 6 a l w a y s 35 94 . C h i l d I s f e a r f u l o f b e i n g p u t down i n a n u n f a m i l i a r p l a c e ( s u p e r m a r k e t c a r t , new s t r o l l e r , p l a y p e n ) w i t h p a r e n t p r e s e n t . a l m o s t n e v e r 1 2 3 4 5 : a l m o s t 6 a l w a y s 36 9 5 . The c h i l d f r o w n s o r c o m p l a i n s when l e f t t o p l a y by s e l f . a l m o s t n e v e r 1 2 3 4 5 : a l m o s t 6 a l w a y s 37 9 6 . T h e c h i l d a c c e p t s w i t h i n 10 m i n u t e s ( f e e l s a t home, a t e a s e ) new s u r r o u n d i n g s (home, s t o r e , p l a y a r e a ) . a l m o s t n e v e r 1 2 c 3 4 5 : a l m o s t 6 38 9 7 . T h e c h i l d l o o k ? up f r o m p l a y when t h e t e l e p h o n e o r d o o r b e l l r i n g s . a l m o s t n e v e r 1 2 3 4 5 : a l m o s t 6 a l w a y s 39 163 M o t h e r ' s g e n e r a l i m p r e s s i o n s o f C h i l d ' s temperament A . How w o u l d y o u d e s c r i b e y o u r c h i l d ' s temperament i n y o u r own w o r d s ? B. I n c o m p a r i s o n w i t h what y o u know o f o t h e r c h i l d r e n o f t h e same a g e , how w o u l d y o u r a t e y o u r c h i l d o n t h e f o l l o w i n g ? ( C i r c l e one) I . A c t i v i t y l e v e l - t h e amount o f p h y s i c a l a c t i v i t y d u r i n g s l e e p , f e e d i n g , p l a y , d r e s s i n g , e t c . (1) h i g h (2) medium (3) l o w *I I I . R e g u l a r i t y - o f b o d i l y f u n c t i o n i n g i n s l e e p , h u n g e r , b o w e l movements , e t c . (1) f a i r l y r e g u l a r (2) v a r i a b l e (3) f a i r l y i r r e g u l a r ^2 I I I . A d a p t a b i l i t y t o c h a n g e i n r o u t i n e - t h e e a s e o r d i f f i c u l t y w i t h w h i c h t h e c h i l d ' s i n i t i a l r e s p o n s e c a n b e m o d i f i e d i n s o c i a l l y d e s i r a b l e way . (1) g e n e r a l l y a d a p t a b l e (2) v a r i a b l e (3) g e n e r a l l y s l o w a t a d a p t a t i o n 43 I V . R e s p o n s e t o new s i t u a t i o n s - i n i t i a l r e a c t i o n t o new s t i m u l i , t o f o o d , p e o p l e , p l a c e s , t o y s , o r p r o c e d u r e s : (1) a p p r o a c h (2) v a r i a b l e ^ (3) w i t h d r a w a l L e v e l o f s e n s o r y t h r e s h o l d - t h e amount o f e x t e r n a l s t i m u l a t i o n , s u c h a s s o u n d s o r c h a n g e s i n f o o d o r p e o p l e , n e c e s s a r y t o p r o d u c e a r e s p o n s e i n t h e c h i l d . (1) h i g h t h r e s h o l d (much s t i m u l a t i o n n e e d e d ) (2) medium (3) l ow t h r e s h o l d ( l i t t l e s t i m u l a t i o n ) -*i -. V I . I n t e n s i t y o f r e s p o n s e - t h e e n e r g y c o n t e n t o f r e s p o n s e s r e g a r d l e s s o f t h e i r q u a l i t y . (1) g e n e r a l l y i n t e n s e (2) v a r i a b l e (3) g e n e r a l l y m i l d 46 V I I . P o s i t i v e o r n e g a t i v e mood - amount o f p l e a s a n t o r u n p l e a s a n t b e h a v i o r t h r o u g h o u t d a y . (1) g e n e r a l l y p o s i t i v e (2) v a r i a b l e (3) g e n e r a l l y n e g a t i v e 47 V I I I . D i s t r a c t i b i l i t y - t h e e f f e c t i v e n e s s o f e x t e r n a l s t i m u l i ( s o u n d s , t o y s , p e o p l e , e t c . ) i n I n t e r f e r i n g w i t h o n g o i n g b e h a v i o r . (1) e a s i l y d i s t r a c t i b l e (2) v a r i a b l e 4g (3) n o n - d i s t r a c t i b l e — , . . / 2 164 - 2 -I X . P e r s i s t e n c e and a t t e n t i o n s p a n - d u r a t i o n o f m a i n t a i n i n g s p e c i f i c a c t i v i t i e s w i t h o r w i t h o u t e x t e r n a l o b s t a c l e s . (1) p e r s i s t e n t (2) v a r i a b l e 49 (3) n o n - p e r s i s t e n t C . How has y o u r c h i l d ' s temperament b e e n a p r o b l e m f o r you? D. I n g e n e r a l , temperament o f c h i l d i s : (a) a b o u t a v e r a g e (b) more d i f f i c u l t t h a n a v e r a g e ( c ) e a s i e r t h a n a v e r a g e J50 166 APPENDIX H A. Overcompliant? YES or NO B. Degree of compliance: 4: Generally attempts compliance with M's d i r e c t i v e s . Degree of noncompliance i s not marked. 3: Often compliant. C may sometimes ignore M's d i r e c t i v e s and/or react megatively to some d i r e c t i v e s ; no aggressive behavior. 2: Sometimes compliant. C may be passively r e s i s t a n t or show some minor instances of active resistance or negativism. 1: Noncompliant. C acts negatively to M and may be v i o l e n t or aggressive. C. A f f e c t : 5: P o s i t i v e a f f e c t predominates. C attempts to involve M; engages i n s i t u a t i o n , i s enthusiastic. 4: A f f e c t i s generally p o s i t i v e , though there may be a few instances or mild negative a f f e c t . 3: P o s i t i v e and negative a f f e c t occur about equally as frequently; neither predominates. May be neutral 2: A f f e c t i s negative i n tone, and there may be instances of marked negativism. C i s , however, at no time aggressive to M. 1: Negative a f f e c t i s predominant and C i s markedly angry and/or aggressive to M. Cr.may also ignore M or withdraw from the s i t u a t i o n . Experience Scale: 5: Exc e l l e n t : C learns something of M's willingness and a b i l i t y to set and maintain l i m i t s on his/her behavior. The i n t e r a c t i o n has a p o s i t i v e tone and i s a cooperative e f f o r t . The C looks happy despite l i m i t - s e t t i n g . 4: Good: Interaction i s not i d e a l . Could be improvement i n the degree to which M and C cooperate (vs. one or the other dominat-ing) or i n the smoothness with which the two work together. 3: F a i r : L i m i t - s e t t i n g may be lacking s l i g h t l y or a b i t too severe OR the C may appear very mildly f r u s t r a t e d (one, not both) 2: Poor: C learns nothing of c o n t r o l l i n g impulses or of M's l i m i t - s e t t i n g . The C i s , however, not severely f r u s t r a t e d . OR M may l i m i t so s t r i c t l y that C has no chance to try on h i s / her own. Again, C looks b a s i c a l l y content. 1: Very poor: C looks completely f r u s t r a t e d , f e a r f u l , withdrawn and/or angry. The i n t e r a c t i o n can i n no way be characterized as 'cooperative'. L i m i t - s e t t i n g may be absent completely. APPENDIX H CODING: CLEAN-UP MOTHER STRATEGIES: Verbal abuse Physical abuse/punishment Threat R i g i d r e p e t i t i o n of i n s t r u c t i o n s Teasing, manipulation, t i c k l i n g , seduction, d i s t r a c t i n g comments Phy s i c a l r e j e c t i o n or c h i l d approach Ignore Bribery ( a f f e c t i o n or reward-ccontingent) Give In Give up Pleading Get firmer Remind Physical i n t r u s i o n Encouragement and h e l p f u l comments Make i t a game Physical presence Cooperates, shares work CHILD BEHAVIORS: A t y p i c a l Aggression Unprovoked? Negativism: Response r e f u s a l , Indirect (ignore) Anger Fr u s t r a t i o n : crying, fussing, whining RATINGS: Degree A f f e c t Experience Mother Scale APPENDIX H (Continued) MOTHER SCALE: 5: Excellent: M gives c l e a r d i r e c t i v e s and follows up on them. Encourages C's e f f o r t s . Sets and maintains boundaries firm l y but not harshly. Is considerate of C and anticipates C's feeli n g s Consistently f l e x i b l e , calm, a t t e n t i v e , responsive and a f f e c t i v e l y involved with C. 4: Good: M sets and maintains boundaries for C. May not be optimal i n calmness, f l e x i b i l i t y , attentiveness, responsiveness or a f f e c t i v e involvement 3: F a i r : M i s generally considerate of and attentive to C. Encouragement may be i n s u f f i c i e n t , d i r e c t i v e s may be unclear. M may be lacking i n f l e x i b i l i t y , calmness,..attentiveness and a f f e c t i v e involvement to a marked degree. To be scored a 3, M MUST set and maintain boundaries. 2: Poor: M i s sometimes considerate of C and vaguely s e n s i t i v e to C. M may be low on attention to C. Encouragement i s lacking and/or inappropriate. M ei t h e r doesn't maintain boundaries or sets them so narrow that C has no room. 1: Very Poor: D i r e c t i v e s , i f given, are vague, r i g i d l y repeated, don't take account of C, and not consistently envorced. M generally inconsiderate of C. May act abusively to C and/or withdraw from the s i t u a t i o n . APPENDIX I 169 MANUAL FOR CODING TOOL-USE TASKS Leah Matas, L. Alan Sroufe & Debbie Rosenberg Un i v e r s i t y of Minnesota, I n s t i t u t e of C h i l d Development 170 APPENDIX I T o o l - U s e T a s k s - M o t h e r V a r i a b l e s SUPPORTIVE PRESENCE T o o l 01 T o o l 92 T o o l |j»3 YES M i n NO NAlJYES Min NO NA YES M i n NO NA * S e c u r e b a s e " l e . h e l p i n g c h i l d f e e l c o m f o r t - " a b l e w i t h w o r k i n g a t t h e t a s k * M o t h e r ' s i n v o l v e m e n t : a t t e n t i v e n e s s t o c h i l d a n d t a s k _1 - F o c u s i n g c h i l d o n t h e t a s k when n e e d e d | 2 - T u n i n g c h i l d i n t o r e i n f o r c i n g a s p e c t s o f t a s k a s n e e d e d 3 - Mood s e t t i n g f o r a p r o b l e m s o l v i n g s i t -u a t i o n a s n e e d e d 4 - H e l p i n g c h i l d a c h i e v e s e n s e o f h a v i n g s o l v e d t h e p r o b l e m h i m s e l f 5 - S h a r i n g i n 1oy o f s o l u t i o n J — 6 ~ E n c o u r a g i n g a n d s u p p o r t i n g ; h i s e f f o r t s 7 - P h y s i c a l p r e s e n c e when n e e d e d 8 - A n t i c i p a t i n g f r u s t r a t i o n and t a k i n g a c -t i o n t o h e l p t h e s i t u a t i o n 9 - M o t h e r s t a v i n g c a l m MOTHER'S RATING - SUPPORTIVE PRESENCE ~ — I i j 1 1 QUALITY OF ASSISTANCE T o o l tl T o o l to T o o l #3 ms JMin NO IN/ ill YES M i n ] N A * H e l p i n g c h i l d s e e r e l a t i o n s h i p b e t w e e n a c t i o n t r e q u i r e d t o s o l v e t h e p r o h l i — I « G i v i n g m i n i m a l a s s i s t a n c e n e e d e d t o keep c h i l e w o r k i n g a n d d i r e c t e d a t s o l u t i o n w i t h o u t s o l v i n s i t f o r h i m I 1 - G r a d i n g o f h i n t s 2 - C l a r i t y o f h i n t s , i e . w h e t h e r t u n e d t o c i l l d ' s l e v e l 3 - F l e x i b i l i t y , c h a n g i n g i n s t r u c t i o n s i f n o t w o r k i n g 4 - T i m i n g o f i n s t r u c t i o n s ~ ~ 5 - P a c i n g o f i n s t r u c t i o n s 6 - C o o p e r a t i n g - g l v i n g h i n t s t h a t t h e c h i l d n e e d s 7 - H a v i n g c o n t r o l o f s i t u a t i o n ' 1 8 - G i v i n g s p a c e i n i t i a l l y 9 - A r e comments h e l p f u l r a t h e r t h a n d i s t r a c t -i n g ? 10 - E f f e c t i v e n e s s o f i n s t r u c t i o n s MOTHER'S RATING - QUALITY OF ASSISTANCE = 1 171 Introduction The fol lowing pages contain descr ipt ions, de f in i t i ons and ins t ruc -t ions for scoring two aspects of mother-chi ld in terac t ion in the context of a problem-solving s i t ua t i on . The.two aspects, supportive presence and qua l i t y of ass istance, pertain to the mother's contr ibut ions to i n te rac t i on . When these var iab les are scored, i t i s of the utmost im-portance to attempt to rate the mother without l e t t i ng the c h i l d ' s con-t r ibu t ions to the s i tuat ion bias the score. This i s not always completely possible because the rated s i tuat ion i s an in te rac t ion; the mother reacts to the ch i ld and the s i tuat iona l demands, jus t as the ch i ld reacts to the mother and the problem at hand. A ch i l d who i s being d i f f i c u l t or upset obviously w i l l need a d i f fe rent type of in teract ion with the mother than the ch i l d who i s very invested in and excited about the task. I t i s im-portant to remember, though, that a d i f f i c u l t or distraught ch i l d does not always mean the mother should receive low scores. The rat ings are meant to character ize the qua l i t y with which the mother deals with a given ch i l d at a given point in time in a spec i f i c s i t ua t i on . Each ch i l d w i l l vary in i t s contr ibut ion to the in te rac t ion ; the highest scores are meant for the mothers who react to the i r c h i l d ' s behaviors in the best possible way. This may sometimes be f i rm, d i r e c t i ve , and even phys ica l l y involved, or i t may be interested and enthus ias t i c , but non-involved in a physical or d i rec t i ve sense. The appropriateness of the mother's behavior i s of prime cons iderat ion. The two aspects of the s i tua t ion which are rated are d i f fe rent but not always mutually exc lus ive. Qual i ty of assistance pertains to the s k i l l and s en s i t i v i t y with which the mother helps the ch i l d solve the problem as well as maximizes the c h i l d ' s chance to learn re la t ionsh ip 172 ru les and concepts which at some point could be general ized to other problems. Supportive presence involves the emotional support with which the mother helps the chid have a pos i t ive and enjoyable learning exper i -ence, no matter how d i f f i c u l t the task. I t i s assumed that a two-year old l i k e s to work autonomously when he/she can but s t i l l needs the care-taker ' s involvement and support i f he/she comes up against a problem which exceeds his/her developmental l e v e l . Therefore supportive presence may be character ized by the balance of encouragement of autonomous work through the provis ion of a secure base by the caretaker and a leve l of involvement which ensures that the ch i l d w i l l obtain emotional or ins t ruc -t i ve assistance when needed. Because these rat ings are qua l i t a t i ve rat ings they may be more d i f f i -cu l t to master than rat ings based on in tens i ty leve ls or frequency-of-behavior counts. The authors encourage the inexperienced rater to seek t ra in ing with a more experienced rater i f poss ib le. If th i s i s not f eas ib l e , i t i s suggested that the rater observe several instances of the interact ions to be rated in order to become more adept at ident i fy ing and judging the d i f fe ren t c r i t e r i a defined in th i s manual. SUPPORTIVE PRESENCE Major C r i t e r i a : 1) Secure Base - helping the ch i l d fee l comfortable at the task 2) Mother involvement - attentiveness to ch i l d and task Subc r i t e r i a : (components of major c r i t e r i a ) a) Focusing ch i l d on task when needed b) Tuning ch i l d i n to re in forc ing aspects of the task as needed c) Mood sett ing fo r a problem solving s i tuat ion as needed d) Helping c h i l d achieve a sense of having solved the problem him/herself e) Sharing in the joy of so lut ion f ) Encouraging and supporting her/his e f f o r t s g) Physical presence when needed h) Ant ic ipat ing f rus t ra t i on and taking act ion to help the s i tua t ion i ) Mother staying calm 174 SUPPORTIVE PRESENCE f Secure Base for Exploration This concept i s d i r e c t l y re lated to the ethologica l concept of the caretaking providing a secure base from which the infant can explore h i s / her environment. In th i s case, however, the concept i s carr ied forward in time to the mother-toddler dyad. The subcr i te r ia which are of major importance in scoring "secure base" are: staying calm, mood se t t ing , tuning, physical presence, and ant i c ipa t ing f r u s t r a t i on . Encouraging and supporting e f fo r t s and helping the ch i l d achieve a sense of solving the problem himself are also important. A mother provides a secure base fo r her toddler by sett ing a calm and con-f ident tone to the problem-solving s i tua t i on . She i s comfortable in the s i tuat ion and therefore projects a sense of confidence in pos i t ive outcome. She does so by remaining calm and mood-setting; she approaches the tool with obvious in te res t or even bet ter , enthusiasm. She makes cer ta in that the ch i l d rea l i zes there i s a problem to be solved, and by tuning, she indicates to the ch i l d that working on the problem can be rewarding. She may also indicate to the ch i l d that she i s ava i lab le to work cooperat ively with him/ her i f i t becomes necessary, but encourages i n i t i a l autonomous work to help the ch i l d achieve a sense of solv ing the problem him/herself. These aspects of secure base serve to motivate and reassure the ch i l d of a pos i t i ve exper i -ence and outcome. During the time the ch i l d i s working, the mother l e t s her ch i ld know that she i s with him/her by encouraging his/her e f f o r t s , reassuring any doubts, and d isp lay ing calm, warm and pos i t ive a f f e c t . She l e t s her ch i l d know that she i s ava i lab le for help e i ther verba l ly or by her physical presence. She moves c loser to the ch i l d when the ch i l d gets stuck or shows signs of f rus t ra t i on ( e . g . , whining, hes i ta t ion , o f f - task behavior, r epe t i t i ve act ions, pounding, shrugging, approach to mother, e t c . ) . She may move c loser by leaning forward in her cha i r , s i t t i n g on the f l oo r c loser to the tool and her c h i l d , or by intervening phys ica l l y with demon-s t r a t i on , i f necessary. She i s quick to ant ic ipate or read the ch i l d ' s signs of mounting f rus t ra t i on and quick to respond, thereby l e t t i ng the ch i l d know that he/she i s with him/her in the experience. A mother who receives a "minimal" secure base i s less c l ea r l y a v a i l -able to the ch i l d when help or encouraaement i s ca l led fo r . She i s less able to help the ch i l d feel safe in the unfami l iar s i tuat ion and with the i demands of the problem. She may help but repeatedly t e l l the ch i l d that she can ' t or won't solve the problem, or she refuses bids from the c h i l d . She may be very slow in moving c loser to the ch i l d when the ch i l d becomes int imidated by the task. I t may not be c lear that she bel ieves she can help the ch i l d solve the problem. . A mother who receives a "no" on secure base i s unavailable to the ch i l d due to her own level of f rus t ra t i on and i n a b i l i t y to remain calm, her pass iv i t y , or her i n a b i l i t y to understand the c h i l d ' s leve l of capa-b i l i t i e s . The mother may become angry and f rus t ra t i on with the c h i l d , o f fe r absolute ly nothing to l e t the ch i l d know that i t i s possible to reach so lut ion and safe to explore the t oo l , or she may demand that the ch i l d perform above age level and expect the ch i l d to work on his/her own w i th-out encouragement. SUPPORTIVE PRESENCE 176 Mother's Involvement : attentiveness to ch i l d and task This c r i t e r i on involves more than observation of the ch i l d by the mother. A mother who receives a "yes" on th i s c r i t e r i on not only attends ca re fu l l y to her c h i l d ' s behaviors, emotional states and progress, but i s a lso emotionally involved with and responsive to the c h i l d . The important subcr i te r ia of involvement are: encouraging and sup-porting e f f o r t s , physical presence, ant i c ipat ing f rus t r a t i on , focusing and sharing joy. The mother watches her ch i l d working with in terest and invest-ment; she may lean forward or approach for better observation and involve-ment (physical presence). She i s aware of the f luc tuat ing emotional states and responds cont igent ly to the c h i l d ' s a f fec t ive expression. She encourages  and supports the c h i l d ' s e f fo r t s by responding pos i t i ve l y when the ch i l d smiles or masters a part of the task. She becomes concerned when the ch i l d shows signs of d i f f i c u l t y with the task, and ant ic ipates and/or reacts qu ick ly to signs of f rus t ra t i on by ass i s t i ng or increasing her level of involvement. She focuses the ch i l d i f he/she loses interest through f r u s t r a - t ion and strays from the task. When the ch i l d solves the problem she shares  the joy of so lut ion by being happy with and for her c h i l d . In general , her emotional responses are contingent upon and appropriate to the ch i l d ' s progress and states. The mother who receives a "minimal" i s interested but less ac t i ve l y involved with her ch i l d and his/her a c t i v i t i e s . The mother may appear some-what passive or le tharg ic in her responsiveness to the c h i l d ' s cues. She does not seem bored, d is interested or a c t i ve l y witholding with her c h i l d . The mother who receives a "no" i s d i s in te res ted , a loof , or cold with 177 her c h i l d . Although she may be invested in ensuring that the ch i l d solves the t oo l , her investment l i e s in the performance rather than a shared experience. She does not respond to the c h i l d ' s negative emotional states as signs of f r u s t r a t i on , and may even become more demanding or withdrawn as the c h i l d ' s f rus t ra t i on increases. OR The mother i s so passive and letharg ic that she i s unresponsive to the c h i l d ' s emotional and behavioral cues. She does not seem ac t i ve l y d is interested but instead seems to lack energy or motivation to be involved. QUALITY OF ASSISTANCE Major C r i t e r i a : 1) Giving minimal assistance needed to keep ch i l d working and directed at so lut ion without solving i t for him. 2) Helping ch i ld see re la t ionsh ip between actions required to solve the problem. Subc r i t e r i a : (components of major c r i t e r i a ) a) Grading of hints b) C l a r i t y of h ints , whether tuned to c h i l d ' s level c) F l e x i b i l i t y , changing ins t ruc t ions i f not working d) Timing of ins t ruct ions e) Pacing of ins t ruct ions f ) Cooperating - g iv ing hints that ch i l d needs g) Having control of the s i tuat ion h) Giving space i n i t i a l l y i ) Are comments helpful rather than d i s t rac t i ng j ) Effect iveness of ins t ruct ions 179. QUALITY OF ASSISTANCE Minimal Assistance This c r i t e r i a involves the mother's s k i l l at assisting her child i n a manner which helps the child stay Interested and motivated while allowing a maximum amount of exploration and discovery. The mother gives the child just enough information but does not jump ahead and show the child actions which she/he could discover with lesser hints. For example, i f the child i s using the two sticks in Tool 3 side-by-side ( ^ ——-^ _ ^ ) f the mother might say something regarding the length of the sticks, or that a longer stick was needed. She might even refer back to Tool 2 in which a longer stick was available to the child so the child could evoke a more concrete memory of the implications of "longer". If the mother, however, took the sticks and showed the child how to make one longer stick without mentioning length f i r s t , the child would miss the p o s s i b i l i t y of discovering by him/herself how to make that step. However, i f a child were not able to understand or incorporate a hint concerning length, i t could become necessary at a later point for the mother to show the child how to connect the sticks to deal with the child's possible mounting frustration or disinterest. The s k i l l of giving minimal assistance i s characterized mainly by the subcriteria of grading, timing, cooperation, space and control. Timing and grading again refer to the step-by-step nature of assistance: giving just enough useable information at the right time to keep the child interested and on the right track. The mother does not make logical jumps. She gives assistance when the child has reached his/her limit of understanding, not before or after. If a mother comes in too soon 180 Minimal Assistance (continued) she has not given the child enough time to use her hint in conjunction with his/her own resources to explore and manipulate. The child might become noncompliant and refuse help. If a mother offers assistance too late the child may lose interest and become frustrated or hesitant. This also involves cooperation because the mother must see the level that the child i s on in order to give just enough information without giving too i much.• A balance of space and control are important i n terms of the child's opportunity to explore and work autonomously unt i l he/she needs assis-tance. The mother does not, however, l e t the d i f f i c u l t y of the task frustrate the child to the point of negative experience. Space also allows the mother to see how much help the child needs. F l e x i b i l i t y and c l a r i t y are essential for giving enough (but not too much) assistance. Instructions which are not understood are not effective or helpful and therefore do not communicate enough information to keep the child working. The mother must adjust her assistance to what the child can use in order to avoid frustration and enhance learning. 181 QUALITY OF ASSISTANCE Helping the Child See the Relationships This c r i t e r i a concerns the rules of causality which the mother tri e s to teach her child pertaining to the particular tool and i t s related parts. A mother might be able to direct her child through the motions required to solve the tool; however i f she does not help the child see the relationships between parts and actions, i t i s unlikely 1) that the child could solve a very similar problem autonomously and 2) that the child has learned any basic cause-effect rules which could be applied to new situations. The subcriteria which are of primary consideration for scoring this c r i t e r i a are: grading, f l e x i b i l i t y and cooperation. Allowing space, helpfulness of instructions and effectiveness of instructions are also important. Grading plays a major role i n this c r i t e r i a because the mother breaks down the task into small enough steps for the child to understand. She does not expect the child to make advanced logical inferences about the causal relationships, so she leads the child with her assistance through the motions and concepts needed to understand and solve the problem. In order to accomplish this she must cooperate by taking account of the particular action the child i s performing at the moment and flexibly base her hints upon that action and i t s effects upon the other parts of the tool. Her hints must be clear so the child can decode and use the information in her message; i f her hints are not clear she must flexibly adjust her mode of assistance. In this way she helps her child make sense of the process required for problem solving. I n i t i a l l y a mother must allow the child space to explore for two 182 Helping the Child (continued) reasons: 1) to insure that the child i s aware of a l l the parts or material available in the tool, and 2) to determine how much the child already understands so she can base her f i r s t hint on the appropriate level and action. This applies to the duration of the process in terms of pacing. The mother does not try to make the child work at a rate which leaves insufficient time to f u l l y process and understand the relationships and actions he/she i s working on at a particular moment. Pacing also effects c l a r i t y and effectiveness of instructions; a child w i l l neither understand nor comply with instructions given in too concentrated a form. Helpfulness of instruction also plays a part in helping the child see the relationships. The child who i s invested in the task i s l i k e l y to try to incorporate the hints given by the mother. If these hints are irrelevant or distracting, the child can become confused in his/her attempts to use that information. The hints could be incorporated into the child's logical understanding which could further hinder appropriate learning, or just distract the child from the essential actions or concepts. APPENDIX J Diagrams of Equipment for Tool-Use Tasks TASKS 1 & 2 7^1 (L Toy i s inserted i n p l e x i g l a s s tube "Stick f o r Task 1 ^Sticks for Task 2 TASK 3 1 3 B a r r i e r "Block to weigh lever down Cup with reward t S i t e of reward 184 APPENDIX K. PRENATAL QUESTIONNAIRE NAME ADDRESS HUSBAND'S NAME PHONE LENGTH OF RESIDENCE TOGETHER EDUCATION: YOURS OCCUPATION: YOURS HUSBAND'S HUSBAND'S ESTIMATED DATE OF DELIVERY DATE OF BIRTH: YOURS TODAY'S DATE PHYSICIAN HUSBAND'S Family Doctor O b s t e t r i c i a n * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * INSTRUCTIONS: When f i l l i n g out scales, c i r c l e the point which best describes how you f e e l . Some women f e e l "better than even" when they're pregnant, some f e e l worse than they usually do, and some f e e l about the same as they always did. Although your f e e l i n g s have probably varied throughout your pregnancy, given your o v e r a l l health and condition before you became pregnant, how would you say you f e e l now? (If you have been having mood swings, f e e l i n g , for example, very happy and very unhappy at d i f f e r e n t times, c i r c l e the point which indicates the way you f e e l o v e r a l l . ) very energetic normal for me very t i r e d 1 1 very anxious 1 1 normal for me very relaxed 1 1 very happy normal fo r me very unhappy | | very uncomfortable normal for me quite comfortable 1 I content normal fo r me impatient depressed normal f or me elated 185 curious normal for me bored 2. Have you had any p h y s i c a l problems during your pregnancy? (Check o f f the problems you have had.) morning sickness bleeding diabetes insomnia toxaemia f l u i d r etention high blood pressure varicose veins ' fatigue anxiety _ _ _ back problems other kidney problems 3. When did you f i r s t go to see a physician about t h i s pregnancy? _____ to confirm pregnancy as soon as I know I was pregnant f i f t h month or l a t e r _______ other .  4. Have you seen any other health care workers during t h i s pregnancy? yes (Specify) . - •  no 5. Have you attended or are you now attending prenatal classes? yes no **IF YOU DID NOT ATTEND PRENATAL CLASSES, SKIP TO QUESTION 15 6. Where were the classes held, and who sponsored them? 7. How many of the classes did you attend (or are you palnning to attend)? 1 more than 4, but not a l l 2-4 a l l 8. Were the classes open to husbands as w e l l as to wives? yes no 9. Was your husband interested i n going to the classes with you? yes no 186 10. I f he did go, how many classes did he attend (or does he plan to attend)? 1 more than 4, but not a l l 2-4 _ a l l 11. What topics did the classes cover? _____ explanation of pregnant woman's body exercises s p e c i f i c labour and del i v e r y exercises information about new born baby information about c h i l d care n u t r i t i o n other (Specify) •  Are there any other topics not covered i n the classes which you would l i k e to have discussed? 12. How happy were you with the classes? very pleased 13. How much did you learn from the classes? quite disappointed learned a l o t learned very l i t t l e 14. Did you read any books that were suggested i n the classes?* (Write the t i t l e s i n the boxes provided and indic a t e how h e l p f u l you f e l t they wree on the scale.) a waste TITLES Very h e l p f u l of time *For other books not suggested by the classes, see question 53. 187 15. Were you working and/or going to school before you became pregnant? yes, I am s t i l l working/going to school yes, I worked/went to school u n t i l (which month?) no 16. If you were working or going to school previously, do you plan to return a f t e r the b i r t h of the baby? yes no undecided 17. I f you do plan to return to work or school, when do you think you might return? 1-3 months I 3-9 months 9-15 months 15-24 months undecided 18. How much would you estimate that t h i s pregnancy coincided with your plans? d e f i n i t e l y t o t a l l y planned unexpected 19. How did you f e e l when you learned that you were pregnant? very happy mixed feel i n g s very unhappy 20. How did you f e e l when you got used to the idea that you were pregnant? — J L - — J : : I . — I — very happy mixed f e e l i n g s very unhappy 21. How do you f e e l now? I — I - 1 - J [ _ very happy mixed f e e l i n g s very unhappy 22. How did your husband f e e l when he learned you were pregnant? — I : | - I - J — [ _ very happy mixed f e e l i n g s very unhappy 188 23. How did he f e e l a f t e r he got used to the idea that you were pregnant? very happy mixed f e e l i n g s 24. How do you think your husband f e e l s now? very unhappy very mixed f e e l i n g s very unhappy 25. To what extent has being pregnant made changes i n your way of l i f e ? not at a l l 26. Do you have any preference f o r a boy or a g i r l ? a great deal I r e a l l y want a boy I have no preference 27. Does your husband have any preference? I r e a l l y want a g i r l He r e a l l y wants a boy He has no preference 28. Have you chosen names for the baby yet? yes (Write names chosen) not yet 29. How do you expect your labour and deli v e r y to be? He r e a l l y wants a g i r l easy d i f f i c u l t 30. Do you f e e l that the ho s p i t a l ' s standard routine i s going to be good for you, or are you planning to make some s p e c i a l arrangements with your doctor? I haven't thought about i t regular h o s p i t a l routine i s a l l r i g h t with me I am planning to make arrangements with my doctor (Specify) .  31. Have you discussed with your doctor the use of drugs during labour and delivery? yes no 189 What decisions have you come to about the use of drugs? I w i l l leave the decision up to my doctor d e f i n i t e l y not unless planning not necessary to use drugs undecided probably w i l l d e f i n i t e l y planning to use some drugs Would you l i k e to have someone with you during labour other than the h o s p i t a l personnel? very much undecided not at a l l a. Are you planning to have someone with you during labour other than h o s p i t a l personnel? plan to have someone with me undecided plan to be on my own b. I f you are planning to have someone with you, speci f y Would you l i k e to have someone with you during d e l i v e r y other than h o s p i t a l personnel? very much undecided not at a l l a. Are you planning to have someone with you during d e l i v e r y other than h o s p i t a l personnel? plan to have undecided plan to, be someone with on my own me b. I f you are planning to have someone with you, specify I f you are planning to have a partner during labour and d e l i v e r y , how does that person f e e l about i t ? quxte w i l l i n g not very enthusiastic enthusiastic 190 36. How much of the time do you think you w i l l want to have the baby i n your room while the two of you are i n hospital? as much as about h a l f only for possible the time feedings 37. Do you think you w i l l want to have the baby with you r i g h t a f t e r the bir t h ? very much undecided probably not 38. Do you f e e l well-prepared to take care of the baby once i t i s born? . : I I 1 ' 1 very w e l l somewhat prepared very prepared unprepared 39. Has your husband expressed any i n t e r e s t i n taking care of the baby? yes no 40. If he wants to take care of the baby, how well-prepared do you think he f e e l s to take care of the baby? very w e l l - somewhat prepared very prepared unprepared 41. Do you a n t i c i p a t e needing help once the baby i s home? a great deal not at a l l 42. Have you discussed arrangements for help? Yes (Specify) ' No 43. If you have made arrangements for help, to what extent are you happy with these arrangements? very very s a t i s f i e d u n s a t i s f i e d 191 44. How do you plan to feed your baby? b o t t l e -breast breast and b o t t l e undecided haven't thought about i t yet 45. I f you are planning to breast-feed, how long would you l i k e to continue nursing? one or two months three or four months f i v e or s i x months seven or eight months more than eight months undecided I'11 see how i t works out 46. Do you think your baby w i l l be able to l e t you know what she/he needs or wants? yes If yes, how? '  no 47. I f the baby were c r y i n g and you knew that she/he had been fed recently and you checked the diapers and they were dry, do you think you would be able to calm the baby down? yes I f yes, what would you do? no 48. When do you think you w i l l develop a strong f e e l i n g toward your baby? I have r i g h t at within f i r s t by a by three already b i r t h two weeks month months 49. When do you think your baby w i l l develop a strong f e e l i n g f o r you i n pa r t i c u l a r ? already b i r t h to by a by three s i x months has two weeks month months or l a t e r 192 50. When do you think your baby w i l l develop a strong f e e l i n g f o r his/her father? 51. 52. b i r t h to two weeks by a month by three months by s i x months l a t e r than s i x months Have you made arrangements f o r the baby's a r r i v a l ? I plan to: arrange a room or space f o r the baby • acquire clothing f o r the baby • acquire f u r n i t u r e f o r the baby • acquire toys f o r the baby . • acquire other equipment (Specify) I did already: arrange a room or space f o r the baby acquire c l o t h i n g f o r the baby acquire f u r n i t u r e f o r the baby acquire toys f o r the baby acquire other equipment (Specify) Have you read any books on pregnancy/childbirth, c h i l d care or c h i l d development? (Write the t i t l e s i n the boxes provided and indicare how h e l p f u l you f e l t they were on the scale.) TITLES very h e l p f u l a waste of time 53. Have you been reading any magazine or newspaper a r t i c l e s about pregnancy or c h i l d care. yes From which newspapers or magazines? • • no 193 54. In general, how h e l p f u l would you say they were? very h e l p f u l a waste of time 55. Do you think you have a clear picture now of what i t w i l l be l i k e to have a new baby? quite clear somewhat hazy quite unclear 56. Do you have any experience with infants or young chi l d r e n which has given you some idea of what i t i s l i k e to take care of a baby? 57. 58. a l o t of experience no experience To what extent do you now consult the following sources f or information about pregnancy, c h i l d b i r t h , i n fant behaviour and c h i l d care? husband own mother own father husband's mother husband's father brothers/ s i s t e r s other r e l a t i v e s friends books physician nurses quite often r a r e l y To what extent do you think having a baby w i l l r e s t r i c t your work/school or s o c i a l l i f e ? , , ' ' a great deal not at a l l work/school s o c i a l 5 9 . Are you a f r a i d that your baby m i g h t become spoiled? 19.4 unconcerned quite concerned 60. Once the baby i s born, to what extent w i l l you seek advice about c h i l d care from the following sources? husband own mother own father husband's mother husband's father brothers/ s i s t e r s other r e l a t i v e s friends books physicians nurses quite often r a r e l y 61. To what extent do you think your r e l a t i o n s h i p s with your husband w i l l change when you have a new baby? a great deal not at a l l I f you think that the existence of the new baby w i l l a l t e r your r e l a t i o n s h i p with your husband, i n what ways do you think t h i s w i l l happen? 62. What was the s i z e of the family you grew up in? (Include everyone who l i v e d i n the house.) # mother, father, s i s t e r s , brothers 7/ . . other r e l a t i v e s # others 19.5 63. What was the s i z e of the family your husband grew up in? (Include everyone who l i v e d i n the house). #_ mother, father, s i s t e r s , brothers other r e l a t i v e s others 64. Does your family l i v e near you now? (Specify who l i v e s where): own family i n the neightbourhood i n the c i t y • within 100 miles - • _ further than 100 miles 65. How frequently do you see your family? own family nearly every day more than once a month about once a month . about once a year r a r e l y husband's family husb and' s family 19.6 APPENDIX L  POST-PARTUM QUESTIONNAIRE NAME ; • BABY'S NAME • • BIRTH DATE TODAY'S DATE * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * INSTRUCTIONS: When f i l l i n g out scales, c i r c l e the point which best describes how you f e e l . 1. Although your feel i n g s have probably been changing from day to day over the past month, how would you say you f e e l now, having been home with the baby for nearly four weeks? 1 1 1 1 1 very energetic 1 1 normal f or me very t i r e d 1 very anxious 1 1 normal f or me very relaxed 1 very happy normal f or me very unhappy 1 very uncomfortable 1 1 normal f or me very comfortable content 1 1 normal f or me impatient 1 depressed 1 1 normal f or me elated curious normal f or me bored 2. Have you had any phys i c a l problems since you've been fatigue sore nipples home from hospital? constipation problems w/stitches depression insomnia excessive bleeding back/leg problems other (specify) 197 3. Has the baby had any physical problems since you've been home? rash diahrrea feeding problems _ cold c o l i c constipation jaundice other specify 4. Have you seen or spoken to your physician since you've been home? yes _____ seen spoken to 5. If you have, for what reasons, and how many times? '• time(s) Reasons 6. Have you seen or spoken to any other health care workers during t h i s time? (for example, nurses) yes seen spoken to no 7. If you have, for what reasons, and how many times? time(s) Reasons 8. Looking back on i t , how would you say your labour was? — J I . : - L _ _ J u easy medium d i f f i c u l t 9. How would you say your d e l i v e r y was? - J - J L_ I 4 — easy medium d i f f i c u l t 10. How happy generally were you with your experience i n the case room at the h o s p i t a l during your labour and delivery? very neutral very happy unhappy 11. How happy generally were you with your experience i n h o s p i t a l during your stay on the maternity floor? very " neutral very happy unhappy 198 Can you describe one (or more) things or experiences i n h o s p i t a l that you f e l t e s p e c i a l l y pleased about? Can you describe one (or more) things or experiences i n h o s p i t a l that you f e l t e s p e c i a l l y unhappy about? Did you have someone with you during labour other than h o s p i t a l personnel? yes (Specify) no If someone was with you, how would you say that worked out? better than a l l r i g h t not very well I expected at a l l Did you have someone with you during d e l i v e r y other than h o s p i t a l personnel? yes (Specify) -no If someone was with you, how would you say that worked out? better than a l l r i g h t not very w e l l I expected at a l l Now that you are home, how confident do you f e e l about taking care of the baby? very mixed f e e l i n g s very confident unsure Does your husband or partner p a r t i c i p a t e i n taking care of the baby? a great deal somewhat not at a l l If he does p a r t i c i p a t e , how confident i s he about taking care o f the baby? very mixed feel i n g s very confident unsure 19.9 21. Have you had any other help during the time since you have been home from hospital? yes (Specify) no ' 22. If you have had other help, how h e l p f u l would you say that was? - J - J I : _ _ J . j very somewhat h e l p f u l very l i t t l e h e l p f u l help 23. How are you feeding the baby now? • b o t t l e ' breast b o t t l e and breast 24. Have you always fed the baby t h i s way since you came home from hospital? yes no (Specify when you switched) 25. If you did change the way you have been feeding the baby, what were your reasons for doing this? 26. Some mothers f e e l i t i s better to have a regular.feeding schedule for the baby; other f e e l i t i s important to feed the baby whenever he/she i s hungry. How do you handle the feeding situation? • regular schedule self-demand combination 27. How would you say feeding has been progressing? very l o t s of smoothly problems 28. I f breast-feeding, how long do you think you w i l l continue nursing? w i l l stop very soon 6-7 more months undecided 2-3 more months 8-10 more months I ' l l see how / c • 4-u m i t works out 4-5 more months more than 10 more months 200 29. Some parents and babies f e e l close to each other r i g h t away, and some take a while getting acquainted. How close do you f e e l to your baby r i g h t now? very close s t i l l seems l i k e a stranger 30. How close does your husband or partner f e e l to the baby r i g h t now? very s t i l l seems close l i k e a stranger 31. How close would you say the baby f e e l s toward you r i g h t now? very not.at a l l close close yet 32. How close would your husband or partner say the baby f e e l s toward him ri g h t now? very not at a l l close close yet 33. When did you begin to f e e l that the baby was r e a l l y yours? r i g h t s t i l l don't away f e e l that way 34. How w e l l are you able to t e l l what your baby needs or wants? very not very well well at a l l 35. What signals does your baby use to communicate with you? 36. I f your baby i s crying and you're sure she/he i s not hungry or wet, what would you do? (Check o f f as many as apply) talk pick up play music or sing give a toy rock l e t baby cry i t out give a p a c i f i e r feed pat other (Specify) 201 37. Do you f i n d i t d i f f i c u l t to quiet the baby down once he/she i s crying or fussing? very very easy d i f f i c u l t 38. Does your baby l i k e you to spend time with him or her besides the time that you usually spend feeding, diapering, bathing, etc.? _____ yes no don't know 39. I f yes, what do you usually do during that time? How often would you say you do this? 40. Some babies seem pretty much the same at one month as they did when they were born; others seem to change quite a b i t during the f i r s t month. What would you say about your baby? changed seems the a l o t same 41. What do you enjoy the most about your baby so far? 42. What does your husband or partner enjoy the most about the baby so far? 43. What do you enjoy the l e a s t about the baby so far? 44. What does your husband or partner enjoy the l e a s t about the baby so far? 45. To what extent has having a baby r e s t r i c t e d your work/school or s o c i a l l i f e ? work/school _J | |__ | [_ s o c i a l _ J . | [__ | |_ a great deal not at a l l 202 46. Do you think that having a new baby has al t e r e d your r e l a t i o n s h i p with your husband or partner? - J I- 1 I- I a great deal not at a l l 47. I f your r e l a t i o n s h i p has changed, i n what ways would you say i t has changed? 48. Have you been out without the baby during the time since you have been home from hospital? '•_ yes (How often?) '•  no I f yes, who stayed with the baby? __. - 49. How did you f e e l while you were out? (Check o f f as many as apply) r e a l l y missed the baby worried about the baby knew the baby was being well cared-for thought a l o t about the baby wondered i f I was doing the right thing f e l t good to be out f o r a change wished I could go out more often other (Specify) ' .  203 APPENDIX M Descriptive S t a t i s t i c s for Items from the Mothers of Toddlers Questionnaire Item Range Mean Minimum Maximum Standard Deviation Self-Esteem & Confidence Self-Esteem Score 3.09 4.95 Competence 2.89 5.00 Parent Confidence Score 1.14 3.59 Confidence/Caregiving 1.00 3.00 Self-Confidence 1.00 4.00: Emotional State Depressed/Elated 1.00 4.00 Content/Discontent 1.00 4.00 Happy/Unhappy 1.00 4.00 Relaxed/Anxious 1.00 5.00 Energetic/Tired 1.00 5.00 Mother-Child Relationship Mother's Emotional T i c 1.00 3.00 Relationship to Toddler 1.00 3.00 Toddler Attachment* 1.00 4.00 Prefer Toddler Stage 1.00 5.00 A b i l i t y to Cope w/ Toddler 1.00 3.00 Number D i s c i p l i n e Issues 0.00 11.00 Marital. Relationship M a r i t a l S a t i s f a c t i o n Over Two Years 1.00 4.00 M a r i t a l S a t i s f a c t i o n Now 1.00 4.00 Child's E f f e c t on Marriage 1.00,- 5.00 4.11 4.41 2.10 1.37 2.00 2.77 2.15 1.9.5 2.48 2.63 1.16 1.31 2.12 1.66 1.76 4.79 1.89 1.82 2.32 .453 .529 .590 .550 .724 .638 .765 .711 .919 .962 .413 .499 .851 .904 .783 2.681 .755 .770 1.666 Denotes 4-point scale Cont'.d 204 APPENDIX M (Continued) Descriptive S t a t i s t i c s f o r Items from the Mothers of Toddlers Questionnaire Item Range Mean Standard Deviation Minimum Maximum Discuss C h i l d w/ Husband Discuss Personal L i f e w/ Husband Partners Agree on D i s c i p l i n e Maternal/Paternal Roles Sim i l a r * Share Ch i l d Care Ov e r a l l Share Child Care When Both Home Mother's Role Concerns Stress Over Two Years Household R e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s * Parenthood Interfere w/ S o c i a l L i f e * Parenthood Interfere w/ Sex L i f e * Parenthood Interfere w/ Career* Worry About Finances* Worry About Future* Unsure How to Care For Toddler* Worry About Being Good Mother* Lack of Time f or S e l f * Lack of Time f or Child' 8 Lack of Time for Husband* Feel Pressure fo r Commitment* Feel Trapped* 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 5.00 5.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 3.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 3.00 4.00 3.42 3.56 1.9.3 2.08 1.93 2.72 2.77 2.41 2.33 2.07 2.11 2.52 2.32 1.53 2.38 2.53 1.77 2.50 1.75 2.02 .879 .898 .544 .809 .772 .839 .956 .973 .995 1.031 1.13 1.04 .971 .700 .934 1.049 . 902 1.064 .809 .911 Denotes 4-point scale 205 APPENDIX N Discussion of R e l i a b i l i t y for Maternal Report Measures A. Mothers of Toddlers Questionnaire and Parent Confidence Scale These two parent-report measures were developed s e p c i f i c a l l y for t h i s exploratory study. Because they were designed to cover a wide range of issues rather than to tap a single construct, assessment of i n t e r n a l consistency (such as s p l i t - h a l f r e l i a b i l i t y ) would be inappropriate. In addition, because the issues of parenthood might be expected to change over time as both parent and c h i l d develop, these measures would be appropriately assessed for short-term, rather than longer-term t e s t - r e t e s t r e l i a b i l i t y . To date, t h i s has not been done. I t i s important that short-term t e s t - r e t e s t r e l i a b i l i t y be established before these two questionnaires are used i n future research. B. Toddler Temperament Scale Carey & McDevitt (1979) report that " r e l i a b i l i t y and i n t e r n a l consistency ... are both about .85" for t h i s scale. C. Self-Esteem Scale (Epstein) Attempts were made to obtain data on the r e l i a b i l i t y of the Epstein scale, but these attempts were unsuccessful. I t i s not known, therefore, whether t h i s scale has been demonstrated to be r e l i a b l e or i f t h i s work i s yet to be done. 

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:
http://iiif.library.ubc.ca/presentation/dsp.831.1-0095215/manifest

Comment

Related Items