Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-dk4vv Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-28T09:54:33.077Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Future Relationships Scale: Measurement of student perceptions of what makes an adult intimate relationship successful

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  30 October 2015

Kym Dickinson  and
Barry Tainton
Kym Dickinson
Affiliation:
Gladstone District Special Services Centre
Barry Tainton
Affiliation:
Research Services, Department of Education, Queensland
Get access

Abstract

This paper briefly outlines the procedures that were undertaken in the development of the Future Relationships Scale (FRS) and discusses its possible application potential. An analysis of the existing literature on Family and Relationship therapy and established diagnostic measurement scales in the area, failed to locate an instrument that could aid in the measuring of perceptions of adolescents of the components that help to make an adult intimate relationship functional. This area was seen by the authors to be important particularly in the light of the development of school based Human Relationships Education. As a result a questionnaire was devised and administered to Year 12 students across three State high schools in Central Queensland. The questionnaire comprised 5 main parts. Part 1 obtained data on a number of independent variables. Part 2 was designed as an open-ended statement that sought Year 12 students' opinions about the components of functional relationships. Part 3 was the Future Relationships Scale. Parts 4 and 5 contained established scales that provided further information on independent variables and validation for the Future Relationships Scale. Analyses of the data indicated that the FRS is worthy of further development, and that Future Relationships was related to the sex and academic aspirations of the student, Personal Beliefs, and Family Assessment. The FRS would appear to be a potentially viable instrument for use in educational guidance and counselling.

Type
Research Article
Information
Queensland Journal of Guidance and Counselling , Volume 4 , November 1990 , pp. 1 - 16
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s) 1990

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Alexander, A. (1985) Adolescents' soap opera viewing and relational perceptions. Journal of Broadcasting and Electronic Media, 20(3), 295–308.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barnhill, L.R. (1979) Healthy family systems. The Family Coordinator, 28, 94–100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beavers, W.R. (1982) Healthy, midrange and severely dysfunctional families. In Walsh, F. (Ed.) Normal family processes (pp 45–67). New York: The Guilford Press.Google Scholar
Bernard, M.E., & Laws, W. (1988) Child and adolescent scale of irrationality. 24th International Congress of Family Functioning. Family Process, 24, 225–239.Google Scholar
Chelune, G.J., & Waring, E.M. (1984) Nature and assessment of intimacy. In McReynolds, P. (Ed.) Advances in psychological assessment (Vol.6, pp 277–311). Jossey-Bass Pub.Google Scholar
Cohen, L., & Manion, L. (1985) Research methods in education (2nd ed.). Great Britain: Croom Helm.Google Scholar
Cook, T.D., & Campbell, D.T. (1979) Quasi-experimentation. Design and analysis issues for field settings. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Co.Google Scholar
Cooksey, R.W. (1984) A descriptive outline of statistical methods. UNE Centre for Behavioural Studies in Education.Google Scholar
Cooksey, R.W. (1987) Experimental design and statistical interpretation for educational researchers. UNE Centre for Behavioural Studies in Education.Google Scholar
Epstein, N.B., Bishop, D.S., & Levin, S. (1978) The McMaster Model of Family Functioning. Journal of Marriage and Family Counseling, 4, 19–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Epstein, N.B., Bishop, D.S., & Baldwin, L.M. (1982) McMaster model of family therapy: A view of the normal family. In Walsh, F. (Ed.) Normal family processes (pp 115–142). New York: The Guilford Press.Google Scholar
Epstein, N.B., Baldwin, L.M., & Bishop, D.S. (1983) The McMaster Family Assessment Device. Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, 9(2), 171–180.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Erikson, E.H. (1973) The life cycle: Epigenesis of identity. In Smart, M.S. & Smart, R.C. (Eds) Adolescents: Development and relationships (pp 292–295). New York: The Macmillan Co.Google Scholar
Fredman, N., & Sherman, R. (1987) Handbook of measurements for marriage and family therapy. New York: Brunner/Mazel Inc.Google Scholar
Hase, H.D. & Goldberg, L.R. (1967) Comparative validity of different strategies of constructing personality inventory scales. Psychological Bulletin, 67, 231–248.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Isaac, S., & Michael, W.B. (1981) Handbook in research and evaluation. (2nd ed.) USA: EDITS.Google Scholar
Juhasz, A.McC., & Sonnenshein-Schneider, M. (1987) Adolescent sexuality: Values, morality and decision making. Adolescence, xxii (87), 579–590.Google Scholar
Kaslow, F. W. (1982) Portrait of a healthy couple. Psychiatric Clinics of North America, 5(3), 519–527.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kidder, L.H., & Judd, C.M. (1986) Research methods in social relations. Japan: CBS College Pub.Google Scholar
Lord, F.M., & Novick, M.R. (1968) Statistical theories of mental test scores. Reading, Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar
Minuchin, S. (1974) Families and family therapy. Great Britain: Tavistock Pub. Ltd.Google Scholar
Minuchin, S., & Fishman, H.C. (1981) Family therapy techniques. USA. President and Fellows of Harvard College.Google Scholar
Nichols, M. (1984) Family therapy. Concepts and methods. New York: Gardner Press Inc.Google Scholar
Olson, D.H. (1986) Circumplex model vii: Validation studies and FACES 111. Family Process, 25(3), 337–351.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Olson, D.H., McCubbin, H.I., Barnes, H.L., Larsen, A.S., Muxen, M.J., & Wilson, M.A. (1983) Families. What makes them work. Beverly Hills: Sage Pub.Google Scholar
Olson, D.H., Sprenkle, D.H., & Russell, C.S. (1979) Circumplex model of marital and family systems: Cohesion and adaptability dimensions, family types and clinical applications. Family Process, 18(1).CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Roscoe, B., Kennedy, D., & Pope, T. (1987) Adolescents' views of intimacy: Distinguishing intimate from nonintimate relationships. Adolescence, xxii (87), 511–516.Google Scholar
Waring, E.M., Tillman, M.P., Frelick, L., Russel, L., & Weisz, G. (1980) Concepts of intimacy in the general population. The Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, 168(8), 471–474.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Werbe, M.J.G. (1987) How adolescents perceive their relationships. Adolescence, xxii (85), 129–142.Google Scholar
Whitmore, J.R. (1974) Thinking about my school (TAMS): The development of an inventory to measure pupil perception of the elementary school environment. Stanford: Stanford Center for Research and Development in Teaching.Google Scholar
Wolcott, I. (1984) From courtship to divorce: Unrealised or unrealistic expectations. Marital Adjustment and Breakdown Proceedings. Australian Family Research Conference, (pp 30–103) Melbourne: Institute of Family Studies. Vol.111.Google Scholar