Final Examination - Sociology 680 -
Fall 2011
This
examination is both an exercise in demonstrating your understanding the
presentation format of scholarly research while at the same time confirming
your ability to articulate and interpret various multivariate techniques within
that context. According, I have placed
on the following pages, six journal article references and their associated
abstracts. It is your job to read the
abstracts, link to the articles and provide a critical summary of the research
questions, methodology and associated results in the following manner:
1. Examine the abstract and articulate the type
of research, keywords for abstracting services, methodology and primary
results.
2. Critique the introduction by judging the reason
for the research (i.e. saying something new; replicating and extending; or
resolving conflicts in the literature), pointing out the research issue and
articulating the propositions/hypotheses.
3. Elaborate the methodology by describing the
model, the type of multivariate technique used, and the approach to the
analysis (e.g. if a path model, what are the direct and indirect paths; if a
log linear model, what factors are used in the model). Be sure to articulate the source of the data
and the assumptions of the model for those data. Did the author satisfy the assumptions?
4.
Report the results of the research. How
closely did the results conform to the hypotheses? Did the model facilitate or impede such
testing. Could a better model have been
used? What would it be and how would it
contribute to a better test of the hypotheses.
5. Did the discussion and interpretation section
point out any shorting comings with the hypotheses, operational definitions,
sample or method? Regardless, did you see
any shorting comings, not mentioned by the author?
6. Looking at the references, which style was
used (i.e. MLA, APA or ASA). How were
the footnotes and tables/graphs integrated?
Did the style flow? Based on the
above, where would you rank the journal from which the article came: Tier I, Tier II or Tier III?
Please
follow this procedure for four of the six references listed on the ensuing
pages. Remember, length of your finished
test is not a criterion for grading. Say
as much as you need, but do not ramble.
This will be due in my office by next Thursday December 15 at 6:00 pm. It may also be emailed to me prior to that
date, with the caveat that you MUST asked for a receipt from me if sending via
email. I will not be responsible for
your final unless you have an email receipt.
I also cannot accept you papers past this date.
1.
Family Experience in Preadolescence and the
Development of Male Delinquency”
Author(s): Chris Coughlin and Samuel Vuchinich.
Journal of Marriage and Family,
Vol. 58, No. 2 (May, 1996), pp. 491-501
This study examined aspects of the family experience of 194 males at age
10 as predictors of police arrest by age 17. Effects for quality of
parent-child relations, parental discipline practices, family structure, and
family problem solving on arrest were found, with intelligence, socioeconomic
status, and peer relations as controls. Experience in stepfamilies or
single-parent families more than doubled the risk of delinquency that began by
age 14, but did not increase the risk for delinquency that began between ages
14 and 17. The elevated risks associated with poor peer relations and
antisocial characteristics were constant across the family structures. Effects
of family problem solving were found only in stepfamilies and single-parent
families. The results clarified the timing and indirect nature of family
effects on the development of delinquency.
Sociometry, Vol. 38, No. 2 (Jun., 1975), pp.
247-260
Jones (1973) has posited that self-esteem will be supported in those
situations in which a subject is the target of evaluative actions and that
consistency theory will hold in those contexts in which a subject observes
others interacting but is not evaluated directly by them. This conjecture was tested in the following
manner: high and low levels of adequacy
of performance, reward, and direct involvement with performance-reward
contingencies were manipulated in a 2 x 2 x 2 factorial design. Dependent variables were the likeability,
evaluation, potency, and activity ratings that experimental subjects attributed
to the experimenter’s “stooge” (the subject who was responsible for
distributing rewards). Self-esteem
theory alone accounted adequately for the data.
3. Family Worship Patterns and Their
Correlation with Adolescent Behavior and Beliefs
Author(s) Jerry W. Lee, Gail T. Rice and V.
Bailey Gillespie
Journal for the Scientific Study of
Religion, Vol. 36, No. 3
(Sep., 1997), pp. 372-381
We examine behaviors involved in family worship, how these behaviors
cluster together into specific patterns of family worship, and how these
patterns of family worship relate to the behaviors and beliefs of adolescents
attending Seventh-day Adventist schools. Seven patterns of family worship were
detected by cluster analysis of questionnaires completed by 7,658 Seventh-day
Adventist youth, grades 6 through 12. Worship patterns that actively involved
youth in reading, praying, and sharing their religious experience were rated as
more meaningful and interesting and were associated with higher levels of
Active Faith (a factor score). Youth in families with worship patterns that did
not actively involve the youth were even lower on Active Faith than youth whose
families had no worship. However, No Worship youth were highest on
Materialism/Legalism and Alcohol/Drug Use. With one exception, worship patterns
with high youth involvement were associated with lower Alcohol/Drug Use and
lower Materialism/Legalism. Youth in the Shared Worship group, in which every
family member participated in every phase of worship every day, were high on
Active Faith but also relatively high on Materialism/Legalism, and Alcohol/Drug
use suggesting a pattern of compulsive behavior.
4.
Forgiveness: An
Exploratory Factor Analysis and Its Relationships to Religious Variables
Author(s): Richard L. Gorsuch and Judy Y. Hao
Review of Religious Research, Vol. 34, No. 4 (Jun., 1993), pp. 333-347
Author(s): E. R. Mahoney
The Journal of Sex Research, Vol. 15, No. 4 (Nov., 1979), pp.
264-275
A modified probability
sample of adults in the United States in 1977 was used to examine factors
related to attitude toward sex education in the public schools. On the basis of
previous research and statements of prominent anti-sex-education advocates, it
was predicted that pro- and anti-sex-education individuals would differ in
political orientation, religious orientation, attitude toward the traditional
family, premarital sexual values, attitudes toward women's roles, age, social
class, gender, and attitudes toward education in general. The ability of these
variables to distinguish between pro- and anti-sex-education subsamples was
examined through discriminant analysis. The results suggest that political
liberalism-conservatism, aright-wing political view, religious
liberalism-conservatism, and age are not important discriminating
characteristics. Rather, pro- and anti-sex-education subsamples were most
clearly distinguished on the factors of having a traditional orientation toward
the family, women's roles, and premarital sexual behavior. These important
distinguishing characteristics suggest that attitude toward sex education has
more to do with views of the role of women, family, and sexuality than with
political-religious views, a reasonable expectation given the traditional
linkage of these three aspects of American society.
Author(s): Alan E. Bayer
Journal of Marriage and the Family, Vol. 31, No. 3 (Aug., 1969), pp. 551-558
Path analysis has been widely employed in recent years
as a concise means of simultaneously analyzing the interrelationships among a
large number of variables. The utility
of this method in family research is demonstrated in the present paper. Four independent variables--socio-economic
status, aptitude, educational plans, and marriage expectations--are related to
the age at marriage among a sub-sample of 4,000 married young people from a
nationwide longitudinal survey. Of the
four independent variables, expected age at marriage, stated some time prior to
marriage, is shown through path analysis to be the best predictor of actual
marriage age. The additional accuracy in
prediction through assessment of the other variables is negligible. A multiple causality model, based on path
analysis and including additional variables to those employed in this paper, is
advocated as a means to optimize prediction of marriage and family related
outcomes