February 14, 2008

Family Life Project: A Longitudinal Adoption Study, 1969-1989

In January 2008, 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 Polina Sheldeshova.

Official name:
Family Life Project: A Longitudinal Adoption Study, 1969-1989 by Chicago Child Care Society; Shireman, Joan; and Vroegh, Karen.

Citation:
Chicago Child Care Society; Shireman, Joan; and Vroegh, Karen, 1999, "Family Life Project: A Longitudinal Adoption Study, 1969-1989", hdl:1902.1/01610 Murray Research Archive [Distributor]

Study purpose:
To examines the influence of adoption on child and family development in intraracial, transracial, single-parent, and two-parent adoptive and biological families.

Principal investigators: Joan Shireman and Karen Vroegh.

Years of data collection:
1969-1970 (20-year longitudinal study).
Waves and ages of participants at each wave: continuous data collection (over 20 years):
1969-1972 across groups at Time I, (0-2 years old);
1973-1976 for all groups at Time II;
1977-1981 at Time III;
1982-1987 for Time IV;
1987-1989 for Time V.

Types of data:
interviews (child, parent, and family);
psychological tests (child),
questionnaires about racial and gender identity (e.g., Doll Puzzle, Doll Test, Semantic Differential Pictures, Toy Preferential Pictures, Piers-Harris Children's Self-Concept Scale, and the Personal Attributes Questionnaire), intelligence (e.g., Preschool Attainment Record, Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test, and the Slosson Intelligence Test for Children and Adults), and social maturity (i.e., the Vineland Social Maturity Scale).

Strengths of the data set:
big sample size;
longitudinal (five-waves) kind of data;

Weaknesses of the data set:
originally only kids from birth to two age were included, thus a greater proportion of kids above the age two were not considered; only African-American children were represented in the sample, although by that time the Korean adoption was also on the rise.

Accessibility of the data:
One can get an access to the documentation overview (abstract, research methodology, publications, and other info) or to the detailed usage terms only after signing legal agreement between data depositor and Murray Archive.

Usefulness for family research:
The data may be useful for those who are interested in single-parent, transracial (White and African-Americans), and traditional adoptive placements. As well as for those who are focused on racial and gender adoptive identities, adopted child development (intelligence, social maturity) through the childhood to early adolescence and adoptive family development over 20 years.

Distributor Contact:
Murray Research Archive
mra_support@help.hmdc.harvard.edu

Posted by hgroteva at 6:52 PM

February 11, 2008

Michigan Study of Life Transitions

In January 2008, 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 Katie Brewton.

Study purpose
• The purpose of this study was to investigate the impact of changes in classroom and family environments on adolescents' achievement-related beliefs, motives, values, and behaviors.

Principal investigator
• Jacquelynne S. Eccles

Years during which data were collected
• 1983 – 1985

Number of waves of data, and ages of participants at each wave
• Four waves of data were collected. The mean age of students at wave 1 was 11 years, 5 months.

Participants
• Wave I – 3,246 adolescents and their parents
• Wave II – 3,157 adolescents (97.2% of the original sample), their parents and teachers. This sample was augmented slightly as the study progressed due to attrition rates; 105 new students participated.
• Wave III – 2,705 adolescents (83.3% of the original sample) and their parents. Three-hundred and eighty-eight new students who moved into the 12 school districts during the course of the study joined.
• Wave IV – Seventy-percent of the original adolescent sample and their parents
Types of data
• Questionnaires and behavioral observations

Strengths and weaknesses of the data set:
Weakness
• The sample of students was homogeneous. Ninety-seven percent of the students were Caucasian and their schools were located in middle-income communities.

Strengths
• The data would be useful to family researchers
• Data were collected from children, parents and teachers using questionnaires and behavior observations

Accessibility of data to the research community
• The data can be downloaded at: http://www.murray.harvard.edu/

Usefulness of data set to family researchers
• The data would be useful to family researchers interested in studying adolescents’ transitions from elementary to junior high school.

Web site information
• On the web site (http://www.rcgd.isr.umich.edu/msalt/home.htm) there is information regarding questionnaires, scales, and data; a list of articles and publications that have resulted from the study; a detailed explanation of the study for past participants; a form for past participants to submit new contact information if they are moving; and a list of family, education, and career web resources.

Gain access to the data
• Data can be acquired through Harvard-Radcliffe's Murray Research Center at: http://www.murray.harvard.edu/

Posted by hgroteva at 7:04 PM

Socialization of Problem Behavior in Youth, 1969 - 1981

In January 2008, 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 Dorothy Rombo.

Website: www.murray.harvard.edu

Principal investigators: Richard Jessor & Shirley L. Jessor

The data can be accessed through the Murray research archive that stores research data in different formats including audio, visual, written etc.

How to access data
Collections of data are classified according to subject. The socialization of problem behavior in youth data are grouped under the health subsection. The data in each section are arranged in either alphabetical order or identification number. Guidelines on what is available and how to access data are given through hot links.
The purpose: to examine problem behavior of youth and developmental processes of change and growth within a social-psychological and psychosocial context.

The study comprised of two phases:
1. Longitudinal study of high school and college study and one wave of family interview.
2. Young adult follow up study that included two samples from phase one.

Years and waves of data collection:

phase wave year participants
1 3 1969-1972 High school, 7th, 8th and 9th graders (N=589)
1 1 1970 Family interview study
(N=200 parents of participants in “high school study?
2 1 Young adult follow up study
Including two samples from wave 1
2 3 1970-1973 1951 birth cohort (N= 276 M&F)
2 1 1981 384 “high school study? and 184 “college study? participant

A 50-page questionnaire was administered to the participants of both the "High School Study" and the "College Study" during these four waves of data collection. The questionnaire contained a variety of subscales which focused on behavior, personality, and perceived environment.

Data gathered through a semi-structured interview with mothers covered aspects of parental beliefs, attitudes, behaviors, and socialization practices. Mothers and fathers independently filled out a questionnaire consisting of personality and attitude measures.

Data: longitudinal, cross sectional & field study.

How to acces the data.
The study website provides reference terms for using the data and an on line application to be filled by potential users. A description of potential users’ project is required before one is granted permission to use the data which is also accessed online.

Posted by hgroteva at 6:57 PM

February 10, 2008

The Early Years of Marriage Study, 1986 - 1989

In January 2008, 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 Samantha Rieks.

Purpose: to investigate factors related to marital stability in the early years of marriage.

Principal Investigators: Joseph Veroff, Shirley Hatchett, Elizabeth Ann Malcolm Douvan, and Terry Orbuch.

Years of Data Collection: 1986, 1987, 1988, and 1989.

Participants: all had applied for a marriage license in Wayne County Michigan between April and June of 1986; wives had to be 35 years old or younger; this marriage was the first for both partners; most participants had beyond a high school education and had achieved an education level beyond their parents’ education levels; statistics varied by race, but most couples did not have children, most couples had one or both spouses employed, and incomes ranged from less than $10,000 a year to over $30,000 a year; the study began with 373 participants (199 African American and 174 White American) and 59 control participants (38 White American and 21 African American).

Waves:
Wave 1, 1986: 373 participants (199 African American and 174 White American) and 59 control (38 White American and 21 African American).
Wave 2, 1987: 347 of original 373 participants.
Wave 3, 1988: 264 of original 373 participants.
Wave 4, 1989: 252 of original 373 participants.

Types of Data:
Wave 1, 1986: individual interviews and an audio taped couple interview.
Wave 2, 1987: telephone interviews with each spouse.
Wave 3, 1988: individual interviews and audio taped couple interview.
Wave 4, 1989: individual phone interviews.

Investigation: combination of phone interviews, surveys, individual interviews and couple narratives were used and scored looking at premarital social status and family background, marital cognitions, interpersonal perceptions and attitudes, perceived and actual interactions, social networks, and marital feelings.

Strengths and Weaknesses:
- For some interviews for some waves (1, 2, and 4) the interviewers only surveyed the wives;
- I am curious about participant selection and using a broader sample or having more descriptive information on the existing sample (i.e., cohabitation, religious beliefs, etc.)
+ The investigators used both participant self-report and observed/coded couple
interactions as data;
-/+ The investigators used a control group to see what impact the study had on
marital life, but it was unclear how they felt the study could contribute to marital
instability.

Accessibility: Basic information on the study is available but without SPSS or library access further details are not available from the Murray Archive alone.

Usefulness to family research: This is a fascinating topic that is timely in light of the broad spectrum of stability and instability in marriage in the United States. Without more information beyond the archive, it is difficult to assess the usefulness of their results or methods, but the design is intriguing.

Website: www.murray.harvard.edu Searching by author and/or name of study and you will find the overview, the interview sheets, the data files and a list of publications.

Access: You can gain basic access to the data by affirming the online agreement not to distribute the information or identifying anyone in the study, etc. There is contact information to submit an application for further access.

Posted by hgroteva at 1:47 PM

February 9, 2008

Gay and Lesbian Family Project

In January 2008, 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 Chelsea Petree.

• This longitudinal study investigated different aspects of gay and lesbian couples. Questions cover topics such as commitment, relationship satisfaction and values, communication, and partner annoyances.

• Principal investigator: Larry Kurdek

• There were three waves of data collection:
-Wave 1: 1986-89
-Wave 2: 1990-93
-Wave 3: 1994-97

• Participants:
-Wave 1: 80 gay and 53 lesbian couples who lived together without children
-Wave 2: 75 gay and 51 lesbian couples who lived together without children
-Wave 3: 57 gay and 54 lesbian couples who lived together without children

• Surveys were sent by mail in all waves

• Strengths of the study:
-Surveys cover a large range of relationship topics
-Gathers information for both partners of the couple

• Weaknesses of the study:
-Data is over ten years old
-Most questions are applicable to couples of all sexual orientations-it misses some factors specific to gay and lesbian couples

• The data is available through the Henry A. Murray Research Archive (www.murray.harvard.edu). There is an online subset of data and a downloadable full data set.

• This data is can be useful when looking closely at gay and lesbian couples, especially when looking how aspects of gay and lesbian relationships are similar and different to heterosexual relationships.

Posted by hgroteva at 2:03 PM

Adolescent and Family Development Project

In January 2008, 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 Di Samek.

Principal investigators: Stuart T. Hauser; Alan M. Jacobson; Gil G. Noam; Sally I. Powers
According to the Murray archive (www.murray.harvard.edu), “The purpose of this study was to examine adolescent development and psychopathology within the context of the family environment. Three groups of adolescents and their parents were studied: insulin dependent diabetic adolescents; adolescents who were psychiatrically hospitalized in the first year of the study; and nonpatient high school students. “
• Years that data were collected: 1978 to 1982
• Type of data collected: “using a battery of instruments assessing personality and moral development. “
• Participants: “There were 57 participants in the diabetic sample, 70 in the psychiatric sample, and 76 in the nonpatient sample. All participants were 14 years old when first contacted.?
• Waves of data: 4 waves: “Interviews were conducted each year, focusing on changes, stresses, and familial and peer relationships. Direct observation of family interactions was also included each year.?
Accessibility of data and how to gain access: “The Murray Archive holds additional analogue materials for this study from all four years of the study Data are available for the psychiatric and nonpatient samples, but not for the diabetic sample. If you would like to access this material, please apply to use the data.?
• Website: either search for “Adolescent and Family Development? through www.murray.harvard.edu or use the following link:
http://dvn.iq.harvard.edu/dvn/dv/mra/faces/study/StudyPage.jsp?studyId=211&studyListingIndex=0_55377a855c73b4b879c6b0a3106b
• Citation: Stuart T. Hauser; Alan M. Jacobson; Gil G. Noam; Sally I. Powers, 1992, "Adolescent and Family Development Study, 1978-1982", hdl:1902.1/00945 UNF:3:gNtHUfeOlaVzXIvDvNBV4A== Murray Research Archive [Distributor]

In this reviewer’s opinion, the strengths of this data set include both a clinical and non-clinical sample as well as observational data in addition to self-report methods. This data set might be more useful for family research if it included assessments other than the adolescent, such as parent or sibling reports. This might actually be the case, but this information is not listed on the Murray archive. Other weaknesses include an accurate description of what kind of observational data was collected, of course these weaknesses are not necessarily of the study, but of the information that is currently available about the study. One criticism I have is that in order to use the data set, one must actually go to Harvard.

Posted by hgroteva at 1:54 PM

Substance Abuse and Mental Health Data Archive

In January 2008, 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 Mary Woodward-Kreitz.

The purpose of this resource is to provide a public resource for data access and analysis.

The Principal Investigators are numerous, as there were more than 20 data sets represented, but the underwriters were:
The Substance Abuse and Mental Health Data Archive (SAMHDA) is an initiative of the Office of Applied Studies, Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA) of the United States Department of Health and Human Services.


Data collected from the following dates: 1975 to present, depending upon the study. Here is a selection of the most commonly requested sites. Some are the same study, redone on the same sample.
National Survey on Drug Use and Health (NSDUH), 2006
Monitoring the Future (MTF), 2006
National Survey of Substance Abuse Treatment Services (N-SSATS), 2006
Gambling Impact and Behavior Study
National Survey on Drug Use and Health (NSDUH), 2005
Monitoring the Future (MTF), 2002
Drug Abuse Treatment Outcome Study (DATOS)
Treatment Episode Data Set (TEDS) Concatenated File, 1992-2005
Alcohol and Drug Services Study (ADSS)
National Comorbidity Survey: Baseline (NCS-1), 1990-1992
Drug Abuse Treatment Outcome Study: Adolescent (DATOS-A)
Health Behavior in School-Aged Children (HBSC), 1997-1998
Monitoring the Future (MTF), 1995
National Household Survey on Drug Abuse (NHSDA), 2001
Monitoring the Future (MTF), 2005
Number of waves of Data, and ages of participants at each wave:

The Archive covers basically three different research projects which all cover substance abuse and mental health variables for teens. The kids range from 12 to 18 years. Some of the data is about substance abuse treatment programs; most is on drug use patterns amongst teens within these age groups. One of the datasets has the same kids measured more than once within the 5 year period. Another does not test the same kids more than once.

The participants are kids themselves or treatment programs. I did not see multiple family members sampled. This is a limitation that seems to be true of all of the data sets on this site.

For the National Survey on Drug Use and Health:
Eight states, referred to as the large sample states, had a sample designed to yield 3,600 respondents per state for the 2006 survey. This sample size was considered adequate to support direct state estimates. The remaining 43 states (which include the District of Columbia) had a sample designed to yield 900 respondents per state in the 2006 survey. All told, this sample is comprised of over 70,000 kids!!

For the National Survey of Substance Abuse Treatment Services (N-SSATS), 17,000 treatment facilities were identified in the U. S. and 13,000 were surveyed.

The type of data received was mailed surveys for the treatment centers, questionnaires for some of the students, and computer assisted interviews and Audio CASI for some of the students on sensitive questions (wow).

Strengths and weaknesses: Amazing data collection effort. Incredible numbers of subjects. Hard to correlate the data between studies, however. Family aspects not included. This could be useful to family researchers in that variables of interest in kids (particularly sensitive variables) could be linked to family studies for estimates of reliability of the data in the family study.

Accessability seems wide open with agreement to terms of use. Able to access the data directly after agreement to terms of use.

Assessment of usefulness: Very useful. Important to be able to track adolescent patterns of risky behaviors as increased numbers of parents enter the work force and more and more kids are unsupervised at home. Still, we are left to wonder why or what correlates exist to the behavior observed in the kids. This would have to be undertaken in a family study.

Web site: links are provided to all of the individual studies providing data.

How to gain access? Agree to terms of use. Can be anonymous or not.

Posted by hgroteva at 1:51 PM

February 7, 2008

Longitudinal Study of Generations and Mental Health, 1971 - 1997

In January 2008, 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 Amanda Matzek.

Study Purpose
To investigate how intergenerational relationships experienced social support and the impact on mental health. The purpose was also to look at how mental health of individual family members changed over time.

Principal Investigators
Vern L. Bengtson and Margaret Gatz

Waves of Data Collection
Wave One: 1971-72
Wave Two: 1984-85
Wave Three: 1988-90
Wave Four: 1991
Wave Five: 1994
Wave Six: 1997

Participants
Data were collected from 345 multigenerational families. Individual family members were participants. The first three waves included three generations. At wave 4, 5, and 6: 116 female and 82 male great grandchildren were included in the study to include four generations.

Wave One
Data were collected from 2,044 participants; Grandparents age 60, parents age early 40s, and grandchildren age 15 to 26

Wave Two
Data were collected for 1,331 participants; Grandparents age 72-74, parents age early 50s, and grandchildren age 27 to 42

Wave Three
Data were collected from 1,483 participants; Grandparents age 75, parents age mid-50s, and grandchildren age 30-43

Wave Four
Data were collected from 1, 734 participants; Grandparents age 78, parents age early 60s, and grandchildren age 33-46. A fourth generation of great-grandchildren was added and averaged age 20.

Wave Five
Data were collected from 1,682 participants; Grandparents age 81, parents age mid 60s, grandchildren age 36-49, great-grandchildren age 23

Wave Six
Data were collected from ___ participants (number not indicated in archives); Grandparents age 84, parents age early 70s, grandchildren age 39-52, great-grandchildren age 26

Types of Data
Survey/Questionnaire

Strengths
This study incorporates multiple family members’ perspectives so that family level analyses can be conducted. It encourages the study of family processes. Also, the study is longitudinal and this allows for researchers to examine how families change over time.

Weakness
As with any longitudinal study, attrition was an issue. The increase in participants in later waves is probably from the inclusion of fourth generation family members in the study.

Accessibility
The data are easily accessible at the Henry A. Murray Research Archive at Harvard University. An interested researcher need only complete an application for use of the data. The application primarily asks for a summary of the proposed project and the researcher’s affiliation. The researcher has the option to use the data set onsite (at the research center) or at a cost, have the files be made available online.

Usefulness
This data set appears to be extremely useful for the family field. It provides data on intergenerational relationships and the longitudinal factor may allow us to look at these family relationships over time. The other focus of the study was on mental health, so it would be interesting to see what types of questions were asked of these families. The data set may be limited to those individuals interested in families and mental health.

Website
http://dvn.iq.harvard.edu/dvn/faces/study/StudyPage.jsp At this website, there is general information about the data set, which includes information about the purpose of the study as well as information about how data was collected for each wave. This site also has a link to the application for use of the data.

Posted by hgroteva at 10:51 PM

National Consortium for the Study of Terrorism and Responses to Terrorism

In January 2008, 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 Janet Yeats.

Official Name of Study: National Consortium for the Study of Terrorism and Responses to Terrorism (START)
Study Purpose: To use state-of-the-art theories, methods and data from the social and behavioral sciences to improve understanding of the origins, dynamics and social and psychological impacts of terrorism.
Principal Investigators:
Working Group 1 – Terrorist Group Formation and Recruitment – Arie Kruglanski
Working Group 2 – Terrorist Group Persistence and Dynamics – Clark McCauley
Working Group 3 – Societal Responses to Terrorist Threats and Attacks – Kathleen Tierney

Years Data Collected: Global Terrorism Database began in 2001, gathering data from 1970-2004, in 2008, data will be updated through 2007.

Number of Waves: N/A

Participants: N/A

Types of Data: Publicly available, open-source material: books, journals, legal documents, news archives.

Strengths: Information can be analyzed by up to 128 different variables: date, incident location, attack type, target type, perpetrator type, weapon type, casualties. Interactive world map. Enormous amount of information available.

Accessibility of Data: Very accessible through the use of a Codebook created by the Database Development Committee made up of terrorism and data collection experts. Codebook can be obtained from website.

Usefulness: Helpful for researchers looking at the impact of terrorism on families.

Website: http://www.start.umd.edu/

Data Access: Inter University Consortium for Political and Social Research – icprs.umich.edu/cocoon/NACJD/STUDY/04586.xml.

Posted by hgroteva at 10:34 PM

Family Socialization and Developmental Competence Project

In January 2008, 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 Bibiana Koh.

A. Official Name of the study: Family Socialization and Developmental Competence Project

B. Study Purpose: The purpose of this study “was to explore familial determinants of individual differences in children’s and adolescents’ competence and development.?

C. Principal Investigators: Diana Baumrind

D. Years during which data were collected: 1968-1980

E. Number of waves of data, and ages of participants at each wave:

• Wave I (1968) – 4 to 5years old
• Wave II (1972) – 7 to 9 years old
• Wave III (1978) – 14 to 15 years old

F. Participants (type and numbers) from whom data were directly collected: 194 families (seen at least once) compromised of parents and children in white middle-class families

• Wave I (1968) – 134 children and their parents (original cohort)
• Wave II (1972) – 104 children and their parents (original cohort); 60 children and their parents (second cohort)
• Wave III (1978) – 89 children (original cohort); 50 children (second cohort)

G. Types of data (survey, interview, observation, records, etc.): questionnaires, personal interviews, videotaped observations, intelligence test (for children only, e.g. Stanford-Binet and WISC)

H. My assessment of strengths and weaknesses of the data set:

Strengths of the data set:

• A major strength of the data set is the measures used at each wave for both children and parents. The measures are comprehensive and include a wide range of variables.
• Multiple forms of data were collected allowing for different kinds of analyses.


Weaknesses of the data set:

• The sample is not diverse and is not nationally representative; the sample is limited to the East Bay area (Berkeley and Oakland, California).
• Given that Wave I was collected nearly 40 years ago, keep in mind the cohort effects if you chose to work with this data set.


I. Accessibility of data to the research community: The data set appears to be easily accessible after you complete and submit an application to gain access to the data.

J. My assessment of how useful data set is for family research: The data set appears to be quite useful for family research given the range and variety of measures used and the data collected. If you chose to use this data set, one thing to keep in mind are the cohort effects given that Wave I was collected nearly 40 years ago.

K. Web site and what kind of information is available: The web site is http://www.murray.harvard.edu/. The web site houses a large amount of data for the archive. It also has quick links for finding and depositing data, and dissertation grants.

L. How does one gain access to the data? To gain access to the data, you must complete an on-line application to request to use the data. As part of the application, you need to submit a 1-2 page description of your proposed research project.

Posted by hgroteva at 10:28 PM

February 6, 2007

Early Childhood Longitudinal Survey, Birth Cohort (ECLS-B)

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 Jinhee Lee. [

Early Childhood Longitudinal Survey, Birth Cohort (ECLS-B)

2) Study purpose: Designed to provide information on children’s health and development in the early years of life. Issues addressed by the ECLS-B are children’s growth and development, children’s health status, and school readiness.

3) Principal investigators:
- The ECLS-B represents the efforts of the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) and several health, education and human services agencies such as U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), and Economic Research Service (ERS).

4) Years during which data were collected
- Data collection for the ECLS-B is longitudinal. The same children are followed from birth through kindergarten entry. Information about these children was collected when the children were approximately 9-months, 2-years (2003), and in preschool (one year away from kindergarten, Fall 2005). In the Fall of 2006, data are collected from all participating sample children, 75% of whom are expected to be age-eligible for kindergarten. In the Fall of 2007, data will be collected from the remaining 25% of participating sample children

5) Number of waves of data, and ages of participants at each wave
- National sample of 10,688 children
- Wave I for 9 months; Wave II for 2 years; Wave III for 4 years; Wave IV for K; Wave V for Grade 1 (Response Rates: Wave I – 74%)

6) Participants (type and numbers) from whom data were directly collected:
- National sample of 10,688 children selected from birth certificates among population of U.S. children born in 2001; minorities oversampled
- Interviewed with primary caregiver, father, child-care provider, teacher, and child.

7) Types of data (survey, interview, observation, records, etc.)
- In-person interviews and assessments (Proxy reports were used through parent reports on child)

8) My assessment of strengths and weaknesses of the data set
- The main strength of the data set is that the longitudinal data provides chances for understanding child development over time. Also data about children, their parents, their child care providers, their teachers and school administrators provide opportunities for understanding children development across multiple settings such as home, school, and child care in terms of children’s cognitive, social, emotional and physical aspects.
- The weakness of the data set is that it does not include diverse ethnic/racial subgroups for multicultural study.

9) Accessibility of data to the research community
- Researchers who are interested in these data can use those data set. The first release, which includes the 9-month (1) parent interview data, (2) child assessment data and (3) father questionnaire data were released at the end of 2004. NCES will release data on subsequent waves approximately one and one half years after data collection ends.

10) My assessment of how useful this data set would be for family research
- This data set provides family researchers with chances for studying fathers’ parenting roles and influences on their children’s development. In this study, fathers' involvement in their children's lives is examined by directly gathering information from the fathers themselves.

11) Web site, and what kind of information is there:
- http://www.nces.ed.gov/ecls/birth/- Study Information / Instruments and Assessments / Data Information / Publications etc.

12) How does one gain access to the data?
- Due to NCES' confidentiality legislation, scholars need to obtain (or amend) a restricted data license to access restricted data from ECLS.


Posted by hgroteva at 1:20 PM

February 5, 2007

National Survey of Child and Adolescent Well-Being (NSCAW), 1997-2010

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 Chris Gonzalez.

National Survey of Child and Adolescent Well-Being (NSCAW), 1997-2010

2. Study Purpose

To study children who are in the welfare system and investigate the issues of abuse and neglect within the child welfare system. It was directed by congress and is a longitudinal study.
The NSCAW is designed to address the following questions:
• What paths do children follow into and through the child welfare system?
• What factors affect investigation, services, placements, and length of involvement?
• What are the long- and short-term outcomes for children and families in the child welfare system in terms of safety, well-being, and permanence?

3. Principal Investigators

RTI – Research Triangle International

4. Years during which data was collected

Data collection actually began in September of 1999 after 18 months of planning and ended 2003.

5. Number of waves of data, and ages of participants at each wave

4 Waves of data collected. Children were ages 0-14 at the beginning of the project.

6. Participants (types and number) from whom data were collected

The sample will include a cohort of 6,000 children and adolescents who have come into contact with the child welfare system. Data will be collected in 4 annual waves from the children, their biological mother, primary caregiver (if different), caseworker, teacher, and agency administrative records.

Both children who remain in the system and those who leave the system are followed

7. Types of data (survey, interview, observation, records, etc)

Face-to-face interviews or assessments
telephone interviews
questionnaires

8. Strengths and weaknesses of the data set

Strengths:
1. First study of its kind.
2. Makes efforts to even the sample by age, gender, and major ethnic groups.
3. Reports on a variety of kinds of abuses and neglect
4. Severity of abuse is also covered, not just type of abuse.
5. The survey covers a wide variety of topics such as: cognitive achievement, social functioning, psychosocial well-being, delinquency, and sexual behavior.

Weaknesses:
1. Does not cover ethnicities beside white, black, and Hispanics.
2. Severity of abuse measures seem to favor severity as defined by the kind of abuse as opposed to the effect the abuse has. The response to the abuse is also an indicator of the severity of the abuse. Also within severity should be the response of the person who the abused first told and when they told, if ever.
3. Any secondary data set is going to have the weakness of fit for the researcher. The challenge in using this data set will be like any other, can the researcher and the data marry?

9. Accessibility of the data to the research community

There are three access gateways for this data set.
1. General use – Good for researchers becoming acquainted with the dataset. Many of the identifiers have been removed. Requires ordering online and various proofs of IRB and so forth.

2. Restricted release – Available to researchers who can demonstrate a high need for the sensitive information contained within the data set. Requires an application that may or may not be accepted.

3. Student use - For use by students who under the supervision of a faculty member.

The following restriction applies: Only faculty and non-student research personnel at institutions which have an Institutional Review Board/Human Subjects Review Committee (IRB) are eligible to order the Data.

10. My assessment of how useful this data set would be for family research

I think that this data set is an excellent one to use for its specific purpose. Families who have contact with the child welfare system often have some challenges that are not common to mainstream families – whatever that means.

American families are becoming more complex and more varied as time moves on. There are more stepfamilies, adoptive families, families in which the parents are not married or are same sex, and single-parent families. Studies that focus on “specialty? families as opposed to the families being a subset of the major study, are going to produce more useful data for better and more use research reports.

11. Website, and what kind of information is there

1. Administration for Children and Families site: http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/opre/abuse_neglect/nscaw/index.html• Overview
• Related Projects and Papers
• Data Collection Schedule
• Sample
• Data Availability
• Project Team

2. National Data Archive on Child Abuse and Neglect
http://www.ndacan.cornell.edu/NDACAN/Datasets/Abstracts/DatasetAbstract_11.html Has a downloadable description of wave I of the data and various pathways to gain access to the dataset.
12. How does one gain access to data?

Order the general use or apply for the restricted use data set from the National Data Archive on Child Abuse and Neglect website.

http://www.ndacan.cornell.edu/NDACAN/Datasets/Abstracts/DatasetAbstrac t_111.html

Posted by hgroteva at 8:42 AM

February 4, 2007

Los Angeles Family and Neighborhood Survey (L.A. FANS)

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 Ella Packingham.

The Los Angeles Family and Neighborhood Survey (L.A. FANS)

• Study Purpose: L.A. FANS is a study of families in Los Angeles County and of the neighborhoods in which they live. The purpose is to address research and policy questions in three areas: neighborhood, family, and peer effects on children's development, effects of welfare reform at the neighborhood level and residential mobility and neighborhood change.

• P.I.s: Anne R. Pebley (Director) & Narayan Sastry (Co-Director)

• Years during which data were collected: Data collection began in April 2000 and ended in mid-January 2002. Wave II data was scheduled to be collected in 2005-2006 (website said that “planning is underway for wave II, with fieldwork scheduled for 2005-2006?. The website was last updated on 12/21/05).

• # of waves, ages of participants at each wave: Two waves. Wave I included approx. 3250 households (3200 children and teenagers (age 0-17), 2500 Adults, and 2000 Caregivers). The website says that in Wave II, Wave I participants will be reinterviewed and that a cohort of “new entrants? into each sampled neighborhoods will be interviewed also. No further info about Wave II was given.

• Participants from whom data were directly collected: L.A.FANS is a multilevel survey, sampling neighborhoods, then sampling blocks within these neighborhoods, then families within these blocks, and finally sampling children and adults within these families (both adults and children were interviewed).

• Types of data: survey, interviews, cognitive assessments (administered to children ages 3 and 9) and in Wave II, collection of biomarkers of stress and health for sampled adults and children.

• My assessment of strengths and weaknesses of the data set: One strength of this study is that it focuses on low-income families and effects of neighborhood, welfare, and implications for policy change. The impact that neighborhoods have on children and families is a valuable thing to study. The way the L.A. FANS surveyed L.A. neighborhoods was comprehensive and random, it seems to be highly representative (from what I can tell), and when Wave II is completed, longitudinal data will be available and any long-term effects neighborhoods had on participants will become apparent. It is also a very large study with over 3200 households surveyed and low-income families were oversampled, giving us a better look at this section of the population. One weakness could be that there may be a great deal of missing data in this longitudinal study due to the fact that the researchers are studying neighborhoods (and the families within these neighborhoods) and many people will most likely have moved out of the neighborhoods by the time Wave II data are collected. The website addresses this concern and recognizes that this will be an issue.

• Accessibility of data to the research community: the public use data set is available via the L.A. FANS website.

• My assessment of how useful this data set would be for family research: I think this data set could be quite useful to family researchers as it is a comprehensive survey of what effect neighborhoods have on children and families, along with other variables like SES, family structure, etc. However, it is limited in its scope of families as it only focuses on families in the Los Angeles area.

• Website and what info is there: www.lasurvey.rand.org. Info regarding the survey’s purpose, design, P.I.s, public use data set access, F.A.Q., etc. A very extensive website, but it has not been updated since 12/21/05 so it is outdated and does not include any actual information regarding Wave II – only projected info.

• How does one gain access to the data?; Via the L.A. FANS website. Prospective data users are required to register on the website before gaining access to the data via an Internet download page.


Posted by hgroteva at 7:44 PM

Survey of Program Dynamics

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 Gregg Schacher.

Survey of Program Dynamics

Study Purpose: To collect data which will demonstrate the degree to which welfare reform initiatives have been successful. This is done through collecting data on the economic, income, family circumstances and social characteristics of a nationally representative sample over a ten year period (1992-2002). Goals include providing information on welfare program participation and its long-term impact (on recipients and their families) and monitoring potential long-term changes that result from implementing welfare reform.

Content: Core questions inquired about labor force participation, sources / amounts of income and program participation. In order to satisfy programmatic needs of other federal agencies each wave collected additional information that may not have been collected again. Examples include areas such as: child care arrangements, child support, health care, housing costs, marital satisfaction, parental depression, and adolescent questions about family conflict, vocational goals, independence, substance abuse, etc.

Principal investigators: A team of researchers from the U.S. Census Bureau.

Sources of data: Information was collected in the 1992 and 1993 panels of the SIPP (Survey of Income and Program Participation); information collected in 1997 used a modified version of the March CPS; and information collected from 1998 to 2002 used the SPD instrument.

Waves of data collection:
1992-1993 (these were survey data included in the first / last waves of the 1992/1993 SIPP panels)
1997 “Bridge? Survey
1998-2002 SPD Surveys

Participants (type and numbers) from whom data were directly collected:
1992/1993 - 35,291 Households (interviewed through SIPP panels)
The SIPP sample consisted of an annual selection of households (a panel) who were a nationally representative sample. All of the adults in those households were interviewed once every four months (this constituted a wave).

1997 Bridge SPD - 30,125 Households
The 1997 SPD bridged the gap in data between the close of the SIPP panels and the start of the SPD by recontacting the interviewed sample people from the 1992 and 1993 SIPP panels. The sample size for the SPD Bridge Survey was 34,609 households of whom 30,125 were interviewed.

1998 SPD - 16,395 Households (these were subsamples of the 1997 Bridge Survey)
1999 SPD - 16,659 Households (consisted of all eligible households from the 1998 SPD Survey)
2000 SPD - 18,716 Households (eligible household from 1999 and a subsample from those noninterviewed households from the 1997 sample)
2001 SPD - 22,340 (from eligible households from all SPD Surveys, a subsample from 1997 and noninterviewed households from 1992 & 1993)

Data collection: Most data were collected with control cards and questionnaires, some through interviews (although adolescents between the ages of 12-17 were interviewed directly and questions were administered by audio-cassette with the adolescent filling in an answer booklet).

Your assessment of strengths and weaknesses of the data set:
Some of these data are longitudinal, collected at three different time points over the course of ten years. The strength for those data is the collection of information over time. Some of the data were not collected at each wave and so there is inconsistency might present challenges to a researcher hoping to see longitudinal outcomes for those data. The types of questions and content areas seem to stress observable behaviors, particularly in relation to resources. This is both a strength and a weakness, depending on the focus of your research. For subjective relationship perceptions there were question about marital satisfaction and parent depression which was in contrast to the behavioral focus on other questions. Attrition rates were another weakness. In 1992/93 there were 35,291 households interviewed (73.4% of possible households) and in 2002 there were 12,496 households interviewed (53% of possible households).

Accessibility of data to the research community:
It appears that much of the data is available for download. However, there are indications that data can be purchased on CD which has the advantage of organizing some of the data categorically and comes with explicit documentation.

My assessment of how useful this data set would be for family research:
It would be very valuable when examining the economic, emotional, community-support, individual-functioning, and relationship impacts of a variety of assistance programs. Although the core questions focus on sources of income and employment in relationship to services received, there is also a host of questions related to such areas as child care arrangements, children’s educational progress, family structure, adolescent behaviors and outcomes, etc.

Web site: http://www.bls.census.gov/spd/
An overview, status reports, design information, survey content, data editing & imputation, information on searches, sampling & weighting info., how to use and link to files, publication generated by SPD data, quality profile, SPD news, user notes, user’s guide and tools to access SPD data. There is a bibliography of SPD-related research.

How does one gain access to the data:
The website offers a free software download called “DataFerrett? which allows users to create a data editing table. It appears that variables put into this table can be downloaded into a variety of different file formats, including SPSS. CD’s with Microdata files can be purchased, as well.


Posted by hgroteva at 7:39 PM

Early Head Start Research & Evaluation Project

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 Seongdok Kim.

Early Head Start (EHS) Research and Evaluation Project

• Study purpose
- Designed to evaluate effectiveness of EHS: fathers added to learn more about their role in low-income families. The Early Head Start Research and Evaluation project, random-assignment evaluation of Early Head Start, was designed to carry out the recommendation of the Advisory Committee on Services for Families with Infants and Toddlers for a strong research and evaluation component to support continuous improvement within the Early Head Start program and to meet the 1994 reauthorization requirement for a national evaluation of the new infant-toddler program.

• Principal investigators - Evaluation Team

Birth to Three Phase (1996-2001)
ACF contracted with Mathematica Policy Research, Inc. (MPR) of Princeton, New Jersey, and its subcontractor, the Center for Children and Families at Columbia University, Teachers College. Dr. John M. Love and Dr. Ellen Eliason Kisker of MPR and Dr. Jeanne Brooks-Gunn of Columbia University led the national evaluation team.
ACF also funded 15 local research teams to work with the Early Head Start research programs to conduct their own research on issues central to the local programs and to participate in many national evaluation activities (including providing field support for the national data collection).
The Early Head Start Research Consortium—composed of federal staff, national evaluation contractor staff, 15 local research teams, and directors of the 17 Early Head Start programs—was created to facilitate collaboration on issues related to policy, assessment, and the use of research and evaluation data.

Pre-Kindergarten Follow-up Phase (2001-2005)
In order to answer policy relevant questions related to child experiences after Early Head Start, ACF funded a Pre-Kindergarten follow-up of the children in the Early Head Start Research and Evaluation sample. In this phase of the study, 15 local research teams were funded to develop cross-site measures and collect data, while MPR was funded in the role of a Data Coordinating and Analysis Center in order to facilitate training, certification, and data consolidation.

Elementary School Follow-up (2005-2010)
ACF has funded a fifth grade (G5) follow-up study of the children in the Early Head Start Research and Evaluation Sample. MPR, along with the National Center for Children and Families at Columbia University and Educational Testing Service, will direct the fifth grade round of data collection scheduled to begin in the spring of 2007. The 15 local research teams will advise MPR on the study design, planning and assist with oversight of the data collection. Xtria will continue to provide support to the EHS Consortium and workgroup activities as they have in previous phases of the study.

• Number of waves of data and ages of participants at each wave
The Early Head Start Research and Evaluation project consisted of three phases: the Congressionally-mandated Birth to Three Phase, the Pre-Kindergarten Follow-up Phase, and the Elementary School Follow-up Phase.
Birth to Three Phase (1996-2001)
It included a cross-site national study that encompassed an Impact Evaluation and Implementation Study as well as site-specific research conducted by local research projects

* Impact Evaluation
A rigorous evaluation was designed to examine the impacts of Early Head Start on key child and family outcomes. The evaluation was conducted in 17 sites where Early Head Start research programs were located. Comprehensive data from multiple sources were used to examine the effects of participation in Early Head Start. Direct child assessments, observations of the parent-child relationships, and the home environment as well as interviews with parents about child and family functioning were conducted when children were 14, 24, and 36 months of age. Information on family service use was collected at 6, 15, 26 months after enrollment and at the time of exit from the program.

* Implementation Evaluation
The implementation study measured the extent to which programs implemented the Head Start Program Performance Standards by 1997 and 1999. Data for the implementation study came from many sources, including three rounds of site visits to the research programs, program documents, self-administered staff surveys, Head Start Family Information System (HSFIS) application and enrollment forms, and other documents and databases.

* Local Research Projects
The major focus for these local studies was the identification of what mediates and moderates positive child and family development within the context of the specific Early Head Start programs and local communities. These local research studies identified site-specific outcomes and examined intra-site differential impacts and their reasons for them.


Pre-Kindergarten Follow-up Phase (2001-2005)
In order to address important policy questions related to childhood experiences after Early Head Start, ACF funded the Pre-Kindergarten Follow-up Phase and awarded cooperative agreements to the same local universities funded during the Birth to Three Phase. These universities conducted cross-site and site-specific research, building upon earlier research and following the original children and families from the time they left the Early Head Start program until they entered kindergarten.

Elementary School Follow-up (2005-2010)
In the Elementary School Follow-Up phase, children and families will be assessed when the children will be fifth graders or attending their sixth year of formal schooling. Approximately 1,900 children, their parents, and teachers in 17 sites across the U.S. are expected to participate. The study includes direct assessments of children's cognitive, socioemotional, and physical development; parent interviews; teacher questionnaires; and videotaping of maternal-child interactions.

• Participants (type and numbers) from whom data were directly collected
- 3,000 low-income families with children born between September 1995 and July 1998 in 17 sites.

• My assessment of strengths and weaknesses of the data set
* Strengths
- One of the strengths of the data set is that it has comprehensive longitudinal study of the subjects via three stages. In doing so, the evaluation can track impacts of the Early Head Start project on infants (to 5 or 6th grade ) and their family. Secondly, the data set has a number of subjects. It includes about 3,000 children and their parents. In the last follow-up (Elementary school follow-up) expect approximately 1,900 children still. Thirdly, the evaluation project utilizes diverse evaluation methods including Infants- Toddler observation, parents’ interview, and teachers’ interview. Thus, it can measure impacts of the Early Head Start in more systematic ways. In addition, there are local research teams join the process of work that identified site-specific outcomes and examined intre-site differential impacts and their reasons for them.
* Weakness
- It may not grasp characteristics for the subgroups (i.e. ethnicity) among low-income families. Despite the same category, different ethnic subgroups might have different cultures on family norm and education that affect on children’s development (intellectual, cognitive, and socioemotional). Secondly, the data may not have the same or similar representation of children among states. Since this evaluation project is a longitudinal, there are dropouts from the project. However, the number of dropouts may different from states. In that case, the sample may not represent a whole population in states restricting validity of the results.

• My assessment of how useful this data set would be for family research
- The data is quite useful for family research since it provides comprehensive longitudinal data on children’s development through diverse evaluation tools. Given the importance of Early Head Start program, the data will provide critical understanding on the children’s development not only by the program itself, but also by interactions among family members.

• Web site, and what kind of information is there
- The website covers overview, evaluation design and components, and evaluation team of the project. The website provides information on Early Head Start Research Consortium, Fatherhood Research, Research Partners, unique features of the project for assessing impacts of an Infant-Toddler Intervention, and about Early Head Start. Also we can access to “Reports?, “Presentations and Papers?, “Instruments?, “Related Resources? related to the project.

• How does one gain access to the data?
- People can access to the data on the webpage at http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/opre/ehs/ehs_resrch/index.html


Posted by hgroteva at 10:59 AM

February 3, 2007

Fragile Families and Child Well-Being Study

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 Kim Diggles.

Fragile Families and Child Wellbeing Study (also called “The Survey of New Parents?)

Study purpose.
This study was designed to help inform not only interested researchers, but also relevant policy makers. Investigators hoped to shed light on four research questions:
1. What are the relationship dynamics between unmarried parents of a young child?
2. How are unmarried parents (especially fathers) able to provide and care for their young child together?
3. What is the well-fare of these young children born to unmarried parents?
4. How does the environment and family policy impact these families?

Principal investigators.
• Sarah McLanahan, Princeton University
• Christina Paxson, Princeton University
• Irwin Garfinkel, Columbia University
• Jeanne Brooks-Gunn, Columbia University

Years during which data was collected.
Initial interviews were conducted between the years of 1998 and 2000. One-year follow ups were done between 1999 and 2001; three-year follow up interviews were conducted from 2001 and 2003. Although they are not yet available for public access, the five year interviews were conducted between 2003 and 2005. (The expected release date for this wave is summer 2008.)

Number of waves of data and ages of participants at each wave.
Parents were interviewed at four different points, the initial one being at the birth of their child. Follow-up interviews were done when the children were ages one, three and five.

Participants (type and number) from whom data were directly collected.
Participants for this study included 5,000 children born between the years of 1998 and 2000 and their biological parents, representative of American cities with 200,000 people or more. It also includes an over-sampling of non-marital births.

Types of data.
The interviews asked parents to answer questions about attitudes, relationships, parenting behavior, demographic characteristics, health (mental and physical), economic and employment status, neighborhood characteristics, and program participation. Many of the questionnaires were selections from larger previously established scales.

Strengths of the data set
• The high frequency of the follow-up waves allows researchers to track change with more accuracy.
• The study sampled both married and unmarried couples which provides researchers with a comparison group.

Weaknesses of the data set
• This study only sampled families from highly populated cities in the US. It gives little information about those families residing in rural parts of the country.

Accessibility of data to the research community
This particular data set doesn’t really have a quick turnaround when it comes to making information available to the public. For example, the third wave of the study was conducted between 2003 and 2005. However, its accessibility will be prolonged fro three years. However, once it is made available it seems relatively simple to access.

Usefulness for family research
This study and data set is highly useful for family research because it explicitly deals with family dynamics and provides information about the dynamics of a less traditional family structure. It also serves to highly inform family policy.

Web site and what kind of information is there.
http://www.fragilefamilies.princeton.edu/
The website provides a wealth of information about the study design and access to questionnaires and codebooks. It also gives information about some of the recent publications that have been written using the data. There is also information about upcoming revisions and data release dates as well as relevant family news. Something that I found to be extremely helpful was the section that provided data alerts, informing users about the limitations of the study and how they can possibly rectify these as they do their own research; this section is also updated regularly.

How one gains access to this data.
To gain access to the public database, one has to first register through the OPR Data Archive (http://opr.princeton.edu/archive/restricted/default.asp). Access to the contract database requires a person to submit $250 and copies of multiple documents including an abstract stating the purpose of your investigation, a statement of approval from an IRB and curriculum vitae.

Posted by hgroteva at 7:13 PM

February 2, 2007

Panel Study of Income Dynamics

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 Anna Thurmes.

The Panel Study of Income Dynamics, PSID, is a longitudinal study of approximately 8,000 U.S. families that began in 1968 and continues today. This includes over 63,000 individuals across 36 years of their life span. It examines men, women, and children within their family units and focuses on economic and demographic behavior variables. Additionally multiple other psychological and sociological measures that may contribute child health and development are examined. There have been over 34 waves of data collection using questionnaires to conduct interviews. Interviews have been done face-to-face, over the phone, and now are computer based. The website, www.psidonline.isr.umich.edu, provides a great depth and breadth of information such as an overview, answers to frequently asked questions, and details related to the project including funding, the sample, and so forth. There are many data files available through the Data Center on the website, but some must be obtained via the Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research. The Data Center is fully automated and allows users to download and merge files.

This data set is useful to family researchers. As described by Hofferth (2005), this data set includes multiple persons within families, extends across generation and household boundaries, measures change over time, and exists in a geographic context, especially when files are merged from the Child Development Supplement. There is a great wealth of information within this data set and the website provides a lot of information. For this reason, it takes a significant amount of time to learn about it. Weaknesses of the data include an over sampling of individuals who are black in the 1970s. It is also complicating and will take some time to learn the data set, since it has such a long history. It’s longitudinal nature, nearly 40 years, gives it great strength. Numerous processes can be examined, such as intergenerational transmission of poverty. The sample is culturally diverse, representative of the U.S., with over 2,000 Latino households represented. The study continues to expand to include more variables such as those related to health.


Posted by hgroteva at 5:22 PM

January 31, 2007

National Survey of Families and Households

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 Julie A. Zaloudek.

Name of Study: National Survey of Families and Households

Purpose: To provide a broad range of information about families and family life that could be used as an interdisciplinary research resource.

Content: Includes life-history such as living arrangements in childhood, leaving and returning home, marriage, cohabitation, education, fertility, and employment as well as some items on relationships, kin contact, economic well-being, and psychological well-being.

Principal Investigators: James A. Sweet, Larry L. Bumpass, and Vaughn R. A. Call from the Center for Demography and Ecology, University of Wisconsin – Madison.

Funding: Funded by the Center for Population Research of the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development

Waves of Data Collection:
Wave One: 1987-1988
Wave Two: 1992-1994
Wave Three: 2001-2003

Participants:
Wave One:
N=13,007
Participants were from randomly selected households with a randomly selected adult in each household participating in the interview as a primary respondent. The spouse or cohabiting partner of the primary respondent was given a shorter self-administered questionnaire.

Wave Two:
N=10,007 original respondents
N=5,624 current spouse of cohabiting partners
N=789 spouses or partners for relationships that ended
N=1,090 children who were ages 13-18 at first wave and 18-23 at second wave
N=1,415 children who were ages 5-12 at first wave and 10-17 at second wave
N=802 proxy interviews with spouse or other relative when original respondent had died to was to ill to interview
N=3,248 parents (one randomly selected per respondent)

Wave Three:
N=9,230 main respondent, spouse, and focal child interviews
N=924 proxy interviews

Types of Data: Interviews, some self-administered sections

Strengths: This is a very large study with a nationally representative sample and broad range of questions. It was intended to be useful to researchers across many social science disciplines. It was very thoroughly done with a lot of multiple reporting (e.g. primary respondent, partner/spouse, child, kin).

Weaknesses: As with any longitudinal project, attrition is an issue. The overall response rate for Wave Three was 57%. Also, although there were many detailed questions asked, they might not be the kinds of questions that researchers might need for their particular research questions.

Accessibility: Data are accessible via the website as well as information for navigating the data, creating tables, conducting analysis, etc. There is also an email address for receiving support in using these data.

Usefulness: These data could be very useful to family scholars. There are many questions about family history and life. It has potential to address many research questions. The website, however, seems a bit outdated with several expired links. Also, the data set is so large that one really needs to have some specific questions going into it. Without a specific purpose, it would be easy to get lost in the data.

To access data got to http://nesstar.ssc.wisc.edu/webview/index.jsp

The website is useful but plain. Don’t expect to be dazzled but to find some good information on the survey and potential for conducting research based on the survey.

Gaining Access: There do not appear to be any barriers to accessing the data. Data from the Wave Three (2001-2003) are not yet available on the website.

Posted by vonko002 at 4:29 PM

Welfare, Children, & Families: A Three City Study

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 4:16 PM

National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD) Study of Early Child Care and Youth Development

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 Jessie Everts Tripoli.

Study Purpose: The NICHD Study of Early Child Care and Youth Development was designed to study the relationship between child care and children's development.

Principal Investigators: Willard Hartup (UMN) Steering Committee chair, 31 Principal and Co-Principal investigators from universities around the US and England.

Years during which data were collected: Phase I: 1991-1994, Phase II: 1995-2000, Phase III: 2000-2005, Phase IV: currently underway.

Number of waves of data: 3 completed, fourth underway.

Ages of participants at each wave: Phase I: birth through three years, Phase II: 54 months through first grade, Phase III: second through sixth grade, Phase IV: ages 14 and 15.

Participants (type and number) from whom data were directly collected: 1364 families with healthy newborns were recruited from hospitals associated with 10 US universities. The researchers followed a random sampling plan, to ensure representation of families in which mothers did and did not plan to work or go to school within the baby's first year of life; economic, educational, and ethnic diversity; and one- and two-parent families. Families were excluded if the mother was under 18, the family planned to move from the area within 3 years, the child was born with disabilities (or was kept in the hospital for more than 7 days), or the mother did not speak conversational English. 1103 of these families continued to Phase II of data collection, and 1077 continued to Phase III.

Types of data (survey, interview, observation, records, etc.): observation, interview, questionnaire, and assessment.

Strengths of data set:
1) Data collected in a variety of environments (home, child care, (later, school), and lab), and with a variety of measures: observations in home, child care, school, and lab; phone interviews every 3 to 6 months; and assessments given in all four environments.
2) The study followed an explicit, complex schedule of assessments in order to ensure consistent data collection.
3) The researchers gave 68 entire assessments to the family within the first 36 months of the child's life, 70 assessments during ages 54 months through first grade (about 17% repeated measures, 83% new (age-appropriate) measures), and 116 assessments between grades 2 and 6 (about 28% repeated measures). There is a wealth of data.
4) The study includes data across many areas--physical health, environment, parent-child relationships, academic functioning, social skills, daily routines and activities, ethnic identity, parental relationship, family finances, parenting philosophies, spirituality, etc.

Weaknesses of data set:
1) So many measures were given, the study as a whole lacks a cohesive purpose. Major hypotheses of the study are not available through the website, but would be helpful in conceptualizing and organizing information about the data.
2) Only 3 assessments were used in all three phases (Child Behavior Checklist (CBCL), Home Observation for Measurement of the Environment (H.O.M.E.) Inventory, and Personal Assessment of Intimacy in Relationships (PAIR))--other patterns must be extrapolated from results of different assessments over different ages.
3) Details of sample not available--demographics, description of retained families vs. non-retained, how sample sites were selected (these may be available with the data, but are not outlined on the website).

Accessibility of data to the research community: The data can be used by any doctoral level researcher associated with a university (or supervisee of such). There is a lengthy application with 16 pages of stipulations, guidelines, and subagreements, which must be completed by potential researchers for use of the data.

Usefulness of data set for family research: This data set is potentially extremely useful. There is a wealth of information available within this data set. Even without using the data, the forms and manuals for the study are helpful for other researchers. The breadth of assessments, schedule for completion, and variety of environments, seem to have been well-planned and justified. Over 140 publications and presentations have used this data set since the first phase data became available in 1993.

Information on website: Study summary, information on investigators, application for data, information about phases (collection instruments and timelines, instrument charts, instrument documentation, assessment forms, manuals)

How to gain access to data: The application can be obtained from http://secc.rti.org/apply.cfm

Posted by vonko002 at 4:11 PM

January 30, 2007

The Project on Human Development in Chicago Neighborhoods

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 Annie Toueng

The Project on Human Development in Chicago Neighborhoods is designed to understand the causes of delinquency, crime, substance abuse, and violence. Researches were interested in positive and negative social behavior. Specifically, this research focuses on the developmental and environmental factors that effect criminal behavior in order to develop crime prevention strategies. The researchers followed criminal behavior to better understand the course of juvenile delinquency, adult crime, substance abuse and violence in urban Chicago.

The principal investigators of the project are Felton J. Earls, M.D. (Director), Albert J. Reiss. Jr. (Co-director), Jeanne Brooks-Gunn, Ph.D., Stephen Raudenbush, Ed.D., and Robert J. Sampson, Ph.D. Three waves of data have been collected and a fourth wave of data collection is in-progress. Wave I occurred January 1995-June 1997, Wave II from February 1997 to January 2000, and Wave III from January 2000 to December 2001.

There were over 6,000 participants in the study. There are five data components of the study. There was the community survey that was conducted in the year of 1995-2000 (household interviews) about the structural conditions and organization of neighborhoods, the dynamic structure of the local community, neighborhood organization, political structures, culture values, formal social control, and the social cohesion. The survey had three stages, first, city blocks were sampled within each neighborhood cluster, then dwelling units were sampled within blocks, lastly, the adult resident was sampled within each selected dwelling unit. There were 80 neighborhood clusters that were involved in data collection.

The second component is the observational study of neighborhoods (1996 and 2000). The purpose was to observe the effects of neighborhood characteristics on the young child’s development. In order to do that, the researchers videotaped of city blocks, one at a time, to observe the physical, social, and economic characteristics. The project ended up in having 27,734 of recordings but 15,141 were coded. There was also a neighborhood expert survey to collect data by interviewing community leaders on community social life and the decision that are made (1996).

The last two types of data are the longitudinal cohort study and administrative data. I The administrative data is not discussed here. The longitudinal cohort study, waves 1 - 3, is the central part of this project. It included an infant assessment. It was designed to examine the effects of prenatal and postnatal conditions on the health and cognitive functioning of infants their first years of life. Researchers were interested in linking early development processes to antisocial behavior. The cohort study includes three waves of data collected over seven years. The sample includes adolescents, young adults, and primary caregivers. There were seven randomly sampled cohorts. Measures also examine family and peer influence. Participants will be followed for eight years so data span from birth to 26 years old.

Strengths of the data set:
- Looks at all aspects according to the participants’ context including the social environment, resources, neighborhood, and the behavior of the individuals
- Also researched about Chicago’s environment, resources, community leaders

Weaknesses of data set:
- The project only collected certain data at one time, such as interviewing the community leaders only in 1996
- Only collected data from Chicago so it might be difficult if potential study was in a smaller population and less diverse area

The website is a very helpful guide to the project. You can retrieve the data directly from the website by variable or type of data. You can log in as a guest to look at the data or to create an account. There are helpful links, including publications, announcements, and a web site map.

Posted by vonko002 at 8:30 PM

National Longitudinal Survey of Youth 1997 (NLSY97)

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 Sunmi Lee.

1. Official name of study:
National Longitudinal Survey of Youth 1997 (NLSY97)
2. Study purpose:
To document the transition from school to work and from adolescence to adulthood
3. Principal investigators:
The National Longitudinal Surveys (NLS) of U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics
4. Number of waves of data, and ages of participants at each wave:
Eight waves of data from 1997 to 2005 were collected annually
5. Participants (type and numbers) from whom data were directly collected:
Participants were 8,984 youths who were 12 to 16 years old as of December 31, 1996 and one of their parents. Two samples were drawn—a sample of 6,748 respondents representative of youth born between January 1, 1980, and December 31, 1984; and a supplemental sample of 2,236 Hispanic or Latino and black youth born during the same period.
6. Types of data (survey, interview, observation, records, etc.):
A personal interview, the screener, household roster, and nonresident roster questionnaire; the youth questionnaire; the parent questionnaire; and the computer adaptive form of the Armed Services Vocational Aptitude Battery (CAT-ASVAB)
7. Your assessment of strengths and weaknesses of the data set:
One strength is that the data set is longitudinal. Weaknesses include a) lack of a representative sample of siblings and b) only one parent participated.
8. Accessibility of data to the research community:
These data care easily accessible.
9. Your assessment of how useful this data set would be for family research:
These data would be useful for family research in areas such as the effect of poverty on family well-being or the effect of family economic condition on child outcomes. The data also include family environment and family formation variables.
10. What kind of information is on the web site:
There is a summary of variables and an overview of the NLSY97. In the overview, there is information about the samples, measures, and major data elements. In addition, there is information about how to access these data, the sampling procedures, and a list of published articles using these data.
11. How does one gain access to the data?
These data are accessible on-line.

Why family scholars might want to use it:
These data are representative of a population of school age youth. Scholars can examine long-term effects. In addition, researchers can easily access these data saving effort and money required during data collection.

Posted by vonko002 at 7:55 PM

Goldmines of Data - Two Major Sources of Many Datasets

In addition to the many individually-archived data sets that are being summarized in blog entries this week, I would like to call attention to two organizations that archive many data sets. Sociometrics, Inc. is a commercial venture whose goal is to preserve high-quality data sets for use by the research community. According to their website, Sociometrics (www.socio.com) currently has almost 600 data sets available from over 250 studies. Of special interest is their American Family Data Archive, (www.socio.com/afda_home.htm), which contains 122 data sets from 20 studies. Sociometrics cleans and archives data sets, using standard conventions for codebooks and variables.

The Henry Murray Research Center at Radcliffe University (www.murray.harvard.edu/mra/index.jsp) is an endowed permanent repository for quantitative and qualitative research data. A unique feature of the Murray Center's archive is that it includes videotapes, audiotapes, transcripts, raw coding sheets and other research artifacts that social scientists might want to work with. Researchers can apply for funding to visit the Murray Center and work with data on site, either for a short term or for longer stays such as a sabbatical.

Both Sociometrics and the Murray Center contribute significantly to the sharing of social science data within the research community. NIH is very supportive of data sharing. They recently published a "Data Sharing Workbook," which discusses different types of data sharing as well as data-sharing issues relevant to the protection of the rights and privacy of human subjects.

Posted by hgroteva at 5:48 PM

January 29, 2007

Early Childhood Longitudinal Study - Kindergarten Cohort 1998-99

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 Holly Carmichael.

The study aims to ascertain information about the knowledge of and skills of young children as they enter kindergarten and progress through early education. It also helps researchers understand what is going on in early education to help explain the outcomes related to later education. Further, it is expected to enable researchers to study the influence of contextual factors on school performance.

The study is sponsored and conducted by the National Center of Education Statistics. The following federal agencies have supported the study in various ways as well:

· Administration on Children, Youth, and Families (ACYF), U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS)
· Economic Research Service (ERS), U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA)
· Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP), U.S. Department of Education
· Office of English Language Acquisition (OELA), U.S. Department of Education
· Policy and Programs Studies Services, U.S. Department of Education
· National Center for Special Education Research (NCSER), IES, U.S. Department of Education

Data was collected in both the fall and spring of kindergarten (1998-999), the fall and spring of 1st grade (1999-2000), the spring of 3rd grade (2002), 5th grade (2004) and expect to be administered in the spring of 8th grade (2007) as well.

Six waves of data have been collected and an additional one is scheduled to be conducted later this year. The age of the participants was not a factor of inclusion, rather the grade of school that the participants were in were considered. Data was collected when participants were in kindergarten, in 1st grade, in 3rd grade, in 5th grade, and researchers expected to collect data while they are in 8th grade as well.

The children in ECLS-K come from both public and private schools and attended both full-day and part-day kindergarten programs. They come from diverse socioeconomic and racial/ethnic backgrounds. Also participating in the study are the children's parents, teachers, and schools. The initial sample was 22000 kindergarten students.

Data was collected through teacher questionnaires, parent interviews, school administrator questionnaires, student records, student questionnaires, student interviews, facilities checklists, and fact sheets.

Assess strengths and weakness of data:
The data are taken from a number of perspectives and a number of methods, providing a potential for triangulation. Given that this is a longitudinal study, I assume (though I cannot find proof) that many blanks are embedded in the responses and would need to be considered before a researcher chose to use the data. I think that it would also take a good amount of time for a researcher to become comfortable with all of the nuances of the measurements, given the vast number of them and the many relationships that I assume are set up. The data cover many variables of child progress, but may not cover any one variable extensively given the large number of supporting agencies (and thus, contradicting agendas).

Though a restricted data license is required to access restricted data, the majority of the data from the study are available for public use. Data is released on CD-Rom by sending an email to ecls@ed.gov. There is no mention of the cost of the data.

Assessment of how useful the data set is for family research:
I think the dataset could be very useful to studies created with a family perspective. Parents and children are both respondents, thus allowing researchers to understand patterns and trends between the two. It would be interesting to connect the parent/child data to sibling data as well, but this seems to be out of scope.

Website: http://nces.ed.gov/ecls/Kindergarten.asp
Full of information and easy to maneuver around on.

Posted by hgroteva at 6:58 PM