In January 2007, each student in FSoS 5014, Introduction to Quantitative Family Research Methods, was asked to summarize and evaluate information about a secondary data set used in the family field. The following summary was prepared by Jane Newell.
1. Official name of study: Welfare, Children, & Families: A Three City Study
2. Study purpose: The purpose of the study is to investigate the consequences of policy changes resulting from the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 (PRWORA). 2,402 children and their caregivers in Boston, Chicago, and San Antonio were interviewed in Wave I between March –Dec, 1999.
3. Principal investigators: Andrew J. Cherlin, Ronald Angel, Linda Burton, P. Lindsay Chase-Lansdale, Robert Moffitt, William Julius Wilson
4. Years during which data were collected:
Wave I: March-December 1999
Wave II: September 2000 – June 2001
Wave III: February 2005 – February 2006
5. Number of waves of data, and ages of participants at each wave:
i. Longitudinal
Wave I: focal child age 0–4 or 10-14 & child’s primary female caregiver
n=2,400 households
Wave II: focal child age 1-6 or 11-16 & child’s primary female caregiver
n=2,158 focal children, n=2,187 caregivers, n=63 separated caregivers
Wave III: focal child age 5-10 /15-20 & child’s primary female caregiver
79.7% focal child at Wave I at Wave III, n=229 separated caregivers, n=114 independent youth
ii. Embedded Developmental Study n=737
a. additional mother/child tasks & interview n=626 (85% response rate)
b. primary care providers at Wave I, n=249 (70% response rate)
c. child’s biological father: n=272 (37% response rate)
iii. Ethnography
a. n=256 additional families with children age 2 -4, or 0-8 with a moderate to severe disability
b. not in survey sample, but resided in same neighborhood
6. Participants (type and numbers) from whom data were directly collected:
As outlined above
7. Types of data (survey, interview, observation, records, etc.):
Longitudinal: interview caregivers, test children, interview older children
Embedded Developmental Study: detailed process-oriented measures
1. an additional home visit: including videotaped tasks, additional mother interview
2. a visit to the child’s primary care provider: rating of care observed & interviews
3. child’s biological father: interview
Ethnography N=256 additional households: “structured discovery� in-depth interviews and observations
8. Strengths and weaknesses of the data set: Strengths: Lots of information: data files for 38 different topics and assessments gathered longitudinally; eleven additional topics gathered in Embedded Developmental Study & ethnography provided additional information from 256 non-randomly selected households. Large samples. Variety of methods used. Weaknesses: primary caregivers interviewed are females only. Small sample size of biological fathers interviewed. Time to understand data. Using data formed by another’s research questions: i.e., no impact on the development of the research questions or design.
9. Accessibility of data to the research community: Available through Sociometrics, Inc. at www.socio.com toll free phone: (800) 846-3475. Those belonging to Sociometrics data library may access data free of charge (others for a fee) - Must sign Use Agreement: data set is not downloadable
10. Assessment of how useful this data set would be for family research: An examination of the topics for data gathered reveals a fairly comprehensive overview of the lives of families who are involved in the governmental welfare system, as well as a number of useful methods: longitudinal, embedded developmental study, and ethnography.
11. Web site information:
This is a very informative web site with study design, principal investigators, publications, funders, and links to other sites available for review.
12. How does one gain access to the data: access to the data is through Sociometrics, Inc. (see above)
Posted by vonko002 at January 31, 2007 4:16 PM