By:
Lina Guzman
Susan M. Jekielek
Paper prepared for
Office of the Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation, HHS
for the contract, Indicators
of Child, Family and Community Connections,
(Contract no. HHS-100-01-0011 (05).)
Family time is a critical family and child resource. Both the amount and the quality of family time are associated with child outcomes (S. Hofferth & Sandberg, 2001) and the amount of couple interaction is linked to marital stability (Presser, 2000). Moreover, the regularity of family activities helps to structure family routine and forge family identity (Fiese et al., 2002). With the rise of women's employment (Bianchi & Spain, 1996), changes in family structure (Federal Interagency Forum on Child and Family Statistics, 2003), the emergence of the 24-hour economy (Presser, 1999), longer workdays (Jacobs, 2003) and increased commute times (Hoffmeister & Edgell, 2003), family time has become the focus of considerable public discussion. Of particular concern, is the "time squeeze" faced by many American families (Jacobs, 2003). While the average workweek for the dual-earner couples and single-parents has not changed much, there are more dual earner couples and single-parent families today than in the past (Jacobs, 2003, p. 6). Moreover, work schedules have become more varied. With the expansion of the service industry, parents today are more likely to be working nights, weekends, and rotating shifts-schedules that are likely to encroach on family time and the regularity of family routines (Presser, 1999). In fact, a quarter of married couples contain at least one spouse working non-standard hours (Presser, 1999).
This topic is of concern because family time matters. By spending time with their children, parents build the bonds that are necessary for the transmission of human capital (Coleman, 1988). Children are better off in terms of academic and emotional well-being from time spent with parents, and from parenting that is characterized by warmth as well as rule-setting (Barber & Erickson, 2001; Baumrind, 1967; Herman, Dornbusch, Herron, & Herting, 1997; Maccoby & Martin, 1983). Finally, a lifecourse perspective would suggest that family routines and rituals experienced in childhood help set the course for how one will organize their own family life in adulthood (Elder, 1999).
Given the importance of family time for family, adult, and child well-being and evidence that new threats to family time are emerging, the need for current and valid measures of family time is increasing. While measures of family time, in particular the amount of time spent together by family members, are available, current measures often fall short in fully capturing the diversity of family activities. Moreover, few measures are available that assess the quality or meaning behind family activities and time. The unit of analysis is often at the individual level, without regard to interactions with other family members or attempts to measure activities with the entire family. Indeed, less is known about how to measure family routines and rituals and about how engaging in activities with family members helps to forge family identity.
[ Go to Contents ]
In recent years, there has been an increase in the availability of data sources that measure family time, including the 1997 Child Development Supplement to the Panel Study of Income Dynamics (PSID-CDS), the National Survey of Families and Households, and the American’s Use of Time Project. Examples of smaller scale studies include the Annual Meaningful Time Check-Up and California’s Children Activity Pattern Survey. Concomitant with this rise has been an increase in the number of studies that focus on family time (see Bianchi, 2000; Bianchi & Robinson, 1997; Bryant & Zick, 1996; Budig & Folbre, 2002; S. Hofferth & Sandberg, 2001; Yeung, Sandberg, Davis-Kean, &Hofferth, 2001). The field has been further aided by qualitative studies that delve into the quality, meaning, and nature of family time and interactions (Blum-Kulka, 1994). The Changing Workforce Study (Bond, Galinsky, &Swanberg, 1998) tracks the subjective experience of employment and family demands on workers, and is unique in collecting this information over time. Both the American Community Survey and the Current Population Survey collect data on commute time to work; however, neither of these surveys has made estimates of commute time for parents publicly available.
Together these surveys, and subsequent studies based on these data, have provided national estimates of the amount of time that families, parents and children in particular, spend together. However, outside of a few key activities, less is known about how families spend their time together or the nature of the family interactions. Moreover, while important advances have been made in the measurement of family time and in data collection methods, most notably in area of time use diaries, the field as a whole is still “underdeveloped (Smeeding & Marchand, 2003). Future studies designed to measure family time will have to balance the need to improve the reliability and accuracy of estimates (Robinson, 1997) with the costs associated with collecting data from multiple perspectives (i.e., parents versus children) and for a wider range of activities.
Despite the entrance of mothers into the labor force and concerns about longer commute times and work days, analyses of available time use data indicate that the amount of family time, in particular, mother-child time, has remained stable since the 1920’s (Bianchi, 2000; Bryant & Zick, 1996). This stability is partly due to the fact that in the earlier part of the century large segments of the population were rural and engaged in agriculture—work that left little time for direct parent-child interaction (Bryant, 1996). Moreover, the gap between employed and non-employed mothers in mother-child time is relatively small. Including time spent directly engaged with children, as well as time spent in their presence, children of employed mothers spend approximately five and half hours less per week with their mothers than children of non-employed mothers (Sandberg & Hofferth, 1999). The gap in time spent with children between employed and non-employed mothers is minimized because non-employed mothers tend to allocate their “non-labor hours to household tasks, volunteer and leisure activities, and not to direct child care (see (Bianchi, 2000). In addition, employed mothers appear to take steps to protect their time with their children by minimizing time spent in household tasks, personal leisure activities and sleep (Bianchi, 2000).
The stability of parent-child time has also been made possible by the increased involvement of married fathers in childcare, in particular among families with employed mothers (Bianchi 2000; Sandberg & Hofferth 1999, 2001). For example, the amount of time fathers spent in direct child care more than doubled between 1965 and 1998 (Bianchi, 2000). Further, Bryant and Zick (1996) find that as mother’s employment hours increase, the amount of time parents (i.e., mothers and fathers) spend with their children doing household tasks and engaging in leisure activities together increases. Last, reduction in family size has resulted in small increases in parental time per child from the perspective of children (Bianchi, 2000).
While trend data and population estimates of parent-child time are useful, they often mask variations by family-structure, family stage, gender, socioeconomic status, and race/ethnicity. In general, children in single-parent families spend less time with their parents than children in two-parent families (Child Trends, 2002). Data collected from the PSID-CDS indicate that children in two-parent families spend approximately 2.21 hours with their mothers and 1.45 hours with their fathers on a daily basis compared to 1.16 hours with mothers and .25 hours with fathers among children in single-parent families (Child Trends 2002). In addition, the data also suggest differences in how parents and children distribute their time across activities by family structure. For example, children from single-mother families spend less time in educational activities but more time in organized sports (S. Hofferth & Sandberg, 2001). Other studies, however, indicate that family structure differences in the types of activities that children engage in are small and non-significant (Bianchi & Robinson, 1997). Additionally, recent studies suggest that children in stable single-parent families may fare better than children whose parents remarry since a new spouse often results in a reallocation of parent’s time (Thomson, Mosley, Hanson, & McLanahan, 2001).
The amount of time that children spend with their parents also varies by developmental stage. Young children, who require extensive direct care, spend more time with their parents than older children who require less direct supervision and who as a result of school, homework, and part-time jobs have less discretionary time (S. Hofferth & Sandberg, 2001; Robinson & Bianchi, 1997). Bryant and Zick (1996) find that mothers share a wider range of household and family maintenance tasks with their children, but the sharing of tasks is somewhat gendered. For example, mothers are more likely to share preparing meals and cleaning with their daughters than with their sons. The authors argue that by engaging in household tasks together, mothers are transmitting and teaching nurturing behavior (Bryant & Zick 1996).
Important differences by race/ethnicity and socioeconomic status have also been found in both the amount of family time and the types of activities in which families engage. Hofferth and Sandberg, for example, find that black children spend more time in church, Asian children spend more time studying, and Hispanic children spend more time engaged in eating meals together and in household tasks.
The body of research reviewed thus far points to several important aspects for the measurement of family time. First, the studies reviewed indicate that, in addition to measuring the amount of family time, it is also important to measure the kinds of activities that family members engage in. For example, Bryant and Zick’s research suggests that, while the amount of family time does not vary greatly by maternal employment status, the type and distribution of family activities do. In addition, it may be that what family members are doing together is as important for family and child well-being as the amount of time families spend together. Second, these studies suggest that it is important to collect data from multiple family members and from multiple perspectives. For example, measuring only mother-child time underestimates the amount of time that children spend with parents and ignores the important contributions that men make to family life. Third, the research of Hofferth and others speaks to the importance of including items that capture the meaning of and the impetus behind family activities. For example, the salience of the family unit among Hispanics may result in Hispanic children and parents sharing household tasks to a greater extent than other racial groups (see (Taylor, 1994).
Time use diaries: One of the most common sources of data on family time has been time use diaries. Time use diaries ask respondents to report how much time they have spent in last 24 hours in various activities, such as in child care, reading or playing, talking, eating meals together, etc. Time use diaries, while popular, have several limitations. Most notably are the costs associated with collecting extensive and detailed information (S. L. Hofferth & Sandberg 2001). Researchers have attempted to curtail costs by asking about activities for a randomly selected weekday or weekend(1) rather than for extended periods of time (e.g., a whole week or month).
Also of concern are issues surrounding recall (Bianchi & Robinson, 1997; Hill & Stafford, 1985; Robinson, 1985). Attempts to improve recall include providing respondents with beepers or timers that alert respondents to record the activities they are currently engaging in. Nevertheless, tasks and activities that occur less frequently have produced less reliable estimates (Hill & Stafford, 1985; Robinson, 1985). Consequently, studies that use time diaries for estimates of the amount of family time often limit their estimates to frequently occurring activities (see Hofferth & Sandberg 2001a). Unfortunately, while this step helps to improve the reliability of estimates, the diversity of family activities that are captured is limited. This may be especially problematic when studying family time among minority groups and non-middle class families whose activities may differ from white middle class families.
Also problematic, although more easily corrected, is the way in which time is allocated to tasks (see (Folbre, 2001). For example, most time diaries ask respondents to report the primary task in which they were engaged during that time. Thus, secondary and tertiary tasks are underestimated. This is particularly problematic for the study of parent-child time since child-related tasks "tend to spill over into many indirect as well as direct responsibilities" (Folbre, 2002, p.5). Moreover, only time that is spent directly interacting with children is counted as parent-child time (also known as direct-time). For example, time that fathers spend doing their children's laundry is counted as time spent on laundry. Similarly, time spent doing laundry while supervising their children's homework is not counted as time spent with children. Recent estimates of direct parent-child time are just under two hours for mother-child and one hour for father-child (Bianchi, 2000).
Clearly, measures of direct parent-child time paint an incomplete picture of parent-child time. Fortunately, recent time use diaries have collected data on secondary and tertiary activities; thereby, providing measures of indirect parent-child time. When secondary activities are included, estimates increase to 2.8 hours per day for mothers and 1.3 for fathers (Bianchi, 2000). Including all time spent with children in any activity, parent-child time increased to 5.5 hours per day for mothers and 3.8 hours for fathers (Bianchi, 2000). Including time spent in an activity, as well as time that parents are accessible to children, though not directly engaged in an activity with them, children are estimated to spend 29 hours with their mothers and 19 hours with their fathers on a weekly basis (Sandberg & Hofferth 2001). The importance of including indirect measures of family time may be particularly relevant for working and single-parents for whom time is more limited and, as noted above, for certain minority group members who are more likely to undertake households tasks together.
Moreover, measures that are based on direct and indirect family time miss the importance of parental accessibility (Bianchi, 2000; Budig & Folbre, 2002). Parental presence regardless of whether parents and children are engaging in activities together may be important for child well-being.
Finally, because time use diaries record data at the individual or dyad level, estimates of time spent together as a family unit are largely missing. That is, less is known about the amount of time that all family members spend talking together, engaging in leisure activities, or interacting as a family unit than is known about parent-child or couple time.
The Home Observation for the Measurement of the Environment (HOME): The HOME scale was developed as a tool for assessing children's home environments (Caldwell & Bradley, 1984). The intent of the scale is to identify children whose home environments place them at risk for unhealthy development. The scale is made up of both parental report items and interviewer observations, and is designed to be child-specific and age appropriate (e.g., items vary by age of the child). The scale has been used in a variety of ways from following the development of low-weight infants over time (Bradley, Caldwell, Rock, &Casey, 1987; Bradley et al., 1994), to researching the influence of work circumstances on children's home environments and their outcomes (Cooksey, Menaghan, &Jekielek, 1997; Parcel & Meneghan, 1994), to assessing the well-being of children who live in poverty (Moore, Glei, Driscoll, Zaslow, &Redd, 2002). Many large-scale studies include measures of the home environment, such as the National Longitudinal Survey of Youth 1979, the Panel Study of Income Dynamics, and the Early Childhood Longitudinal Study.
While the HOME scale was not developed to measure time use specifically, it does contain items that might be helpful in this regard. Several of the items tap into aspects of children's time use, such as how often parents read to their children, how often children perform chores, how often parents take their child to the grocery store or how often the parents take their child to a museum; the response options are typically in Likert-scale format, and do not capture actual time spent in each activity. Other items tap into the quality of interactions: Affective items tap into the quality of parent-child interactions by reflecting pleasant conversations, parental responsiveness to children's questions, kissing, hugging and caressing of the child by the parent (as observed by the interviewer). Questions about cognitive stimulation often probe the frequency of activities with a child, such as reading with the child, or helping the child with tasks, going to museums, etc. Questions from the scale also probe aspects of overall family time spent together, and not just parent-child time, although these questions are very limited. They tap into the frequency with which the child gets together with other family and friends, and the frequency with which the child eats dinner together with the family.
The HOME scale is useful but also too limited to address current critiques of family time use measures. While some items provide a sense of quality and others of quantity of time spent together, the items do not offer a way to judge whether quality time is spent within specific activities. In addition, although quantity of time in activities is reported, it is difficult to get an idea of the make-up of the family day: this would be a limitation of most any measure that is not collected with a time use diary. The items in this scale do not provide information on the interactions that other family members have with each other. While this scale has proven an important tool for understanding child development, it is limited in addressing current issues related to family time use.
Other measures: The most common survey research method for collecting time use information is to directly ask parents how much time they spend in specific activities with their children. While seemingly more simple than time use diaries, or more accurate in terms of actual time than items from measures like the HOME scale, this method is known to be biased: Parents will report more time spent on desirable activities than on less desirable ones, the reports are difficult to validate, and some research shows that times have been inaccurately reported with this method (S. L. Hofferth & Sandberg 2001).
Routines and rituals: We have suggested that current measures of time use are better at capturing activities between parents and children than they are at capturing interactions at the family level. We view family-level activities as important from the standpoint that one's experience in their family of origin has implications throughout the lifecourse, influencing the manner in which offspring form and interact with their own families. Additionally, Howe (2002) asserts that family-level activities shape a unique family identity, a sense of commitment to others in one's family that fosters networks of social support. Toward this end, there has been a resurgence in attention to the notion of family routines and family rituals as separate but important constructs.
The term 'routine' is used to identify habits of daily living - instrumental, brief, observable behavior that is repeated over time (Fiese et al., 2002). To a limited degree, data on some key family 'routines' are already collected (eating dinner together, going shopping together). Rituals are contrasted from routines as having an affective component, a symbolic meaning that conveys a sense of family identity that leaves an individual with a sense of belonging (Fiese et al., 2002, page 382). Distinctions between the two have rarely been made in empirical studies.
Fiese and Kline (1993) developed an instrument that actually distinguishes between the two concepts (Fiese et al., 2002, page 384). Their questions on routines go beyond typical measures that capture 'frequency of eating dinner together.' For example, they probe whether family members are expected to contribute to the chore of getting the dinner on the table. They identify rituals by collecting responses dealing with the "affect, symbolic significance, and commitment to continue the activity across generations" related to routines. These appear to be open-ended questions. They find that the distinction makes a difference in their research - family rituals were associated with adolescent identity and marital satisfaction, whereas family routines were not (Fiese, Hooker, Kotary, &Schwagler, 1993). While these instruments help identify family routines that are meaningful family activities, they have only been used on small samples. It would likely be costly to code responses on the meaningfulness of family routines in large scale surveys. Alternatively, Larson suggests that one way to identify meaningful family interactions (or in his conceptualization, activities that involve an emotional component) is to include a survey question probing the most significant and least significant activities of the day (Larson, 1997).
[ Go to Contents ]
In this review, we have identified existing measures of family time and discussed each of their strengths and limitations. We summarize these important issues here, as well as highlight additional measurement gaps.
Quantity, quality and regularity. This review has revealed that many dimensions of family time exist. Describing the quantity of time that parents and children spend in activities is one way to identify whether parents are investing instrumentally, emotionally and cognitively into their families. While time diaries and surveys have been fairly adequate at capturing adult time spent in routine activities (although respondents tend to over-report time in housework (Robinson, 1997)), some uses of time are difficult to capture but are nonetheless important. For example, it is possible to accomplish two activities at once, such as cooking dinner while handling tasks on the phone or talking to one's child about her day. The management of household tasks, such as taking responsibility for making sure household functions get addressed and assigning the tasks to be completed, is also an important chore that is not typically captured by items that tap into time spent in specific chores (Hoffmeister & Edgell, 2003).
Researchers have also emphasized the need to better measure and probe the quality of time spent in interactions. As explained earlier, the HOME inventory identifies parent-child activities that are associated with positive child development. From a child development perspective, however, the effect of time spent in activities with family members might also depend upon the interactions taking place within the activity. For example, simply watching television with one's child might signal to a child that a parent cares, but interactions and communication between parents and their children regarding the content of television shows or daily activities may strengthen this signal, while also allowing parents to convey important family values. This is not to suggest that all time spent together as a family needs to be maximized to fulfill both child development and other purposes; however, along with others, we are suggesting that attention to the absolute amount of time in certain activities may not reveal interactions that may have a significant and positive influence on children.
It is also possible that there is value to children of their parents just "being there" (Bianchi 1999), but this remains an unanswered question. Time when mothers are available but not directly involved with their children is a main reason for a time differential between employed and non-employed mothers' time spent with their children. And yet, the availability of cellular phones and beepers might help reduce this differential. Research is just beginning to address these issues (see Bianchi 1999).
Finally, researchers would also like to know more about the regularity of activities. Fiese et al. (Fiese et al., 2002) suggest that identifying routines is important: routine or 'regular' interactions can foster adaptation in times of family crises, such that maintaining regular routines, such as dinner time or family gatherings, can help children cope with disruptive events (e.g. transitions in family structure). Also, rituals are distinct but important time use that influences family members' sense of belonging.
Unit of analysis. Most measures of family interaction are focused on whether families are fulfilling the task of childrearing successfully. The interactions are often from the perspective of the child or parent, and they can shed light on whether an individual child is receiving adequate parental attention. Accordingly, results reveal information on the happenings within that dyad but they cannot necessarily be generalized to other relationships within the family, or to interactions that include the whole family. Measuring what other family members are doing in the household would give us a more complex glimpse of how families spend time together (Bianchi, 1997). Measuring family time from the perspective of the whole family is also important. Time spent together helps families shape a unique identity, and helps individuals within the family unit feel a sense of belonging that is important for healthy development. Further, spending time with family members and extended family members helps to build individual access to lasting resources of social support. The importance of family rituals (differentiated from routines as having an affective component) such as holidays, birthdays, weddings or other significant events is under-studied.
Attention to cultural differences. Attention to cultural differences in the use of family time has been limited. This is an area that would likely benefit from qualitative and observational research. A very insightful example is present in the work of Martini (1996). Martini observes the communication exchange between family members in a typical, in fact, probably the most measured, family activity: eating meals together. The author found that Caucasian-American families held different types of conversations compared to Japanese-Americans — the former were more likely to focus on the individual experiences and the child, while the latter mainly discussed group activities and shared experiences. Observations of the content of communication of an otherwise simply measured activity (eating dinner) yields information on how families transmit their values, and how this varies by culture. Similar analyses of other 'routine' activities necessary for family maintenance may also be fruitful.
Attention to developmental and lifecourse changes. Time use is not static across the lifecourse. The transition to parenthood remains an important event for the re-organization of couple time, often resulting in an unequal division of domestic labor. In terms of child development, young children are more demanding on parental time than are older children, although Bianchi makes the point that when the parental work day is over, children themselves may have limited time available to spend with their parents (2000). Adolescents, in particular, require fewer parental time investments for their upkeep (clothing, feeding, etc), but they do require other types of time investments by parents, such as monitoring of their activities and whereabouts (Furstenberg, Cook, Eccles, Elder, &Sameroff, 1999). The ratio of needed time to actual time may vary as children age, but, to our knowledge, empirical estimates have not been attempted.
Theoretical gaps. The collection of improved measures of time use has the potential to expand theoretical perspectives, and therefore also improve our understanding of patterns. In particular, closer examination of time in primary and secondary tasks may help inform gender theories on the division of labor. Measures of family time spent together will be useful toward the development of perspectives on family routines and rituals. Collecting time use information of multiple persons in the same household, simultaneously, will be helpful towards informing family systems theory. Understanding time use may help inform how healthy marriages are sustained and how strong families are maintained. Better data may also inform debates about the quality versus the quantity of family time.
The need to collect measures regularly. Although the availability of data on the amount of family time has increased, our most recent national estimates of family time are now more than five years old (for example, PSID time diaries were collected in 1998). Given the changing work schedules of parents, economic shifts, and changes in children's living arrangements, there is a need for more current and up-to-date information. Moreover, although researchers have been able to create a historical picture of family time by piecing together data from various surveys (see (Bianchi, 2000; Fiese et al., 2002), this historical picture is incomplete. Because of the lack of continuous data, researchers have been limited to comparing estimates of family time over a small number of years (e.g., 1965 to 1998). These comparisons may mask variations in patterns that occurred in between data collection efforts. Without the availability of regularly collected measures of family time, the ability of researchers and policy makers to track trends in family time will be limited to patching together data from multiple sources that may not use comparable definitions. Finally, trend data are important for evaluating the implications that changes in government assistance programs, federal laws (i.e., Family Leave Act), and work-place policies (i.e., flex-time, telecommuting, etc) may have on family time.
Designing longitudinal studies of family time. In addition to surveys that measure family time and activities at regular points in time, longitudinal studies of family time are needed. Research using cross-sectional data suggests that children's educational achievement, risk behaviors and parental marital stability are associated with family time (S. Hofferth & Sandberg, 2001; Presser, 2000). However, longitudinal studies are needed to address issues of causality and to further investigate the processes by which family time is associated with child outcomes. It is important to note that longitudinal studies of family time need to include measures of family background characteristics, as well as measures of child outcomes measures. Care should be taken to ensure that the list of child outcomes variables is not limited to negative outcomes or risk behaviors, but also includes positive outcomes and behaviors. Longitudinal studies should include, whenever feasible, data from multiple family members and perspectives. Ideally, longitudinal studies should include items that measure both the amount of family time and the kinds of activities that parents and children engage in together. Lastly, special attention should also be given to include items that capture the quality, meaning and nature of family interactions.
[ Go to Contents ]
Promising measures adaptable for large scale surveys. Items used in qualitative and small-scale studies might serve as a good starting point when developing new items for large scale studies. In this section, we identify promising measures and constructs; the items we recommend are listed in Appendix A.
Capturing interactions between family members while engaged in activities, not just the activities themselves, is key to understanding the importance of the use of family time. Observational research on family interactions will be key to developing these measures in the future. An example mentioned above is that observations of parents and children watching television together reveal that important socialization activities can occur in this time. While observational measures are not adaptable to large-scale surveys, per se, we do offer suggested items that have been used in an international survey that can be fielded immediately in surveys on families to capture some of the content of social and cultural communication around activities and topics (see Appendix A, Communication and interactions during activities). Some of these items have been found to be related to higher levels of literacy among youth in the U.S. and other OECD (Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development) countries (Guzman, Hampden-Thompson, and Lippman, 2003).
Numerous studies indicate that children who eat meals with their parents regularly fare better, and thus such a measure is worth repeating in surveys (S. Hofferth & Sandberg, 2001). While information is available about the frequency and regularity with which families eat meals together, less is known about what goes on during family meals. Qualitative studies by Blum-Kulka (1994) indicate that the activities and content of conversations that take place at the dinner table vary by class. It is important not to restrict survey items to dinner because of variations if families' availability depending on work schedules. The items we recommend fielding then, ask about the frequency of eating any meal together, not just dinner, and about whether that time is used by families to find out what and how other family members are doing (see Appendix A Family routines and rituals).
Given the recent emphasis on the "squeeze" of family time, we also suggest adapting such a measure to on-the-go activities. Hofferth and Sandberg (2001a) indicate that parents often bring their children shopping with them. For busy or cash-strapped parents, this may provide an opportunity to spend time together while at the same stocking the cupboards. Traveling together in the car to get to school and work is another opportunity for such interaction. We therefore suggest adding an item to existing measures of commuting time to explore how families are using this time (see Appendix A: Family routines and rituals).
In addition to regular routines and communication, time to relax together as a family is important for family well-being. Research on stepfamilies (Braithwaite, Olson, Golish, Soukup, &Turman, 2001) suggests that taking family vacations is an important symbolic step in forging family identity for newly formed families. Identifying whether families spend weekends and vacations together is largely uncaptured in existing large-scale surveys, but can be found in a small-scale survey (Fiese and Kline, 1991), which we recommend (see Appendix A, Family routines and rituals).
Given that family identity appears to be created through shared family time, history and events, and meaning is created through family celebrations, fielding measures that capture cultural traditions, annual celebrations, the presence of family stories, the retelling of family events and the recording of family history may also be worthwhile (see Appendix A, Family routines and rituals).
In this paper we have provided an overview of existing measures of family time use, as well as suggestions for new measures. Given the importance of family time for the well-being of families and their individual members, and evidence that new threats to family time are emerging, the development and implementation of family time measures in large-scale surveys will yield a deeper understanding of contemporary families and how they adapt to their social context.
[ Go to Contents ]
Family traditions and history (Developed by Child Trends)
[ Go to Contents ]
Barber, B. K. & Erickson, L. D. (2001). Adolescent social initiative: Antecedents in the ecology of social connections. Journal of Adolescent Research, 16(4), 326-354.
Baumrind, D. (1967). Child care practices anteceding three patterns of preschool behavior. Genetic Psychology Monographs, 75, 43-88.
Bianchi, S. M. (1997). Remember Parkinson's law: Work expands to fill the time available (Discussant Remarks), Time use, non-market work, and family well-being: Washington, DC.
Bianchi, S. M. (2000). Maternal employment and time with children: Dramatic change or surprising continuity? Demography, 37(4), 401-414.
Bianchi, S. M. & Robinson, J. P. (1997). What did you do today? Children's use of time, family composition, and the acquisition of social capital. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 59(2), 332-344.
Bianchi, S. M. & Spain, D. (1996). Women, Work, and Family in America. Population Bulletin.
Blum-Kulka, S. (1994). The dynamics of family dinner talk: Cultural contexts to children's passages to adult discourse. Research on language and social interaction, 27(1), 1-50.
Bond, J. T., Galinsky, E., & Swanberg, J. E. (1998). The 1997 National Study of the Changing Workforce. New York: Families and Work Institute.
Bradley, R. H., Caldwell, B., Rock, S. L., & Casey, P. M. (1987). The early development of low-birthweight infants: Relationship to health, family status, family context, family processes, and parenting. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 10(3), 301-318.
Bradley, R. H., Whiteside, L., Mundfrom, D., Casey, P., Kelleher, & Pope, S. (1994). Early Indications of Resilience and Their Relations to Experiences in the Home Environments of Low Birthweight Premature Children Living in Poverty. Child Development, 65(2), 346-360.
Braithwaite, D. O., Olson, L. N., Golish, T. D., Soukup, C., & Turman, P. (2001). "Becoming a family": Developmental processes represented in blended family discourse. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 29(3), 221-247.
Bryant, W. K. (1996). A comparison of the household work of married females: The mid 1920s and the late 1960s. Family and Consumer Sciences Research Journal, 24(4), 358-384.
Bryant, W. K. & Zick, C. D. (1996). An examination of parent-child shared time. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 58, 227-237.
Budig, M. J. & Folbre, N. (2002). Has parental time devoted to children remained unchanged? Amherst: University of Massachusetts.
Caldwell, B. & Bradley, R. H. (1984). Home observation for measurement of the environment. Little Rock: University of Arkansas at Little Rock.
Coleman, J. S. (1988). Social capital in the creation of human capital. American Journal of Sociology, 96, S95-S120.
Cooksey, E. C., Menaghan, E. G., & Jekielek, S. M. (1997). Life-course effects of work and family circumstances on children. Social Forces, 76(2), 637-667.
Elder, G. (1999). Children of the Great Depression. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
Federal Interagency Forum on Child and Family Statistics. (2003). American's Children: Key National of Well-being, 2003. Washington DC: US Government Printing Office: Federal Intergancy Forum on Child and Family Statistics.
Fiese, B. H., Hooker, K. A., Kotary, L., & Schwagler, J. (1993). Family rituals in the early stages of parenthood. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 57, 633-642.
Fiese, B. H. & Kline, C. A. (1993). Development of the family ritual questionnaire: Initial reliability and validation studies. Journal of Family Psychology, 6, 290-299.
Fiese, B. H., Tomcho, T. J., Douglas, M., Josephs, K., Poltrock, S., & Baker, T. (2002). A review of 50 years of research on naturally occurring family routines and rituals: Cause for celebration? Journal of Family Psychology, 16(4), 381-390.
Folbre, N. (2001). The invisible heart. New York: The New Press.
Folbre, N. (2002). Valuing parental time: New estimates of expenditures on children in the United States. Paper presented at the Allied Social Science Association, Atlanta, GA.
Furstenberg, F. F., Cook, T. D., Eccles, J., Elder, G. H., & Sameroff, A. (1999). Managing to make it, Urban families and adolescent success. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Herman, M. R., Dornbusch, S. M., Herron, M. C., & Herting, J. R. (1997). The influence of family regulation, connection, and psychological autonomy on six measures of adolescent functioning. Journal of Adolescent Research, 12(1), 34-67.
Hill, C. R. & Stafford, F. P. (1985). Parental care of children: Time diary estimates of quantity, predictability, and variety. In F. T. Juster & F. P. Stafford (Eds.), Time, goods, and well-being (pp. 415-437). Ann Arbor, MI: Institute for Social Research.
Hofferth, S. & Sandberg, J. F. (2001). How American children spend their time. Journal of Marriage and Family, 63, 295-308.
Hofferth, S. L. & Sandberg , J. F. (2001). Changes in American Children's Use of Time, 1981-1997. In T. Owens & S. Hofferth (Eds.), Children at the Millennium: Where Have We Come From, Where are we Going? (pp. 193-229). New York: Elsevier Science.
Hoffmeister, H. & Edgell, P. (2003). Sunday morning rush hour. In P. Moen (Ed.), It's about time, Couples and careers. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.
Howe, G. W. (2002). Integrating family routines and rituals with other family research paradigms: Comment on the special section. Journal of Family Psychology, 16(4), 437-440.
Jacobs, J. A. (2003, June 16-18). Changing hours of employment in American families. Paper presented at the Workforce/Workplace Mismatch? Work, Family, Health, and Well-Being, Washington, D.C.
Larson, R. W. (1997). How children and adolescents spend time across the world. Paper presented at the Time use, non-market work, and family well-being, Washington, DC.
Maccoby, E. E. & Martin, J. A. (1983). Socialization in the context of the family: Parent-child interaction. In M. A. Hetherington (Ed.), Handbook of Child Psychology: Volume 4. Socialization, Personality, and Social Development (4 ed., pp. 1-101). New York: Wiley.
Martini, M. (1996). "What's new?" at the dinner table: Family dynamics during mealtimes in two cultural groups in Hawaii. Early Development and Parenting, 5, 23-24.
Moore, K. A., Glei, D. A., Driscoll, A. K., Zaslow, M. J., & Redd, Z. (2002). Poverty and Welfare Patterns: Implications for Children. Journal of Social Policy, 31(2), 207-227.
Parcel, T. & Meneghan, E. (1994). Parents' jobs and children's lives. New York: Aldine De Gruyter.
Presser, H. B. (1999). Towards a 24-hour economy. Science, 284, 1778-1779.
Presser, H. B. (2000). Nonstandard work schedules and marital instability. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 62(1), 93-110.
Robinson, J. P. (1985). The validity and reliability of diaries versus alternative time use measures. In F. T. Juster & F. P. Stafford (Eds.), Time, goods, and well-being (pp. 33-62). Ann Arbor, MI: Institute for Social Research.
Robinson, J. P. (1997). Remember Parkinson's law: Work expands to fill the time available. Paper presented at the Time use, non-market work, and family well-being, Washington, DC.
Robinson, J. P. & Bianchi, S. M. (1997). The children's hours. American Demographics, 19(12), 20-24.
Sandberg, J. F. & Hofferth, S. (1999, October 6-8). Changes in parental time with children, U.S. 1981-1987. Paper presented at the International Association of Time Use Research, University of Essex, Colchester.
Smeeding, T. M. & Marchand, J. T. (2003). Family time and public policy in the United States. (Unpublished Manuscript). Syracuse, NY: Center for Policy Research.
Taylor, R. L. (1994). Minority families and social change. In R. L. Taylor (Ed.), Minority families in the United States: A multicultural perspective (pp. 204-248). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Thomson, E., Mosley, J., Hanson, T. L., & McLanahan, S. S. ( 2001). Remarriage, Cohabitation and Changes in Mothering. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 63, 370-380.
Yeung, W. J., Sandberg, J. F., Davis-Kean, P., & Hofferth, S. (2001). Children's time with fathers in intact families. Journal of Marriage and Family, 63, 136-154.
[ Go to Contents ]
(1) It is important to collect information for both weekday and weekend activities because the type of and amount of time spent in activities varies by weekday and weekend.
Main Page of Report | Contents of Report
Home Pages:
Papers Index Page
Human Services Policy (HSP)
Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation
(ASPE)
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services
(HHS)