Conceptual Issues Related to Measurement in Family Research

Abstract

Scholars from a number of disciplines are directing more attention to epistemological, conceptual and methodological issues associated with family research. These issues include concerns about theoretical and operational definitions of family variables (Feetham, 1984; Gilliss, 1983), debates about technical aspects of measurement and analysis (Hudson & Murphy, 1984; Schumm, Milliken, Poresky, Bollman, & Jurich, 1983; Schumm, Barnes, Bollman, Jurich, & Milliken, 1985), and fundamental questions regarding the appropriateness of the logical-positivistic tradition of scientific inquiry as the pathway to knowledge about the family (Becvar & Becvar, 1988; Bed-nar, Burlingame, & Masters, 1988). Approaches to method and measurement follow conceptual decisions. Therefore, the purpose of this paper is to identify some core conceptual concerns related to measurement in family research and to pose questions and make suggestions to those interested in clarifying some of the associated problems. Among the problems are the following. 1. Confusion and inaccuracies in the research literature related to definitions of the term "family". These include problems with how to measure the "whole", the propensity to rely on singular informants, the importance of context and external versus internal definitions of the family. 2. Incongruencies in use of conceptual definitions, operational definitions, design and analysis methods that threaten the validity of research findings. 3. Incongruence between the logical-positivistic methods currently used and accepted by the research community and family systems principles. 4. A lack of respect for qualitative research methods resulting in theory and measurement gaps as a consequence of poorly defined constructs and processes.