334 HANSON,MCLANAHAN,AND THOMSON above 1 indicates that the household is not poor.Home ownership is a dichoto- mous variable indicating whether the respondent owns her/his home.3 We include four measures of parental resources:(1)mother activities with children,(2)supervision in the home,(3)control,and(4)educational expecta- tions.Mother activities is a summary measure based on mother reports of the frequency of time spent with children sharing the following activities:weekly dinners(0-7),leisure activities away from home,working on a project or playing together at home,and helping with reading or homework ("never or rarely"to "almost everyday,"1-6).Supervision is measured by two items asking whether the focal child is allowed to be at home alone (1)in the afternoon and (2)at night, or overnight (0,1).Control is measured by two items asking about television restrictions:(1)whether the parent restricts the amount of television the child watches and(2)whether the parent restricts the type of programs watched(0,1). We created factor scores for mother activities,supervision,and control based on a confirmatory factor analysis of the items used to measure these constructs.The confirmatory factor analysis models were fitted using Muthen's(1988)methodol- ogy for factor analysis with dichotomous and/or ordinal variables and were standardized to have a mean of 0 and a standard deviation of 1.We measured educational expectations as a dichotomous variable,coded I if the mother reports that she expects the focal child to obtain more than a high school degree and 0 if otherwise. We use a variety of measures of community resources.First,we use two measures of residential mobility:a dichotomous variable indicating whether the parent moved during the 5 years prior to the survey and a continuous variable indicating the number of moves during that time period.We use these variables as proxies for ties to the community.Second,we include a variety of measures of relations between mothers and grandparents,including (1)frequency of contact (“not at all'"to“several times a week,."),(2)relationship quality(“very poor”to "excellent,"1-7,6(3)emotional support received,and (4)instrumental support received during the month prior to the survey(0,1).Instrumental support received includes help with childcare,transportation,and work around the house.Emo- tional support includes advice,encouragement,and moral or emotional support. Third,we examine relations between mothers and friends.We use a measure of the frequency of social time spent with friends(neighbors,coworkers,friends outside neighborhood,group recreation activities),and two dichotomous mea- sures indicating whether emotional support and instrumental support was re- ceived from friends.Finally,we include two very different measures of group participation:(1)religious social activities and (2)time spent in a bar or tavern. The measure of religious social activities is based on a question asking how often 5 Note that home ownership may also produce community resources,because home owners have a stake in maintaining community quality through community involvement,they also have longer tenure in a neighborhood or community and therefore should have stronger ties to their neighbors. 6 In the 1992-1994 round,this item contains 10 categories.We standardized the 1987-1988 item and the 1992-1994 items
above 1 indicates that the household is not poor. Home ownership is a dichotomous variable indicating whether the respondent owns her/his home.5 We include four measures of parental resources: (1) mother activities with children, (2) supervision in the home, (3) control, and (4) educational expectations. Mother activities is a summary measure based on mother reports of the frequency of time spent with children sharing the following activities: weekly dinners (0–7), leisure activities away from home, working on a project or playing together at home, and helping with reading or homework (‘‘never or rarely’’ to ‘‘almost everyday,’’ 1–6). Supervision is measured by two items asking whether the focal child is allowed to be at home alone (1) in the afternoon and (2) at night, or overnight (0, 1). Control is measured by two items asking about television restrictions: (1) whether the parent restricts the amount of television the child watches and (2) whether the parent restricts the type of programs watched (0, 1). We created factor scores for mother activities, supervision, and control based on a confirmatory factor analysis of the items used to measure these constructs. The confirmatory factor analysis models were fitted using Muthe´n’s (1988) methodology for factor analysis with dichotomous and/or ordinal variables and were standardized to have a mean of 0 and a standard deviation of 1. We measured educational expectations as a dichotomous variable, coded 1 if the mother reports that she expects the focal child to obtain more than a high school degree and 0 if otherwise. We use a variety of measures of community resources. First, we use two measures of residential mobility: a dichotomous variable indicating whether the parent moved during the 5 years prior to the survey and a continuous variable indicating the number of moves during that time period. We use these variables as proxies for ties to the community. Second, we include a variety of measures of relations between mothers and grandparents, including (1) frequency of contact (‘‘not at all’’ to ‘‘several times a week,’’), (2) relationship quality (‘‘very poor’’ to ‘‘excellent,’’ 1–7,6 (3) emotional support received, and (4) instrumental support received during the month prior to the survey (0, 1). Instrumental support received includes help with childcare, transportation, and work around the house. Emotional support includes advice, encouragement, and moral or emotional support. Third, we examine relations between mothers and friends. We use a measure of the frequency of social time spent with friends (neighbors, coworkers, friends outside neighborhood, group recreation activities), and two dichotomous measures indicating whether emotional support and instrumental support was received from friends. Finally, we include two very different measures of group participation: (1) religious social activities and (2) time spent in a bar or tavern. The measure of religious social activities is based on a question asking how often 5 Note that home ownership may also produce community resources, because home owners have a stake in maintaining community quality through community involvement; they also have longer tenure in a neighborhood or community and therefore should have stronger ties to their neighbors. 6 In the 1992–1994 round, this item contains 10 categories. We standardized the 1987–1988 item and the 1992–1994 items. 334 HANSON, MCLANAHAN, AND THOMSON SSR625 @xyserv1/disk4/CLS_jrnlkz/GRP_ssrj/JOB_ssrj27-3/DIV_231a04 debb
WINDOWS ON DIVORCE 335 the parent attends a social event at a church or a synagogue ("not at all"to "several times a week,").The bar/tavern measure is based on a similar item asking about time spent in a bar or tavern.We expect that religious groups provide support for effective parenting and access to community resources for children. On the other hand,social activities in bars or taverns are unlikely to provide access to child-centered community resources and may detract from parental resources for children.A"4 times per year"metric was used for contact with parents,time with friends,time with religious groups,and time in bars/taverns. Control Variables In the analyses that follow,we control for parental age(age of oldest resident parent),the number of children in the household,parental education(highest of two parents-no high school degree,high school degree,some college,college degree or more),and race/ethnicity (European-American,African-American, Hispanic,other).If the focal child is the referent to the outcome variable of interest(i.e.,supervision),we also control for the age and sex of the focal child. Otherwise,we control for the age of the youngest child and the number of female children in the household.All of the control variables come from the 1987-1988 survey. RESULTS Table 1 shows means(proportions)of demographic characteristics and the measures of family resources in 1987-1988 and 1992-1994.Columns 1 and 2 show means for families in which the parents were continuously married during the two time periods,while columns 3 and 4 show means for families in which the parents separated or divorced,including families in which there was a remarriage. A comparison of the numbers in column I and column 3 in panel 1 shows that parents who eventually divorced were younger and less educated than parents who stayed together,which underlies some of the gross differences in family resources observed at time 1. Gross Differences in Resources Do families that eventually divorce have fewer resources prior to divorce than families that stay together?Columns I and 3 show,first,that families with parents who eventually divorce have fewer economic resources-household income (p<.10),standard of living (p<10),home ownership-prior to divorce than families with parents who stay together.The results are mixed for parental resources.Mothers who eventually divorce engage in more activities with their children but have lower college expectations than mothers who remain married. There are no significant differences in supervision and television restrictions between the two groups.Results are also mixed for kin/community resources.On the positive side,mothers who eventually divorce report higher levels of contact with their own parents than mothers who stay married.On the negative side, they report lower quality relationships with their parents,less religious-related
the parent attends a social event at a church or a synagogue (‘‘not at all’’ to ‘‘several times a week,’’). The bar/tavern measure is based on a similar item asking about time spent in a bar or tavern. We expect that religious groups provide support for effective parenting and access to community resources for children. On the other hand, social activities in bars or taverns are unlikely to provide access to child-centered community resources and may detract from parental resources for children. A ‘‘4 times per year’’ metric was used for contact with parents, time with friends, time with religious groups, and time in bars/taverns. Control Variables In the analyses that follow, we control for parental age (age of oldest resident parent), the number of children in the household, parental education (highest of two parents—no high school degree, high school degree, some college, college degree or more), and race/ethnicity (European-American, African-American, Hispanic, other). If the focal child is the referent to the outcome variable of interest (i.e., supervision), we also control for the age and sex of the focal child. Otherwise, we control for the age of the youngest child and the number of female children in the household. All of the control variables come from the 1987–1988 survey. RESULTS Table 1 shows means (proportions) of demographic characteristics and the measures of family resources in 1987–1988 and 1992–1994. Columns 1 and 2 show means for families in which the parents were continuously married during the two time periods, while columns 3 and 4 show means for families in which the parents separated or divorced, including families in which there was a remarriage. A comparison of the numbers in column 1 and column 3 in panel 1 shows that parents who eventually divorced were younger and less educated than parents who stayed together, which underlies some of the gross differences in family resources observed at time 1. Gross Differences in Resources Do families that eventually divorce have fewer resources prior to divorce than families that stay together? Columns 1 and 3 show, first, that families with parents who eventually divorce have fewer economic resources—household income ( p , .10), standard of living ( p , 10), home ownership—prior to divorce than families with parents who stay together. The results are mixed for parental resources. Mothers who eventually divorce engage in more activities with their children but have lower college expectations than mothers who remain married. There are no significant differences in supervision and television restrictions between the two groups. Results are also mixed for kin/community resources. On the positive side, mothers who eventually divorce report higher levels of contact with their own parents than mothers who stay married. On the negative side, they report lower quality relationships with their parents, less religious-related WINDOWS ON DIVORCE 335 SSR625 @xyserv1/disk4/CLS_jrnlkz/GRP_ssrj/JOB_ssrj27-3/DIV_231a04 debb