Use of an Opinion Polling Technique in a Study of Parent-Child Relationships

230 Pages·011.534 MB·English

by  Hackett, Clarence G

PURDUE UNIVERSITY
THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT THE THESIS PREPARED UNDER MY SUPERVISION
BY Clarence G# Haekett
ENTITLED ITse of An Opinion Polling Technique in a Study
of Parent-Child Relationships
COMPETES WITH THE UNIVERSITY REGULATIONS ON GRADUATION THESES
AND IS APPROVED BY ME AS FUEFIEEING THIS PART OF THE REQUIREMENTS
FOR THE DEGREE OF
Doctor of Philosophy
Professor in Charge of Thesis
f t <. (M' <7~zLéL<3 __ Head of School, or Department
V
TO THE LIBRARIAN
si
THIS THESIS IS NOT TO BE REGARDED AS CONFIDENTIAL.
MtOF'BSSOB ZBT OBABGB
GHAD. SCKOOIi FORM 9—3-49—ZM

USE OF AN OPINION POLLING TECHNIQUE
IN A STUDY OF
PARENT-CHILD RELATIONSHIPS
A Thesis
Submitted to the Faculty
of
Purdue Univers ity
by
Clarence G. Haekett
In Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree
of
Doctor of philosophy
June, 1950
ProQuest Number: 27714070
All rights reserved
INFORMATION TO ALL USERS
The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted.
In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript
and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if material had to be removed,
a note will indicate the deletion.
uest
ProQuest 27714070
Published by ProQuest LLC (2019). Copyright of the Dissertation is held by the Author.
All rights reserved.
This work is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code
Microform Edition © ProQuest LLC.
ProQuest LLC.
789 East Eisenhower Parkway
P.O. Box 1346
Ann Arbor, Ml 48106 - 1346
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The writer wishes to express appreciation and gratitude to
Dr. H* H. Remmers for his suggestion of the problem and direction
of the study, as well as his interest and encouragement. Thanks are
due to Dr. Harriet E. O'Shea, Dr. Ida B. Kelley, and Dr. Kenneth S.
Davenport for their practical guidance and pertinent suggestions.
The assistance and advice of Mr. James A. Norton, Jr., in the statis­
tical phases of the study, and of Dr. Arthur J. Drucker, on Purdue
Opinion Panel procedure, has been greatly appreciated. The writer
is especially indebted to his wife, Margaret Haekett, for her patient
enc our agement.
Among the many others whose help has made this study possible,
special acknowledgement and thanks are due to Superintendent Roy E.
Robinson, the high school students and their parents of Ferndale,
Michigan, for participating in the study. The writer is also grate­
ful to the Purdue Research Foundation for financial assistance in
carrying out the study.
- ii -
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
ABSTRACT
I. INTRODUCTION AND RATIONALE ............................ 1
The Concept of Felt-Conflict .............. . . . . . 7
The Concepts of Actual-Conflict and Empathy . . . . . . 11
II. OBTAINING- THE DATA...................................... 13
Construction of the Questionnaire . . . . . . . . . . . 13
Source of the Questions . . . . . . . . . . 13
Ratings by Judges .......................... 14
Preliminary Administration........................ 14
Final Selection of the Items...................... 17
Forms of the Questionnaire......... 17
The Purdue Opinion Panel • • • • . • • • • . 19
The Ferndale Sample . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
III. TREATMENT OF THE D A T A .................................. 23
Felt-Conflict Scores..................... 31.
Actual-Conflict Scores • • • . . «. 32
Empathy Scores................................. 33
The Reliability of the Scores . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
IV. RESULTS $ THE NATIONAL SAMPLE.......................... 36
Breakdown of the population............... 44
V. COMPARISON OF SAMPLES.................................. 53
VI. RESULTS î THE FERNDALE SAMPLE.......................... 61
Rank Order of the Scores . ................ 70
Felt-Conflict .................................... 70
- iii -
Page
Actual-Conf lict.................................* • ^
Empathy • ............................ "
Relationships Between Felt-Conflict and Actual-Conflict 77
Interpretation of the Empathy Scores................. 86
Extent of Complete Agreement........................ 102
Results in Terms of Percentages.................... 106
VII. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS -.............................. 107
Purpose . . . 107
Procedure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 107
The Samples • ........ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 109
Results . . . . . . . . . ; . . . . Ill
Comparison of Forms . . . . . . . Ill
Felt-Conflict •• . . . . . . Ill
Actual-Conflict . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 113
Smp at h y ........................... 114
Suggestions for Further Research • • • • ........... 116
BIBLIOGRAPHY OF CITED REFERENCES.......................... 118
APPENDIX A ................... 120
Manual of Directions for Poll No. 2 3 . . . . . . . . . 121
Question Sheet - Form A ........................... 122
Percentage Tables on Each Item for the National
Sample..................................... 125
APPENDIX B ............. 157
Question Sheet - Form B ............................ 158
Percentage Tables on Each Item for the Ferndale
Sample ......... 162
- iv -
Page
APPENDIX ................................................ 194
Manual of Directions for Ferndale, Michigan . . . . . 195
Letter to Parents ........ . . . . . . . . . . 196
Question Sheet for Parents • • • ................. 197
APPENDIX D . . .......................................... 199
Worksheets Used in the Computations . . . . . . . . . 200
VITA ............................... 203
TABLES
ige
First Draft of the Questions and Instructions to Judges • 16
Composition of the Stratified Sample of High School
Students ............................................ 20
Composition of the Ferndale Sample Used in Making
the Analysis....................................... 22
Definition of Scores ...................... 25
Items Designated as Questions of “Opinion” ............ 28
Items Designated as Questions of “Fact” ................ 29
Interpretations of Scores • • • • • .............. • • • 30
Critical Ratios of Mean Felt-Conflict Scores for
"Opinion” Items (National Sample) . . . . . . . 37
Critical Ratios of Mean Felt-Conflict Scores for
"Fact” Items (National Sample) ............. . • • • • 38
Mean Position of Children on Three-Point Scale
for "Opinion" Items (National Sample)................ 37
Mean Position of Children on Three-Point Scale
for "Fact” Items (National Sample)........... . . . . 38
Items on Which Children Indicate Significantly Different
Degrees of Felt-Conflict with Either Parent ........ 39
Items on Which Children Indicate No Significantly
Different Degree of Felt-Conflict with Either Parent • 39
Rank Order of Mean FeIt-Conflict Scores for "Opinion”
Items (National Sample) . . ........................ 42
Rank Order of Mean Felt-Conflict Scores for "Fact”
Items (National Sample)................ ............ 42
Comparison of Mean Felt-Conflict Scores for Parents
in the Two Ferndale Samples . ...................... 55
Comparison of Mean Felt-Conflict Scores for Children
in the Two Ferndale Samples....................... 56
Comparison of Mean Felt-Conflict Scores for the
National Sample and the Ferndale Sample ............ 58
- vi -
Table Page
14. Items on Which Statistically Significantly Different
Degrees of Felt-Conflict Are Indicated Between the
National Sample and the Ferndale Sample ............ 59
15. Critical Ratios of Mean Scores on Each of the Poll
Items (Ferndale Sample) . . . . . . ................ 65-68
ISA. Mean Position of Children, Mothers, and Fathers on
3-Point Scale for uOpinion11 Items (Ferndale Sample) • 69
16B. Mean Position of Children, Mothers, and Fathers on
3-Point Scale for "Fact" Items (Ferndale Sample ) . . . 69
17A. Rank Order of Children's Mean Felt-Conflict Scores
for "Opinion" Items (Ferndale Sample) 71
17B. Rank Order of Children's Mean Felt-Conflict Scores
for "Fact" Items (Ferndale Sample) .................. 71
17C. Rank Order of Parent's Mean Felt-Conflict Sôores
for "Opinion" Items (Ferndale Sample ) • • • .... 72
17D. Rank Order of Parent's Mean Felt-Conflict Scores
for "Fact" Items (Ferndale Sample) . . . . . . . . . . 72
18A. Rank Order of Mean Actual-Conflict Scores for
"Opinion” Items (Ferndale Sample) • • • • ......... 74
18B. Rank Order of Mean Actual-Conflict Scores for
"Fact" Items (Ferndale Sample) . . . . . . . . . . . . 74
19A. Rank Order of Mean Empathy Scores in Terms of Lack of
Empathy for Parent's Attitudes on "Opinion” Items
(Ferndale Sample) .................................. 76
19B. Rank Order of Mean Empathy Scores in Terms of Lack of
Empathy for Parent's Attitudes on "Fact" Items
(Ferndale Sample) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76
19C. Rank Order of Mean Empathy Scores in Terms of Lack of
Empathy for Children's Attitudes on ”Opinion" Items
(Ferndale Sample ) ................. 78
19D. Rank Order of Mean Empathy Scores in Terms of Lack of
Empathy for Children's Attitudes on "Fact" Items
(Ferndale Sample)..................... 78
20. Items on Which Children Indicate They Feel Conflict with
parents and Significant Actual-Conflict Does Exist . . 79