Date of Award

1986

Document Type

Dissertation

Degree Name

Doctor of Education (Ed.D.)

Department

Education

First Advisor

Stephen Trotter

First Committee Member

Deann Christianson

Second Committee Member

Douglas W. Matheson

Third Committee Member

Robert R. Hopkins

Fourth Committee Member

Robert P. Morrow

Abstract

The purpose of the present study was the integration of the father-absence research to determine the effects of father absence on children's cognitive development as assessed by standardized intelligence, aptitude, and achievement tests and school grades. The study used the quantitative integrative review methodology of meta-analysis through which the findings from individual studies were integrated and relations between the study findings and characteristics were explored. The meta-analytic approach involved transforming the findings of individual studies to a common metric (i.e., effect size), describing and coding the characteristics of the studies, and then using the analysis of variance and multiple regression analysis to determine whether there were overall effects, subsample effects, and relations among the characteristics of the studies and the study findings. Extensive manual and computer searches uncovered 137 father-absence studies representing 9,955,118 father-absent and father-present subjects from preschool to college age. Analysis of the study findings at the highest level of aggregation yielded a mean effect size of -.26 reflecting a .26 standard deviation superiority of the father-present subjects over the father-absent subjects. Mean effect sizes were found to differ significantly as a function of age of the child at onset of the father absence, age of the subjects at time of study, sample size, sample geographic distribution, and number of matched/controlled factors in each study. Five significant correlations between study characteristics and study effect sizes were obtained: (1) larger effect sizes were associated with father-absence onset during 7-12 years of age; (2) larger effect sizes were identified with younger study subjects; (3) larger effect sizes were associated with smaller study sample sizes; (4) larger effect sizes were related to narrow geographic distributions of study samples; and (5) larger effect sizes were associated with a greater number of matched or controlled factors in the study. Only 14% of the total variance in the study effect sizes was accounted for by the composite set of predictors (i.e., study characteristics).

Pages

214

Share

COinS
 

Rights Statement

Rights Statement

No Known Copyright. URI: http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/NKC/1.0/
The organization that has made the Item available reasonably believes that the Item is not restricted by copyright or related rights, but a conclusive determination could not be made. Please refer to the organization that has made the Item available for more information. You are free to use this Item in any way that is permitted by the copyright and related rights legislation that applies to your use.