Meaning of Work for Women

Publication Year:
1973
Usage 65
Downloads 52
Abstract Views 13
Repository URL:
https://pdxscholar.library.pdx.edu/open_access_etds/1597
DOI:
10.15760/etd.1597
Author(s):
Ackerman, Susan; Clark, Carolyn; Judd, Michael; Kaplan, Lise; Klineberg, Pearl; Little, Anne
Publisher(s):
Portland State University Library
Tags:
Women -- Employment; Work -- Psychological aspects; Social Work
report description
In this research practicum we were concerned with the measurement and implications of factors which influence the meaning of work for white American women. The present study was a pilot study for the second part of a research project proposed by the Human Interaction Research Institute (H.I.R.I.). John Marks, Ph.D., was co-director of the first part of the project and is the director of this study. Part I of the "Meaning of Work" project examined alternative life styles and corresponding career choices made by young men. This study identified values, aspirations, backgrounds, and characteristics of men who were grouped as "hippies", "surfers", "bikers", and "straights". Part II of the project will investigate the factors which influence the choices women make in working outside or inside the home, or in not working. The second part of the research plan will closely parallel the procedures and plans of the first part, "The Meaning of Work for Men". Included in the second part will be the personal and situational factors which determine women's choices of employment or homemaking careers or of non-employment. There were three objectives for this pilot study: (1) to develop instruments (an appropriate interview form and a corresponding data sheet for analysis purposes), (2) to generate hypotheses in relation to the unique meanings which work holds for American women, and (3) to develop instructions and standards for the persons employing the interview and data forms. It was anticipated that products of this pilot study would be utilized in the formal study. This report will include the following areas: (1) the review of pertinent literature, (2) the method, including the development of instruments, the trial interviews, and their analyses, (3) the results of the coding of the interviewed responses, (4) the proposed hypotheses, and (5) the discussion of our analysis of the instruments and process.