Lecture Outline for September 7: Cherlin pp.3-37.
I: What is Sociology of the Family?
Study of complex set of relationships between societal forces, individual and family
characteristics, and family-related behavior.
1: societal influences on family related behavior
2: inverse of (1) - influence of family behavior on larger society
3: relationship between individual and family characteristics and family related
behavior
4: relationship between larger societal forces and individual and family
characteristics
II: How do Sociologists define the family?
Typically it is defined by the functions performed.
1: Provision of care for dependents
A: Caring for and raising children
B: Caring for frail family members (elderly, disabled, etc.)
2: Emotional support (including sexual relations)
Difference between family and household.
Difference between family and kin.
1
III: Theoretical Frameworks for study of the family:
1: Functionalism
2: Exchange Theory
3: Conflict Perspective
4: Symbolic Interaction
5: Feminist Theory
IV: Data
1: Survey data
A. Random sample
B. Large scale
C. Allows for generalizations
D. Allows for comparisons of different groups (e.g., races)
2. Ethnographic data
A. Usually non-random sample
B. small scale
C. Allows for more nuanced analysis
3. Relationship between survey and ethnographic data
2
V: How do Sociologists Study the Family?
Typically by making use of variation and change in the behavior of interest.
1: Historical perspective
2: Comparative approach
3: Group differences
4: Life Course approach
3
Lecture Outline for September 12: Aldous (CP).
I: What is the life course approach?
A very general and broad framework for studying the interactive relationships between
individual behavior throughout life and a variety of familial, community, and social
forces.
1: Particularly concerned with the timing and sequencing of life transitions/events
(e.g., finishing school, marriage, childbirth, etc. etc.)
2: Focus on how (1) is influenced by biological, social, cultural, economic, and
demographic forces (and vice-versa).
3: Also focus on how experience earlier in life impacts events later in life - a
cumulative view of individual lives.
4: Focus on the interdependence of the life courses of individual family members
– “mutually contingent careers.”
II: Dimensions of the life course
1: Individual time (age effects)
a: Biological age – e.g., sexual maturity, death, etc.
b: Legal/social age – well-established age-grades (e.g., school system,
retirement policies)
2: Social (family) time
a: Normative age – the “appropriate” time to leave home, marry, have
children, etc.
b: Social roles – e.g., student, career stage, etc.
4
b: Family roles – e.g., dependent child, spouse, parent, etc.
c: Family composition – e.g., only-child, parent of dependent children,
single mother, etc.
3: Historical time (period and cohort effects)
a: Short-term change – e.g., wars, depressions, famines, political upheaval,
changing cohort size, etc. (“period effects” and “cohort effects”)
b: Long -term change – e.g., improved mortality, change in attitudes
III: Examples of studies using life-course framework
1. Watkins et al. (ASR 1987) - Effect of long-term mortality decline on women's
family roles (child, parent, spouse).
A: Fertility decline outweighs mortality decline in reducing number of
years as a parent of a dependent child.
B: Mortality decline increases number of years as a child of an elderly
parent.
C: Fertility decline outweighs mortality effect in reducing the number of
years with a dependent child and parent.
D: Total effect is increase number of years with a dependent child or
parent - mortality decline.
E: Years with spouse increases in response to decline in mortality, but this
increase is limited by changes in divorce.
5
2: Waite et al. (ASR 1986) - Effect of nonfamily (i.e., independent) living on
family attitudes and expectations of young adults.
A: Premise of study
Individual family attitudes are shaped not only by general social trends
(historical time) but also by the experiences of the individuals themselves
(requires longitudinal data).
B: Expectations
1. Non-family living leads to a shift away from traditional family attitudes
(less control and influence from parents)
2. Effect of non-family living should be greater for women than for men
(parental influence with respect to family attitudes thought to be stronger
for women)
3. Effect of college education should be particularly large for those who
go away to school
(Combined effect of two forces promoting less adherence to traditional
roles and attitudes).
C: Findings – Compared to those who lived at home from age 17 to
marriage, those who lived away from home were found to be:
1. More likely to plan on working at age 35 (10% more likely at age 20)
2. More supportive of work for mothers
3. Expected to have fewer children
4. Similar with respect to ideal family size
5. More liberal with respect to sex roles – less support for breadwinnerhomemaker division of labor
IV: Summary – Pros and cons of the life course approach
1. Very broad and useful framework for study of family
6
2. Overly complex
3. A framework, not a theory
4. Results may not be generalizable
7