summary Soc

Sociology 101

Research Report #1

Need more of an intro before you begin to talk about the article. For instance, what is the purpose of your paper?

The purpose of this study (which study?) was to investigate the impact of differences in stepfather and nonresident father relationships on children of different genders and age groups. Specifically, some of the research questions posed in this study were: How common are different types of closeness to stepfathers and nonresident fathers (i.e. closeness to only one of either or closeness to both nonresident fathers and stepfathers)? What factors predict these patterns of closeness? And, how do these different types of closeness affect children (measured in terms of internalized and externalized problems, and failing grades) (King, 2006).

The author of the article cited many other studies to build his hypotheses. He recognized that many other studies examined the way in which relationships between children and their nonresident fathers, and relationships between children and their stepfathers affected children. Might summarize some key findings from these earlier studies. But these studies did not address a direct comparison between both stepfather and nonresident father relationships with children. This study examines the comparison between the dynamics of stepfather and nonresident father relationships with their children. The author also discussed other studies that examine factors that may also contribute to a child’s well-being, specifically defined in this study in terms of failing grades or internal and external problems, in addition to the relationships the children may have with their two fathers. One such source seems to suggest that better education among fathers affects the level of closeness that they feel with their children (King, 2006). Likewise, gender and age play huge roles in the amount of closeness that children feel towards their stepfather or nonresident father. For the most part, boys tend to report feeling closer to their fathers than girls and as children grow older they report to feeling less close to both their stepfather or nonresident father (King, 2006). In addition, in families that report higher marital happiness between the mother and stepfather, the closeness that the children feel toward a stepfather is closer. Also, a close mother and child relationship positively correlates with a close father-child relationship (King, 2006).

This study includes several different alternative hypotheses. The first hypothesis, referred to as the additive hypothesis, states that children benefit equally from close relationships with either father but may derive even more benefit from close relationships with both nonresident fathers and stepfathers (King, 2006). The second hypothesis, named the redundancy hypothesis, predicts that having close ties to both fathers is not especially beneficial, rather having a close tie to only one father is sufficient for a child’s well-being (King, 2006). The third hypothesis, called the primacy of biology hypothesis, states that a close tie to a nonresident father is the most influential in promoting the well-being of a child (King, 2006). The fourth hypothesis, called the primacy of residence hypothesis, predicts just the opposite: that children benefit most from close relationships with their stepfathers (King, 2006). The fifth hypothesis, referred to as the irrelevant hypothesis, states that relationships with nonresident fathers and stepfathers have no relevance to a child’s well-being (King, 2006). Great job explaining the different hypotheses. The independent variable in this study was the rating of closeness between the nonresident father or stepfather and the child. There were four different experimental groups within this study: children who reported being close to both fathers, children who reported being close to their stepfathers only, children who reported being close to their nonresident fathers only, and children who reported very little or no closeness with either father. Closeness to nonresident fathers and stepfathers were rated by adolescents on a scale from one to five, one being ‘not at all close’ and 5 being ‘extremely close’ (King, 2006). The dependent variables were the externalized and internalized problems that the child experienced as well as the number of failing grades that the child had earned. A number reflecting a child’s internalized problems were acquired through the use of four different scales that measured depressive symptoms, psychological distress, negative outlook, and low self-esteem (King, 2006). Children were asked how often they experienced moods or feelings that reflected each of these types of internalized problems and rank the regularity of these occurrences based on a scale from zero to three, zero being never or rarely and three being a lot (King, 2006). Similarly, children were asked to rank the prevalence of externalized problems in their lives as measured by the occurrence of nonviolent delinquency, violent delinquency, as well as the use of tobacco, marijuana, and alcohol. The third dependent variable, failing grades, is the easiest of the variables to quantify because adolescents with grades below a D were simply recorded. Good job explaining the measures and good understanding of the variables.

The results of this experiment were gained by way of a series of surveys that accessed children’s closeness with their fathers, marital happiness, as well as the three dependent variables being measured. The primary results of the study were that children who had close relationships with both their stepfather and nonresident father tended to have the lowest amount of internalized and externalized problems as well as fewer failing grades (King, 2006). This seems to suggest that closer ties with family help to promote the well-being of adolescents. Likewise, children who are close to their stepfathers derived nearly the same benefits as children who had close relationships with both fathers and also tended to rate closeness with their mothers higher than those who have a close relationship with their nonresident father only (King, 2006). These children, who only report a close relationship with their biological fathers, tend to have been born in marriage, have higher educated parents, and have poorer relationships with their mothers (King, 2006). In addition, adolescents who reported poor relationships with both of their fathers tended to have higher rates of externalized and internalized problems as well as more failing grades (King, 2006). This finding has one of the greatest implications for how the dynamics of family relationships affect adolescents’ success. This especially emphasizes the fact that having a close relationship to a father very positively affects the behavior and academic success of a child. Conversely, a poor relationship between a child and his or her father can often dictate whether that child will be successful or not.

The author reported several different limitations of the study. One of the most notable of these was the fact that older adolescents (ranging from age 11 to 18) were the only age group studied (King, 2006). Studying a broader age group would help to better catalog the changes that occur in father-child closeness that occurs as the children age and they live longer and longer away from their nonresident father. Another problem with this study is the mere fact that it makes a fundamental causation assumption, that father-child closeness affects internalized and externalized problems rather than the other way around. Despite these weaknesses, the study has strength in its new approach to looking at relationships with stepfathers and biological fathers. The very direct comparison between nonresident fathers and stepfather that is utilized in this study better gives an idea of how nonresident father-child relationships and stepfather-child relationships affect children in similar and different ways. Not only that, but this sort of comparison gives a suggestion of which relationship seems to be more important in determining a child’s well-being, in this case indicating that a strong relationship with both fathers is most beneficial but a strong relationship between children and their stepfather are almost as beneficial.

Works Cited

King, Valarie (2006).The antecedents and consequences of adolescents' relationships with stepfathers

and nonresident fathers. Journal of Marriage and Family. 68, 1-20.

Interesting article! Great understanding of the research process.