Family power studies: some major methodological issues

Abstract

Traditionally, the study of family concentrates mainly on the spousal household decision-making wherein researchers argue that the balance in marriage is influenced by the comparative valued of the spouses. The underlying assumption of this argument is drawn from the of marital power (Blood and Wolfe, 1960) which suggests that comparative pragmatic resources (such as income, education, and occupational status) of husband and wife are significantly important in providing leverage to spousal decision-making. A positive link between women's economic participation and their decision-making in the family has been suggested by many researchers (McKinly, 1964; Scanzoni, 1970; Bahr, Bowerman and Gecas, 1974). Findings from several empirical studies in developed countries such as France (Michel, 1967), Yugoslavia (Buric and Zecevic, 1967), Germany (Lamouse, 1969; Lupri, 1969), and the United States (Kandel and Lesser, 1972; Bahr, 1974) generally supported such contentions. Further tests of resource in other cultures such as India, Denmark and Sweden, showed that a husband's resources had no correlation with his decision-making (Rodman, 1972). In the United States and France, however, resources of a husband had a positive relationship with decision making, whereas in Greece and Yugoslavia the husband's was found to be negatively correlated with his education. Rodman argued that the influence of pragmatic resources on marital varies from society to society due to interaction of comparative resources and cultural expectations. This explanation of Rodman came to be known as the theory of resources in cultural context. He also believed that in a society where cultural norms dictate strong male authority, socioeconomic resources of the wife will have little or no effect on marital power. Both the resource and the of resources in cultural context have been tested widely in developed and developing countries but the

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 17 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.