Spouse/Partner Measures Book - Harvard University · Variable Name Item text Reverse-coded Subscale . Version 7 . Page 8 . SPB_ZRID SPB RESPONDENT ID ... SPB CHB, EHB, AWB : CAPILINK

Version 7

Page 1

Work, Family & Health Network

Spouse/Partner’s Measures Book

Version 7

Page 2

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Section 1: Demographics .............................................................................................................................. 5

Background ................................................................................................................................................... 6

Spouse Demographics ................................................................................................................................. 38

Work Characteristics ................................................................................................................................... 85

Section 2: Spouse Workplace Measures ................................................................................................... 120

Work Schedule Flexibility .......................................................................................................................... 121

Work-Family Conflict................................................................................................................................. 130

Positive Work-to-Family Spillover ............................................................................................................. 141

Time Adequacy.......................................................................................................................................... 150

Productivity: HPQ/Attendance ................................................................................................................. 164

Job Security ............................................................................................................................................... 175

Income Adequacy...................................................................................................................................... 185

Employee Work-Family Conflict (Spouse Report) ..................................................................................... 194

Section 3: Spouse/Partner Physical & Mental Health Measures .............................................................. 204

Physical Health Symptoms ........................................................................................................................ 205

Insurance and hospital visits ..................................................................................................................... 215

Sleep Quality ............................................................................................................................................. 232

Health Behaviors ....................................................................................................................................... 245

Psychological Distress ............................................................................................................................... 260

Perceived Stress ........................................................................................................................................ 272

Section 4: Physical & Mental Health Measures of EMP............................................................................ 283

Employee Sleep Apnea ............................................................................................................................. 284

Employee Smoking and Alcohol Use ......................................................................................................... 298

Section 5: Family Measures – Spouse/Partner Relationship ................................................................... 309

Relationship Satisfaction ........................................................................................................................... 310

Spouse Support and Strain ........................................................................................................................ 320

Coparenting............................................................................................................................................... 333

Chaos at Home .......................................................................................................................................... 343

Time Spent Caring for Adult(s) .................................................................................................................. 355

Parent-Child Conflict ................................................................................................................................. 364

Version 7

Page 3

Parental Knowledge .................................................................................................................................. 395

Parenting ................................................................................................................................................... 405

Time Spent Caring for Child(ren) .............................................................................................................. 421

Target Child’s Physical Health Symptoms ................................................................................................. 445

Target Child’s Negative and Positive Affect .............................................................................................. 459

Parenthood Plans ...................................................................................................................................... 475

Version 7

Page 4

Sp Version 7 Updates

New content:

• Added descriptive statistics for Tomo 12m and Leef12m for several SM sections. • Added descriptive statistics for both industries and all waves for several created variables in Section 1

Edits:

• Work-Family Conflict – corrected an error with the Netemeyer reference • Spouse Report on Employee WFC– corrected an error with the Netemeyer reference

Formatting (none)

Version 7

Page 5

Section 1: Demographics

Version 7

Page 6

Page last updated: 05/14/2013

Prepared by: Mike Mills, Jesse Hinde & Kelly Davis

BACKGROUND

DESCRIPTION

These questions ask about the spouse’s/partner’s background.

PREVIOUS PSYCHOMETRIC PROPERTIES

N/A

PI USE OF MEASURE

N/A

Version 7

Page 7

WHO MEASURE NORMED ON/SAMPLES MEASURE USED WITH

N/A

ASSOCIATED PAPERS

N/A

SCALE SUBJECT INSTRUCTIONS & ITEM LIST

Subject Instructions

This first section will ask you some basic questions about yourself and your job at ^FCOMPANY.

Variable Name Item text Reverse-coded Subscale

Version 7

Page 8

SPB_ZRID SPB RESPONDENT ID

SP_ZRID SP RESPONDENT ID (ACROSS WAVES)

CAPILINKB Linking ID for EMB, SPB CHB, EHB, AWB

CAPILINK Linking ID for appending EM/AW/SP/CH/EH merged data across waves

FAMLINKB Linking ID for EMB, SPB CHB, EHB, AWB

FAMLINK Linking ID for appending EM/AW/SP/CH/EH merged data across waves

SITE1 1.0 SITE

mc_sum_evt Current Event Code

mc_sum_evtxt Description of current event code

mc_sum_stat Summary Status of case

mc_sum_sttxt Summary Status of case – text

mc_comp_date Completion Date

mc_comp_time Completion Time

mc_InstID Instrument type EMB,EHB,CHB,MNB,SPB,AWB

mc_Version Instrument version set in a bpf file

mc_review PRESS 1 AND ENTER TO COMPLETE INTERVIEW

mc_IND Type of industry (IND): 1-IT, 2-NH

CONDITION Condition

Version 7

Page 9

1=INTERVENTION

2=CONTROL

SD_INT1 Hello, my name is ___________________. I am calling from RTI International for a research study called the Work, Family, and Health Study. May I please speak to ^SNAME ^SLNAME?

1 = YES [IS TALKING TO CORRECT RESP OR PHONE IS PASSED TO CORRECT RESP]

2 = NOT HERE RIGHT NOW, CAN'T COME TO THE PHONE, OFFERS TO TAKE A MESSAGE

3 = HANG UP, HARD REFUSAL, NOT INTERESTED

SD_VERY2 INTERVIEWER CHECKPOINT:

IS THIS THE CORRECT RESPONDENT FOR THIS CASE?

1 = YES

2 = NO

SD_CNST1 (My name is ________________ and I'm calling from RTI International, a nonprofit research organization. We are interviewing people for an important research study called the Work, Family, and Health Study.)

We recently interviewed ÊNAME for the study, and would also like to ask you to participate. You were selected as a possible participant because ÊFname is employed by ^FCompany. ÊFname may have provided

Version 7

Page 10

you with some information describing the study.

PRESS 1 AND ENTER TO CONTINUE

1 = Continue.

SD_CNST2 Is this a good time for you to talk?

1 = YES [THIS IS A GOOD TIME]

2 = NO [THIS IS NOT A CONVENIENT TIME]

3 = NO [REFUSAL]

SD_CNST3 Your participation in the study would involve a 30 minute telephone interview. Before we begin, I would like share with you some information about the study and your rights as a study participant. This study is about the work environments, personal lives, and health and well-being of employees and their families. It is funded by the National Institutes of Health, an agency of the federal government. The study is being conducted by RTI International, a not-for-profit research organization, in collaboration with researchers at Harvard University, Michigan State University, Penn State University, Portland State University, the University of Minnesota, and the Kaiser Permanente Center for Health Research. The goal of the study is to learn more about how organization policies, practices, and culture affect the health and well-being of employees and their families. Over 1000 spouses or partners of employees at multiple organizations will

Version 7

Page 11

participate in this study.

We would like you to consider participating in this study now and again in 12 months. When we contact you again, you can decide whether or not you want to continue to participate.

The interview will take about 30 minutes and asks questions about your background and, if applicable, your job and opinions about your work and ÊNAME's work . We will ask about your familys physical and mental health and health habits. We will also ask about your relationship with ÊNAME^FSDfill. This is an opportunity for you to make a valuable contribution to our knowledge about the health and well-being of employees and their families. To thank you for taking part in this interview, you will receive $20.


1 = Continue SD_CNST4

Before we begin, please know that your participation in this study is completely voluntary and very important. You can choose not to participate, you can choose to not answer some questions, and you can stop the interview at any time. We have applied for a Confidentiality Certificate from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS), which will help us to protect your identity and information you provide. Your name will be replaced with a number for the

Version 7

Page 12

purposes of this study. Your information will be combined with data from other participants in the study and only group results will be reported. All personal information will be kept completely confidential and will not be disclosed.

The answers you give will be used only for research purposes. The only exception to this is that if you tell me that you or another person is in danger or being hurt, I will need to report this to my study team leader who may report it to the appropriate agency.

If you have any questions about the study or your rights as a participant, I can give you information about whom to contact.

Before we begin the interview, do you have any questions for me?

[ANSWER QUESTIONS]

May we begin?

INTERVIEWER: INDICATE ON THE COMPUTER WHETHER THE RESPONDENT PROVIDED VERBAL CONSENT.

1 = YES

2 = NO

SD_ApptDate THE BEST DATE TO CALL THE SPOUSE SD_ApptTime THE BEST TIME TO CALL THE SPOUSE

S_THK1 Thank you. That is the end of the interview. As our token of appreciation for participating we will be sending you $20 in the mail. For the purposes of mailing a check to you, I'd

Version 7

Page 13

like to verify that we have your full name and mailing address information correct.


1 = Continue

Pld_EGender Employee Gender

Pld_LE17ChNum Number of children age 17 and under living in the home

Pld_FD_CNUM Number of children live in home >= 3 days a week

Pld_FD_COUT Number of children R has that do not live in home

Pld_MarStatus Employee Married status

LF_CENTERID [Leef Only]

ID for Individual Leef Centers

Range: 1-31

ITEM VALUES

Never = 1

Rarely = 2

Some of the time = 3

Version 7

Page 14

Most of the time = 4

All of the time = 5

SCORING OF SCALE

No scales.

MISCELLANEOUS SCALE ANALYSES

[E.G., FACTOR ANALYSIS]

CHANGES FOR 2.0 AND BEYOND

New items were added related to the response card booklet to assist the spouse in the interviewing process.

Variable Item text

Version 7

Page 15

Name SD_BOOK1 During our interview today, we will be using a response card booklet. I provided

this booklet to ÊFname during ^FHisHer interview at work. Do you have this booklet handy?

INTERVIEWER: ALLOW RESPONDENT TO SEARCH FOR BOOKLET IF NECESSARY BEFORE ENTERING ANSWER.

1 = Yes

2 = No

SD_BOOK2 For some of the questions, I will tell you to turn to a specific page in the booklet. You may then choose your response from the choices listed on the page.Not all of the questions have response cards. Some questions will require a yes or no answer. Some questions will ask you to provide numerical answers, such as the number of days you do a certain activity a week, or the time of day you do this activity.

As we go through the interview, I will try and let you know in advance whether or not to use the response card booklet. Do you have any questions before we begin?


1 = Continue SD_BOOK3 That's fine. We can proceed with the interview anyway.INTERVIEWER: READ

ALL ANSWER CHOICES IN FULL.


1 = Continue

S_LANG IN WHAT LANGUAGE DID YOU COMPLETE THE INTERVIEW?

1 = ENGLISH

2 = SPANISH

3 = MIXED (BOTH ENGLISH AND SPANISH)

Version 7

Page 16

CHANGES FOR 6-MONTH FOLLOWUP

N/A


No changes.


N/A

TOMO DESCRIPTIVE STATISTICS

Version 7

Page 17

TOMO BASELINE

Item N

Mean (SD)

Median

Mode

Min

Max

Skew

Kurt

Pld_LE17ChNum 245 2.24 (2.94)

1.00 20 5.478 30.566

Pld_FD_CNUM 455 1.15 (1.08)

0 8 1.051 3.288

Pld_FD_COUT 413 0.76 (1.20)

0 6 1.695 2.786

Variable Name SITE1 SITE1 Frequency Percent

------------------------------

0 413 90.77

1 42 9.23

mc_sum_evt mc_sum_evt Frequency Percent

---------------------------------

491 455 100.00

mc_sum_evtxt mc_sum_evtxt Frequency Percent

-----------------------------------

Completed 455 100.00

mc_sum_stat mc_sum_stat Frequency Percent

---------------------------------

Version 7

Page 18

491 455 100.00

mc_sum_sttxt mc_sum_sttxt Frequency Percent

----------------------------------

Completed 455 100.00

mc_comp_date mc_comp_date Frequency Percent

----------------------------------

MIN: 09112009 1 0.22

MAX: 09222010 1 0.22

mc_comp_time mc_comp_time Frequency Percent

--------------------------------------

MIN: 08:22:47 1 0.22

MAX: 23:57:48 1 0.22

mc_InstID InstID Frequency Percent

--------------------------------

SPB 455 100.00

mc_Version mc_Version Frequency Percent

----------------------------------------------------

V12.2.0.0 - 01/25/2010 6 1.32

V12.3.0.0 - 01/28/2010 58 12.75

V13.0.0.0 - 02/25/2010 13 2.86

V13.1.0.0 - 03/02/2010 77 16.92

V13.2.0.0 - 03/22/2010 37 8.13

V13.3.0.0 - 04/22/2010 95 20.88

Version 7

Page 19

V13.4.0.0 - 06/24/2010 127 27.91

V8.2.0.0 - Prepared 09/10/2009 42 9.23

mc_review mc_review Frequency Percent

----------------------------------

Continue 455 100.00

mc_IND mc_IND Frequency Percent

-------------------------------

1 455 100.00

SD_INT1 SD_INT1 Frequency Percent

---------------------------------------------------

1 - YES [IS TALKING TO CORRECT 455 100.00

RESP OR PHONE IS PASSED

TO CORRECT RESP]

SD_VERY2 SD_VERY2 Frequency Percent

---------------------------------

1 - YES 455 100.00

SD_CNST1 SD_CNST1 Frequency Percent

----------------------------------

Continue 455 100.00

SD_CNST2 SD_CNST2 Frequency Percent --------------------------------------------------- 1 - YES [THIS IS A GOOD TIME] 455 100.00

SD_CNST3 SD_CNST3 Frequency Percent

----------------------------------

Continue 455 100.00 SD_CNST4 SD_CNST4 Frequency Percent

Version 7

Page 20

----------------------------------

Continue 455 100.00 S_THK1 S_THK1 Frequency Percent

----------------------------------

Continue 455 100.00 Pld_EGender Pld_EGender Frequency Percent

----------------------------------

MALE 304 66.81

FEMALE 151 33.19

Pld_MarStatus Pld_MarStatus Frequency Percent

-----------------------------------------------

1 - Yes, currently married 425 93.41

2 - Yes, currently living with 30 6.59

romantic partner

SD_BOOK1 SD_BOOK1 Frequency Percent

----------------------------------

1 - Yes 365 88.38

2 - No 48 11.62

SD_BOOK2 SD_BOOK2 Frequency Percent

----------------------------------

Continue 365 100.00

Frequency Missing = 90

SD_BOOK3 S_THK1 Frequency Percent

Version 7

Page 21

----------------------------------

Continue 48 100.00


S_LANG S_LANG Frequency Percent

-------------------------------------

1 - ENGLISH 412 99.76

2 - SPANISH 1 0.24


TOMO 6 MONTHS

N/A

TOMO 12 MONTHS

Version 7

Page 22

VARIABLE N MEAN STD MIN MAX SKEW KURT

Pld_LE17ChNum 171 1.8304 0.9643 1 9 3.33381 19.499

Pld_FD_CNUM 323 1.2415 1.1678 0 9 1.48577 6.102

Pld_FD_COUT 334 0.7635 1.206 0 6 1.77595 3.227

[FREQUENCIES FOR CATEGORICAL SINGLE ITEM QUESTIONS]

1.0 SITE

SITE1 Frequency Percent Cumulative Frequency

Cumulative Percent

0 304 91.02 304 91.02

1 30 8.98 334 100

SP: Current Event Code

mc_sum_evt Frequency Percent Cumulative Frequency

Cumulative Percent

491 334 100 334 100

SP: Description of current event code

mc_sum_evtxt Frequency Percent Cumulative Frequency

Cumulative Percent

Completed 334 100 334 100

SP: Completion Date

mc_comp_date Frequency Percent Cumulative Cumulative

Version 7

Page 23

Frequency Percent

2032011 1 0.3 1 0.3

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

11102010 2 0.6 334 100

SP: Completion Time

mc_comp_time Frequency Percent Cumulative Frequency

Cumulative Percent

09:26:45 1 0.3 1 0.3

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

23:45:29 1 0.3 334 100

SP: Instrument type EMB,EHB,CHB,MNB,SPB,AWB

mc_InstID Frequency Percent Cumulative Frequency

Cumulative Percent

Sp12m 334 100 334 100

SP: Instrument version set in a bpf file

mc_Version Frequency Percent Cumulative Frequency

Cumulative Percent

V1.1.0.0 - 09/12/2010 30 8.98 30 8.98

V2.0.0.0 - 01/06/2011 304 91.02 334 100

SP: PRESS 1 AND ENTER TO COMPLETE INTERVIEW

mc_review Frequency Percent Cumulative Frequency

Cumulative Percent

Version 7

Page 24

Continue 334 100 334 100

Type of industry (IND) ; 1-IT, 2-NH

mc_IND Frequency Percent Cumulative Frequency

Cumulative Percent

1 334 100 334 100

SP: TESTING: Employee Gender

Pld_EGender Frequency Percent Cumulative Frequency

Cumulative Percent

MALE 235 70.36 235 70.36

FEMALE 99 29.64 334 100

SP: Intro script

SD_CNST1 Frequency Percent Cumulative Frequency

Cumulative Percent

Continue 334 100 334 100

SP: Intro script


Cumulative Percent

Continue 334 100 334 100

SP: Response Booklet Intro

SD_BOOK2 Frequency Percent Cumulative Frequency

Cumulative Percent

Version 7

Page 25

Continue 290 100 290 100



Cumulative Percent

Continue 44 100 44 100

R is also an employee and may have completed EM interview

SV_SPEMPflag Frequency Percent Cumulative Frequency

Cumulative Percent

1 3 100 3 100

TOMO 18 MONTHS

N/A

*********************************************************************************************

Version 7

Page 26

LEEF DESCRIPTIVE STATISTICS

LEEF BASELINE


Pld_LE17ChNum 216 2.53 3.56 1 20 4.40694 19.101

Pld_FD_CNUM 404 1.19 1.2 0 6 0.91088 0.5051

Pld_FD_COUT 380 0.84 1.26 0 6 1.42873 1.2848

SD_CNST1 404 1 0 1 1 . .

SD_CNST3 404 1 0 1 1 . .

SD_BOOK2 254 1 0 1 1 . .

SD_BOOK3 126 1 0 1 1 . .

S_THK1 404 1 0 1 1 . .

1.0 SITE


Cumulative Percent

0 380 94.06 380 94.06

1 24 5.94 404 100

Version 7

Page 27

Current Event Code


Cumulative Percent

491 404 100 404 100

Description of current event code


Cumulative Percent

Completed 404 100 404 100

Summary Status of case

mc_sum_stat Frequency Percent Cumulative Frequency

Cumulative Percent

491 404 100 404 100

Summary Status of case - text

mc_sum_sttxt Frequency Percent Cumulative Frequency

Cumulative Percent

Completed 404 100 404 100

Completion Date

mc_comp_date Frequency Percent Cumulative Frequency

Cumulative Percent

MIN: 09302009 1 0.25 336 83.17

MAX: 08252011 1 0.25 293 72.52

Version 7

Page 28

Completion Time

mc_comp_time

MIN: 00:06:14

MAX: 23:08:12

Instrument type EMB,EHB,CHB,MNB,SPB,AWB

mc_InstID Frequency Percent Cumulative Frequency

Cumulative Percent

SPB 404 100 404 100

Instrument version set in a bpf file


Cumulative Percent

V13.1.0.0 - 03/02/2010 6 1.49 6 1.49

V13.2.0.0 - 03/22/2010 24 5.94 30 7.43

V13.3.0.0 - 04/22/2010 65 16.09 95 23.51

V13.4.0.0 - 06/24/2010 285 70.54 380 94.06

V8.2.0.0 - Prepared 09/10/2009 24 5.94 404 100

PRESS 1 AND ENTER TO COMPLETE INTERVIEW


Cumulative Percent

Continue 404 100 404 100

Type of industry (IND): 1-IT, 2-NH

Version 7

Page 29

mc_IND Frequency Percent Cumulative Frequency

Cumulative Percent

2 404 100 404 100

Intro

SD_INT1 Frequency Percent Cumulative Frequency

Cumulative Percent

YES [IS TALKING TO CORRECT RESP OR PHONE IS PASSED TO CORRECT RESP] 404 100 404 100

CORRECT R FOR THIS CASE

SD_VERY2 Frequency Percent Cumulative Frequency

Cumulative Percent

YES 404 100 404 100

Good time to talk with R


Cumulative Percent

YES [THIS IS A GOOD TIME] 404 100 404 100

R PROVIDED VERBAL CONSENT


Cumulative Percent

YES 404 100 404 100

Employee Gender

Version 7

Page 30


Cumulative Percent

MALE 23 5.69 23 5.69

FEMALE 381 94.31 404 100

Employee Married status

Pld_MarStatus Frequency Percent Cumulative Frequency

Cumulative Percent

Yes, currently married 264 65.35 264 65.35

Yes, currently living with romantic partner 140 34.65 404 100

Response Booklet Intro


Cumulative Percent

Yes 254 66.84 254 66.84

No 126 33.16 380 100

LANGUAGE OF INTERVIEW

S_LANG Frequency Percent Cumulative Frequency

Cumulative Percent

ENGLISH 371 97.63 371 97.63

SPANISH 6 1.58 377 99.21

MIXED (BOTH ENGLISH AND SPANISH) 3 0.79 380 100

Leef Center ID

Version 7

Page 31

LF_CENTERID Frequency Percent Cumulative Frequency

Cumulative Percent

1 9 2.23 9 2.23

2 16 3.96 25 6.19

3 16 3.96 41 10.15

4 17 4.21 58 14.36

5 9 2.23 67 16.58

6 11 2.72 78 19.31

8 10 2.48 88 21.78

9 15 3.71 103 25.5

10 18 4.46 121 29.95

11 8 1.98 129 31.93

12 14 3.47 143 35.4

13 21 5.2 164 40.59

14 8 1.98 172 42.57

15 25 6.19 197 48.76

16 17 4.21 214 52.97

17 19 4.7 233 57.67

18 10 2.48 243 60.15

19 15 3.71 258 63.86

20 13 3.22 271 67.08

21 7 1.73 278 68.81

22 17 4.21 295 73.02

23 13 3.22 308 76.24

24 13 3.22 321 79.46

Version 7

Page 32

25 6 1.49 327 80.94

26 26 6.44 353 87.38

27 6 1.49 359 88.86

28 9 2.23 368 91.09

29 10 2.48 378 93.56

30 14 3.47 392 97.03

31 12 2.97 404 100

LEEF 6 MONTHS

N/A

LEEF 12 MONTHS


Pld_LE17ChNum 87 1.77 0.82 1.00 5.00 1.24 2.26

Pld_FD_CNUM 181 1.19 1.21 0.00 7.00 1.14 2.26

Pld_FD_COUT 184 0.99 1.21 0.00 5.00 0.92 -0.17

Version 7

Page 33

1.0 SITE


Cumulative Percent

0 176 95.652 176 95.652

1 8 4.348 184 100

SP: Current Event Code


Cumulative Percent

491 184 100 184 100

SP: Description of current event code


Cumulative Percent

Completed 184 100 184 100

SP: Instrument version set in a bpf file


Cumulative Percent

V1.1.0.0 - 09/12/2010 8 4.348 8 4.348

V2.0.0.0 - 01/06/2011 176 95.652 184 100

SP: PRESS 1 AND ENTER TO COMPLETE INTERVIEW


Cumulative Percent

Continue 184 100 184 100

Version 7

Page 34

SP: TESTING: Employee Gender


Cumulative Percent

MALE 8 4.348 8 4.348

FEMALE 176 95.652 184 100

SP: Intro

SD_INT1 Frequency Percent Cumulative Frequency

Cumulative Percent

YES [IS TALKING TO CORRECT RESP OR PHONE IS PASSED TO CORRECT RESP] 184 100 184 100

SP: CORRECT R FOR THIS CASE

SD_VERY2 Frequency Percent Cumulative Frequency

Cumulative Percent

YES 184 100 184 100

SP: Good time to talk with R


Cumulative Percent

YES [THIS IS A GOOD TIME] 184 100 184 100

SP: R PROVIDED VERBAL CONSENT


Cumulative Percent

YES 184 100 184 100

Version 7

Page 35



Cumulative Percent

Yes 130 70.652 130 70.652

No 54 29.348 184 100

SP: LANGUAGE OF INTERVIEW

S_LANG Frequency Percent Cumulative Frequency

Cumulative Percent

ENGLISH 180 97.826 180 97.826

SPANISH 3 1.63 183 99.457

MIXED (BOTH ENGLISH AND SPANISH) 1 0.543 184 100

Leef Center ID

LF_CENTERID Frequency Percent Cumulative Frequency

Cumulative Percent

1 3 1.63 3 1.63

2 5 2.717 8 4.348

3 4 2.174 12 6.522

4 11 5.978 23 12.5

5 7 3.804 30 16.304

6 6 3.261 36 19.565

8 6 3.261 42 22.826

9 8 4.348 50 27.174

10 9 4.891 59 32.065

11 6 3.261 65 35.326

Version 7

Page 36

12 3 1.63 68 36.957

13 7 3.804 75 40.761

14 3 1.63 78 42.391

15 11 5.978 89 48.37

16 6 3.261 95 51.63

17 4 2.174 99 53.804

18 5 2.717 104 56.522

19 2 1.087 106 57.609

20 7 3.804 113 61.413

21 5 2.717 118 64.13

22 5 2.717 123 66.848

23 8 4.348 131 71.196

24 8 4.348 139 75.543

25 3 1.63 142 77.174

26 16 8.696 158 85.87

27 3 1.63 161 87.5

28 4 2.174 165 89.674

29 5 2.717 170 92.391

30 6 3.261 176 95.652

31 8 4.348 184 100

LEEF 18 MONTHS

Version 7

Page 37

N/A

Version 7

Page 38

Page last updated: 01/08/2014 Prepared by: Mike Mills, Jesse Hinde & Kelly Davis

SPOUSE DEMOGRAPHICS

DESCRIPTION

These questions ask about the spouse’s/partner’s background.


N/A

PI USE OF MEASURE

N/A


Version 7

Page 39

N/A

ASSOCIATED PAPERS

N/A




Variable Name

Item text Reverse-coded Subscale

SD_AGE

How old are you? YEARS OLD

SD_GEN What is your gender? 1 = MALE 2 = FEMALE

SD_HISP1 Are you Hispanic or ^FLatin? 1 = YES

Version 7

Page 40

2 = NO

SD_HISP2 [if SD_HISP1 = 1] Which of the followings best describes you? Are you Mexican, Mexican American, or Chicano, Cuban, Puerto Rican, Central American, South American, or something other? 1 = MEXICAN/MEXICAN AMERICAN/CHICANO 2 = CUBAN 3 = PUERTO RICAN 4 = CENTRAL AMERICAN 5 = SOUTH AMERICAN 6 = OTHER (SPECIFY:)

SDHISP2s [if SD_HISP2 = 6] Specify:

SD_RACE_1 How would you describe your race? Would you say. . . 1 = White 2 = American Indian Or Alaskan Native 3 = Black Or African American 4 = Asian Indian 5 = Other Asian 6 = Other Pacific Islander 7 = Some other race


SD_RACE_3 How would you describe your race? Would you say. . .

Version 7

Page 41

1 = White 2 = American Indian Or Alaskan Native 3 = Black Or African American 4 = Asian Indian 5 = Other Asian 6 = Other Pacific Islander 7 = Some other race




SD_RACE_7 How would you describe your race? Would you say. . . 1 = White 2 = American Indian Or Alaskan Native 3 = Black Or African American

Version 7

Page 42

4 = Asian Indian 5 = Other Asian 6 = Other Pacific Islander 7 = Some other race

SD_Races [if any of (SD_RACE_1-SD_RACE_7) = 7] Specify:

SD_EDU What is the highest grade of school you completed? Would you say 1 = Grade 1 through 8 2 = Grade 9 through 11 (some high school) 3 = Grade 12 or GED (high school graduate) 4 = College 1 - 3 years (some college or technical school) 5 = College 4 years or more (college graduate)

rc1SD_RACE RACE – “WHITE” selected (1, blank, -7=REF, -4=DK)

rc2SD_RACE RACE – “American Indian Or Alaskan Native” selected (1 or blank)

rc3SD_RACE RACE – “Black Or African American” selected (1 or blank)

rc4SD_RACE RACE – “Asian Indian” selected (1 or blank)

rc5SD_RACE RACE – “Other Asian” selected (1 or blank)

rc6SD_RACE RACE – “Other Pacific Islander” selected (1 or blank)

rc7SD_RACE RACE – “Some other race” selected (1 or blank)

CVSD_RACE Combined Race w Hispanic and More than 1 Race Cat.: CONSTRUCTED 1 = WHITE, NON-HISPANIC 2 = AMERICAN INDIAN OR ALASKAN NATIVE

Version 7

Page 43

3 = BLACK OR AFRICAN AMERICAN, NON-HISPANIC 4 = ASIAN INDIAN 5 = OTHER ASIAN 6 = OTHER PACIFIC ISLANDER 7 = SOME OTHER RACE 8 = HISPANIC 9 = MORE THAN ONE RACE -7 = REFUSAL -4 = DONTKNOW

ITEM VALUES

Never = 1

Rarely = 2



All of the time = 5

SCORING OF SCALE

Notes on the Construction of CVSD_RACE (added by Anne Kaduk):

Version 7

Page 44

A new race/ethnicity variable (cvsd_race) was created for each dataset by:

1. Combining the following two questions so that Hispanic gets a category: SD_HISP1: Are you Hispanic or Latino/a?

SD_RACE_1-7: How would you describe your race? Please select all that apply

2. Assigning people who have more than one race have a single category 3. Recoding 7: Some other race as applicable (from responses recorded in SD_RACES).

The categories for cvsd_race are as follows:

1 = White

2 = American Indian or Alaskan Native

3 = Black or African American

4 = Asian Indian

5 = Other Asian

6 = Other Pacific Islander

7 = Some other race (when not enough info. to recode)

NEW 8 = Hispanic

NEW 9 = More than one race

Guidelines for coding race and ethnicity provided by Lynne Casper and Carolyn Liebler:

*NOTE: Hispanic trumps all other categories, as done with Census. A person is coded as Hispanic regardless or other race category or categories selected. The only way a person who responded yes to the Hispanic question can be coded as anything other than Hispanic for cvsd_race is if they specify Portuguese or Brazilian in the “other specify” option for either the Hispanic question (sdhisp2s) or the race question (sd_races).

1. Code as “White, non-Hispanic” if in “other specify responses” participant says: a. Portuguese b. Brazilian

Version 7

Page 45

c. Non-Spanish European countries (i.e., Italian, Irish, Polish, etc.) d. Hebrew, Jewish e. Middle Eastern (including specific Middle Eastern countries, such as Lebanese)

2. American Indian or Alaskan Native

3. Code as “Black or African American” if stated:

a. From Africa or named an African country (i.e., Cape Verde, Ghana, etc.) b. Jamaican and Haitian

4. Asian Indian

5. Coded as “Other Asian” if participants stated:

a. Chinese b. Filipino

6. Other Pacific Islander

7. Coded as “Some other race” only if unclear how to recode based on other info. provided here

8. Coded as “Hispanic” (even if the responded said no to the Hispanic question) if participant says:

a. Hispanic, Latino/a, Spanish, Latin American b. Spanish-colonized/Spanish-speaking country (i.e., Peru, Pamamian, Ecuadorian,

Dominican (but not Haitians), and Puerto Rican)

9. Coded as “More than one race” if participant specified two races but not including Hispanic a. Respondents who said they are Hispanic and also selected two or more races in the race

question are still coded as Hispanic for cvsd_race. Syntax describing the detailed recoding decisions will be available with the datasets for download from RTI.

Constructed Race Variables

if SD_HISP1 = 1 then CVSD_RACE = 8 ;

else if SD_RACE_2 = . & SD_RACE_1 < 7 then CVSD_RACE = sd_race_1 ;

else if . < SD_RACE_1 < 7 & . < SD_RACE_2 < 7 then CVSD_RACE = 9 ;

Version 7

Page 46

if upcase(SD_RACES) in ("CZECH IRISH, SCOTCH, GERMAN") then CVSD_RACE = 1 ;

if upcase(SD_RACES) in ("PHILLIPINO", "CHINESE") then CVSD_RACE = 5 ;

if upcase(SD_RACES) = "CAJUN" then CVSD_RACE = 7 ;

if upcase(SD_RACES) = "HISPANIC & AFRICAN AMERICAN" then CVSD_RACE = 8 ;

if upcase(SD_RACES) in ("HALF WHITE, 1/4 FILIPINO,1/4 ALASKAN INDIAN", "BIRACIAL, WHITE AND BLACK") then CVSD_RACE = 9 ;

CVSD_RACEflag = CVSD_RACE ne SD_RACE_1 ;

LABEL

CVSD_RACEflag = 'Race recoded to s.th other than 1st reported race: CONSTRUCTED'

CVSD_RACE = 'Combined Race w Hispanic and More than 1 Race Cat.: CONSTRUCTED'

if (upcase(SD_RACES) in ("PORTUGUESE","PORTUGESE","BRASIL") & SD_RACE_1 = 7)

or (upcase(SDHISP2S) in ("PORTUGUESE","PORTUGESE","BRASIL")) then CVSD_RACE = 1 ;

else if SD_HISP1 = 1 then CVSD_RACE = 8 ;

else if SD_RACE_2 = . & SD_RACE_1 < 7 then CVSD_RACE = SD_RACE_1 ;

else if . < SD_RACE_1 < 7 & SD_RACE_2 NE . then CVSD_RACE = 9 ;

else if upcase(SD_RACES) in ("HEBREW","ITALIAN AMERICAN") then CVSD_RACE = 1 ;

else if upcase(SD_RACES) in ("CAPE VERDEAN","CAPE VERDIAN","JAMAICAN","JAMEICAN") then CVSD_RACE = 3 ;

else if upcase(SD_RACES) = "FILIPINO" then CVSD_RACE = 6 ;

else if upcase(SD_RACES) in ("WEST INDIAN") then CVSD_RACE = 7 ;

else if upcase(SD_RACES) = "CENTRAL AMERICAN" then CVSD_RACE = 8 ;

else if upcase(SD_RACES) = "MULATTO" then CVSD_RACE = 9 ;

CVSD_RACEflag = CVSD_RACE ne SD_RACE_1 ;

Version 7

Page 47

LABEL

CVSD_RACEflag = 'Race recoded to s.th other than 1st reported race: CONSTRUCTED'

CVSD_RACE = 'Combined Race w Hispanic and More than 1 Race Cat.: CONSTRUCTED'



No changes.


N/A

Version 7

Page 48


Variable Name Item text

SD_EDU3_1 [if SD_EDU = 4 or SD_EDU in a previous wave = 4 & SD_EDU2 not equal Yes]

Have you received an associate’s degree, technical degree or professional certification?

SELECT ALL THAT APPLY

First selected response (Not necessarily SD_EDU3 == 1)

1 – ASSOCIATE’S DEGREE

2 – TECHNICAL DEGREE

3 – PROFESSIONAL CERTIFICATION

4 – NO DEGREE OR PROFESSIONAL CERTIFICATION





Version 7

Page 49
















Version 7

Page 50






SD_EDU4 [if SD_EDU = 5 or (SD_EDU in previous wave = 5 & SD_EDU2 not equal Yes]

What is the highest level of degree you have obtained?

1 – BACHELOR’S DEGREE

2 – MASTER’S DEGREE

3 – PROFESSIONAL DEGREE

4 – DOCTORAL DEGREE


N/A

Version 7

Page 51


TOMO BASELINE

Subscale

# Items

Mean (SD)

Median

Mode

Min

Max

Skew

Kurt

Alpha

N (scale calculated)

N (Miss data)

N (Scale N/A)

SD_AGE Age

1 45.33

(9.34)

45 38 26 71 0.09 -0.71 N/A 455 0 0


Gender

SD_GEN Frequency Percent Cumulative Frequency

Cumulative Percent

1 149 32.75 149 32.75

2 306 67.25 455 100.00


Hispanic or Latino/Latina

Version 7

Page 52

SD_HISP1 Frequency Percent Cumulative Frequency

Cumulative Percent

1 28 6.15 28 6.15

2 427 93.85 455 100.00


Hispanic of Latino/Latina: Category


Cumulative Percent

1 17 60.71 17 60.71

3 1 3.57 18 64.29

4 4 14.29 22 78.57

5 3 10.71 25 89.29

6 3 10.71 28 100.00


Specify:

SDHISP2s Frequency Percent Cumulative Frequency

Cumulative Percent

Spain 1 33.33 1 33.33

american indian, French,hispanic 1 33.33 2 66.67

spanish 1 33.33 3 100.00


Race

Version 7

Page 53

SD_RACE_1 Frequency Percent Cumulative Cumulative

Frequency Percent

1 332 72.97 332 72.97

2 4 0.88 336 73.85

3 8 1.76 344 75.60

4 68 14.95 412 90.55

5 24 5.27 436 95.82

6 2 0.44 438 96.26

7 17 3.74 455 100.00


Race

SD_RACE_2 Frequency Percent Cumulative Frequency

Cumulative Percent

2 2 66.67 2 66.67

4 1 33.33 3 100.00


Race


Cumulative Percent


Race


Cumulative Percent

Version 7

Page 54

Race


Cumulative Percent


Race


Cumulative Percent


Race


Cumulative Percent


Race


Cumulative Percent


Specify:

SD_Races Frequency Percent Cumulative Frequency

Cumulative Percent

Values 17 100.00 17 100.00


Version 7

Page 55

Highest grade of school completed

SD_EDU Frequency Percent Cumulative Frequency

Cumulative Percent

2 1 0.22 1 0.22

3 42 9.23 43 9.45

4 120 26.37 163 35.82

5 292 64.18 455 100.00


Please turn to response card #2 in your booklet. How wou

-Option 1 selected (1, blank, -7=REF, -4=DK)

rc1SD_RACE Frequency Percent Cumulative Frequency

Cumulative Percent

1 332 100.00 332 100.00



-Option 2 selected (1 or blank)


Cumulative Percent

1 6 100.00 6 100.00




Version 7

Page 56

Rc3SD_RACE Frequency Percent Cumulative Frequency

Cumulative Percent

1 8 100.00 8 100.00





Cumulative Percent

1 69 100.00 69 100.00





Cumulative Percent

1 24 100.00 24 100.00





Cumulative Percent

1 2 100.00 2 100.00


Version 7

Page 57




Cumulative Percent

1 17 100.00 17 100.00


Combined Race w Hispanic and More than 1 Race Cat.: CONSTRUCTED

CVSD_RACE_B Frequency Percent Cumulative Frequency

Cumulative Percent

WHITE, NON-HISPANIC 316 69.451 316 69.451

AMERICAN INDIAN OR ALASKAN NATIVE 1 0.22 317 69.67

BLACK OR AFRICAN AMERICAN, NON-HISPANIC 8 1.758 325 71.429

ASIAN INDIAN 68 14.945 393 86.374

OTHER ASIAN 26 5.714 419 92.088

OTHER PACIFIC ISLANDER 1 0.22 420 92.308

SOME OTHER RACE 1 0.22 421 92.527

HISPANIC 29 6.374 450 98.901

MORE THAN ONE RACE 5 1.099 455 100

Race recoded to s.th other than 1st reported race: CONSTRUCTED

CVSD_RACEBflag Frequency Percent Cumulative Frequency

Cumulative Percent

0 418 91.868 418 91.868

1 37 8.132 455 100

Version 7

Page 58

LATEST WAVE'S RECODED RACE: CONSTRUCTED

CVSD_RACE Frequency Percent Cumulative Frequency

Cumulative Percent



ASIAN INDIAN 70 15.385 396 87.033

OTHER ASIAN 26 5.714 422 92.747


SOME OTHER RACE 1 0.22 424 93.187

HISPANIC 27 5.934 451 99.121


CVSD_RACE is different from own-wave's recoded Race

CVSD_RACEflag Frequency Percent Cumulative Frequency

Cumulative Percent

0 439 96.484 439 96.484

1 16 3.516 455 100

TOMO 6 MONTHS

N/A

Version 7

Page 59

TOMO 12 MONTHS


SD_AGE 334 46.775 9.3841 27 72 0.03772 -0.793

SP: Gender


Cumulative Percent

MALE 104 31.14 104 31.14

FEMALE 230 68.86 334 100

SP: Hispanic or Latino/Latina


Cumulative Percent

YES 19 5.69 19 5.69

NO 315 94.31 334 100

SP: Hispanic of Latino/Latina: Category


Cumulative Percent

MEXICAN/MEXICAN AMERICAN/CHICANO 10 52.63 10 52.63

CENTRAL AMERICAN 3 15.79 13 68.42

Version 7

Page 60

SOUTH AMERICAN 2 10.53 15 78.95

OTHER (SPECIFY:) 4 21.05 19 100

SP: Specify:


Cumulative Percent

SPANISH 1 25 1 25

Spanish 1 25 2 50

hispanic 1 25 3 75

spanish american 1 25 4 100

SP: Race


Cumulative Percent

White 257 76.95 257 76.95

American Indian Or Alaskan Native 2 0.6 259 77.54

Black Or African American 3 0.9 262 78.44

Asian Indian 42 12.57 304 91.02

Other Asian 20 5.99 324 97.01

Other Pacific Islander 1 0.3 325 97.31

Some other race 9 2.69 334 100

SP: Race


Cumulative Percent

American Indian Or Alaskan Native 1 100 1 100

Version 7

Page 61

SP: Race


Cumulative Percent

Other Pacific Islander 1 100 1 100

SP: Race


Cumulative Percent

SP: Race


Cumulative Percent

SP: Race


Cumulative Percent

SP: Race


Cumulative Percent

Version 7

Page 62

SP: Specify:


Cumulative Percent

-4 1 11.11 1 11.11

Brazilian 1 11.11 2 22.22

Hiapanic 1 11.11 3 33.33

WHITE, NATIVE AND AFRICAN 1 11.11 4 44.44

bi racial white black 1 11.11 5 55.56

hispanic 2 22.22 7 77.78

mexican american/hispanic 1 11.11 8 88.89

south asian 1 11.11 9 100



Cumulative Percent

SP: Race -Option 1 selected (1, blank, -7=REF, -4=DK)


Cumulative Percent

Category selected 257 100 257 100



Cumulative Percent


Version 7

Page 63



Cumulative Percent




Cumulative Percent




Cumulative Percent




Cumulative Percent




Cumulative Percent


Version 7

Page 64

SP: Highest grade of school completed


Cumulative Percent

Grade 12 or GED (high school graduate) 35 10.48 35 10.48

College 1 - 3 years (some college or technical school) 86 25.75 121 36.23

College 4 years or more (college graduate) 213 63.77 334 100

SP: R received Assoc/Tech Degree or Prof Certification

SD_EDU3_1 Frequency Percent Cumulative Frequency

Cumulative Percent

ASSOCIATE'S DEGREE 14 17.5 14 17.5

TECHNICAL DEGREE 14 17.5 28 35

PROFESSIONAL CERTIFICATION 16 20 44 55

NO DEGREE OR PROFESSIONAL CERTIFICATION 36 45 80 100



Cumulative Percent

PROFESSIONAL CERTIFICATION 1 100 1 100



Cumulative Percent


Version 7

Page 65


Cumulative Percent

SP: ASSOCIATE'S DEGREE selected

rc1SD_EDU3 Frequency Percent Cumulative Frequency

Cumulative Percent


SP: TECHNICAL DEGREE selected


Cumulative Percent


SP: PROFESSIONAL CERTIFICATION selected


Cumulative Percent


SP: NO DEGREE OR PROFESSIONAL CERTIFICATION selected


Cumulative Percent


SP: R's highest degree obtained

SD_EDU4 Frequency Percent Cumulative Frequency

Cumulative Percent

Version 7

Page 66

-7 2 1.02 2 1.02

BACHELOR'S DEGREE 99 50.51 101 51.53

MASTER'S DEGREE 77 39.29 178 90.82

PROFESSIONAL DEGREE 7 3.57 185 94.39

DOCTORAL DEGREE 11 5.61 196 100


CVSD_RACE_W12 Frequency Percent Cumulative Frequency

Cumulative Percent



ASIAN INDIAN 42 12.575 292 87.425

OTHER ASIAN 21 6.287 313 93.713

HISPANIC 18 5.389 331 99.102



CVSD_RACEW12flag Frequency Percent Cumu Freq

0 311 93.114

1 23 6.886



Cumulative Percent


Version 7

Page 67


ASIAN INDIAN 42 12.575 292 87.425

OTHER ASIAN 21 6.287 313 93.713

HISPANIC 18 5.389 331 99.102




Cumulative Percent

0 334 100 334 100

TOMO 18 MONTHS

N/A

*********************************************************************************************


Version 7

Page 68

LEEF BASELINE


SD_AGE 404 41.38 13.06 18 75 0.36019 -

0.6492


Gender


Cumulative Percent

MALE 374 92.57 374 92.57

FEMALE 30 7.43 404 100

Hispanic or Latino/Latina


Cumulative Percent

YES 48 11.88 48 11.88

NO 356 88.12 404 100

Version 7

Page 69

Hispanic of Latino/Latina: Category


Cumulative Percent


PUERTO RICAN 22 45.83 28 58.33


SOUTH AMERICAN 3 6.25 34 70.83

OTHER (SPECIFY:) 14 29.17 48 100

Specify:


Cumulative Percent

Dominican 5 35.71 5 35.71

Dominican Republic 1 7.14 6 42.86

Latin American 1 7.14 7 50

dominican 3 21.43 10 71.43

dominicano 1 7.14 11 78.57

from Dominican Republic 1 7.14 12 85.71

portuguese 1 7.14 13 92.86

spanish 1 7.14 14 100

Race


Cumulative Percent

White 299 74.01 299 74.01


Version 7

Page 70


Other Asian 4 0.99 359 88.86


Race


Cumulative Percent

American Indian Or Alaskan Native 3 50 3 50



Race


Cumulative Percent

Race


Cumulative Percent

Race


Cumulative Percent

Version 7

Page 71

Race


Cumulative Percent

Race


Cumulative Percent

Specify:


Cumulative Percent

Cape Verdian 1 2.13 1 2.13

Central American 1 2.13 2 4.26

DOMINICAN 1 2.13 3 6.38

Dominican 2 4.26 5 10.64

Hispanic 2 4.26 7 14.89

Italian American 1 2.13 8 17.02

Portugese 1 2.13 9 19.15

Puerto Rican 2 4.26 11 23.4

Spanish 1 2.13 12 25.53

all of them 1 2.13 13 27.66

american 1 2.13 14 29.79

brasil 1 2.13 15 31.91

cape verdean 1 2.13 16 34.04

Version 7

Page 72

domincian 1 2.13 17 36.17

dominican 2 4.26 19 40.43

filipino 1 2.13 20 42.55

hebrew 1 2.13 21 44.68

hispanic 6 12.77 27 57.45

hispanic american 2 4.26 29 61.7

hispano 1 2.13 30 63.83

jamaican 1 2.13 31 65.96

jameican 1 2.13 32 68.09

mexican 2 4.26 34 72.34

mexican, puerto rico 1 2.13 35 74.47

mulatto 1 2.13 36 76.6

parents white and black 1 2.13 37 78.72

polish 1 2.13 38 80.85

portuguese 2 4.26 40 85.11

puerto rican 4 8.51 44 93.62

spainish 2 4.26 46 97.87

west Indian 1 2.13 47 100

Highest grade of school completed


Cumulative Percent

Grade 1 through 8 14 3.47 14 3.47

Grade 9 through 11 (some high school) 37 9.16 51 12.62

Version 7

Page 73

Grade 12 or GED (high school graduate) 151 37.38 202 50



Please turn to response card #2 in your booklet. How wou -Option 1 selected (1, blank, -7=REF, -4=DK)


Cumulative Percent


Please turn to response card #2 in your booklet. How wou -Option 2 selected (1 or blank)


Cumulative Percent




Cumulative Percent




Cumulative Percent


Version 7

Page 74


Cumulative Percent




Cumulative Percent



Cumulative Percent



CVSD_RACE_B Frequency Percent Cumulative Frequency

Cumulative Percent




OTHER ASIAN 4 0.99 348 86.139


SOME OTHER RACE 1 0.248 350 86.634

HISPANIC 47 11.634 397 98.267


Version 7

Page 75


CVSD_RACEBflag Frequency Percent Cumulative Frequency

Cumulative Percent

0 340 84.158 340 84.158

1 64 15.842 404 100



Cumulative Percent




OTHER ASIAN 4 0.99 346 85.644


SOME OTHER RACE 1 0.248 348 86.139

HISPANIC 49 12.129 397 98.267




Cumulative Percent

0 394 97.525 394 97.525

1 10 2.475 404 100

Version 7

Page 76

LEEF 6 MONTHS

N/A

LEEF 12 MONTHS


SD_AGE 184 45.85 13.21 19.00 77.00 0.08 -0.64

SP: Gender


Cumulative Percent

MALE 172 93.478 172 93.478

FEMALE 12 6.522 184 100

SP: Hispanic or Latino/Latina


Cumulative Percent

YES 16 8.696 16 8.696

Version 7

Page 77

NO 168 91.304 184 100

SP: Hispanic of Latino/Latina: Category


Cumulative Percent

. 168 91.304 168 91.304


PUERTO RICAN 7 3.804 176 95.652


OTHER (SPECIFY:) 7 3.804 184 100

SP: Race


Cumulative Percent

White 145 78.804 145 78.804




SP: Race


Cumulative Percent

. 180 97.826 180 97.826

White 1 0.543 181 98.37


Version 7

Page 78

Black Or African American 2 1.087 184 100

SP: Race


Cumulative Percent

. 184 100 184 100

SP: Race


Cumulative Percent

. 184 100 184 100

SP: Race


Cumulative Percent

. 184 100 184 100

SP: Race


Cumulative Percent

. 184 100 184 100

SP: Race


Cumulative Percent

. 184 100 184 100

Version 7

Page 79



Cumulative Percent

. 38 20.652 38 20.652

Category selected 146 79.348 184 100



Cumulative Percent

. 179 97.283 179 97.283




Cumulative Percent

. 158 85.87 158 85.87




Cumulative Percent

. 184 100 184 100


rc5SD_RACE Frequency Percent Cumulative Cumulative

Version 7

Page 80

Frequency Percent

. 184 100 184 100



Cumulative Percent

. 184 100 184 100



Cumulative Percent

. 173 94.022 173 94.022


SP: Highest grade of school completed


Cumulative Percent

Grade 1 through 8 7 3.804 7 3.804

Grade 9 through 11 (some high school) 10 5.435 17 9.239

Grade 12 or GED (high school graduate) 65 35.326 82 44.565




Version 7

Page 81


Cumulative Percent

. 120 65.217 120 65.217

ASSOCIATE'S DEGREE 17 9.239 137 74.457

TECHNICAL DEGREE 9 4.891 146 79.348

PROFESSIONAL CERTIFICATION 19 10.326 165 89.674

NO DEGREE OR PROFESSIONAL CERTIFICATION 19 10.326 184 100



Cumulative Percent

. 182 98.913 182 98.913

PROFESSIONAL CERTIFICATION 2 1.087 184 100



Cumulative Percent

. 184 100 184 100



Cumulative Percent

. 184 100 184 100

SP: R's highest degree obtained

Version 7

Page 82

SD_EDU4 Frequency Percent Cumulative Frequency

Cumulative Percent

. 153 83.152 153 83.152

BACHELOR'S DEGREE 22 11.957 175 95.109

MASTER'S DEGREE 8 4.348 183 99.457

PROFESSIONAL DEGREE 1 0.543 184 100

SP: ASSOCIATE'S DEGREE selected


Cumulative Percent

. 167 90.761 167 90.761


SP: TECHNICAL DEGREE selected


Cumulative Percent

. 175 95.109 175 95.109


SP: PROFESSIONAL CERTIFICATION selected


Cumulative Percent

. 163 88.587 163 88.587


SP: NO DEGREE OR PROFESSIONAL CERTIFICATION selected

Version 7

Page 83


Cumulative Percent

. 165 89.674 165 89.674



CVSD_RACE_W12 Frequency Percent Cumulative Frequency

Cumulative Percent




OTHER ASIAN 1 0.543 164 89.13

SOME OTHER RACE 1 0.543 165 89.674

HISPANIC 16 8.696 181 98.37



CVSD_RACEW12flag Frequency Percent Cumulative Frequency

Cumulative Percent

0 163 88.587 163 88.587

1 21 11.413 184 100



Cumulative Percent


Version 7

Page 84



OTHER ASIAN 1 0.543 164 89.13

SOME OTHER RACE 1 0.543 165 89.674

HISPANIC 16 8.696 181 98.37




Cumulative Percent

0 184 100 184 100

LEEF 18 MONTHS

N/A

Version 7

Page 85


Prepared by: Yin Liu, Mike Mills, Kelly Davis & Soomi Lee

WORK CHARACTERISTICS

DESCRIPTION

These questions ask about the spouse’s/partner’s job and their workplace.


N/A

PI USE OF MEASURE

Version 7

Page 86

N/A


N/A

ASSOCIATED PAPERS

N/A



Version 7

Page 87


Variable Name

Item text Reverse-Coded

Subscale

SD_EMP1 Do you currently have a full or part time job?] 1 = YES 2 = NO

SD_EMP2 [if SD_EMP1 = 1] Do you have more than one job? 1 = YES 2 = NO

SD_EMP3 [if SD_EMP1 = 2] What is the main reason you do not have a full or part time job? 1 = Unemployed (e.g. on layoff/unable to find work) 2 = Own medical reason 3 = Primary care provider for child under 18 4 = Primary care for elder (parents or in-laws) 5 = Primary care for other adult (spouse or sibling or disabled child over 18, friend or non-relative over 18) 6 = School or training 7 = Retired 8 = Other (specify)

SD_EMPs [if SD_EMP3 = 8] Specify

SD_JT What is your official job title for your primary job?

SD_AHWS1

On average, how many hours do you work per week on your primary job? HOURS

SD_AHWS2

On average how many hours do you work per week in your other job or jobs? HOURS

SD_SCH Which of the following best describes your work schedule on your primary job? Is it a variable schedule, regular daytime schedule, regular evening shift, regular night shift, rotating shift, split shift, or some other type of shedule? 1 = VARIABLE SCHEDULE (ONE THAT CHANGES FROM DAY TO DAY) 2 = REGULAR DAYTIME SCHEDULE 3 = REGULAR EVENING SHIFT 4 = REGULAR NIGHT SHIFT

Version 7

Page 88

5 = ROTATING SHIFT (ONE THAT CHANGES REGULARLY FROM DAYS TO EVENINGS OR NIGHTS) 6 = SPLIT SHIFT (ONE CONSISTING OF TWO DISTINCT PERIODS EACH DAY) 7 = OTHER (SPECIFY)

SD_SCHs [if SD_SCH = 7] Specify: SD_PINC Now please tell me, what is your approximate gross income

for the past 12 months^FThisjob, that is, income earned before taxes, social security, and so on, but not including benefits. Please do not include your spouse or partner's income.

SD_PINC1 [Tomo Only (IND = “1”); if refusal to SD_PINC] Will you specify a range? 1 = LESS THAN 49,999 2 = 50,000 - 59,999 3 = 60,000 - 69,999 4 = 70,000 - 79,999 5 = 80,000 - 89,999 6 = 90,000 - 99,999 7 = 100,000 - 109,999 8 = 110,000 - 119,999 9 = 120,000 - 129,999 10 = 130,000 - 139,999 11 = 140,000 - 149,999 12 = MORE THAN 150,000

SD_PINC2 [Leef Only (IND = “2”; if refusal to SD_PINC] Will you specify a range? 1 = LESS THAN 4,999 2 = 5,000 - 9,999 3 = 10,000 - 14,999 4 = 15,000 - 19,999 5 = 20,000 - 24,999 6 = 25,000 - 29,999 7 = 30,000 - 34,999 8 = 35,000 - 39,999 9 = 40,000 - 44,999 10 = 45,000 - 49,999 11 = 50,000 - 54,999 12 = 55,000 - 59,999 13 = MORE THAN 60,000

Version 7

Page 89

ITEM VALUES

Never = 1

Rarely = 2



All of the time = 5

SCORING OF SCALE

Constructed reasons spouse (R) unemployed variables

* ‘cvsd_emps’ is constructed to add 2 new reasons (9 and 10)

VALUE cvsd_emps

-4 ='Dontknow'

-7 ='Refusal'

1 = 'unemployed'

2 = 'Own medical reason'

3 = 'Primary care provider for child under 18'

4 = 'Primary care for older (parents or in-laws)'

Version 7

Page 90

5 = 'Primary care for other adult (spouse or sibling or disabled child over 18, friend, or non-realtive over 18)'

6 = 'School/training'

7 = 'Retired'

8 = 'Other (specify)'

9 = 'Homemaker / preference'

10 = 'Legal reasons';

* Recode responses of “other” in the original variable to indicate reasons of unemployment (SD_EMP3=8)

cvsd_emps = SD_EMP3;

Recode specific responses in FD_SWRKs by cases;

LABEL cvsd_emps ='Reason R does not have full or part time job- Newly constructed to include preference and legal reason';

/* CREATE FLAGS FOR CASES THAT SHOULD HAVE BEEN CODED AS EMPLOYED */

cvsd_empsFLAG = cvsd_empsFLAG1+cvsd_empsFLAG2;

LABEL cvsd_empsFLAG ='REASON R DOES NOT WORK_ self-employed FLAG_when SD_EMP1 is 2(unemployed)

but in constructed variable (CV) is .(treated as employed or missing)';

CVSD_EMP1 = SD_EMP1;

if cvsd_empsFLAG > 0 then CVSD_EMP1 = 1;

Version 7

Page 91

LABEL CVSD_EMP1 ='R employed_newly constructed including cases that should have been coded as employed';run;


N/A


Items

SD_PINC not asked after 1.0; only SD_PINC1 and SD_PINC2 are used.


Version 7

Page 92

N/A


No changes.


N/A


Version 7

Page 93

TOMO BASELINE

Item N

Mean (SD)

Median

Mode

Min

Max

Skew

Kurt

SD_AHWS1 355 39.58 (12.67)

2.00 100.00 -0.305 2.348

SD_AHWS2 32 11.78 (7.89) 1.00 32.00 0.807 0.336

SD_PINC 37 156028.89 (300920.51)

1.00 999999.00 2.537 4.882

Single Item Frequencies

Variable Name Item text SD_EMP1 SD_EMP1 Frequency Percent

--------------------------------- 1 - YES 356 78.24 2 - NO 99 21.76

SD_EMP2 SD_EMP2 Frequency Percent --------------------------------- 1 - YES 33 9.27 2 - NO 323 90.73 Frequency Missing = 99

SD_EMP3 SD_EMP3 Frequency Percent ---------------------------------------------- 1 - Unemployed 19 19.19 2 - Own medical reason 8 8.08 3 - Primary care provider 40 40.40 for child under 18 5 - Primary care for other adult 2 2.02 6 - School or training 5 5.05 7 - Retired 9 9.09 8 - Other (specify) 16 16.16 Frequency Missing = 356

SD_EMPs SD_EMPs Frequency Percent -----------------------------------------------------------

Version 7

Page 94

Author 1 6.25 Does not have work permit 1 6.25 Life transition 1 6.25 R is medically unable to get employed 1 6.25 She just got her working permit. 1 6.25 Taking care of children full-time 1 6.25 a mom taking care of the family 1 6.25 chooses not to work 1 6.25 dependent visa 1 6.25 house mom to 4 people with A.D.H.D. 1 6.25 no work permit 1 6.25 primary caretaker of child & student 1 6.25 provides daycare for granddaughter 1 6.25 semi retired 1 6.25 until the nyoungest goes to school 1 6.25 works sometimes for self 1 6.25 Frequency Missing = 439

SD_JT Frequency Missing = 99

SD_SCH SD_SCH Frequency Percent ------------------------------------------------ 1 - VARIABLE SCHEDULE 75 21.07 2 - REGULAR DAYTIME SCHEDULE 256 71.91 3 - REGULAR EVENING SHIFT 7 1.97 4 - REGULAR NIGHT SHIFT 4 1.12 5 - ROTATING SHIFT 4 1.12 6 - SPLIT SHIFT 5 1.40 7 - OTHER (SPECIFY) 5 1.40 Frequency Missing = 99

SD_SCHs SD_SCHs Frequency Percent ---------------------------------------------------- 3 hours every other week 1 20.00 ON CALL 1 20.00 Seasonally daytime schedule 1 20.00 open daytime schedule 1 20.00 part time 1 20.00 Frequency Missing = 450

SD_PINC1 [Tomo Only (IND = “1”); if refusal to SD_PINC] Will you specify a range? 1 = LESS THAN 49,9992 = 50,000 - 59,9993 = 60,000 - 69,9994 = 70,000 - 79,9995 = 80,000 - 89,9996 = 90,000 - 99,9997 = 100,000 - 109,9998 = 110,000 - 119,9999 = 120,000 - 129,99910 = 130,000 - 139,999 11 = 140,000 - 149,999 12 = MORE THAN 150,000 IND = “1” SD_PINC1 Frequency Percent -------------------------------------------

Version 7

Page 95

1 - LESS THAN 49,999 207 51.75 2 - 50,000 - 59,999 34 8.50 3 - 60,000 - 69,999 28 7.00 4 - 70,000 - 79,999 24 6.00 5 - 80,000 - 89,999 23 5.75 6 - 90,000 - 99,999 27 6.75 7 - 100,000 - 109,999 12 3.00 8 - 110,000 - 119,999 6 1.50 9 - 120,000 - 129,999 14 3.50 10 - 130,000 - 139,999 6 1.50 11 - 140,000 - 149,999 3 0.75 12 - MORE THAN 150,000 16 4.00 Frequency Missing = 55

SD_PINC2 Frequency Missing = 455

Reason R does not have full or part

time job (constructed variable to include preference and legal reason

cvsd_emps Frequency Percent

Cumulative

Frequency

Cumulative

Percent

1. UNEMPLOYED (E.G. ON LAYOFF/UNABLE TO FIND WORK)

19 19.59 19 19.59

2. OWN MEDICAL REASON 9 9.28 28 28.87

3. PRIMARY CARE PROVIDER FOR CHILD UNDER 18

44 45.36 72 74.23

4. PRIMARY CARE FOR OLDER (parents in laws)

0 0 72 74.23

5. PRIMARY CARE FOR OTHER ADULT (spouse or sibling or disabled child over 19, friend, or non-relative over 18)

4 4.12 76 78.35

6. SCHOOL / TRAINING 5 5.15 81 83.51

7. RETIRED 10 10.31 91 93.81

Version 7

Page 96


time job (constructed variable to include preference and legal reason


Cumulative

Frequency

Cumulative

Percent

8. OTHER 1 1.03 92 94.85

9. HOMEMAKER/PREFERENCE 1 1.03 93 95.88

10. LEGAL REASONS 4 4.12 97 100.00


REASON R DOES NOT WORK_ self-employed FLAG_when SD_EMP1 is 2(unemployed)

but in constructed variable (CV) is .(treated as employed or missing))

cvsd_empsFLAG Frequency Percent Cumulative Frequency

Cumulative Percent

0 453 99.56 453 99.56

1 2 0.44 455 100.00

R employed_newly constructed including cases that should have been coded as employed

CVSD_EMP1 Frequency Percent Cumulative Frequency

Cumulative Percent

1 358 78.68 358 78.68

2 97 21.32 455 100.00

SPB: Recoded SD_EMP3 to incorporate 'Other-Specify' when possible


Cumulative Percent

Version 7

Page 97

. 358 78.681 358 78.681

UNEMPLOYED 19 4.176 377 82.857

OWN MEDICAL REASON 9 1.978 386 84.835

PRIMARY CARE PROVIDER FOR CHILD UNDER 18 44 9.67 430 94.505

PRIMARY CARE FOR OTHER ADULT (SPOUSE OR SIBLING OR DISABLED CHILD OVER 18, FRIEND, OR

NON-REALTIVE OVER 18) 4 0.879 434 95.385

SCHOOL/TRAINING 5 1.099 439 96.484

RETIRED 10 2.198 449 98.681

OTHER (SPECIFY) 1 0.22 450 98.901

HOMEMAKER / PREFERENCE 1 0.22 451 99.121

LEGAL REASONS 4 0.879 455 100

SPB: EMPs: self-employed when SD_EMP1 is 2 (unemployed) so CVSD_EMP3 = '.'

CVSD_EMP3flag Frequency Percent Cumulative Frequency

Cumulative Percent

. 356 78.242 356 78.242

0 97 21.319 453 99.56

1 2 0.44 455 100

Work Schedule, other specify incl: CONSTRUCTED

CVSD_SCH Frequency Percent Cumulative Frequency

Cumulative Percent

. 99 21.758 99 21.758

VARIABLE SCHEDULE (ONE THAT CHANGES FROM 78 17.143 177 38.901

Version 7

Page 98

DAY TO DAY)

REGULAR DAYTIME SCHEDULE 256 56.264 433 95.165

REGULAR EVENING SHIFT 7 1.538 440 96.703

REGULAR NIGHT SHIFT 4 0.879 444 97.582

ROTATING SHIFT (ONE THAT CHANGES REGULARLY FROM DAYS TO EVENINGS OR NIGHTS) 4 0.879 448 98.462

SPLIT SHIFT (ONE CONSISTING OF TWO DISTINCT PERIODS EACH DAY) 5 1.099 453 99.56

OTHER 2 0.44 455 100

TOMO 6 MONTHS

N/A

TOMO 12 MONTHS


Version 7

Page 99

SD_AHWS1 259 38.699 14.772 -4 168 2.12584 22.384

SD_AHWS2 24 11.292 9.6119 -4 30 0.65156 -0.623

SP: R currently has full or part time job

SD_EMP1 Frequency Percent Cumulative Frequency

Cumulative Percent

YES 259 77.54 259 77.54

NO 75 22.46 334 100

SP: R has more than one job


Cumulative Percent

YES 24 9.27 24 9.27

NO 235 90.73 259 100

SP: Main reason R does not have full or part time job


Cumulative Percent

Unemployed (e.g. on layoff/unable to find work) 13 17.33 13 17.33

Own medical reason 8 10.67 21 28

Primary care provider for child under 18 29 38.67 50 66.67

Primary care for elder (parents or in-laws) 2 2.67 52 69.33

School or training 5 6.67 57 76

Retired 14 18.67 71 94.67

Version 7

Page 100

Other (specify) 4 5.33 75 100

SP: Specify:

SD_EMPs Frequency Percent Cumulative Frequency

Cumulative Percent

Takes care of 4 ADD adults 1 25 1 25

benched -waiting for a new contract 1 25 2 50

by choice 1 25 3 75

homemaker 1 25 4 100

SP: Work schedule on primary job

SD_SCH Frequency Percent Cumulative Frequency

Cumulative Percent

VARIABLE SCHEDULE (ONE THAT CHANGES FROM DAY TO DAY) 62 23.94 62 23.94





OTHER (SPECIFY) 7 2.7 259 100

SP: Specify:

SD_SCHs Frequency Percent Cumulative Frequency

Cumulative Percent

Work from 3:00AM until 11:00AM 1 14.29 1 14.29

Version 7

Page 101

Work from home variable schedule 1 14.29 2 28.57

on call 1 14.29 3 42.86

on call 24/7, medical assistance 1 14.29 4 57.14

once a month if needed 1 14.29 5 71.43

roating regular day shift 1 14.29 6 85.71

some jobs are routeine and some are very varyable 1 14.29 7 100

SP: Current annual personal income

SD_PINC1 Frequency Percent Cumulative Frequency

Cumulative Percent

-7 6 1.8 6 1.8

LESS THAN 49,999 179 53.59 185 55.39

50,000 - 59,999 31 9.28 216 64.67

60,000 - 69,999 17 5.09 233 69.76

70,000 - 79,999 24 7.19 257 76.95

80,000 - 89,999 23 6.89 280 83.83

90,000 - 99,999 15 4.49 295 88.32

100,000 - 109,999 10 2.99 305 91.32

110,000 - 119,999 7 2.1 312 93.41

120,000 - 129,999 5 1.5 317 94.91

130,000 - 139,999 5 1.5 322 96.41

140,000 - 149,999 2 0.6 324 97.01

MORE THAN 150,000 10 2.99 334 100

Version 7

Page 102

Work Schedule, other specify incl: CONSTRUCTED


Cumulative Percent

. 75 22.455 75 22.455






7 1 0.299 334 100

TOMO 18 MONTHS

N/A

*********************************************************************************************


Version 7

Page 103

LEEF BASELINE


SD_AHWS1 306 42.08 10.2 2 80 -0.0751 2.8014

SD_AHWS2 56 14.61 11.35 1 48 1.20277 1.1093

SD_PINC 22 77843.6 207184 60 999999 4.60093 21.41

R currently has full or part time job


Cumulative Percent

YES 306 75.74 306 75.74

NO 98 24.26 404 100

R has more than one job


Cumulative Percent

YES 56 18.3 56 18.3

NO 250 81.7 306 100

Version 7

Page 104

Main reason R does not have full or part time job


Cumulative Percent


Own medical reason 15 15.31 57 58.16


Primary care for other adult (spouse or sibling or disabled child over 18, friend or non-relative over 18) 1 1.02 66 67.35

School or training 6 6.12 72 73.47

Retired 20 20.41 92 93.88

Other (specify) 6 6.12 98 100

Specify:


Cumulative Percent

-7 1 16.67 1 16.67

diagreement with management 1 16.67 2 33.33

medical disability 1 16.67 3 50

stay @ home Dad 1 16.67 4 66.67

stay at home father 1 16.67 5 83.33

unreliable transportation and school 1 16.67 6 100

Official job title for R's primary job

SD_JT Frequency Percent Cumulative Frequency

Cumulative Percent

Missing 1

Version 7

Page 105

Work schedule on primary job


Cumulative Percent







OTHER (SPECIFY) 6 1.96 306 100

Specify:


Cumulative Percent

24 hr shift which changes every week 1 16.67 1 16.67

8-1 daily and 4-7 F,S &S 1 16.67 2 33.33

flex schedule 1 16.67 3 50

noon to eight 1 16.67 4 66.67

self employed 1 16.67 5 83.33

two weeks on for 12 hours per day two weeks off 1 16.67 6 100

Current annual personal income

Version 7

Page 106


Cumulative Percent

Current annual personal income


Cumulative Percent

LESS THAN 4,999 32 8.47 32 8.47

5,000 - 9,999 18 4.76 50 13.23

10,000 - 14,999 27 7.14 77 20.37

15,000 - 19,999 24 6.35 101 26.72

20,000 - 24,999 27 7.14 128 33.86

25,000 - 29,999 38 10.05 166 43.92

30,000 - 34,999 29 7.67 195 51.59

35,000 - 39,999 40 10.58 235 62.17

40,000 - 44,999 25 6.61 260 68.78

45,000 - 49,999 27 7.14 287 75.93

50,000 - 54,999 20 5.29 307 81.22

55,000 - 59,999 23 6.08 330 87.3

MORE THAN 60,000 48 12.7 378 100


time job (constructed variable to include preference and legal reason)

Version 7

Page 107


Cumulative

Frequency Cumulative

Percent

1. UNEMPLOYED (E.G. ON LAYOFF/UNABLE TO FIND WORK)

43 44.33 43 44.33

2. OWN MEDICAL REASON 16 16.49 59 60.82

3. PRIMARY CARE PROVIDER FOR CHILD UNDER 18

10 10.31 69 71.13

4. PRIMARY CARE FOR OLDER (parents in laws)

0 0 69 71.13

5. PRIMARY CARE FOR OTHER ADULT (spouse or sibling or disabled child over 19, friend, or non-relative over 18)

1 1.03 70 72.16

6. SCHOOL / TRAINING 6 6.19 76 78.35

7. RETIRED 20 20.62 96 98.97

8. OTHER 1 1.03 97 100.00

9. HOMEMAKER/PREFERENCE 0 0 0

10. LEGAL REASONS 0 0 0


Recoded SD_EMP3 to incorporate 'Other-Specify' when possible


Cumulative Percent

. 306 75.743 306 75.743

Refusal 1 0.248 307 75.99

UNEMPLOYED 43 10.644 350 86.634

OWN MEDICAL REASON 16 3.96 366 90.594

Version 7

Page 108

PRIMARY CARE PROVIDER FOR CHILD UNDER 18 10 2.475 376 93.069

PRIMARY CARE FOR OTHER ADULT (SPOUSE OR SIBLING OR DISABLED CHILD OVER 18, FRIEND, OR

NON-REALTIVE OVER 18) 1 0.248 377 93.317

SCHOOL/TRAINING 6 1.485 383 94.802

RETIRED 20 4.95 403 99.752

OTHER (SPECIFY) 1 0.248 404 100

Work Schedule (other speify coded): CONSTRUCTED


Cumulative Percent

. 98 24.257 98 24.257







LONG/DOUBLE SHIFTS (INCLUDES CONDENSED WORK WEEK, WEEKEND WORKERS WHO GENERALLY

WORK 12 HOUR SHIFTS) 1 0.248 404 100

LEEF 6 MONTHS

Version 7

Page 109

N/A

LEEF 12 MONTHS

Variable Label N Mean Median

Mode

Min

Max

Skew Kurt

SD_AHWS1 Hours/week R works on primary job

142 41.042

(11.517)

40 40 4 80 -0.324 2.263

SD_AHWS2 Hours/week R works in =other job(s)

35 13.000

(11.064)

10 8 1 60 2.782 9.621

SD_PINC R's approximate gross income 0 . . . . . . .

SP: R currently has full or part time job


Cumulative Percent

YES 142 77.17 142 77.17

NO 42 22.83 184 100.00

Version 7

Page 110

SP: R has more than one job


Cumulative Percent

YES 35 24.65 35 24.65

NO 107 75.35 142 100.00


SP: Main reason R does not have full or part time job


Cumulative Percent


Own medical reason 9 21.43 24 57.14


School or training 1 2.38 28 66.67

Retired 13 30.95 41 97.62

Other (specify) 1 2.38 42 100.00


SP: Specify:


Cumulative Percent

Retired and disabled 1 100.00 1 100.00


Version 7

Page 111

SP: Official job title for R's primary job

SD_JT Frequency Percent Cumulative Frequency

Cumulative Percent

-4 1 0.70 1 0.70

Activity Director 1 0.70 2 1.41

Adolescent social worker 1 0.70 3 2.11

Anestheia Tech 1 0.70 4 2.82

AutoGlass Technician and business owner 1 0.70 5 3.52

Automotive Tech. 1 0.70 6 4.23

Automotive Technician 1 0.70 7 4.93

Boileer engineer 1 0.70 8 5.63

Business Development MGR 1 0.70 9 6.34

Business owner for Construction company 1 0.70 10 7.04

C & C programmer 1 0.70 11 7.75

CNA 2 1.41 13 9.15

Civil Engineer 1 0.70 14 9.86

Customer service rep. 1 0.70 15 10.56

Dairy Farmer 1 0.70 16 11.27

Distributer @ Wearhouse 1 0.70 17 11.97

Driver 1 0.70 18 12.68

Driver education Instructor 1 0.70 19 13.38

Extruder operator 1 0.70 20 14.08

Finish operator 1 0.70 21 14.79

Firefighter 1 0.70 22 15.49

First class lineworker power co 1 0.70 23 16.20

Forklift operator 1 0.70 24 16.90

Forklift operator misc 1 0.70 25 17.61

Heating technition 1 0.70 26 18.31

Housekeeping 1 0.70 27 19.01

ICS Associate 1 0.70 28 19.72

LNA 1 0.70 29 20.42

Version 7

Page 112

LPN 1 0.70 30 21.13

Lic. Practical Nurse 1 0.70 31 21.83

Limo Driver for airport services 1 0.70 32 22.54

MGL (Managing Group Leader) 1 0.70 33 23.24

Owner 1 0.70 34 23.94

Owner/operator Main Street Billards 1 0.70 35 24.65

Parts Specialist wholesaler 1 0.70 36 25.35

Petty Officer - USN 1 0.70 37 26.06

Plumber 1 0.70 38 26.76

Quality Technician 1 0.70 39 27.46

Refrigeration technician 1 0.70 40 28.17

Roof Mechanic 1 0.70 41 28.87

Route Sales Representative 1 0.70 42 29.58

Shipping and Receiving 1 0.70 43 30.28

Special Education Teacher 1 0.70 44 30.99

Sub Contractor 1 0.70 45 31.69

Teacher 1 0.70 46 32.39

Trainer 1 0.70 47 33.10

Truck Driver 1 0.70 48 33.80

adjunct professor technology and engineering 1 0.70 49 34.51

assembler 1 0.70 50 35.21

assistant manager 1 0.70 51 35.92

assistant program director 2 1.41 53 37.32

assistant restaurant mgr 1 0.70 54 38.03

assistant superintendent construction 1 0.70 55 38.73

aviation agent 1 0.70 56 39.44

bartender 1 0.70 57 40.14

boiler operatr 1 0.70 58 40.85

bridge worker 1 0.70 59 41.55

building contractor 1 0.70 60 42.25

cab driver 1 0.70 61 42.96

Version 7

Page 113

cabinet maker 1 0.70 62 43.66

certified nursing assistant 2 1.41 64 45.07

chef 1 0.70 65 45.77

cna 1 0.70 66 46.48

cnc machinist 1 0.70 67 47.18

construction framer 1 0.70 68 47.89

construction superintendent 1 0.70 69 48.59

direct support professional 1 0.70 70 49.30

director of technology 1 0.70 71 50.00

electrical assembler 1 0.70 72 50.70

electrician 1 0.70 73 51.41

environmental field contractor 1 0.70 74 52.11

excavator operator 1 0.70 75 52.82

floor covering self employed 1 0.70 76 53.52

foreman 1 0.70 77 54.23

gans 1 0.70 78 54.93

grounds keeper @ golf course 1 0.70 79 55.63

group home worker 1 0.70 80 56.34

handy man 1 0.70 81 57.04

heating oil guy 1 0.70 82 57.75

house keeping floor tech 1 0.70 83 58.45

housekeeper 1 0.70 84 59.15

housekeeping 1 0.70 85 59.86

inventory clerk aerospace machine shop 1 0.70 86 60.56

jeweler 1 0.70 87 61.27

job site superintendent 1 0.70 88 61.97

labor 1 0.70 89 62.68

landscaper 1 0.70 90 63.38

lead tech 1 0.70 91 64.08

licensed nurse assistant 2 1.41 93 65.49

line cook 1 0.70 94 66.20

Version 7

Page 114

line operator 1 0.70 95 66.90

lot manager for car dealership 1 0.70 96 67.61

lp gas installer 1 0.70 97 68.31

machine operator and machine maintenance person 1 0.70 98 69.01

macine operator 1 0.70 99 69.72

maintainer II 1 0.70 100 70.42

maintenance 1 0.70 101 71.13

manager of bingo operations 1 0.70 102 71.83

meat processor 1 0.70 103 72.54

mechanical engineer 1 0.70 104 73.24

naval engineering unit leader 1 0.70 105 73.94

news editor local newspaper 1 0.70 106 74.65

nurse 1 0.70 107 75.35

operational manager 1 0.70 108 76.06

optical technician 1 0.70 109 76.76

packer in a greenhouse 1 0.70 110 77.46

painter 1 0.70 111 78.17

paralegal 1 0.70 112 78.87

parts technician, mechanic1 1 0.70 113 79.58

physican assistant 1 0.70 114 80.28

plumber and electric handyman 1 0.70 115 80.99

postmaster 1 0.70 116 81.69

purchasing agent 1 0.70 117 82.39

real estate agent and mortgage broker 1 0.70 118 83.10

research associate 1 0.70 119 83.80

residential advisor for job corp 1 0.70 120 84.51

residential health care staffer 1 0.70 121 85.21

retail installation specialist 1 0.70 122 85.92

sALES AGENT IN REAL ESTATE 1 0.70 123 86.62

sales agent 1 0.70 124 87.32

sales associate retail 1 0.70 125 88.03

Version 7

Page 115

sales rep 1 0.70 126 88.73

secondary english teacher 1 0.70 127 89.44

security person 1 0.70 128 90.14

senior corporate account executive 1 0.70 129 90.85

shared living provider 1 0.70 130 91.55

slot attendant 1 0.70 131 92.25

solderer 1 0.70 132 92.96

solid waste and recycling coordinator 1 0.70 133 93.66

supervisor 1 0.70 134 94.37

teacher 1 0.70 135 95.07

technician/laborer 1 0.70 136 95.77

thread engineer 1 0.70 137 96.48

trash collector 1 0.70 138 97.18

truck dispatcher 1 0.70 139 97.89

union iron worker 1 0.70 140 98.59

warehouse man 1 0.70 141 99.30

warehouse supervisor 1 0.70 142 100.00


Version 7

Page 116

SP: Work schedule on primary job


Cumulative Percent





ROTATING SHIFT (ONE THAT CHANGES REGULARLY FROM DAYS TO EVENINGS OR NIGHTS)

6 4.23 136 95.77

SPLIT SHIFT (ONE CONSISTING OF TWO DISTINCT PERIODS EACH DAY)

2 1.41 138 97.18

OTHER (SPECIFY) 4 2.82 142 100.00


SP: Specify:


Cumulative Percent

i work 2 24hrs shift and then it rotates a day beh 1 25.00 1 25.00

lives with the person he cares for 24/7 1 25.00 2 50.00

tues-sun 10am-10pm 1 25.00 3 75.00

works 14-15 hour shifts from 7 a.m. until it's don 1 25.00 4 100.00




Cumulative Percent


Version 7

Page 117



Cumulative Percent

LESS THAN 4,999 13 7.10 13 7.10

5,000 - 9,999 6 3.28 19 10.38

10,000 - 14,999 14 7.65 33 18.03

15,000 - 19,999 11 6.01 44 24.04

20,000 - 24,999 15 8.20 59 32.24

25,000 - 29,999 19 10.38 78 42.62

30,000 - 34,999 15 8.20 93 50.82

35,000 - 39,999 15 8.20 108 59.02

40,000 - 44,999 9 4.92 117 63.93

45,000 - 49,999 16 8.74 133 72.68

50,000 - 54,999 15 8.20 148 80.87

55,000 - 59,999 9 4.92 157 85.79

MORE THAN 60,000 26 14.21 183 100.00


Recoded SD_EMP3 to incorporate 'Other-Specify' when possible


Cumulative Percent

1 15 36.59 15 36.59

2 9 21.95 24 58.54

3 3 7.32 27 65.85

6 1 2.44 28 68.29

7 13 31.71 41 100.00


Work Schedule (other speify coded): CONSTRUCTED


Cumulative Percent

Version 7

Page 118

. 42 22.826 42 22.826

1 30 16.304 72 39.13

2 82 44.565 154 83.696

3 17 9.239 171 92.935

4 1 0.543 172 93.478

5 6 3.261 178 96.739

6 2 1.087 180 97.826

7 4 2.174 184 100

LEEF 18 MONTHS

N/A

Version 7

Page 119

Version 7

Page 120

Section 2: Spouse Workplace Measures

Version 7

Page 121


Prepared by: Tori Crain, Kelly Davis, Matt Piszczek, & Joe Sherwood

WORK SCHEDULE FLEXIBILITY

DESCRIPTION

These two items are used capture the spouse/partner’s perception of the amount of flexibility in his/her own work schedule as well as the employee’s. The spouse/partner’s schedule flexibility could play a role in how much work-family conflict the employee feels. The second question is another way to assess whether there has been a change in the employee’s schedule control.


N/A

PI USE OF MEASURE

Developed during Hammer's Sandwiched Generation study to assess the perceived degree of workplace flexilibility one has in their ability to handle family responsibilities. As we were examining couples, we also asked the same question about their spouse/partner's flexibility, based on Hammer's spousal crossover work. Related to various outcomes, including work-to-family conflict, positive WF spillover (both directions), life satisfaction, and job satisfaction.

Version 7

Page 122


N/A

ASSOCIATED PAPERS

TYPE OF REFERENCE REFERENCE HOW USED IN PHASE 2 – IV,

Z, DV

Best reference for actual measure

Neal, M. B., & Hammer, L. B. (2007). Working couples caring for children and aging parents: Effects on Work and well-being. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.

--

Examples by non-network members

--

Examples of use by network members

--

Network papers using measure in Phase II data

[INCLUDE LINKS TO ACTUAL PAPERS]



Version 7

Page 123

The following section is about work. To begin, I want to ask about how much flexibility you and your spouse/partner have had in your work schedules to handle family responsibilities in the past month. You can say: No flexibility at all, hardly any flexibility, some flexibility, or a lot of flexibility.

Variable Name Item text Reverse-coded

Subscale

SW_WSF1 How much flexibility do you have in your work schedule to handle family responsibilities?

SW_WSF2 How much flexibility does your spouse/partner have in his/her work schedule to handle family responsibilities?

ITEM VALUES

No flexibility at all = 1

Hardly any flexibility = 2

Some flexibility = 3

A lot of flexibility = 4

Don’t know =-4

Refused =-7

Higher scores reflect more flexibility.

Version 7

Page 124

SCORING OF SCALE

No scale.




No changes.


Version 7

Page 125

N/A


No changes.


N/A


Version 7

Page 126

TOMO BASELINE

Subscale

# Item

s

Mean (SD)

Median

Mode

Min

Max

Skew

Kurt

Alpha

N (scale calculated

)

N (Miss data)

N (Scale N/A)

SW_WSF1

1 3.33 (0.70)

3.00 3.00

1.00

4.00 -0.96 1.11

N/A 355 100 N/A

SW_WSF2

1 3.17 (0.63)

3.00 3.00

1.00

4.00 -0.52 1.00

N/A 454 1 N/A

TOMO 6 MONTHS

N/A

Version 7

Page 127

TOMO 12 MONTHS

Subscale

# Items

Mean (SD)

Median

Mode

Min

Max

Skew

Kurt

Alpha


N (Miss data)

N (Scale N/A)

SW_WSF1 1 3.41

(.65)

3.00 4.00 1.00 4.00 -.89

.87 N/A 259 75 N/A

SW_WSF2 1 3.29

(.63)

3.00 3.00 1.00 4.00 -.68

1.22 N/A 334 0 N/A

TOMO 18 MONTHS

N/A

*********************************************************************************************

Version 7

Page 128


LEEF BASELINE

Subscale

# Items

Mean (SD)

Median

Mode

Min

Max

Skew

Kurt

Alpha


N (Miss data)

N (Scale N/A)

SW_WSF1 1 3.27

(.80)

3.00 4.00 1.00 4.00 -1.04

.80 N/A 306 98 N/A

SW_WSF2 1 2.85

(.76)

3.00 3.00 1.00 4.00 -.60 .36 N/A 401 3 N/A

LEEF 6 MONTHS

N/A

LEEF 12 MONTHS

Version 7

Page 129

Subscale

# Items

Mean (SD)

Median

Mode

Min

Max

Skew

Kurt

Alpha


N (Miss data)

N (Scale N/A)

SW_WSF1 1 3.27

(.77)

3.00 3.00 1.00 4.00 -1.08

1.17 N/A 142 42 N/A

SW_WSF2 1 2.94

(.77)

3.00 3.00 1.00 4.00 -.55 .23 N/A 184 0 N/A

LEEF 18 MONTHS

N/A

Version 7

Page 130


Prepared by: Tori Crain, Krista Brockwood , Matt Piszczek, Kelly Davis, Joe Sherwood

WORK-FAMILY CONFLICT

DESCRIPTION

“This type of conflict reflects the degree to which role responsibilities from the work and family domains are incompatible, that is ‘participation in the work (family) role is made more difficult by virtue of participation in the family (work) role’ (Greenhaus & Beutell, 1985).” (From Netemeyer et al., 1996).


P/M: .87 (WIF), .85 (FIW); MN .93 w2 (WIF) and .90 both waves (FIW); from original article .91 for wives and .90 for husbands. For FIW .88 both husbands and wives

PI USE OF MEASURE

Used by P/M and MN

Version 7

Page 131


One of the most widely used measures; used in numerous studies.

Netemeyer et al. normed their measure on three samples: elementary and high-school teachers and administrators in a large southeastern city, small business owners in a large southeastern city, and real estate salespeople in a large southeastern city.

ASSOCIATED PAPERS


Z, DV


Netemeyer, R.G., Boles, J.S., & McMurrian, R. (1996). Development and Validation of Work-Family Conflict and Family-Work Conflict Scales. Journal of Applied Psychology, 81(4) 400-410.

--


--


Neal, M.B. and Hammer, L.B. (1998). National Survey of Dual-Earner Couples in the Sandwiched Generation. Portland State University. A study of working couples caring for children and aging parents. Funded by the Alfred P. Sloan

--

Version 7

Page 132

Foundation.





The next section will ask you some questions about how your job relates to your family or personal life.

Please continue using response card #10 and think about the past 6 months.


Subscale

SW_WFC1 The demands of your work interfere with your family or personal time.

R Work-to-Family Conflict

SW_WFC2 The amount of time your job takes up makes it difficult to fulfill your family or personal responsibilities.


SW_WFC3 Things you want to do at home do not get done because of the demands your job puts on you

R Work-to-Family

Version 7

Page 133

Conflict

SW_WFC4 Your job produces strain that makes it difficult to fulfill your family or personal duties.


SW_WFC5 Due to your work-related duties, you have to make changes to your plans for family or personal activities.


SW_WFC6 The demands of your family or personal relationships interfere with work-related activities.

R Family-to-Work Conflict

SW_WFC7 You have to put off doing things at work because of demands on your time at home.


SW_WFC8 Things you want to do at work don't get done because of the demands of your family or personal life.


SW_WFC9 Your home life interferes with your responsibilities at work, such as getting to work on time, accomplishing daily tasks, and working overtime.


SW_WFC10 Family-related strain interferes with your ability to perform job-related duties.


ITEM VALUES

Strongly Agree = 1

Agree = 2

Neither = 3

Disagree = 4

Strongly Disagree = 5

Version 7

Page 134

Recoded items:

Strongly Agree = 5

Agree = 4

Neither = 3

Disagree = 2


Higher scores reflect greater work-family conflict.

SCORING OF SCALE

Work-to-Family Conflict, listwise deletion: SCSW_WTFC = Mean.5(SW_WFC1R, SW_WFC2R, SW_WFC3R, SW_WFC4R, SW_WFC5R).

Work-to-Family Conflict, mean imputation: SCSW_WTFCi=Mean.4(SW_WFC1R, SW_WFC2R, SW_WFC3R, SW_WFC4R, SW_WFC5R).

Family-to-Work Conflict, listwise deletion: SCSW_FTWC = Mean.5(SW_WFC6R, SW_WFC7R, SW_WFC8R, SW_WFC9R, SW_WFC10R).

Family-to-Work Conflict, mean imputation: SCSW_FTWC = Mean.4(SW_WFC6R, SW_WFC7R, SW_WFC8R, SW_WFC9R, SW_WFC10R).


Version 7

Page 135



No changes.


N/A


No changes.

Version 7

Page 136


N/A


TOMO BASELINE

Subscale

# Item

s

Mean (SD)

Median

Mode

Min

Max

Skew

Kurt

Alpha

N (scale calculate

d)

N (Miss data)

N (Scale N/A_

SCSW_WTFC

5 2.76 (0.93)

2.80 2.00

1.00

5.00 0.09 -0.54

0.90 355 100 N/A

SCSW_WTFCi

5 2.76 (0.93)

2.80 2.00

1.00

5.00 0.09 -0.54

N/A 355 100 N/A

SCSW_FTWC

5 2.11 (0.72

2.00 2.00

1.00

4.60 0.70 0.70 0.88 354 101 N/A

Version 7

Page 137

)

SCSW_FTWCi

5 2.12 (0.72)

2.00 2.00

1.00

4.60 0.66 0.66 N/A 355 100 N/A

TOMO 6 MONTHS

N/A

TOMO 12 MONTHS

Subscale

# Items

Mean (SD)

Median

Mode

Min

Max

Skew

Kurt

Alpha


N (Miss data)

N (Scale N/A)

SCSW_WTFC 5 2.62

(.88)

2.40 2.00 1.00 5.00 .36 -.26 .89 258 76 N/A

SCSW_WTFCi 5 2.63

(.89)

2.40 2.00 1.00 5.00 .36 -.29 N/A 259 75 N/A

SCSW_FTWC 5 2.09

(.67)

2.00 2.00 1.00 5.00 .71 1.49 .88 259 75 N/A

SCSW_FTWCi 5 2.09

(.67)

2.00 2.00 1.00 5.00 .71 1.49 N/A 259 75 N/A

Version 7

Page 138

TOMO 18 MONTHS

N/A

*********************************************************************************************


LEEF BASELINE

Subscale

# Items

Mean (SD)

Median

Mode

Min

Max

Skew

Kurt

Alpha


N (Miss data)

N (Scale N/A)

SCSW_WTFC 5 2.71

(.88)

2.60 2.00 1.00 5.00 .35 -.49 .87 306 98 N/A

Version 7

Page 139

SCSW_WTFCi 5 2.71

(.88)

2.60 2.00 1.00 5.00 .35 -.49 N/A 306 98 N/A

SCSW_FTWC 5 2.12

(.64)

2.00 2.00 1.00 5.00 .97 2.64 .85 306 98 N/A

SCSW_FTWCi 5 2.12

(.64)

2.00 2.00 1.00 5.00 .97 2.64 N/A 306 98 N/A

LEEF 6 MONTHS

N/A

LEEF 12 MONTHS

Subscale

# Items

Mean (SD)

Median

Mode

Min

Max

Skew

Kurt

Alpha


N (Miss data)

N (Scale N/A)

SCSW_WTFC 5 2.53

(.90)

2.40 2.00 1.00 5.00 .33 -.32 .91 141 43 N/A

SCSW_WTFCi 5 2.52

(.89)

2.40 2.00 1.00 5.00 .34 -.31 N/A 142 42 N/A

SCSW_FTWC 5 2.02

(.59)

2.00 2.00 1.00 4.00 .66 1.38 .87 142 42 N/A

Version 7

Page 140

SCSW_FTWCi 5 2.02

(.59)

2.00 2.00 1.00 4.00 .66 1.38 N/A 142 42 N/A

LEEF 18 MONTHS

N/A

Version 7

Page 141


Prepared by: Tori Crain, Kelly Davis, Matt Piszczek, Joe Sherwood

POSITIVE FAMILY-TO-WORK SPILLOVER

DESCRIPTION

We included spouse’s positive family-to-work spillover to investigate if there was a spillover effect from family life (potentially improved by the employee intervention) to the spouse’s work experiences. We also included to capture the positive connection between work and family, not just the negative (i.e., work-family conflict) for spouses. The four items included represent affective positive spillover created by Hanson, Hammer, & Colton, 2006.


Hanson and colleagues (2006) reported an alpha of .83 for the family-to-work affective positive spillover subscale.

PI USE OF MEASURE

Leslie Hammer

Version 7

Page 142


Employees working for a large distribution center, a public utility company, and an electronics design company

ASSOCIATED PAPERS


Z, DV


Hanson, G. C., Hammer, L. B., & Colton, C. L. (2006). Development and validation of a multidimensional scale of perceived work-family positive spillover. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 11, 249-265.

--


--


--



Version 7

Page 143



The next section will ask you some questions about how your job relates to your family or personal life. Please think about the past month and tell me if you strongly agree, agree, neither agree nor disagree, disagree, or strongly disagree.


Subscale

SW_FWPS1 When things are going well in your family or personal life, your outlook regarding your job is improved.

R Positive FW spillover

SW_FWPS2 Being in a positive mood at home helps you to be in a positive mood at work.


SW_FWPS3 Being happy at home improves your spirits at work. R Positive FW spillover

SW_FWPS4 Having a happy day with your family allows you to be optimistic at work.


ITEM VALUES

In CAPI:

Version 7

Page 144

Strongly agree = 1

Agree = 2

Neither agree nor disagree = 3

Disagree = 4

Strongly disagree = 5

Recoded:

Strongly agree = 5

Agree = 4


Disagree = 2


Higher scores reflect greater positive spillover.

SCORING OF SCALE

FWPS, listwise deletion: SCSW_FWPS= MEAN.4 (SW_FWPS1R, SW_FWPS2R, SW_FWPS3R, SW_FWPS4R).

FWPS, mean imputation: SCSW_FWPSi= MEAN.3 (SW_FWPS1R, SW_FWPS2R, SW_FWPS3R, SW_FWPS4R).

Version 7

Page 145




No changes.


N/A


Version 7

Page 146

No changes.


N/A


TOMO BASELINE

Subscale

# Item

s

Mean (SD)

Median

Mode

Min

Max

Skew

Kurt

Alpha

N (scale calculated

)

N (Miss data)

N (Scale N’A)

SCSW_FWPS

4 4.12 (0.61)

4.00 4.00

2.00

5.00 -0.48

0.68

0.89

354 101 N/A

SCSW_FWP 4 4.11 4.00 4.0 2.0 5.00 - 0.6 N/A 356 99 N/A

Version 7

Page 147

Si (0.61) 0 0 0.48 9

TOMO 6 MONTHS

N/A

TOMO 12 MONTHS

Subscale

# Items

Mean (SD)

Median

Mode

Min

Max

Skew

Kurt

Alpha


N (Miss data)

N (Scale N/A)

SCSW_FWPS 4 4.06

(.61)

4.00 4.00 1.00 5.00 -.94

3.02 .87 259 75 N/A

SCSW_FWPSi 4 4.06

(.61)

4.00 4.00 1.00 5.00 -.94

3.02 N/A 259 75 N/A

TOMO 18 MONTHS

N/A

Version 7

Page 148

*********************************************************************************************


LEEF BASELINE

Subscale

# Items

Mean (SD)

Median

Mode

Min

Max

Skew

Kurt

Alpha


N (Miss data)

N (Scale N/A)

SCSW_FWPS 4 3.96

(.59)

4.00 4.00 1.00 5.00 -.94

3.30 .82 306 98 N/A

SCSW_FWPSi 4 3.96

(.59)

4.00 4.00 1.00 5.00 -.94

3.30 N/A 306 98 N/A

LEEF 6 MONTHS

Version 7

Page 149

N/A

LEEF 12 MONTHS

Subscale

# Item

s

Mean (SD)

Median

Mode

Min

Max

Skew

Kurt

Alpha


N (Miss data)

N (Scale N/A)

SCSW_FWPS 4 3.97

(.57)

4.00 4.00 2.25

5.00

-.30 .56 .84 142 42 N/A

SCSW_FWPSi 4 3.97

(.57)

4.00 4.00 2.25

5.00

-.30 .56 N/A 142 42 N/A

LEEF 18 MONTHS

N/A

Version 7

Page 150


Prepared by: Yin Liu, Soomi Lee, Michelle Blocklin, Kelly Davis, Joe Sherwood

TIME ADEQUACY

DESCRIPTION

Time adequacy questions are part of the larger Family Resource Scale-Revised (FRS; Van Horn, Bellis, & Snyder, 2001), which is an assessment of a family member’s perceptions of available resources across a range of areas. The original scale consists of 30 items, based on a 5-point Likert scale ranging from Not at all adequate to Almost always adequate. In revising the original version of the scale in an effort to address the original’s small sample size, data were collected within a 31-site, 5-year longitudinal intervention study of former Head Start children and their families, where two cohorts of families of kindergartners were followed through third grade (30% AA, 47% Caucasian, 14% Hispanic).

Questions utilized in Phase I Hotel Work & Well-Being Study survey consisted of those found in 2 of the 4 subscales of the revised version, based on factor analyses—time for self and time for family.

For Phase II, items were added to reflect the Network’s focus on control over work time. For example, we added item #3 about being able to take your child(ren) to medical appointments. We also added #4 to include adult/elder care issues. Only 4 of the 7 items from the employee and manager interview were included in the spouse/partner interview.


Version 7

Page 151

The reliability for the scale among the sample of hotel managers was .81.

PI USE OF MEASURE

Phase I Hotel Work & Well-Being Study (Dave Almeida, Nan Crouter, Susan McHale, Laura Klein)


Former Head Start children and their families (30% AA, 47% Caucasian, 14% Hispanic), hotel employees.

ASSOCIATED PAPERS


Z, DV


Van Horn, M. L., Bellis, J. M., Snyder, S. W. (2001). Family Resource Scale-Revised: Psychometrics and

--

Version 7

Page 152

validation of a measure of family resources in a sample of low-income families. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 19, 54-68.


Dunst, C. J., & Leet, H. E. (1987). Measuring the adequacy of resources in households with young children. Health & Development, 13, 111-125.

Dunst, C. J., Leet, H. E., & Trivette, C. M. (1988). Family resources, personal well-being, and early intervention. Journal of Special Education, 22, 108-116.

--


--





Now, I will ask you about whether you have had enough time for different parts of your life, on a regular basis, during the past month. For each statement you can say: never, rarely, some of the time, most of the time, or all of the time.

Variable Name Item text Reverse- Subscale

Version 7

Page 153

coded

To what extent is there enough time…

SW_TIMS1 To be with your child/ren?

Time

Adequacy with Children

SW_TIMS2 To be with your spouse/partner?

Time

Adequacy with Family

SW_TIMS3 To take your child/ren to medical appointments?

Time


SW_TIMS4 To what extent is there enough time to care for the needs of other family members

Time


ITEM VALUES

Never = 1

Rarely = 2



All of the time = 5

Don’t know = -4

Version 7

Page 154

Refused = -7

SCORING OF SCALE

Scores are created by averaging subject responses. Higher mean scores translate to a higher level of time adequacy. For time adequacy (for all four items), mean replacement was used if 3 out of 4 items were complete. Mena replacement ewas not used for time adequacy with children.

Time adequacy = with children (SCSW_TIMEKID):

IF NMISS(OF SW_TIMS1 SW_TIMS3) = 0 THEN SCSW_TIMEKID = MEAN(OF SW_TIMS1 SW_TIMS3) ;

Time adequacy with family (SCSW_TIMEFAM):

IF NMISS(OF SW_TIMS2 SW_TIMS4) = 0 THEN SCSW_TIMEFAM = MEAN(OF SW_TIMS2 SW_TIMS4) ;

Time adequacy (For participants who were asked all 4 items)(SCSW_TIME):

IF NMISS(OF SW_TIMS1-SW_TIMS4) = 0 THEN SCSW_TIME = MEAN(OF SW_TIMS1-SW_TIMS4) ;

SCSW_TIMEi:

IF NMISS(OF SW_TIMS1-SW_TIMS4) <=1 THEN SCSW_TIMEi = MEAN(OF SW_TIMS1-SW_TIMS4) ;

Total Time Adequacy (for all participants)

Version 7

Page 155

With kids (SCSW_TIMEALL):

IF FD_CNUM > 0 THEN DO;

IF NMISS(OF SW_TIMS1 SW_TIMS2 SW_TIMS3 SW_TIMS4) = 0 THEN

SCSW_TIMEALL = MEAN(OF SW_TIMS1 SW_TIMS2 SW_TIMS3 SW_TIMS4) ;

ELSE IF NMISS(OF SW_TIMS1 SW_TIMS2 SW_TIMS3 SW_TIMS4) < 4 THEN

SCSW_TIMEALL = .M ;

SCSW_TIMEALLi:

IF NMISS(of SW_TIMS1 SW_TIMS2 SW_TIMS3 SW_TIMS4) <= 1 THEN

SCSW_TIMEALLi = MEAN(of SW_TIMS1 SW_TIMS2 SW_TIMS3 SW_TIMS4);

ELSE IF NMISS(OF SW_TIMS1 SW_TIMS2 SW_TIMS3 SW_TIMS4) < 4 THEN

SCSW_TIMEALLi = .M ;

END;

Without kids (SCSW_TIMEALL):

IF FD_CNUM = 0 THEN DO;

IF NMISS(OF SW_TIMS2 SW_TIMS4) = 0 THEN SCSW_TIMEALL = MEAN(OF

SW_TIMS2 SW_TIMS4) ;

ELSE IF NMISS(OF SW_TIMS2 SW_TIMS4) < 2 THEN SCSW_TIMEALL = .M ;

SCSW_TIMEALLi:

SCSW_TIMEALLi = SCSW_TIMEALL ;

END ;

Version 7

Page 156




Description

For 2.0 sites, item wording was changed so that all items began with “How often” instead of “To what extent”. Item 3 was also changed from “medical appointments” to “school and medical appointments.”

Items


Subscale

SW_TIMS1 How often is there enough time to be with your child/ren?

Time


SW_TIMS2 How often is there enough time to be with your spouse/partner?

Time


Version 7

Page 157

SW_TIMS3 How often is there enough time to take your child/ren to school and medical appointments?

Time


SW_TIMS4 How often is there enough time to care for the needs of other family members?

Time


Scoring of Scale - No change.


N/A


No changes.


Version 7

Page 158

N/A


TOMO BASELINE

Subscale

# Items

Mean

(SD)

Median

Mode

Min

Max

Skew

Kurt

Alpha

N (scale calculate

d)

N (Mis

s data

)

N (Scale N/A)

SCSW_TIMEKID 2 3.84 (.76)

4.00 4.00

1.50

5.00

-.49 -.17 .56 282 10 163

SCSW_TIMEFAM 2 3.41 (.68)

3.50 3.00

1.50

5.00

-.08 -.03 .52 443 0 12

SCSW_TIME 4 3.59 (.63

3.75 3.75

1.75

5.00

-.22 -.04 .68 276 179 0

Version 7

Page 159

)

SCSW_TIMEi 4 3.60 (.63)

3.75 3.75

1.75

5.0 -.23 -.06 N/A 288 167 0

SCSW_TIMEALL 2-4

3.56 (.63)

3.50 4.00

1.50

5.00

-.26 .17 N/A 433 22 407

SCSW_TIMEALLi 2-4

3.57 (.63)

3.50 4.00

1.50

5.00

-.26 .15 N/A 445 10 407

TOMO 6 MONTHS

N/A

TOMO 12 MONTHS

Subscale

# Items

Mean (SD)

Median

Mode

Min

Max

Skew

Kurt

Alpha

N (scale calculat

ed)

N (Mis

s data

)

N (Scale N/A)

Version 7

Page 160

SCSW_TIMEKID 2 3.89

(0.78)

4.00 4.00

1.50

5.00

-0.60

-0.17

.59 214 4 116

SCSW_TIMEFAM 2 3.50

(0.68)

3.50 4.00

1.50

5.00

-0.40

0.21

.50 328 6 0

SCSW_TIME 4 3.66

(0.65)

3.75 4.00

1.50

5.00

-0.43

0.08

.70 211 123 0

SCSW_TIMEi 4 3.67

(0.64)

3.75 4.00

1.50

5.00

-0.44

0.13

N/A

217 117 0

SCSW_TIMEALL 2-4

3.65

(0.64)

3.75 4.00

1.50

5.00

-0.43

0.17

N/A

324 10 0

SCSW_TIMEALLi 2-4

3.65

(0.64)

3.75 4.00

1.50

5.00

-0.44

0.20

N/A

330 4 0

TOMO 18 MONTHS

N/A

*********************************************************************************************


Version 7

Page 161

LEEF BASELINE

Subscale

# Items

Mean

(SD)

Median

Mode

Min

Max

Skew

Kurt

Alpha

N (scale

calculated)

N (Mis

s data

)

N (Scale N/A)

SCSW_TIMEKID 2 3.70

(0.86)

4.00 4.00

1.50

5.00

-0.35 -0.47 .0.48 235 14 155

SCSW_TIMEFAM 2 3.25

(0.79)

3.50 3.00

1.00

5.00

-0.10 -0.34 0.47 396 8 0

SCSW_TIME 4 3.41

(0.71)

3.50 3.50

1.50

5.00

-0.21 -0.50 0.63 232 172 0

SCSW_TIMEi 4 3.42

(0.70)

3.50 4.00

1.50

5.00

-0.19 -0.45 N/A 246 158 0

SCSW_TIMEALL 2-4 3.41

(0.72)

3.50 3.00

1.50

5.00

-0.11 -0.39 N/A 383 21 0

Version 7

Page 162

SCSW_TIMEALLi 2-4 3.42

(0.72)

3.50 3.00

1.50

5.00

-0.10 -0.37 N/A 397 7 0

LEEF 6 MONTHS

N/A

LEEF 12 MONTHS

Subscale

# Items

Mean (SD)

Median

Mode

Min

Max

Skew

Kurt

Alpha

N (scale calculated

)

N (Miss data)

N (Scal

e N/A)

SCSW_TIMEKID 2 3.63

(0.90)

4.00 4.00 1.00 5.00 -0.65 0.11 0.67 99 15 70

SCSW_TIMEFAM 2 3.23

(0.84)

3.00 3.00 1.00 5.00 -0.15 -0.02 0.65 183 1 0

SCSW_TIME 4 3.36 3.50 3.50 1.25 4.75 -0.53 -0.02 0.76 99 15 70

Version 7

Page 163

(0.77)

SCSW_TIMEi 4 3.37

(0.75)

3.50 4.00 1.25 4.75 -0.57 -0.02 N/A 114 0 70

SCSW_TIMEALL 2-4 3.39

(0.81)

3.50 3.50 1.00 5.00 -0.26 0.08 N/A 168 16 0

SCSW_TIMEALLi 2-4 3.39

(0.80)

3.50 4.00 1.00 5.00 -0.29 0.10 N/A 183 1 0

LEEF 18 MONTHS

N/A

Version 7

Page 164

Page last updated: 05/14/2013 Prepared by: Mike Mills, Jesse Hinde, Krista Brockwood , Matt Piszczek, & Kelly Davis

PRODUCTIVITY: HPQ/ATTENDANCE

DESCRIPTION

A review of health-related productivity measurement instruments rated the HPQ very high in terms of a performance indicator, especially absenteeism and presenteeism. Has high external validity as it has been administered across a wide variety of occupational groups and countries.


Test-retest coefficients are reported to be very high, but exact numbers weren't reported (Loepke et al., 2003).

PI USE OF MEASURE

None given

Version 7

Page 165


Kessler et al paper: Reservation agents, customer service representatives, executives, and railroad engineers.

ASSOCIATED PAPERS


Z, DV


WHO Health Performance Questionnaire (HPQ).. Kessler, R.C., Barber, C., Beck, A., Berglund, P., Cleary, P.D., McKenas, D., Pronk, N., Simon, G., Stang, P., Üstün, T.U., Wang, P. (2003). The World Health Organization Health and Work Performance Questionnaire (HPQ). Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, 45 (2), 156-174.

(The full instrument, scoring info and other pertinent info can be found at : http://www.hcp.med.harvard.edu/hpq/)

--

Examples by non- Kessler, R.C., Ames, M., Hymel, P.A., Loeppke, R., McKenas, --

Version 7

Page 166

network members D.K., Richling, D., Stang, P.E., Ustun, T.B. (2004). Using the WHO Health and Work Performance Questionnaire (HPQ) to evaluate the indirect workplace costs.

Wang, P., Beck, A.L., Berglund, P.A., Leutzinger, J. A., Pronk, N.P., Richling, D., Simon, G.E., Stang, P.E., Ustun, T.B., Kessler, R.C. (2003). Chronic Medical Conditions and Work Performance in the HPQ Calibration Surveys. Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, 45(12), 1303-1311.

Loeppke, R., Hymel, P., Lofland, J., Pizzi, L. T., Konicki, D. L., Anstadt, G. W., Baase, C., Fortuna, J., & Scharf, T. (2003). Health-related workplace productivity measurement: general and migraine-specific recommendations from the ACOEM Expert Panel. Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, Vol. 45, 349-359.


--





Version 7

Page 167

The next set of questions will ask you about your work at your primary job.


Subscale

SW_HPQ1 About how many hours altogether did you work at this job in the last full 7-day calendar week?

SW_HPQ2 How many hours does your manager expect you to work in a typical 7-day calendar week?

SW_HPQ2flag ODD HPQ RESPONSES: CHECK FOR MISTAKES

SW_HPQ2r Revised SW_HPQ2 to correct likely keying mistake

SW_HPQ3 On a scale of 0 to 10, where 0 is the worst job performance anyone could have at your job and 10 is the performance of a top worker, how would you rate the usual performance of most workers in a job similar to yours?

SW_HPQ4 Using the same 0 to 10 scale, how would you rate your overall performance on the days you worked during the past 4 weeks?

ITEM VALUES

SW_HPQ1 & SW_HPQ2: # Hours

SW_HPQ2 & SW_HPQ3: 0-10 scale

Version 7

Page 168

SCORING OF SCALE

Relative absenteeism = (SW_HPQ1/ SW_HPQ2). Less than 1 answer means works less than expected vs. more than 1 work more than expected.

Score is a ratio for presenteeism - one's own actual performance in past 4 weeks/that of most employees doing similar job/ 0-10 rating

Absolute absenteeism

CVSW_HPQABSABSNT = (4*SW_HPQ2r - 4*SW_HPQ1)

Relative absenteeism

\ IF SW_HPQ2r > 0 THEN CVSW_HPQRELAB = (4*SW_HPQ2r - 4*SW_HPQ1)/(4*SW_HPQ2r)

ELSE IF SW_HPQ2r = 0 THEN CVSW_HPQRELAB = .Z

Relative hours of work

IF SW_HPQ2r > 0 THEN CVSW_HPQRELHWK = SW_HPQ1 / SW_HPQ2r

ELSE IF SW_HPQ2r = 0 THEN CVSW_HPQRELHWK = .Z

Version 7

Page 169

Relative presenteeism

IF SW_HPQ3 > 0 THEN CVSW_HPQPRES = SW_HPQ4 / SW_HPQ3

ELSE IF SW_HPQ3 = 0 THEN CVSW_HPQPRES = .Z

IF CVSW_HPQPRES > 2 THEN CVSW_HPQPRES = 2

ELSE IF 0 <= CVSW_HPQPRES < 0.25 THEN CVSW_HPQPRES = 0.25

Productivity:

CVSW_HPQPROD = CVSW_HPQRELHWK * CVSW_HPQPRES



Version 7

Page 170


No changes.


N/A


No changes.


N/A

Version 7

Page 171


TOMO BASELINE

Subscale

# Item

s

Mean (SD)

Median

Mode

Min

Max

Skew

Kurt

Alpha

N (scale calculate

d)

N (scal

e not

calc)

CVSW_HPQABSABSNT

1 -8.6057 (37.26792)

0 0 -188 144 -0.709

3.457 317 138

CVSW_HPQRELAB 1 -0.1059 (0.90831)

0 0 -15.67

0.95 -15.901

273.045

319 136

CVSW_HPQRELHWK

1 1.1059 (0.90831)

1 1 0.05 16.67

15.901

273.045

319 136

CVSW_HPQPRES 1 1.1681 (0.20436)

1.1429

1 0.71 1.8 0.916 0.938 326 129

CVSW_HPQPROD 1.2510

(0.4087)

1.25 1 0 2.8 0.3183

2.2734 312 143

Version 7

Page 172

TOMO 6 MONTHS

N/A

TOMO 12 MONTHS


CVSW_HPQABSABSNT 236 -5.9322 41.47 -208 220 0.60628 9.35

CVSW_HPQRELAB 232 -0.0443 0.3711 -4 1 -4.7215 56.809

CVSW_HPQRELHWK 233 1.0828 0.6938 0 10 9.90238 122.39

CVSW_HPQPRES 244 1.1617 0.2328 0.5 2 1.60068 4.291

CVSW_HPQPROD 222 1.2787 0.8529 0 11.43 8.6749 96.59

TOMO 18 MONTHS

N/A

Version 7

Page 173

*********************************************************************************************


LEEF BASELINE


CVSW_HPQABSABSNT 296 -6.43 45.65 -240 180 0.57946 7.504

CVSW_HPQRELAB 296 -0.21 1.24 -9 1 -6.3776 41.887

CVSW_HPQRELHWK 296 0.89 1.38 -9 7 -5.9605 44.218

CVSW_HPQPRES 301 1.24 0.28 0.6 2 1.14549 1.1382

CVSW_HPQPROD 287 1.31 0.6 0 7.88 4.98828 51.511

LEEF 6 MONTHS

Version 7

Page 174

N/A

LEEF 12 MONTHS


CVSW_HPQABSABSNT 134 -6.63 42.53 -160.00 180.00 1.21 7.52

CVSW_HPQRELAB 133 -0.04 0.27 -1.00 1.00 1.26 7.05

CVSW_HPQRELHWK 133 1.04 0.27 0.00 2.00 -1.26 7.05

CVSW_HPQPRES 137 1.24 0.28 0.78 2.00 1.26 1.19

CVSW_HPQPROD 129 1.29 0.49 0.00 3.33 0.81 4.12

LEEF 18 MONTHS

N/A

Version 7

Page 175


Prepared by: Tori Crain, Krista Brockwood , Matt Piszczek, Kelly Davis, & Joe Sherwood

JOB SECURITY

DESCRIPTION

Assesses likelihood of losing present job and ease of finding another, for both the employee and spouse (if applicable) in next year. This was added as the economic downturn is likely to have an effect on the stress and well-being of employees and their families.


Not found.

PI USE OF MEASURE

N/A

Version 7

Page 176


Adapted from version used in General Social Survey (David & Smith, 2003).

MIDUS; changed from 'few years' to '12 months'

ASSOCIATED PAPERS


Z, DV


--


--


--




Version 7

Page 177



Subscale

SW_SEC1 Thinking about the next 12 months, how likely do you think it is that you will lose your job or be laid off?

SW_SEC2 Thinking about the next 12 months, how likely do you think it is that your spouse/partner will lose his/her job or be laid off?

SW_SEC3 How easy would it be for you to find a job with another employer with approximately the same income and fringe benefits as you have now?

SW_SEC4 How easy would it be for your spouse/partner to find a job with another employer with approximately the same income and fringe benefits as he/she has now?

ITEM VALUES

For SW_SEC1 – 2:

Very likely = 1

Fairly likely = 2

Not too likely = 3

Not at all likely = 4

Will voluntarily leave company in next 12 months = 5

Version 7

Page 178

For SW_SEC3-4:

Very easy = 1

Somewhat easy = 2

Not easy at all = 3

Don’t know = -4

Refused = -7

SCORING OF SCALE

Use individual items at present.



Version 7

Page 179


No changes.


N/A


No changes.


Version 7

Page 180

N/A


TOMO BASELINE

Subscale

# Item

s

Mean (SD)

Median

Mode

Min

Max

Skew

Kurt

Alpha

N (scale calculated

)

N (Miss data)

N (Scale N/A)

SW_SEC1

1 3.34 (0.74)

3.00 3.00 1.00

5.00

-0.69

0.70

N/A

355 100 N/A

SW_SEC2

1 2.83 (0.75)

3.00 3.00 1.00

5.00

-0.13

0.26 N/A 348 107 N/A

SW_SEC3

1 2.39 (0.69

3.00 3.00 1.00

3.00

-0.6

-0.68 N/A 355 100;

Includes

N/A

Version 7

Page 181

)_ 8 1 refused

SW_SEC4

1 2.45 (0.67)

3.00 3.00 1.00

3.00

-0.82

-0.45 N/A 353 102;

Includes 3 “don’t know”

TOMO 6 MONTHS

N/A

TOMO 12 MONTHS

Subscale

# Items

Mean (SD)

Median

Mode

Min

Max

Skew

Kurt

Alpha


N (Miss data)

N (Scale N/A)

SW_SEC1 1 3.34

(.76)

3.00 4.00 1.00 5.00 -.99

1.13 N/A 257 77 N/A

SW_SEC2 1 2.81

(.68)

3.00 3.00 1.00 4.00 -.48

.51 N/A 258 76 N/A

SW_SEC3 1 2.38

(.65)

2.00 3.00 1.00 3.00 -.58

-.64 N/A 258 76 N/A

SW_SEC4 1 2.42

(.65)

3.00 3.00 1.00 3.00 -.69

-.55 N/A 258 76 N/A

Version 7

Page 182

TOMO 18 MONTHS

N/A

*********************************************************************************************


LEEF BASELINE

Subscale

# Items

Mean (SD)

Median

Mode

Min

Max

Skew

Kurt

Alpha


N (Miss data)

N (Scale N/A)

Version 7

Page 183

SW_SEC1 1 3.34

(.86)

4.00 4.00 1.00 5.00 -.12

1.00 N/A 303 101 N/A

SW_SEC2 1 3.50

(.59)

4.00 4.00 1.00 4.00 -.83

.23 N/A 303 101 N/A

SW_SEC3 1 2.35

(.70)

2.00 3.00 1.00 3.00 -.61

-.79 N/A 305 99 N/A

SW_SEC4 1 1.73

(.72)

2.00 1.00 1.00 3.00 .45 -.98 N/A 306 98 N/A

LEEF 6 MONTHS

N/A

LEEF 12 MONTHS

Subscale

# Items

Mean (SD)

Median

Mode

Min

Max

Skew

Kurt

Alpha


N (Miss data)

N (Scale N/A)

SW_SEC1 1 2.34

(.75)

3.00 3.00 1.00 3.00 -.65

-.93 N/A 141 43 N/A

SW_SEC2 1 3.46

(.57)

3.00 3.00 1.00 4.00 -.67

.88 N/A 140 44 N/A

SW_SEC3 1 2.34

(.75)

3.00 3.00 1.00 3.00 -.65

-.93 N/A 141 43 N/A

Version 7

Page 184

SW_SEC4 1 1.91

(.73)

2.00 2.00 1.00 3.00 .14 -1.08

N/A 141 43 N/A

LEEF 18 MONTHS

N/A

Version 7

Page 185


Prepared by: Tori Crain, Krista Brockwood, Matt Piszczek, Kelly Davis, & Joe Sherwood

INCOME ADEQUACY

DESCRIPTION

Assesses perceived adequacy of household income relative to expenses rather than just income.


None given.

PI USE OF MEASURE

Used by Hammer in Sandwiched Generation study and in Phase I. Predictor of depression, WFC (both directions) and positive W->F spillover.

Version 7

Page 186


Sandwiched Generation Couples; Grocery store workers

ASSOCIATED PAPERS


Z, DV



--


--


Hammer, L. B., Cullen, J. C., Neal, M. B., Sinclair, R. R., & Shafiro, M. (2005). The longitudinal effects of work-family conflict and positive spillover on depressive symptoms among dual-earner couples. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 10, 138-154.

--




Version 7

Page 187



Subscale

SW_INAD Which of the following four statements describes your ability to get along on your income?

ITEM VALUES

We can’t make ends meet = 1

We have just enough, no more = 2

We have enough, with a little extra sometimes = 3

We always have money left over = 4

Higher scores reflect greater income adequacy

SCORING OF SCALE

Single categorical item—not a scale.

Range: 1-4

Version 7

Page 188




No changes.


N/A


Version 7

Page 189

No changes.


N/A


TOMO BASELINE

TOMO SCALE STATISTICS

Ability to get along on income

SW_INAD Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent

Version 7

Page 190

Valid WE CAN’T MAKE ENDS MEET 17 3.7 3.8 3.8

WE HAVE JUST ENOUGH, NO MORE

59 13.0 13.0 16.8

WE HAVE ENOUGH, WITH A LITTLE EXTRA SOMETIMES

232 51.0 51.2 68.0

WE ALWAYS HAVE MONEY LEFT OVER

145 31.9 32.0 100.0

Total 453 99.6 100.0

Missing -7 2 .4

Total 455 100.0

TOMO 6 MONTHS

N/A

TOMO 12 MONTHS

SP: Ability to get along on income


Version 7

Page 191

Valid WE HAVE JUST ENOUGH, NO MORE

45 13.5 13.5 13.5


180 53.9 54.1 67.6


108 32.3 32.4 100.0

Total 333 99.7 100.0

Missing -7 1 .3

Total 334 100.0

TOMO 18 MONTHS

N/A

*********************************************************************************************


Version 7

Page 192

LEEF BASELINE

Ability to get along on income


Valid WE CAN’T MAKE ENDS MEET 38 9.4 9.4 9.4

WE HAVE JUST ENOUGH, NO MORE

107 26.5 26.5 35.9


215 53.2 53.2 89.1


44 10.9 10.9 100.0

Total 404 100.0 100.0

LEEF 6 MONTHS

N/A

Version 7

Page 193

LEEF 12 MONTHS

SP: Ability to get along on income

SW_INAD Frequency Percent Valid Percent

Cumulative

Percent

Valid WE CAN'T MAKE ENDS MEET 15 8.2 8.2 8.2

WE HAVE JUST ENOUGH, NO

MORE

56 30.4 30.4 38.6

WE HAVE ENOUGH, WITH A

LITTLE EXTRA SOMETIMES

81 44.0 44.0 82.6

WE ALWAYS HAVE MONEY

LEFT OVER

32 17.4 17.4 100.0

Total 184 100.0 100.0

LEEF 18 MONTHS

N/A

Version 7

Page 194


Prepared by: Tori Crain, Michelle Blocklin, Kelly Davis, Matt Piszczek, Joe Sherwood

EMPLOYEE WORK-FAMILY CONFLICT (SPOUSE REPORT)

DESCRIPTION

Work-family conflict is a type of inter-role conflict in which the roles of work and family are incompatible in some way (Greenhaus & Beutell, 1985). We assessed the employee’s work-family conflict a second time by getting the spouse/partner’s perspective. We only asked for the spouse/partner to report on the employee’s work-to-family conflict (and not family-to-work conflict) as this is the type of conflict targeted by the intervention.


P/M: .87 (WIF), .85 (FIW); MN .93 w2 (WIF) and .90 both waves (FIW); from original article .91 for wives and .90 for husbands. For FIW .88 both husbands and wives.

PI USE OF MEASURE

Version 7

Page 195

Used by P/M and MN


One of the most widely used measures; used in numerous studies.

Netemeyer et al. normed their measure on three samples: elementary and high-school teachers and administrators in a large southeastern city, small business owners in a large southeastern city, and real estate salespeople in a large southeastern city.

ASSOCIATED PAPERS


Z, DV


Netemeyer, R. G., Boles, J. S., & McMurrian, R. (1996). Development and validation of work-family conflict and family-work conflict scales. Journal of Applied Psychology, 81, 400-410.

--


--


--

Version 7

Page 196





Now I will ask a few questions about how your spouse’s job affects your family. Please think about the past month and tell me if you strongly agree, agree, neither agree nor disagree, disagree, or strongly disagree.


Subscale

SW_CONF1 The demands of your spouse/partner’s work interfere with his/her family time.

R Spouse report of employee

WFC

SW_CONF2 The amount of time your spouse/partner’s job takes up makes it difficult for him/her to fulfill his/her family responsibilities.


WFC

SW_CONF3 Things your spouse/ partner should do at home do not get done because of the demands of his/her job.


WFC

SW_CONF4 Your spouse/ partner’s job produces strain that makes it difficult to fulfill his/her family duties.


WFC

Version 7

Page 197

SW_CONF5 Due to your spouse/ partner’s work-related duties, he/she has to make changes to his/her plans for family activities.


WFC

ITEM VALUES

In CAPI:

Strongly Agree = 1

Agree = 2


Disagree = 4

Disagree Strongly = 5

Don’t know = -4

Refused = -7

Recoded:

Strongly Agree = 5

Agree = 6


Disagree = 2

Disagree Strongly = 1

Version 7

Page 198

Higher scores reflect greater work-family conflict.

SCORING OF SCALE

The scale is created by averaging the items. After reverse-coding all the items, higher means reflect more employee work-family conflict, as perceived by the spouse.

Employee WFC , listwise deletion = SCSW_CONF= MEAN.5 (SW_CONF1R, SW_CONF2R, SW_CONF3R, SW_CONF4R, SW_CONF5R)

Employee WFC, mean imputation: SCSW_CONFi= MEAN.4 (SW_CONF1R, SW_CONF2R, SW_CONF3R, SW_CONF4R, SW_CONF5R).




Version 7

Page 199

No changes.


N/A


No changes.


N/A

Version 7

Page 200


TOMO BASELINE

Subscale

# tems

Mean (SD)

Median

Mode

Min

Max

Skew

Kurt

Alpha


N (Miss data)

N (Scale N/A)

SCSW_CONF 5 2.79 (0.93)

2.60 2.00 1.00 5.00 0.25 -0.59

0.91 451 4 N/A

SCSW_CONFi 5 2.78 (0.92)

2.60 2.00 1.00 5.00 0.26 -0.58

N/A 455 0 N/A

TOMO 6 MONTHS

N/A

TOMO 12 MONTHS

Version 7

Page 201

Subscale

# Items

Mean (SD)

Median

Mode

Min

Max

Skew

Kurt

Alpha


N (Miss data)

N (Scale N/A)

SCSW_CONF 5 2.56

(.86)

2.40 2.00 1.00 5.00 .46 -.09

.90 334 0 N/A

SCSW_CONFi 5 2.56

(.86)

2.40 2.00 1.00 5.00 .46 -.09

N/A 334 0 N/A

TOMO 18 MONTHS

N/A

*********************************************************************************************


Version 7

Page 202

LEEF BASELINE

Subscale

# Items

Mean (SD)

Median

Mode

Min

Max

Skew

Kurt

Alpha


N (Miss data)

N (Scale N/A)

SCSW_CONF 5 2.80

(.84)

2.80 2.00 1.00 5.00 .30 -.33

.84 404 0 N/A

SCSW_CONFi 5 2.80

(.84)

2.80 2.00 1.00 5.00 .30 -.33

N/A 404 0 N/A

LEEF 6 MONTHS

N/A

LEEF 12 MONTHS

Version 7

Page 203

Subscale

# Items

Mean (SD)

Median

Mode

Min

Max

Skew

Kurt

Alpha


N (Miss data)

N (Scale N/A)

SCSW_CONF 5 2.77

(.90)

2.60 2.00 1.00 5.00 .39 -.44

.88 184 0 N/A

SCSW_CONFi 5 2.77

(.90)

2.60 2.00 1.00 5.00 .39 -.44

N/A 184 0 N/A

LEEF 18 MONTHS

N/A

Version 7

Page 204

Section 3: Spouse/Partner Physical & Mental Health Measures

Version 7

Page 205


Prepared by: Yin Liu, Kelly Davis & Soomi Lee

PHYSICAL HEALTH SYMPTOMS

DESCRIPTION

We adapted Larsen and Kasimatis (1991) symptoms checklist, the same checklist used in the Daily Inventory of Stressful Experiences (Almeida, 1998). We included as a measure of spouse health to investigate whether there are crossover effects of the employee to the spouse.


N/A

PI USE OF MEASURE

Daily Inventory of Stressful Experiences for Youth (Almeida, 1998)

Version 7

Page 206

Hotel Work and Well-being Study (PIs: Dave Almeida & Nan Crouter)


A nationally representative sample of adults aged 25-74 (NSDE) and hotel managers and hourly employees (Phase I Hotel Work & Well-Being study).

ASSOCIATED PAPERS


Z, DV


Larsen, R. J., & Kasimatis, M. (1991). Day-to-day physical symptoms: Individual differences in the occurrence, duration, and emotional concomitants of minor daily illnesses. Journal of Personality, 59, 387-423.

--


--


Almeida, D. M. (1998). Daily Inventory of Stressful Events (DISE) expert coding manual. Tucson, AZ: Division of Family Studies and Human Development, University of Arizona.

--

Version 7

Page 207





This next section is about your health. For this first section, please think about the past 2 weeks when answering.


Subscale

SH_PHS1 In the past 2 weeks, have you had a persistent cough?

Physical health

symptoms

SH_PHS2 In the past 2 weeks, have you had a cold?

Physical health symptoms

SH_PHS3 Have you had the flu?


SH_PHS4 Have you had a sore throat?


Version 7

Page 208

SH_PHS5 Have you had diarrhea?


ITEM VALUES

1 = Almost never

2 = Rarely

3 = Sometimes

4 = Frequently

5 = Almost always

-4 = Don’t know -7 = Refused

SCORING OF SCALE

Items are summed, with higher scores representing greater frequency of spouse physical health problems in the past month. Mean replacement was used if 4 out of the 5 items were complete.

Physical Health Symptoms (SCSH_PHS):

IF NMISS(OF SH_PHS1-SH_PHS5) = 0 THEN SCSH_PHS = SUM(OF SH_PHS1-SH_PHS5) ;

Version 7

Page 209

SCSH_PHSi:

IF NMISS(OF SH_PHS1-SH_PHS5) <= 1 THEN SCSH_PHSi = MEAN(OF SH_PHS1-SH_PHS5)*5 ;




No changes.


N/A

Version 7

Page 210


No changes.


N/A


TOMO BASELINE

Subscale

# Items

Mean (SD)

Median

Mode

Min

Max

Skew

Kurt

Alpha


N (Miss

N (Scale

Version 7

Page 211

data) N/A)

SCSH_PHS 5 9.57 (.85)

10.0 10.0 6.0 10.0 -2.10

3.81 N/A 453 2 0

SCSH_PHSi 5 9.56 (.88)

10.0 10.0 5.0 10.0 -2.19

4.57 N/A 454 1 0

TOMO 6 MONTHS

N/A

TOMO 12 MONTHS

Subscale

# Items

Mean (SD)

Median

Mode

Min

Max

Skew

Kurt

Alpha

N (scale calculate

d)

N (Miss data)

N (Scale N/A)

SCSH_PHS 5 9.63

(0.81)

10 10 6 10 -2.44 5.58 N/A 333 1 0

SCSH_PHSi 5 9.62

(0.82)

10 10 6 10 -2.40 5.32 N/A 334 0 0

Version 7

Page 212

TOMO 18 MONTHS

N/A

*********************************************************************************************


LEEF BASELINE

Subscale

# Items

Mean (SD)

Median

Mode

Min

Max

Skew

Kurt

Alpha


N (Miss data)

N (Scale N/A)

SCSH_PHS 5 9.56 10.0 10.0 6.0 10.0 - 3.26 N/A 404 0 0

Version 7

Page 213

(.78) 1.90

SCSH_PHSi 5 9.56 (.78)

10.0 10.0 6.0 10.0 -1.90

3.26 N/A 404 0 0

LEEF 6 MONTHS

N/A

LEEF 12 MONTHS

Subscale

# Items

Mean (SD)

Median

Mode

Min

Max

Skew

Kurt

Alpha


N (Miss data)

N (Scale N/A)

SCSH_PHS 5 9.511

(0.964)

10 10 6 10 -2.031 3.231 0.664 184 0 0

SCSH_PHSi 5 9.511

(0.964)

10 10 6 10 -2.031 3.231 N/A 184 0 0

Version 7

Page 214

LEEF 18 MONTHS

N/A

Version 7

Page 215


Prepared by: Mike Mills & Jesse Hinde

INSURANCE AND HOSPITAL VISITS

DESCRIPTION

[WHY MEASURE SELECTED; PURPOSE OF MEASURE; CHANGES MADE FOR PHASE II, ETC.]


PI USE OF MEASURE


Version 7

Page 216

ASSOCIATED PAPERS


Z, DV


--


--


--





Version 7

Page 217

This next section is about your health. For this first section, please think about the past 2 weeks when answering.


Subscale

SH_PLAN Are you covered by your spouse/partner’s health plan through [Company]?

Yes 1 YES

No 2 NO

SH_HCU1 During the past 6 months, have you spent the night in a hospital in order to receive care for yourself?

Yes 1 YES

No 2 NO

SH_HCU2 [if SH_HCU = 1] How many nights did you stay in the hospital?

NIGHTS

SH_HCU3a [if SH_HCU2 > 1] Of those ^SH_HCU2 nights, how many were alcohol, drug use, or mental health related?

NIGHTS

SH_HCU3b [if SH_HCU2 = 1] Was your stay at the hospital that night related to alcohol, drug use, or mental

Version 7

Page 218

health?

Yes 1 YES

No 2 NO

SH_HCU4 ^FSH_HCU4 the past 6 months, have you made a visit to the emergency room or urgent care treatment facility for health treatment?

Yes 1 YES

No 2 NO

SH_HCU5 [if SH_HCU4 = 1] How many visits did you make?

VISITS

SH_HCU6 ^FSH_HCU6 you visited any other health care professionals to receive outpatient treatment or counseling during the past 6 months?

Yes 1 YES

No 2 NO

SH_HCU7 [if SH_HCU6 = 1] How many visits did you make?

VISITS

SH_HCU8a [if_SH_HCU7 > 1] Of those ^SH_HCU7 visits, how many were alcohol, drug use, or mental health related?

Version 7

Page 219

VISITS

SH_HCU8b [if SH_HCU7 = 1] Was your visit to another health professional related to alcohol, drug use, or mental health?

Yes 1 YES

No 2 NO

ITEM VALUES

SCORING OF SCALE

N/A



Version 7

Page 220


No changes.


N/A


No changes.


Version 7

Page 221

N/A


TOMO BASELINE

Subscale

# Item

s

Mean (SD)

Median

Mode

Min

Max

Skew

Kurt

Alpha

N (scale calculated

)

N (Mis

s data)

N (Scal

e N/A)

SH_HCU2 1 2.737

(3.016)

2 1 1 13 2.673

7.640 N/A

19 436 0

SH_HCU3a

1 1.300

(4.111)

0 0 0 13 3.162

10 N/A

10 445 0

SH_HCU5 1 1.327

(0.904)

1 1 1 6 3.664

14.839

N/A

55 400 0

SH_HCU7 1 4.042

(5.470

2 1 1 35 3.358

12.828

N/A

189 266 0

Version 7

Page 222

)

SH_HCU8a

1 0.992

(3.838)

0 0 0 24 4.542

21.018

N/A

120 335 0

R covered by Emp's health plan through company

SH_PLAN Frequency Percent Cumulative Frequency

Cumulative Percent

1 319 70.26 319 70.26

2 135 29.74 454 100.00


R spent the night in a hospital to receive care for self

SH_HCU1 Frequency Percent Cumulative Frequency

Cumulative Percent

1 19 4.18 19 4.18

2 436 95.82 455 100.00


Night was alcohol, drug use, or mental health related

SH_HCU3b Frequency Percent Cumulative Frequency

Cumulative Percent

1 2 22.22 2 22.22

2 7 77.78 9 100.00


Version 7

Page 223

R made a visit to ER for health treatment


Cumulative Percent

1 55 12.09 55 12.09

2 400 87.91 455 100.00


R visited any other HC profs for outpatient tx/counseling


Cumulative Percent

1 189 41.54 189 41.54

2 266 58.46 455 100.00


Visit was alc/drug use/mental health related


Cumulative Percent

1 2 2.90 2 2.90

2 67 97.10 69 100.00


TOMO 6 MONTHS

Version 7

Page 224

N/A

TOMO 12 MONTHS


SH_HCU2 24 2.5833 1.8158 1 8 1.73129 3.32

SH_HCU3a 16 0 0 0 0 . .

SH_HCU5 33 4.7879 20.867 1 121 5.7405 32.968

SH_HCU7 132 4.1667 4.7312 1 30 2.87949 10.448

SH_HCU8a 92 0.5 3.0364 -7 24 5.92256 43.005


SP: R covered by Emp's health plan through company


Cumulative Percent

YES 232 69.46 232 69.46

NO 102 30.54 334 100

SP: R spent the night in a hospital to receive care for self


Cumulative Percent

Version 7

Page 225

YES 24 7.19 24 7.19

NO 310 92.81 334 100

SP: Night was alcohol, drug use, or mental health related


Cumulative Percent

NO 8 100 8 100

SP: R made a visit to ER for health treatment


Cumulative Percent

YES 33 9.88 33 9.88

NO 301 90.12 334 100

SP: R visited any other HC profs for outpatient tx/counseling


Cumulative Percent

YES 132 39.52 132 39.52

NO 202 60.48 334 100

SP: Visit was alc/drug use/mental health related


Cumulative Percent

NO 40 100 40 100

Version 7

Page 226

TOMO 18 MONTHS

N/A

*********************************************************************************************


LEEF BASELINE


SH_HCU2 19 9.53 15.52 1 60 2.34324 5.646

Version 7

Page 227

SH_HCU3a 12 0.25 0.62 0 2 2.55515 6.2422

SH_HCU5 58 1.36 0.79 1 6 3.92842 20.74

SH_HCU7 134 4.3 9.13 1 90 6.84491 59.221

SH_HCU8a 79 2.48 11.12 0 90 6.75044 50.752

R covered by Emp's health plan through company


Cumulative Percent

YES 96 23.82 96 23.82

NO 307 76.18 403 100

R spent the night in a hospital to receive care for self


Cumulative Percent

YES 19 4.7 19 4.7

NO 385 95.3 404 100

Night was alcohol, drug use, or mental health related


Cumulative Percent

YES 1 14.29 1 14.29

NO 6 85.71 7 100

R made a visit to ER for health treatment


Cumulative Percent

Version 7

Page 228

YES 58 14.36 58 14.36

NO 346 85.64 404 100

R visited any other HC profs for outpatient tx/counseling


Cumulative Percent

YES 134 33.17 134 33.17

NO 270 66.83 404 100

Visit was alc/drug use/mental health related


Cumulative Percent

YES 3 5.45 3 5.45

NO 52 94.55 55 100

LEEF 6 MONTHS

N/A

LEEF 12 MONTHS

Version 7

Page 229


SH_HCU2 12 5.17 8.01 1.00 30.00 3.19 10.57

SH_HCU3a 9 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 . .

SH_HCU5 23 1.78 2.28 1.00 12.00 4.48 20.84

SH_HCU7 74 4.69 9.12 1.00 60.00 4.35 21.45

SH_HCU8a 44 1.05 4.83 0.00 30.00 5.53 32.11

SP: R covered by Emp's health plan through company


Cumulative Percent

YES 52 28.261 52 28.261

NO 132 71.739 184 100

SP: R spent the night in a hospital to receive care for self


Cumulative Percent

YES 12 6.522 12 6.522

NO 172 93.478 184 100

SP: Night was alcohol, drug use, or mental health related


Cumulative Percent

. 181 98.37 181 98.37

NO 3 1.63 184 100

Version 7

Page 230

SP: R made a visit to ER for health treatment


Cumulative Percent

YES 23 12.5 23 12.5

NO 161 87.5 184 100

SP: R visited any other HC profs for outpatient tx/counseling


Cumulative Percent

YES 74 40.217 74 40.217

NO 110 59.783 184 100

SP: Visit was alc/drug use/mental health related


Cumulative Percent

. 154 83.696 154 83.696

YES 1 0.543 155 84.239

NO 29 15.761 184 100

LEEF 18 MONTHS

N/A

Version 7

Page 231

Version 7

Page 232


Prepared by: Sam Liu, Qiong Wu & Mack Ramsey

SLEEP QUALITY

DESCRIPTION

Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index is the most widely used questionnaire for general sleep characteristics and sleep duration, with strong relationship to daily sleep diary reports.


PI USE OF MEASURE


Version 7

Page 233

ASSOCIATED PAPERS


Z, DV


Buysse, D.J., Reynolds, C.F., Monk, T.H., Berman, S.R., & Kupfer, D.J. (1989). The Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI): A new instrument for psychiatric research and practice. Psychiatry Research, 28(2), 193-213.

PH_PSQI5:

Sorensen, G., Quintiliani, L., Pereira, L., Yang, M., & Stoddard, A. (2009). Work Experiences and Tobacco Use: Findings from the Gear Up for Health Study. Journal of Occupational & Environmental Medicine, 51(1), 87-94.

--


Cohen, S., Doyle, W.J., Skoner, D.P., Rabin, B.S., & Gwaltney Jr., J.M. (1997). Social ties and susceptibility to the common cold. JAMA, 277(24), 1940-1944.

Calabrese, J.R., Keck, P.E. Jr, Macfadden, W., Minkwitz, M., Ketter, T.A., Weisler, R.H., Cutler, A.J., McCoy, R., Wilson, E., & Mullen, J. (2005). A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of quetiapine in the treatment of bipolar I or II depression. Am J Psychiatry, 162(7): 1351-1360.

--

Version 7

Page 234

PH_PSQ15:

Groeneveld, I.F., Proper, K.I., van der Beek, A.J., van Duivenbooden, C., & van Mechelen, W. (2008). Design of a RCT evaluating the (cost-) effectiveness of a lifestyle intervention for male construction workers at risk for cardiovascular disease: The health under Construction study. BMC Public Health, 8(1). doi:10.1186/1471-2458-8-1.


Sorenson, G., Stoddard, A.M., Stoffel, S., Buxton, O., Sembajwe, G., Hashimoto, D., Dennerlein, J.T., Hopcia, K. (2011). The Role of the Work Context in Multiple Wellness Outcomes for Hospital Patient Care Workers. Journal of Occupational & Environmental Medicine, 53(8), 899-910.

PH_PSQ15:

Buxton OM, Quintiliani LM, Yang MH, et al. (2009). Association of sleep adequacy with more healthful food choices and positive workplace experiences among motor freight workers. Americal Journal of Public Health, 99, S636-S643.

--





Version 7

Page 235

The next set of questions is about your sleep in the past month.


Subscale

SH_SLPS1 In the past month, how many hours do you think you actually slept each night on average? This may be different than the number of hours you spent in bed.

HOURS/NIGHT

Sleep Duration

SH_SLPS2 Please pick up your response card booklet and turn to response card #14.

How often during the past month did you get enough sleep to feel rested upon waking up? Is it never, rarely, sometimes, often or very often?

never 1 NEVER

rarely 2 RARELY

sometimes 3 SOMETIMES

often 4 OFTEN

voften 5 VERY OFTEN

Sleep Adequacy

SH_SLPS3 Please turn to response card #15.

How would you rate your sleep quality overall? Would you say it is very good, fairly good, fairly bad,

Sleep Quality

Version 7

Page 236

or very bad?

vgood 1 VERY GOOD

fairgood 2 FAIRLY GOOD

fairbad 3 FAIRLY BAD

vbad 4 VERY BAD

ITEM VALUES

SCORING OF SCALE

No scale.

Version 7

Page 237




No changes.


N/A

Version 7

Page 238


No changes.


N/A


Version 7

Page 239

TOMO BASELINE

Got enough sleep to feel rested upon waking up

SH_SLPS2 Frequency Percent Cumulative Frequency

Cumulative Percent

NEVER 10 2.2 10 2.2

RARELY 74 16.26 84 18.46

SOMETIMES 167 36.7 251 55.16

OFTEN 162 35.6 413 90.77

VERY OFTEN 42 9.23 455 100

Rating of sleep quality overall


Cumulative Percent

VERY GOOD 75 16.48 75 16.48

FAIRLY GOOD 276 60.66 351 77.14

FAIRLY BAD 89 19.56 440 96.7

VERY BAD 15 3.3 455 100

TOMO 6 MONTHS

Version 7

Page 240

N/A

TOMO 12 MONTHS

Subscale

# Items

Mean (SD)

Median

Mode

Min

Max

Skew

Kurt

Alpha


N (Miss data)

N (Scale N/A)

SH_SLPS1 1 6.816 7.00 7.00 4.00 12.00 0.125 1.480 334

SH_SLPS2 1 3.377 3.00 3.00 1.00 5.00 -0.327

-0.124

334

SH_SLPS3 1 2.069 2.00 2.00 1.00 4.00 0.538 0.748 334



Cumulative Percent

NEVER 11 3.29 11 3.29

RARELY 43 12.87 54 16.17

SOMETIMES 123 36.83 177 52.99

OFTEN 123 36.83 300 89.82

VERY OFTEN 34 10.8 334 100.00

Version 7

Page 241



Cumulative Percent

VERY GOOD 56 16.44 56 16.77

FAIRLY GOOD 210 62.87 266 79.64

FAIRLY BAD 57 17.07 323 96.71

VERY BAD 11 3.29 334 100.00

TOMO 18 MONTHS

N/A

*********************************************************************************************


Version 7

Page 242

LEEF BASELINE



Cumulative Percent

NEVER 32 7.92 32 7.92

RARELY 78 19.31 110 27.23

SOMETIMES 127 31.44 237 58.66

OFTEN 125 30.94 362 89.60

VERY OFTEN 42 10.40 404 100.00



Cumulative Percent

Don’t Know 1 0.25 1 0.25

VERY GOOD 63 15.59 64 15.84

FAIRLY GOOD 225 55.69 289 71.53

FAIRLY BAD 83 20.54 372 92.08

VERY BAD 32 7.92 404 100.00

Version 7

Page 243

LEEF 6 MONTHS

N/A

LEEF 12 MONTHS

Subscale

# Items

Mean (SD)

Median

Mode

Min

Max

Skew

Kurt

Alpha


N (Miss data)

N (Scale N/A)

SH_SLPS1 1 6.245 6.00 6.00 3.00 10.00 0.114 0.018 184

SH_SLPS2 1 3.201 3.00 3.00 1.00 5.00 -0.076

-0.724

184

SH_SLPS3 1 2.174 2.00 2.00 1.00 4.00 0.415 0.211 184



Cumulative Percent

NEVER 10 5.43 10 5.43

RARELY 41 22.28 51 27.72

Version 7

Page 244

SOMETIMES 58 31.52 109 59.24

OFTEN 52 28.26 161 87.50

VERY OFTEN 23 12.50 184 100.00



Cumulative Percent

VERY GOOD 27 14.67 27 14.67

FAIRLY GOOD 106 57.61 133 72.28

FAIRLY BAD 43 23.37 176 95.65

VERY BAD 8 4.35 184 100.00

LEEF 18 MONTHS

N/A

Version 7

Page 245

Page last updated: 10/07/2013 Prepared by: Sam Liu, Qiong Wu, Mack Ramsey, Kelly Davis

HEALTH BEHAVIORS

DESCRIPTION

These items come directly from the National Health Interview Survey, one of the largest and most informative national surveys on health and health behaviors in the United States for the past 50 years. These items represent brief screens for frequency and quantity of cigarette use, alcohol use, - no reliability information is available given the brevity of the screeners.

This set of questions does not measure a single underlying construct (thus it is not a scale where the items are supposed to cluster together), rather it seeks to get measurable information about employee healthcare use. This set of questions has been found to be sensitive to changes in employee healthcare utilization.


PI USE OF MEASURE

Version 7

Page 246


ASSOCIATED PAPERS


Z, DV


National Center for Health Statistics (2011). Data File Documentation, National Health Interview Survey, 1992 (machine readable data file and documentation). National Center for Health Statistics, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Hyattsville, Maryland.

PH_HBEH7:

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS). National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey Questionnaire, 2005-2006. Hyattsville, MD: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, [http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nhanes/nhanes2005-2006/quex05_06.htm].

--

Version 7

Page 247


N/A --


N/A --





The next set of questions ask about your use of tobacco and alcohol.

Variable Name Item text Reverse-

coded Subscale

SH_HBEH1 Do you smoke tobacco cigarettes every day, some days or not at all?

daily 1 EVERY DAY

somedays 2 SOME DAYS

notatall 3 NOT AT ALL

Smoking

SH_HBEH2 On average, in a week, on how many days do you smoke?

Smoking

Version 7

Page 248

DAYS

SH_HBEH3 On the days you do smoke, how many tobacco cigarettes do you smoke on an average day?

(1 PACK = 20 CIGARETTES)

CIGARETTES

Smoking

SH_HBEH4 On average, in one week, how many days do you drink any type of alcohol?

DAYS

Alcohol Use

SH_HBEH5 On the days you do drink alcohol, how many drinks do you have on the average day?

DRINKS

Alcohol Use

Version 7

Page 249

SH_HBEH6 How many times in the past 4 weeks did you engage in exercise for at least 20 minutes that caused you to break a sweat?

INTERVIEWER: ANSWER SHOULD REFLECT THE TOTAL NUMBER OF TIMES EXERCISED OVER THE PAST 4 WEEKS.

TIMES

Exercise

SH_HBEH7 Please turn to response card #16.

How many times in the past 4 weeks have you eaten a meal from a fast food restaurant? Would you say never, 1 to 3 times, 1 or 2 times a week, 3 or 4 times a week, 5 or 6 times a week, 1 time per day, or 2 or more times per day?

DEFINITION OF "FAST FOOD": (Food that is prepared in advance and sits in warming areas)

lessmo 1 NEVER

oncemo 2 1-3 TIMES

oncewk 3 1-2 TIMES A WEEK

thricewk 4 3-4 TIMES A WEEK

fivewk 5 5 - 6 TIMES A WEEK

daily 6 1 TIME PER DAY

moreonceday 7 2 OR MORE TIMES PER DAY

Fast Food

Skip Pattern:

Version 7

Page 250

SH_HBEH2 and SH_HBEH3 are asked only if SH_HBEH1= 1 or 2;

SH_HBEH2 and SH_HBEH3 are asked only if SH_HBEH1= 1 or 2;

SCORING OF SCALE

CVSH_CIGPWK:: number of tobacco cigarettes per week

CVSH_DKPWK: number of drinks per week

SAS code:

CVSH_CIGPWK = SH_HBEH2 * SH_HBEH3 ;

IF 0 < SH_HBEH1 < 3 & NMISS(OF SH_HBEH2 SH_HBEH3) = 1 THEN CVSH_CIGPWK = .M ;

CVSH_DKPWK = SH_HBEH4 * SH_HBEH5 ;

IF NMISS(OF SH_HBEH4 SH_HBEH5) = 1 THEN CVSH_DKPWK = .M ;



Version 7

Page 251


No changes.


N/A


No changes.

Version 7

Page 252


N/A


TOMO BASELINE

Smoke tobacco cigarettes

SH_HBEH1 Frequency Percent Cumulative Frequency

Cumulative Percent

EVERY DAY 17 3.74 17 3.74

SOME DAYS 9 1.98 26 5.71

NOT AT ALL 429 94.29 455 100

Version 7

Page 253

R eaten a meal from a fast food restaurant


Cumulative Percent

Dontknow 2 0.44 2 0.44

NEVER 95 20.88 97 21.32

1-3 TIMES 179 39.34 276 60.66

1-2 TIMES A WEEK 112 24.62 388 85.27

3-4 TIMES A WEEK 44 9.67 432 94.95

5 - 6 TIMES A WEEK 14 3.08 446 98.02

1 TIME PER DAY 7 1.54 453 99.56

2 OR MORE TIMES PER DAY 2 0.44 455 100

Variable Label N Mean Std Dev Min Max Skewness Kurtosis

CVSH_CIGPWK SPB: TOBACCO CIGARETTES PER WEEK: CONSTRUCTED 26 74.2692308 72.5581464 1 245 0.7613017 -0.4147555


CVSH_DKPWK SPB: DRINKS PER WEEK: CONSTRUCTED 217 5.9124424 10.9170561 1 136 8.6177441 95.715377

TOMO 6 MONTHS

Version 7

Page 254

N/A

TOMO 12 MONTHS



Cumulative Percent

EVERY DAY 12 3.59 12 3.59

SOME DAYS 3 0.90 15 4.49

NOT AT ALL 319 95.51 334 100.00


Cumulative Percent

NEVER 64 19.16 64 19.16

1-3 TIMES 141 42.22 205 61.38

1-2 TIMES A WEEK 81 24.25 286 85.63

3-4 TIMES A WEEK 36 10.78 322 96.41

Version 7

Page 255

5 - 6 TIMES A WEEK 9 2.69 331 99.70

1 TIME PER DAY 2 0.60 333 99.70

2 OR MORE TIMES PER DAY 1 0.30 334 100


CVSH_CIGPWK SPB: TOBACCO CIGARETTES PER WEEK: CONSTRUCTED 15 75.200 56.959 3.00 175.00 0.442 -1.287


CVSH_DKPWK SPB: DRINKS PER WEEK: CONSTRUCTED 156 5.429 6.800 1.00 56.00 3.883 22.065

TOMO 18 MONTHS

N/A

*********************************************************************************************

Version 7

Page 256


LEEF BASELINE



Cumulative Percent

EVERY DAY 106 26.24 106 26.24

SOME DAYS 26 6.44 132 32.67

NOT AT ALL 272 67.33 404 100.00



Cumulative Percent

NEVER 81 20.05 81 20.05

1-3 TIMES 160 39.60 241 59.65

1-2 TIMES A WEEK 103 25.50 344 85.15

3-4 TIMES A WEEK 38 9.41 382 94.55

5 - 6 TIMES A WEEK 8 1.98 390 96.53

Version 7

Page 257

1 TIME PER DAY 11 2.72 401 99.26

2 OR MORE TIMES PER DAY 3 0.74 404 100.00


CVSH_CIGPWK SPB: TOBACCO CIGARETTES PER WEEK: CONSTRUCTED 132 98.4469697 68.2313436 1 280 0.723 0.242



LEEF 6 MONTHS

N/A

LEEF 12 MONTHS

Version 7

Page 258



Cumulative Percent

EVERY DAY 36 19.57 36 19.57

SOME DAYS 8 4.35 44 23.91

NOT AT ALL 140 76.09 184 100.00



Cumulative Percent

NEVER 30 16.30 30 16.30

1-3 TIMES 98 53.26 128 69.57

1-2 TIMES A WEEK 30 16.30 158 85.87

3-4 TIMES A WEEK 20 10.87 178 96.74

5 - 6 TIMES A WEEK 1 0.54 179 97.28

1 TIME PER DAY 4 2.17 183 99.46

2 OR MORE TIMES PER DAY 1 0.54 184 100.00


CVSH_CIGPWK SPB: TOBACCO CIGARETTES PER WEEK: CONSTRUCTED 44 101.205 71.879 2 280 0.544 0.089



Version 7

Page 259

LEEF 18 MONTHS

N/A

Version 7

Page 260

Page last updated: 10/07/2013 Prepared by: Sam Liu, Qiong Wu, Mack Ramsey, Kelly Davis, Rachel Boyce

PSYCHOLOGICAL DISTRESS

DESCRIPTION

The K6 is the most widely used mental health screening scale in the United States and has been utilized in numerous psychiatric and social epidemiology studies, including the National Household Survey on Drug Abuse (e.g., Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2004; US Department of Health and Human Services, 2004).

Extensive clinical validation of the K6 has been conducted. When compared to a gold-standard structured diagnostic interview, the K6 has demonstrated excellent precision, including sensitivity and specificity (area under the curve = 0.86)

The K-6 has excellent internal consistency (alpha = 0.89) and has been demonstrated to better predict a diagnosis of serious mental illness than a number of other well-validated scales of psychological distress (Kessler et al., 2003).


Version 7

Page 261

PI USE OF MEASURE


ASSOCIATED PAPERS


Z, DV


Kessler, R.C., Barker, P.R., Colpe, L.J., Epstein, J.F., Gfroerer, J.C., Hiripi, E., Howes, M.J, Normand, S-L.T., Manderscheid, R.W., Walters, E.E., Zaslavsky, A.M. (2003). Screening for serious mental illness in the general population. Archives of General Psychiatry, 60(2), 184-189.

--


Wang, P.S., Simon, G.E., Avorn, J., Azocar, F., Ludman, E.J., McCulloch, J., Petukhova, M.Z., & Kessler, R.C. (2007). Telephone Screening, Outreach, and Care Management for

--

Version 7

Page 262

Depressed Workers and Impact on Clinical and Work Productivity Outcomes: A randomized controlled trial. JAMA, 298(12), 1401-411.

Sullivan, P.F., de Geus, E.J.C., Willemsen, G. ,James, M.R., Smit, J.H., Arolt, V., et al. (2009). Genome-wide association for major depressive disorder: a possible role for the presynaptic protein piccoloMajor depressive disorder genome-wide association. Molecular Psychiatry, 14, 359-375.


N/A --





Please turn to response card #17.

The next set of questions asks about happy and sad feelings you experienced during the past 30 days.


Subscale

SH_DST1 During the past 30 days, how much of the time did you feel so sad nothing could cheer you up? Was it all of the time, most of the time, some of the time, a

R Distress

Version 7

Page 263

little of the time, or none of the time?

SH_DST2 During the past 30 days, how much of the time did you feel nervous? (Was it all of the time, most of the time, some of the time, a little of the time, or none of the time?)

R Distress

SH_DST3 During the past 30 days, how much of the time did you feel restless or fidgety? (Was it all of the time, most of the time, some of the time, a little of the time, or none of the time?)

R Distress

SH_DST4 During the past 30 days, how much of the time did you feel hopeless? (Was it all of the time, most of the time, some of the time, a little of the time, or none of the time?)

R Distress

SH_DST5 During the past 30 days, how much of the time did you feel that everything was an effort? (Was it all of the time, most of the time, some of the time, a little of the time, or none of the time?)

R Distress

SH_DST6 During the past 30 days, how much of the time did you feel worthless? (Was it all of the time, most of the time, some of the time, a little of the time, or none of the time?)

R Distress

Version 7

Page 264

ITEM VALUES

1 = ALL OF THE TIME

2 = MOST OF THE TIME

3 = SOME OF THE TIME

4 = A LITTLE OF THE TIME

5 = NONE OF THE TIME

-4 = Don’t Know

-7 = Refused

SCORING OF SCALE

SCSH_DST: Psychological Distress, ranging from 6 to 30, with higher scores indicating higher level of distress. SCSH_DSTi SPOUSE BASELINE Psychological distress-imputed, ranging from 6 to 30, with higher scores indicating higher level of distress.

All items need to be reverse coded so that higher scores mean higher psychological distress. A composite distress score is formed by summing the item responses. Higher sum scores translate to a higher level of distress.

Version 7

Page 265

Missing data: if less than 25% of variables are missing (<=1 items), use conditional mean imputation based on scale

responses; otherwise, the scale score is missing

ARRAY DIST SH_DST1 SH_DST2 SH_DST3 SH_DST4 SH_DST5 SH_DST6 ;

ARRAY DIST_R SH_DST1R SH_DST2R SH_DST3R SH_DST4R SH_DST5R SH_DST6R ;

DO OVER DIST ;

DIST_R = 6 - DIST ;

END ;

IF NMISS(OF SH_DST1-SH_DST6) = 0 THEN SCSH_DST = SUM(OF SH_DST1R--SH_DST6R) ;

ELSE IF NMISS(OF SH_DST1-SH_DST6) < 6 THEN SCSH_DST = .M ;

IF NMISS(OF SH_DST1-SH_DST6) <= 1 THEN SCSH_DSTi = MEAN(OF SH_DST1R--SH_DST6R)*6 ;

ELSE IF NMISS(OF SH_DST1-SH_DST6) < 6 THEN SCSH_DSTi = .M ;

Version 7

Page 266




No changes.


N/A

Version 7

Page 267


No changes.


N/A


TOMO BASELINE

Version 7

Page 268

Subscale

# Items

Mean (SD)

Median

Mode

Min

Max

Skew

Kurt

Alpha


N (Miss data)

N (Scale N/A)

SCSH_DST 6 10.09 (3.30)

9 9 6 25 1.36 2.37 .78 452 3 3

SCSH_DSTi 6 10.09 (3.29)

9 9 6 25 1.35 2.38 .78 454 1 1

TOMO 6 MONTHS

N/A

TOMO 12 MONTHS

Subscale

# tems

Mean (SD)

Median

Mode

Min

Max

Skew

Kurt

Alpha


N (Miss data)

(S N

SCSH_DST 6 9.8708709 (3.2121041)

9 7 6 26 1.4472860

2.9464035 0.779681 333 1

Version 7

Page 269

SCSH_DSTi 6 9.8708709 (3.2121041)

9 7 6 26 1.4472860 2.9464035 0.779681 333 1

TOMO 18 MONTHS

N/A

*********************************************************************************************


LEEF BASELINE

Subscale

# tems

Mean (SD)

Median

Mode

Min

Max

Skew

Kurt

Alpha


N (Miss

N (Scale

Version 7

Page 270

data) N/A)

SCSH_DST 6 10.8436725 (4.0497993)

10 6 6 29 1.28 2.5 403 1

SCSH_DSTi 6 10.8495040 (4.0464701)

10 6 6 29 1.28 2.5 404 0

LEEF 6 MONTHS

N/A

LEEF 12 MONTHS

Subscale

# tems

Mean (SD)

Median

Mode

Min

Max

Skew

Kurt

Alpha


N (Miss data)

N (Scale N/A)

SCSH_DST 6 10.353 (3.968)

10.0 6.00 6 27 1.436

2.628 184

SCSH_DSTi 6 10.353 (3.968)

10.0 6.00 6 27 1.436 2.628 184

Version 7

Page 271

LEEF 18 MONTHS

N/A

Version 7

Page 272


Prepared by: Sam Liu, Qiong Wu, Mack Ramsey, Kelly Davis, Rachel Boyce

PERCEIVED STRESS

DESCRIPTION

The PSS is by far the most widely used scale of stress appraisals and has been found to be more predictive of physical and mental health outcomes and use of health servicesthan event-based stress checklists (Cohen & Williamson, 1988)

The PSS has been found to predict many adverse physical and mental health outcomes (Cohen et al., 1983). The PSS has shown discriminant validity with regard to life event measures of stress (i.e., each measure of stress predicts different stress-related processes or outcomes).

The PSS has good internal consistency (alpha =.78)


Version 7

Page 273

PI USE OF MEASURE


ASSOCIATED PAPERS


Z, DV


Cohen, S., Kamarck, T., & Mermelstein, R. (1983). A Global Measure of Perceived Stress. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 24, 385-396.

--


Hobfoll, S.E. (1989). Conservation of resources: A new attempt at conceptualizing stress. American Psychologist, 44(3), 513-524.

--


N/A --

Version 7

Page 274





Please turn to response card #18

The next set of questions asks about how you have felt during the past 30 days.


Subscale

SH_STRS1 During the past 30 days, how often have you felt that you were unable to control the important things in your life? Would you say very often, fairly often, sometimes, almost never, or never?

R Stress

SH_STRS2 During the past 30 days, how often have you felt confident about your ability to handle your personal problems? (Would you say very often, fairly often, sometimes, almost never, or never?)

R Stress

SH_STRS3 During the past 30 days, how often have you felt that things were going your way? (Would you say very

R Stress

Version 7

Page 275

often, fairly often, sometimes, almost never, or never?)

SH_STRS4 During the past 30 days, how often have you felt difficulties were piling up so high that you could not overcome them? (Would you say very often, fairly often, sometimes, almost never, or never?)

R Stress

ITEM VALUES

1 = VERY OFTEN

2 = FAIRLY OFTEN

3 = SOMETIMES

4 = ALMOST NEVER

5 = NEVER

-4 = Don’t Know

-7 = Refused

SCORING OF SCALE

SCSH_STRS: Perceived stress, ranging from 4 to 20.

Version 7

Page 276

SCSH_STRSi Perceived Stress (imputed)

Scores are created by summing subject responses after reverse-coding certain items. Higher mean scores translate to a higher level of stress.

Missing data: if less than 25% of variables are missing (<=1 items), use conditional mean imputation based on scale

responses; otherwise, the scale score is missing

SAS code:

ARRAY STRS SH_STRS1 /*SH_STRS2 SH_STRS3*/ SH_STRS4 ;

ARRAY STRS_R SH_STRS1R /*SH_STRS2R SH_STRS3R*/ SH_STRS4R ;

DO OVER STRS ;

STRS_R = 6 - STRS ;

END ;

IF NMISS(OF SH_STRS1-SH_STRS4) = 0 THEN SCSH_STRS = SUM(OF SH_STRS1R SH_STRS2 SH_STRS3 SH_STRS4R) ;

ELSE IF NMISS(OF SH_STRS1-SH_STRS4) < 4 THEN SCSH_STRS = .M ;

IF NMISS(OF SH_STRS1-SH_STRS4) <= 1 THEN SCSH_STRSi = MEAN(OF SH_STRS1R SH_STRS2 SH_STRS3 SH_STRS4R)*4 ;

Version 7

Page 277

ELSE IF NMISS(OF SH_STRS1-SH_STRS4) < 4 THEN SCSH_STRSi = .M ;




No changes.

Version 7

Page 278


N/A


No changes.


N/A


Version 7

Page 279

TOMO BASELINE

Subscale

# Items

Mean (SD)

Median

Mode

Min

Max

Skew

Kurt

Alpha


N (Miss data)

N (Scale N/A)

SCSH_STRS 4 8.26 (2.63)

8 8 4 17 .48 -.08

.70 451 4 4

SCSH_STRSi 4 8.28 (2.63)

8 8 4 17 .47 -.11

.70 455 0 0

TOMO 6 MONTHS

N/A

TOMO 12 MONTHS

Version 7

Page 280

Subscale

# tems

Mean (SD)

Median

Mode

Min

Max

Skew

Kurt

Alpha


N (Miss data)

SCSH_STRS 4 8.2245509 (2.7531902)

8 8 4 18 0.6448889 0.3972459 0.789990 334 0

SCSH_STRSi 4 8.2245509 (2.7531902)

8 8 4 18 0.6448889 0.3972459 0.789990 334 0

TOMO 18 MONTHS

N/A

*********************************************************************************************


LEEF BASELINE

Version 7

Page 281

Subscale

# Item

s

Mean (SD)

Median

Mode

Min

Max

Skew

Kurt

Alpha

N (scale calculated

)

N (Mis

s data

)

N (Scal

e N/A)

SCSH_STRS 4 8.95792079 (2.946287)

9 8 4 20 0.647

0.715

404 0

SCSH_STRSi

4 8.95792079 (2.946287)

9 8 4 20 0.647

0.715

404 0

LEEF 6 MONTHS

N/A

LEEF 12 MONTHS

Subscale

# tems

Mean (SD)

Median

Mode

Min

Max

Skew

Kurt

Alpha


N (Miss data)

N (Scale N/A)

Version 7

Page 282

SCSH_STRS 4 8.304 (3.004)

8 7 4 19 0.822 0.825 0.801 184 0

SCSH_STRSi 4 8.304 (3.004)

8 7 4 19 0.822 0.825 0.801 184 0

LEEF 18 MONTHS

N/A

Version 7

Page 283

Section 4: Physical & Mental Health Measures of EMP

Version 7

Page 284


Prepared by: Sam Liu, Qiong Wu, Mack Ramsey, Kelly Davis, Rachel Boyce

EMPLOYEE SLEEP APNEA

DESCRIPTION

This part contains four items measuring a sleep disorder characterized by abnormal pauses in breathing or instances of abnormally low breathing during sleep. Biomarker sleep data will be meaningless if we cannot rule out these important confounding medical conditions, especially sleep apnea.


PI USE OF MEASURE

Version 7

Page 285


ASSOCIATED PAPERS


Z, DV


Maislin, G., Pack A.I., Kribbs, N.B., Smith, P.L., Schwartz, A.R., Kline, L.R., Schwab, R.J., & Dinges, D.F. (1995). A survey screen for prediction of apnea. Sleep, 18(3), 158–166.

--


Netzer, N.C., Stoohs, R.A., Netzer, C.M., Clark, K., & Strohl, K.P. (1999). Using the Berline Questionnaire to identify patients are risk for the sleep apnea syndrome. Annals of Internal Medicine, 131(7), 485-491.

Strohl, K.P. & Redline, S. (1996). Recognition of obstructive sleep apnea. Am J Respir Crit Care Med, 154(2 Pt 1): 279-289.

--


N/A --



Version 7

Page 286



I'm now going to ask about ^Fmar's health. The first set of questions will ask about ^Fhisher behavior while sleeping, trying to sleep, or while feeling sleepy during the past month. Please put your response card booklet down and respond with "yes" or "no."


Subscale

SM_SAP1 During the past month, did ^Fmar snore?

Yes 1 YES

No 2 NO

Sleep Apnea

SM_SAP2 During the past month, did ^Fmar snore loudly?

Yes 1 YES

No 2 NO

Sleep Apnea

SM_SAP3 During the past month, did ^Fmar snort or gasp?

Yes 1 YES

No 2 NO

Sleep Apnea

SM_SAP4 During the past month, did ^Fmar's breathing stop or did ^Fheshe struggle for breath?

Sleep Apnea

Version 7

Page 287

Yes 1 YES

No 2 NO

Skip Pattern:

SM_SAP2 is asked only if SM_SAP 1=YES;

ITEM VALUES

SCORING OF SCALE

Version 7

Page 288

[DESCRIBE HOW SCALES ARE CREATED. INCLUDE POSSIBLE RANGE OF SCALE]

[PROVIDE EQUATION. HIGHLIGHT VARIABLE LABEL – NEED TO CHANGE AFTER RTI NAMES SCALES]




No changes.


N/A

Version 7

Page 289


No changes.


N/A


TOMO BASELINE

Emp snored

Version 7

Page 290

SM_SAP1 Frequency Percent Cumulative Frequency

Cumulative Percent

Refusal 1 0.22 1 0.22

Dontknow 6 1.32 7 1.54

YES 306 67.25 313 68.79

NO 142 31.21 455 100

Emp snored loudly


Cumulative Percent

Dontknow 4 1.31 4 1.31

YES 196 64.05 200 65.36

NO 106 34.64 306 100


Emp snorted or gasped


Cumulative Percent

Refusal 1 0.22 1 0.22

Dontknow 10 2.2 11 2.42

YES 97 21.32 108 23.74

NO 347 76.26 455 100

Version 7

Page 291

Emp's breathing stoped or did Emp struggled for breath


Cumulative Percent

Refusal 1 0.22 1 0.22

Dontknow 9 1.98 10 2.2

YES 32 7.03 42 9.23

NO 413 90.77 455 100

TOMO 6 MONTHS

N/A

TOMO 12 MONTHS

Version 7

Page 292

Emp snored


Cumulative Percent

-4 3 0.90 3 0.90

YES 241 72.16 244 73.05

NO 90 26.95 334 100.00

Emp snored loudly


Cumulative Percent

YES 145 60.17 145 60.17

NO 96 39.83 241 100.00

Freq Missing = 93



Cumulative Percent

-4 6 1.80 6 1.80

YES 69 20.66 75 22.46

Version 7

Page 293



Cumulative Percent

NO 259 77.54 334 100.00



Cumulative Percent

-4 10 2.99 10 2.99

YES 19 5.69 29 8.68

NO 305 91.32 334 100.00

TOMO 18 MONTHS

N/A

*********************************************************************************************

Version 7

Page 294


LEEF BASELINE

Emp snored


Cumulative Percent

YES 240 60.00 240 60.00

NO 160 40.00 400 100.00


Emp snored loudly


Cumulative Percent

YES 127 53.14 127 53.14

NO 112 46.86 239 100.00

Version 7

Page 295




Cumulative Percent

YES 75 18.75 75 18.75

NO 325 81.25 400 100.00

Frequency Missing=4



Cumulative Percent

YES 32 7.98 32 7.98

NO 369 92.02 401 100.00

Frequency Missing=3

LEEF 6 MONTHS

N/A

Version 7

Page 296

LEEF 12 MONTHS

Emp snored


Cumulative Percent

YES 113 62.4 113 62.43

NO 68 37.6 181 100.00

Frequency Missing =

Emp snored loudly


Cumulative Percent

YES 62 54.9 62 54.84

NO 51 45.1 113 100.00

Frequency Missing =



Cumulative Percent

YES 37 20.4 37 20.44

NO 144 79.6 181 100.00

Frequency Missing=

Version 7

Page 297

Emp's breathing stopped or did Emp struggled for breath


Cumulative Percent

YES 14 7.7 14 7.73

NO 167 92.3 181 100.00

Frequency Missing=

LEEF 18 MONTHS

N/A

Version 7

Page 298


Prepared by: Qiong Wu, Mack Ramsey, Kelly Davis, Rachel Boyce

EMPLOYEE SMOKING AND ALCOHOL USE

DESCRIPTION

These items come directly from the National Health Interview Survey, one of the largest and most informative national surveys on health and health behaviors in the United States for the past 50 years. These items represent brief screens for frequency and quantity of cigarette use, alcohol use, - no reliability information is available given the brevity of the screeners.

This set of questions does not measure a single underlying construct (thus it is not a scale where the items are supposed to cluster together), rather it seeks to get measurable information about employee healthcare use. This set of questions has been found to be sensitive to changes in employee healthcare utilization.


PI USE OF MEASURE

Version 7

Page 299


ASSOCIATED PAPERS


Z, DV


National Center for Health Statistics (2011). Data File Documentation, National Health Interview Survey, 1992 (machine readable data file and documentation). National Center for Health Statistics, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Hyattsville, Maryland.

--


N/A --


N/A --



Version 7

Page 300



The next set of questions asks about ^Fmar's use of tobacco and alcohol.


Subscale

SM_SMK1 Does ^Fmar smoke tobacco cigarettes every day, some days or not at all?

daily 1 EVERY DAY

somedays 2 SOME DAYS

notatall 3 NOT AT ALL

Smoking

SM_SMK2 On average, in a week, on how many days does ^Fheshe smoke?

DAYS

Smoking

M_SMK3 On the ^Fdays ^Fheshe does smoke, how many tobacco cigarettes does ^Fheshe smoke on an average day?

(1 PACK = 20 CIGARETTES)

Smoking

Version 7

Page 301

CIGARETTES

SM_ALC1 On average, in one week, how many days does ^Fheshe drink any type of alcohol?

DAYS

Alcohol Use

SM_ALC2 On the ^Fdays ^Fheshe does drink alcohol, how many drinks does ^FHeShe have on the average day?

DRINKS

Alcohol Use

ITEM VALUES

Never = 1

Rarely = 2



All of the time = 5

SCORING OF SCALE

CVSM_CIGPWK BASELINE SPOUSE REPORTED EMPLOYEE #TOBACCO CIGARETTES PER WEEK

CVSM_DKPWK BASELINE SPOUSE REPORTED EMPLOYEE #DRINKS PER WEEK

Version 7

Page 302

SAS code:

CVSM_CIGPWK = SM_SMK2 * SM_SMK3 ;

IF 0 < SM_SMK1 < 3 & NMISS(OF SM_SMK2 SM_SMK3) = 1 THEN CVSM_CIGPWK = .M ;

CVSM_DKPWK = SM_ALC1 * SM_ALC2 ;

IF NMISS(OF SM_ALC1 SM_ALC2) = 1 THEN CVSM_DKPWK = .M ;




No changes.


Version 7

Page 303

N/A


No changes.


N/A


Version 7

Page 304

TOMO BASELINE

Emp smokes tobacco cigarettes

SM_SMK1 Frequency Percent Cumulative Frequency

Cumulative Percent

EVERY DAY 10 2.2 10 2.2

SOME DAYS 8 1.76 18 3.96

NOT AT ALL 437 96.04 455 100


CVSM_CIGPWK

SPB: SP REPORTED EMP TOBACCO CIGARETTES PER WEEK: CONSTRUCTED 15 62.2 79.0236854 1 245 1.166117 0.2948202


CVSM_DKPWK

SPB: SP REPORTED EMP DRINKS PER WEEK: CONSTRUCTED 246 5.1910569 5.4906304 1 42 2.9552317 13.0912

Version 7

Page 305

TOMO 6 MONTHS

N/A

TOMO 12 MONTHS



Cumulative Percent

EVERY DAY 8 2.40 8 2.40

SOME DAYS 8 2.40 16 4.79

NOT AT ALL 318 95.21 334 100.00

Variable N N Mis

s

Mean Std Dev Minimum

Maximum

Skewness Kurtosis

CVSM_CIGPWK

13 321 48.07692

81.256242

1 280 2.3132274

5.5453053

Version 7

Page 306

CVSM_DKPWK 182

152 5.247253

5.1689006

1 35 2.5445577

9.1545858

TOMO 18 MONTHS

N/A

*********************************************************************************************


LEEF BASELINE

Version 7

Page 307



Cumulative Percent

EVERY DAY 93 23.02 93 23.02

SOME DAYS 13 3.22 106 26.24

NOT AT ALL 298 73.76 404 100.00


CVSM_CIGPWK



CVSM_DKPWK


LEEF 6 MONTHS

N/A

LEEF 12 MONTHS

Version 7

Page 308



Cumulative Percent

EVERY DAY 31 16.8 31 16.85

SOME DAYS 5 2.7 36 19.57

NOT AT ALL 148 80.4 184 100.00


CVSM_CIGPWK



CVSM_DKPWK


LEEF 18 MONTHS

N/A

Version 7

Page 309

Section 5: Family Measures – Spouse/Partner Relationship

Version 7

Page 310


Prepared by: Yin Liu, Soomi Lee, Michelle Blocklin & Kelly Davis

RELATIONSHIP SATISFACTION

DESCRIPTION

This instrument was originally used in a project by Nan Crouter and Susan McHale and is modeled after the “domains” questions in the PAIR project created by Huston, McHale & Crouter (1986). It was designed to get a summary of how satisfied the respondent is with a variety of aspects of marriage and family life. The original measure included ten items, but in the Family Relationships Project, only seven items were used, excluding items about the respondents’ satisfaction with their spouse.

For Phase II, 3 of these 7 items were chosen. Originally, spouses were asked to rate their satisfaction on each domain on a 9 point scale (1=extremely dissatisfied to 9=extremely satisfied), but we changed this to a 5-point scale (1 = extremely satisfied, 5 = extremely dissatisfied).


The reliability of the original measure is satisfactory (McHale & Crouter, 1992; see also Huston et al., 1986). With 16 items in the Mexican American sample, the reliabilities were .94 and .92 for wives and husbands, respectively; with the 3 items used in phase II, the alphas were .83 for wives and .72 for husbands.

Version 7

Page 311

PI USE OF MEASURE

Family Relationships Project (Nan Crouter & Susan McHale)


This measure has been used with European American, Mexican American, and African American dual-earner families.

ASSOCIATED PAPERS


Z, DV


Huston, T. L., McHale, S., & Crouter, A. (1986). When the honeymoon's over: Changes in the marriage relationship over the first year. In R. Gilmour & S. Duck (Eds.), The emerging field of personal relationships (pp. 109-132). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

--

Version 7

Page 312


--


McHale, S.M. & Crouter, A.C. (1992). You can’t always get what you want: Incongruence between sex-role attitudes and family work roles and its implications for marriage. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 54, 537-547.

--





The next section is about your spouse. I would like you to describe your level of satisfaction with your spouse during the past month. For each question, you can say extremely satisfied, satisfied, neither satisfied nor dissatisfied, dissatisfied, or extremely dissatisfied.


Subscale

How satisfied are you with how…

SR_SAT1 Understanding your spouse/partner is about your work situation either inside or outside the home?

R Relationship Satisfaction

Version 7

Page 313

SR_SAT2 The two of you divide housework such as cooking, cleaning, yard work, and so on?


SR_SAT3 The two of you divide the tasks of taking care of children?


ITEM VALUES

Extremely satisfied = 1

Satisfied = 2

Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied = 3

Dissatisfied = 4

Extremely dissatisfied = 5

Don’t know = -4

Refused = -7

SCORING OF SCALE

Version 7

Page 314

Items need to be reverse-scored, so that higher numbers reflect greater satisfaction in the relationship. All items are summed to examine relationship satisfaction. In the Family Relationships Project (PIs: Susan McHale and Nan Crouter) mean replacement was used when 1 out of 7 items was missing. The version used here, however, has had more than half the items cut.

Relationship Satisfaction (SCSR_SAT):

IF NMISS(OF SR_SAT1-SR_SAT3) = 0 THEN SCSR_SAT = SUM(OF SR_SAT1R--SR_SAT3R) ;




Description

For item 1, “either inside or outside the home” was deleted.

Items


Subscale

Version 7

Page 315

How satisfied are you with how…

SR_SAT1 Understanding your spouse/partner is about your work situation?


Scoring of Scale

No change.


N/A


No changes.

Version 7

Page 316


N/A


TOMO BASELINE

Subscale

# Items

Mean (SD)

Median

Mode

Min

Max

Skew

Kurt

Alpha


N (Miss data)

N (Scale N/A)

SCSR_SAT 3 12.11 (2.05)

12.0 12.0 6.0 15.0 -.56

-.09 .72 287 168 0

TOMO 6 MONTHS

Version 7

Page 317

N/A

TOMO 12 MONTHS

Subscale

# Items

Mean (SD)

Median

Mode

Min

Max

Skew

Kurt

Alpha

N (scale calculat

ed)

N (Miss data)

N (Scale N/A)

SCSR_SAT 3 12.13

(2.00)

12 12 3 15 -1.07 2.52 .72 216 117 1

TOMO 18 MONTHS

N/A

*********************************************************************************************

Version 7

Page 318


LEEF BASELINE

Subscale

# Items

Mean (SD)

Median

Mode

Min

Max

Skew

Kurt

Alpha


N (Miss data)

N (Scale N/A)

SCSR_SAT 3 15.98

(0.92)

16 16 13 17 -1.05 1.36 0.74 243 161 0

LEEF 6 MONTHS

N/A

Version 7

Page 319

LEEF 12 MONTHS

Subscale

# Items

Mean (SD)

Median

Mode

Min

Max

Skew

Kurt

Alpha


N (Miss data)

N (Scale N/A)

SCSR_SAT 3 11.879

(1.882)

12 12 7 15 -0.453 0.150 0.682 107 7 70

LEEF 18 MONTHS

N/A

Version 7

Page 320


Prepared by: Yin Liu, Michelle Blocklin, Kelly Davis, & Soomi Lee

SPOUSE SUPPORT AND STRAIN

DESCRIPTION

Spouse/partner support (7 items) and strain (6 items) scales were adopted from the Midlife in the United States (MIDUS) study. Penn State used these scales in their Phase I pilot study—The Hotel Work and Well-Being Study—a study of work, health, and family of employees at various levels in the hotel industry. Some revisions were made for the hotel project: Penn State (a) reversed the response numbers to be consistent with the rest of the scale, (b) changed the strain items from 1 = never to 4 = often to the following: 1 = not at all to 4 = a lot, and (c) switched the stem from “How often” to “How much” for the support and strain questions.

Both scales can be combined (by reverse-coding the strain items and summing all 13 items) to create a measure of affectual solidarity in the romantic relationship.

In the interest of time, for Phase II we had to cut both support and strain scales to 5 items. For spouse support, the following 2 items were dropped because dropping both would improve the alpha individually by increasing it from .77 to .79 in the Hotel manager baseline survey data.

1. How much does he or she understand what you go through at work?

2. How much do you rely on him or her for help if you have a serious problem?

For spouse strain, the following 1 item was dropped because it improved the alpha from .81 to .82.

1. How much does he or she let you down when you are counting on him or her?

Version 7

Page 321


In the Hotel manager (N = 380 subsample) baseline survey data, the Cronbach’s alphas for support and strain were .77 and .81, respectively. The alpha for the combined scale was .84 in Phase I. When two items for the support scale were excluded, the alpha for the 5-item support scale was .76. The alpha for the 5-item strain scale was .82.

The original 7-item support scale and the new 5-item support scale were highly correlated (r = .97, p < .001) and associated with the same outcomes of interest. Both support scales were positively associated with positive family-to-work spillover (p < .001) and negatively associated with negative family-to-work spillover (p < .05) and face time pressure at work (p < .01). The only association that lost significance by using the new spousal support variable was between support and positive work-to-family spillover (from r = .11, p < .05 to r = .10, p = .06).

The original and new strain scales were correlated at .98, p < .001 and associated with the same outcomes. Both strain scales were positively associated with negative work-to-family and family-to-work spillover as well as face time pressure (p < .01). Strain was also negatively associated with positive family-to-work spillover (p < .01). The only association that lost significance by replacing the old strain variable with the new was the association between strain and managerial support (r = -.11, p < .05 to r = -.10, p = .06).

PI USE OF MEASURE

Phase I Hotel Work & Well-Being Study (Dave Almeida, Nan Crouter, Susan McHale, Laura Klein)

MIDUS (Dave Almeida)

Version 7

Page 322


MIDUS sample, a nationally representative sample of middle-aged adults 25-74

Hotel Managers across the U.S.

ASSOCIATED PAPERS


Z, DV


Grzywacz, J. G., & Marks, N. F. (1999). Family Solidarity and health behaviors: Evidence from the National Survey of Midlife Development in the United States. Journal of Family Issues, 20, 2, 243-268.

Schuster, T. L., Kessler, R. C., & Aseltine, R. H. (1990). Supportive interactions, negative interactions, and depressive mood. American Journal of Community Psychology, 18, 423-438.

Whalen, H.R., & Lachman, M.E. (2000). Social support and

--

Version 7

Page 323

strain from partner, family and friends: Costs and benefits for men and women in adulthood. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 17, 1, 5-30.


Grzywacz, J.G., & Marks, N.F. (2001). Social inequalities and exercise during adulthood: Toward an ecological perspective. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 42, 202-220.

Grzywacz, J.G., & Marks, N.F. (2000). Reconceptualizing the

work-family interface: An Ecological perspective on the correlates of positive and negative spillover between work and family. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 5, 111-126.

Ryff, C. D., Singer, B. H., Wing E. & Love, G. D. (2001). Elective affinities and uninvited agonies: Mapping emotion with significant others onto health. In C. D. Ryff & B. H. Singer (Eds.), Emotion, Social Relationships, and Health (pp. 133-175). New York: Oxford Univ. Press.

--


--





Version 7

Page 324

For the next questions, think about the past month and tell me how well each statement describes your spouse by saying not at all, a little, some, or a lot.


Subscale

How much…

SR_SUP1 Does your spouse/partner really care about you?

Spouse support

SR_SUP2 Does he/she understand the way you feel about things?

Spouse support

SR_SUP3 Does he/she appreciate you?

Spouse support

SR_SUP4 Can you open up to him/her if you need to talk about your worries?

Spouse support

SR_SUP5 Can you relax and be yourself around him/her?

Spouse support

SR_SUP6 Do you feel your spouse/partner makes too many demands on you?

*(see note)

Spousal strain

SR_SUP7 Does he/she argue with you?

*(see note)

Spousal strain

SR_SUP8 Does he/she make you feel tense?

*(see note)

Spousal strain

Version 7

Page 325

SR_SUP9 Does he/she criticize you?

*(see note)

Spousal strain

SR_SUP10 Does he/she get on your nerves?

*(see note)

Spousal strain

*Note: SR_SUP6, SR_SUP7, SR_SUP8, SR_SUP9, and SR_SUP10 are reverse coded into SR_SUP6R, SR_SUP7R, SR_SUP8R, SR_SUP9R, and SR_SUP10R to create the affectual solidarity score.

ITEM VALUES

Not at all = 1

A little = 2

Some = 3

A lot = 4

Don’t know = -4

Refused = -7

SCORING OF SCALE

Items are summed. Higher numbers indicate more support or strain in the relationship. Affectual solidarity can be computed by reverse-coding the strain items and then combining them with the

Version 7

Page 326

support items. For support and strain, mean replacement was used if 4 out of 5 items were complete. For affectual solidarity, mean replacement was used if 8 out of 10 items were complete.

Support (SCSR_SUPPORT):

IF NMISS(OF SR_SUP1-SR_SUP5) = 0 THEN SCSR_SUPPORT = SUM(OF SR_SUP1-SR_SUP5) ;

SCSR_SUPPORTi:

IF NMISS(OF SR_SUP1-SR_SUP5) <= 1 THEN SCSR_SUPPORTi = MEAN(OF SR_SUP1-SR_SUP5)*5 ;

Strain (SCSR_STRAIN):

IF NMISS(OF SR_SUP6-SR_SUP10) = 0 THEN SCSR_STRAIN = SUM(OF SR_SUP6-SR_SUP10) ;

SCSR_STRAINi:

IF NMISS(OF SR_SUP6-SR_SUP10) <= 1 THEN SCSR_STRAINi = MEAN(OF SR_SUP6-SR_SUP10)*5 ;

Affectual solidarity (SCSR_AFFSOL):

IF NMISS(OF SR_SUP1-SR_SUP10) = 0 THEN SCSR_AFFSOL = SUM(OF SR_SUP1-SR_SUP5 SR_SUP6R--SR_SUP10R) ;

SCSR_AFFSOLi:

IF NMISS(OF SR_SUP1-SR_SUP10) <= 2 THEN SCSR_AFFSOLi = MEAN(OF SR_SUP1-SR_SUP5 SR_SUP6R--SR_SUP10R)*10 ;

Version 7

Page 327




No changes.


N/A


Version 7

Page 328

No changes.


N/A


TOMO BASELINE

Subscale

# Items

Mean (SD)

Median

Mode

Min

Max

Skew

Kurt

Alpha


N (Miss data)

N (Scale N/A)

SCSR_SUPPORT 5 18.42 (2.29)

19.00 20.00 5.00 20.00 -2.31 6.68 .85 453 2 0

SCSR_SUPPORTi 5 18.41 (2.30)

19.00 20.00 5.00 20.00 -2.28 6.48 N/A 455 0 0

Version 7

Page 329

SCSR_STRAIN 5 9.02 (3.05)

8.00 8.00 5.00 20.00 1.13 1.09 .81 454 1 0

SCSR_STRAINi 5 9.03 (3.05)

8,00 8.00 5.00 20.00 1.12 1.06 N/A 455 0 0

SCSR_AFFSOL 10 34.39 (4.80)

36.00 38.00 10.00 40.00 -1.60 3.14 .88 452 3 0

SCSR_AFFSOLi 10 34.38 (4.80)

36.00 38.00 10.00 40.00 -1.58 3.08 N/A 455 0 0

TOMO 6 MONTHS

N/A

TOMO 12 MONTHS

Subscale

# Items

Mean (SD)

Median

Mode

Min

Max

Skew

Kurt

Alpha


N (Miss data)

N (Scale N/A)

SCSR_SUPPORT 5 18.37

(2.37)

19 20 5 20 -2.53 8.00 .87 334 0 0

SCSR_SUPPORTi 5 18.37

(2.37)

19 20 5 20 -2.53 8.00 N/A 334 0 0

SCSR_STRAIN 5 8.86

(2.99)

8 7 5 20 1.08 1.38 .82 334 0 0

SCSR_STRAINi 5 8.86

(2.99)

8 7 5 20 1.08 1.38 N/A 334 0 0

Version 7

Page 330

SCSR_AFFSOL 10 34.51

(4.79)

35.5 38 10 40 -1.65 4.06 .88 334 0 0

SCSR_AFFSOLi 10 34.51

(4.79)

35.5 38 10 40 -1.65 4.06 N/A 334 0 0

TOMO 18 MONTHS

N/A

*********************************************************************************************


LEEF BASELINE

Version 7

Page 331

Subscale

# Items

Mean (SD)

Median

Mode

Min

Max

Skew

Kurt

Alpha


N (Miss data)

N (Scale N/A)


(2.52)

19 20 6 20 -2.19 5.44 0.83 400 4 0


(2.53)

19 20 6 20 -2.15 5.26 N/A 403 1 0

SCSR_STRAIN 5 9.71

(3.48)

9 10 5 20 0.81 0.22 0.81 403 1 0

SCSR_STRAINi 5 9.70

(3.48)

9 10 5 20 0.82 0.22 N/A 404 0 0


(3.02)

42 44 27 44 -1.79 3.75 0.87 399 5 0


(2.17)

30 31.43 19.29 31.67 -1.75 3.55 N/A 404 0 0

LEEF 6 MONTHS

N/A

LEEF 12 MONTHS

Subscale

# Items

Mean (SD)

Median

Mode

Min

Max

Skew

Kurt

Alpha


N (Miss data)

N (Scale N/A)

Version 7

Page 332


(2.088)

19 20 8 20 -2.132 5.925 0.822 184 0 0


(2.088)

19 20 8 20 -2.132 5.925 N/A 184 0 0

SCSR_STRAIN 5 9.011

(3.099)

8 10 5 19 0.953 0.955 0.803 183 1 0

SCSR_STRAINi 5 9.023

(3.095)

8 10 5 19 0.941 0.940 N/A 184 0 0


(4.669)

35 38 14 40 -1.550 3.550 0.869 183 1 0


(4.656)

35 38 14 40 -1.553 3.584 N/A 184 0 0

LEEF 18 MONTHS

N/A

Version 7

Page 333

Page last updated: 01/24/2013 Prepared by: Yin Liu, Soomi Lee, Michelle Blocklin & Kelly Davis

COPARENTING

DESCRIPTION

This measure of co-parenting, devised by Margolin (2001), asks questions about parents’ co-parenting relationship, or the extent to which parents work as team in rearing their child. The measure originally consisted of 22 items on four areas of coparenting relationships, including cooperation, conflict, triangulation, and spousal confidence on parenting matters. In Phase II, only the cooperation subscale was used, and questions were asked about all children collectively, not specifically the target child, because it was assumed that there would be similarities across children. Each item was originally rated on a five point Likert scale (1 = not at all; 5 = almost always), with a higher score indicating greater frequency of behavior, but for Phase II the response scale was changed to a four point scale (1 = not at all; 4 = a lot) to match the scale of the measure that precedes it in the interview (thereby reducing participant burden). Wording was also changed from “my” and “me” to “your” and “you” to be consistent with the rest of the interview. The time frame was also changed from the past year to the past month.


Margolin and colleagues (2001) reported alphas ranging from .69 to .87 for the three factors that make up coparenting. Baril, Crouter, and McHale (2007) reported Cronbach’s alph of .81 for mothers and .75 for fathers on the cooperation scale.

Version 7

Page 334

PI USE OF MEASURE

Susan McHale and Nan Crouter in the Family Relationships Project


Margolin et al. used the measure with 3 community samples – mothers, couples with preadolescents, and couples with preschoolers (all 2-parent families). This measure was also used with 171 two-parent families with at least two children; the oldest was adolescent age.

ASSOCIATED PAPERS


Z, DV


Margolin, G., Gordis, E., & John, R. (2001). Coparenting: A link between marital conflict and parenting in two parent families. Journal of Family Psychology, 15, 3-21.

--

Version 7

Page 335


--


Baril, M. E., Crouter, A.C., & McHale, S. M. (2007). Processes linking adolescent well-being, marital love, and coparenting. Journal of Family Psychology, 21, 645-654.

--





For the next questions, think about the past month and tell me how well each statement describes your spouse by saying not at all, a little, some, or a lot.


Subscale

SR_COP1 Your spouse/partner tells you lots of things about your children.

Coparenting

SR_COP2 Your spouse/partner fills you in on what happens during your children's day.

Coparenting

Version 7

Page 336

SR_COP3 Your spouse/partner says nice things about you to your children.

Coparenting

SR_COP4 Your spouse/partner asks your opinion on issues related to parenting.

Coparenting

SR_COP5 Your spouse/partner shares the burden of discipline.

Coparenting

SR_COP6 Your spouse/partner helps you find solutions to problems with your children.

Coparenting

ITEM VALUES

Not at all = 1

A little = 2

Some = 3

A lot = 4

Don’t know = -4

Refused = -7

SCORING OF SCALE

Version 7

Page 337

The mean is taken of all items. Higher scores mean better coparenting. Mean replacement was used if 5 out of 6 items were complete.

Coparenting (SCSR_COP):

IF NMISS(OF SR_COP1-SR_COP6) = 0 THEN SCSR_COP = MEAN(OF SR_COP1-SR_COP6) ;

SCSR_COPi=

IF NMISS(OF SR_COP1-SR_COP6) <= 1 THEN SCSR_COPi = MEAN(OF SR_COP1-SR_COP6) ;




No changes.

Version 7

Page 338


N/A


No changes.


N/A


Version 7

Page 339

TOMO BASELINE

Subscale

# Items

Mean (SD)

Median

Mode

Min

Max

Skew

Kurt

Alpha


N (Miss data)

N (Scale N/A)

SCSR_COP 6 3.36 (.57)

3.5 4.0 1.0 4.0 -.96

.77 .79 275 17 163

SCSR_COPi 6 3.36 (.57)

3.5 4.0 1.0 4.0 -.94

.62 N/A 288 4 163

TOMO 6 MONTHS

N/A

TOMO 12 MONTHS

Version 7

Page 340

Subscale # Items

Mean (SD)

Median

Mode

Min

Max

Skew Kurt Alpha N (scale calculat

ed)

N (Miss data)

N (Scale N/A)

SCSR_COP 6 3.29

(0.60)

3.33 3.67

1 4 -1.00 0.89 .80 205 13 116

SCSR_COPi 6 3.27

(0.61)

3.33 3.67

1 4 -0.96 0.63 N/A 213 5 116

TOMO 18 MONTHS

N/A

*********************************************************************************************


Version 7

Page 341

LEEF BASELINE

Subscale

# Items

Mean (SD)

Median

Mode

Min

Max

Skew

Kurt

Alpha

N (scale calculat

ed)

N (Miss data)

N (Scale N/A)

SCSR_COP 6 3.38

(0.65)

3.67 4 1 4 -1.33 1.68 0.81 231 17 156

SCSR_COPi 6 3.36

(0.66)

3.67 4 1 4 -1.29 1.52 N/A 240 8 156

LEEF 6 MONTHS

N/A

LEEF 12 MONTHS

Subscale

# Items

Mean (SD)

Median

Mode

Min

Max

Skew

Kurt

Alpha


N (Miss

N (Scale

Version 7

Page 342

data) N/A)

SCSR_COP 6 3.421

(0.599)

3.667 4 1.833 4 -0.885 -0.262 0.825 99 15 70

SCSR_COPi 6 3.387

(0.630)

3.55 4 1.2 4 -1.017 0.480 N/A 104 10 70

LEEF 18 MONTHS

N/A

Version 7

Page 343



CHAOS AT HOME

DESCRIPTION

We included the Confusion, Hubbub, and Order (CHAOS) measure to assess the quality of the home setting. This measure was developed by Matheny and colleagues (1995) for parents to assess environmental confusion (e.g., noise, crowding, traffic) in the home. Because we could not do observations of the home, this measure was used to provide some information about this setting. It was originally developed for the Louisville Twin Study (Matheny, Thoben, & Wilson, 1982) for this very reason – to replace home observer ratings. Toddlers living in homes with more noise-confusion were at greater risk for accidental injuries, negative mood, and being less adaptable and more reactive. Coldwell, Pike, and Dunn (2006) demonstrated that high scores on the CHAOS measure were linked to greater parental anger/hostility among parents of 4 to 8 year olds. Coldwell et al. also showed that household chaos was linked to children’s problem behavior, assessed by Goodman’s Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire, over and above parenting.

We selected items from the total 15 CHAOS items shown in Table 1 of the Matheny et al. (1995) article. Given time limitations in the spouse/partner telephone interview, we had to select items with the highest total score correlation. We chose 9 with total score correlations of .50 and above. Matheny et al. calculated scores by summing the responses. Originally, they used a true-false response format. To conform to the response formats we had in place for Phase II, we changed the response format to a 5-point Likert scale.


Version 7

Page 344

The 9 items chosen had total score correlations of .50 and above.

PI USE OF MEASURE

N/A


Mothers of infants and toddlers (Matheny et al., 1995) and two-parent, middle-class families with two children aged 4-8 (Coldwell et al., 2006).

ASSOCIATED PAPERS


Z, DV

Version 7

Page 345


Matheny, A. P. Jr., Wachs, T. D., Ludwig, J. L., & Phillips, K. (1995). Bringing order out of chaos: Psychometric characteristics of the Confusion, Hubbub, and Order Scale. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 16, 429-444.

--


Coldwell, J., Pike, A., & Dunn, J. (2006). Household chaos – links with parenting and child behavior. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 47, 1116-1122.

Matheny, A. P. Jr., Thoben, A., & Wilson, R. S. (1982). Appraisals of basic opportunities for developmental experiences (ABODE): Manual for home assessments of twin children. JSAS, Catalog of Selected Documents in Psychology, 23, 323-331.

--


--





The next section is about what your home has been like in the past month. For each statement, please tell me whether you strongly agree, agree, neither agree nor disagree, disagree, or strongly disagree.

Version 7

Page 346

Variable Name Item text Reverse-

coded Subscale

SR_CHAO1 You can usually find things when you need them.

Chaos

SR_CHAO2 You almost always seem to be rushed.

R Chaos

SR_CHAO3 You are usually able to stay on top of things.

Chaos

SR_CHAO4 It’s a real zoo in your home.

R Chaos

SR_CHAO5 At home you can talk to each other without being interrupted.

Chaos

SR_CHAO6 There is often a fuss going on at your home.

R Chaos

SR_CHAO7 You can’t hear yourself think in your home.

R Chaos

SR_CHAO8 Your home is a good place to relax.

Chaos

SR_CHAO9 The atmosphere in your home is calm.

Chaos

Version 7

Page 347

ITEM VALUES

Strongly agree = 1

Agree = 2


Disagree = 4


Don’t know = -4

Refused = -7

SCORING OF SCALE

Items are summed after certain items are reverse-coded. Higher sums mean more chaos in the home. Mean replacement was used if 7 out of 9 items were complete.

CHAOS = (SCSR_CHAOS):

IF NMISS(OF SR_CHAO1-SR_CHAO9) = 0 THEN SCSR_CHAO = SUM(OF SR_CHAO1 SR_CHAO2R SR_CHAO3 SR_CHAO4R SR_CHAO5 SR_CHAO6R SR_CHAO7R SR_CHAO8 SR_CHAO9) ;

SCSR_CHAOSi:

Version 7

Page 348

IF NMISS(OF SR_CHAO1-SR_CHAO9) <= 2 THEN SCSR_CHAOi = MEAN(OF SR_CHAO1 SR_CHAO2R SR_CHAO3 SR_CHAO4R SR_CHAO5 SR_CHAO6R SR_CHAO7R SR_CHAO8 SR_CHAO9)*9 ;




Description

We received feedback from the TOMO FIs after 1.0 data collection that several of the spouses/partners (particularly Indian Asians) did not understand what the word “fuss” meant in item 6. We therefore revised the items for 2.0 and beyond to say “commotion or fuss”.

Version 7

Page 349

Items


Subscale

SR_CHAO6 There is often a commotion or fuss going on at your home.

R Chaos

Scoring of Scale

No change.


N/A


No changes.

Version 7

Page 350


N/A


TOMO BASELINE

Version 7

Page 351

Subscale

# Items

Mean (SD)

Median

Mode

Min

Max

Skew

Kurt

Alpha


N (Miss data)

N (Scale N/A)

SCSR_CHAOS 9 19.36 (5.43)

19.0 20.0 9.0 38.0 .55 .62 .83 445 10 0

SCSR_CHAOSi 9 19.45 (5.45)

19.0 20.0 9.0 38.0 .54 .54 N/A 455 0 0

TOMO 6 MONTHS

N/A

TOMO 12 MONTHS

Subscale

# Items

Mean (SD)

Median

Mode

Min

Max

Skew

Kurt

Alpha


N (Miss data)

N (Scale N/A)

SCSR_CHAOS 9 19.51

(5.46)

19 18 9 40 0.60 0.65 .84 333 1 0

SCSR_CHAOSi 9 19.50

(0.60)

19 18 9 40 0.60 0.66 N/A 334 0 0

Version 7

Page 352

TOMO 18 MONTHS

N/A

*********************************************************************************************


LEEF BASELINE

Subscale

# tems

Mean (SD)

Median

Mode

Min

Max

Skew

Kurt

Alpha


N (Miss data)

N (Scale N/A)

Version 7

Page 353

SCSR_CHAO 9 20.04

(5.79)

19 18 9 45 0.80 1.31 0.85 404 0 0

SCSR_CHAOi 9 20.04

(5.79)

19 18 9 45 0.80 1.31 N/A 404 0 0

LEEF 6 MONTHS

N/A

LEEF 12 MONTHS

Subscale

# Items

Mean (SD)

Median

Mode

Min

Max

Skew

Kurt

Alpha

N (scale

calculated)

N (Miss data)

N (Scale N/A)

SCSR_CHAO 9 19.234

(5.346)

19 19 9 35 0.402 0.117 0.840

184 0 0

SCSR_CHAOi 9 19.234

(5.346)

19 19 9 35 0.402 0.117 N/A 184 0 0

Version 7

Page 354

LEEF 18 MONTHS

N/A

Version 7

Page 355


Prepared by: Yin Liu, Soomi Lee, Katie Lawson, Michelle Blocklin & Kelly Davis

TIME SPENT CARING FOR ADULT(S)

DESCRIPTION

This single item captures whether the spouse provided care to adult relative each week.


N/A

PI USE OF MEASURE

Used as criterion (3+ hours per week) for inclusion in Hammer's Sandwiched Generation study. Determined to be the amount of time that is impactful to work-and-family demands, but also inclusive of a wide variety of family situations..

Version 7

Page 356


N/A

ASSOCIATED PAPERS


Z, DV



--


--


--




Version 7

Page 357


[No instructions.]


Subscale

SR_ACRE During the past 6 months have you provided at least 3 hours of care per week to an adult relative inside or outside your home? This could include help with shopping, medical care, or assistance in financial/ budget planning.

1. Yes

2. No

SCORING OF SCALE

N/A



Version 7

Page 358


No changes.


N/A


No changes.


Version 7

Page 359

N/A


TOMO BASELINE


Provided >= 3 hours of care per week to an adult relative

SR_ACRE Frequency Percent Cumulative Frequency

Cumulative Percent

1 123 27.09 123 27.09

2 331 72.91 454 100.00

TOMO 6 MONTHS

Version 7

Page 360

N/A

TOMO 12 MONTHS




Cumulative Percent

1 85 25.53 85 25.53

2 248 74.47 333 100.00

TOMO 18 MONTHS

N/A

Version 7

Page 361

*********************************************************************************************


LEEF BASELINE




Cumulative Percent

1 138 34.16 138 34.16

2 266 65.84 404 100.00

LEEF 6 MONTHS

Version 7

Page 362

N/A

LEEF 12 MONTHS

SP: Provided >= 3 hours of care per week to an adult relative


Cumulative Percent

YES 59 32.07 59 32.07

NO 125 67.93 184 100.00

LEEF 18 MONTHS

N/A

Version 7

Page 363

Section 6: Family Measures – Child

Version 7

Page 364



PARENT-CHILD CONFLICT

DESCRIPTION

This measure assesses the frequency of conflicts within the parent-child relationship in 10 domains. Based on the work of Smetana (1988), Harris (1999) and McHale created this questionnaire and it has been adapted slightly for this study. Ten of the problem areas in this measure were drawn from Smetana’s (1988) work, in which she initially identified and coded the types of issues that caused conflicts in adolescent-parent dyads into ten content areas. The additional problem area of relationships with brothers/sisters was added for the Family Relationships Project.

For parents of children ages 6-9 or 10-17:

In Phase II, parents are asked to rate how often they have conflicts with their child in each domain on a five point scale (1 = almost never; 5 = almost always), which was changed from the previous six -point scale (1 = not at all, 6 = several times a day). We selected 5 of the domains of conflict for Phase II due to time constraints. Item wording was also changed slightly. In item 1, wording was changed from “problems about household chores such as keeping his/her room clean, doing the dishes, shoveling snow, or setting the table” to “household chores”. In item 2, wording was changed from “Problems about homework or getting good grades” to “School such as his/her homework or grades”. Item 3 combined two previous items “Social Life: Problems about choosing friends, deciding when to see friends, going to parties or clubs, or the kinds of activities planned/done with friends” and “Choosing Activities: Problems about what activity is done and when it is done; such as amount of time talking on the phone, watching T.V., playing sports, shopping, or not practicing lessons”. Item 4 changed from “Problems about bad behavior or habits like being stubborn, talking too much, or disobeying rules” to “His/Her problem behavior like being stubborn or disobeying rules”. Item 5 changed from “Problems about getting along with brothers and sisters such as fighting with them,

Version 7

Page 365

hitting, yelling, teasing, or hurting them” to “How well [Target Child] gets along with his/her brother/sister”.

For parents of children ages 3-5:

Additional wording changes were made for parents of children between the ages of 3 and 5, to make the questions more applicable to this age group (see questions below).


In previous work on the Family Relationships Project (PIs: Nan Crouter & Susan Mchale, Penn State) and Juntos Project (PI: Kim Updegraff, ASU), Cronbach’s alpha ranged from .66 to .80 for frequency of conflicts in the parent-child relationship, using the 5 items that will be used in Phase II and from .60 to .76 using the first 4 items for children who do not have siblings. The 5-item mother-child conflict variable was positively and significantly correlated with risky behavior for both older and younger siblings (r = .29, p < .0001 and r = .17, p < .05), and the 5-item father-child conflict variable was positively correlated with older siblings’ risky behavior (r = .22, p < .01). The 4-item mother-child conflict variable (for children without siblings) was positively and significantly correlated with risky behavior for both older and younger siblings (r = .33, p < .0001 and r = .19, p < .01), and the 4-item father-child conflict variable was positively correlated with older siblings’ risky behavior (r = .25, p < .001).

PI USE OF MEASURE

Version 7

Page 366

Family Relationships Project (PIs: Nan Crouter & Susan Mchale, Penn State) and Juntos Project (PI: Kim Updegraff, ASU, Co-PIs: Nan Crouter & Susan Mchale, Penn State)


European American, African American, and Mexican American parents and adolescents

ASSOCIATED PAPERS


Z, DV


Smetana, J.G. (1998) Concepts of self and social convention: Adolescents’ and parents reasoning about hypothetical and actual family conflicts. In M.R. Gunnar & W.A. Collins (Eds.) Minnesota Symposia on Child Psychology, Vol.21: Development during the transition to adolescence (pp. 79-122). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

--


Harris, V.S. (1992) But dad said I could: Within-family differences in parental control in early adolescence. Dissertation Abstracts International, 52, 4104.

--

Version 7

Page 367


--




C_Int

As I mentioned before, the goal of the study is to learn more about how organizations' policies, practices, and culture promote the health and well-being of employees and their families. During our time together today, I would like to ask you some questions about your relationship with ^FTchild. We are interested in learning more about family relationships with children in certain age groups. ^FTchild was selected based on ^FCHisHer age.

C_1

Before moving forward with the rest of the interview, I would like to confirm first that you are comfortable answering questions about ^FTchild. Do you feel comfortable answering questions about ^FTchild?

C_2

Alright. Let's begin.

C_3

That's just fine. We will skip these questions about ^FTchild.

Version 7

Page 368


For this next section, please think about the last month.



Subscale

During the past month, how often did you have conflicts with [Target Child] about …

C1S_PCC1/ C2S_PCC1

Household chores?

P-C

Conflict

C1S_PCC2/ C2S_PCC2

School such as his/her homework or grades?

P-C

Conflict

C1S_PCC3/ C2S_PCC3

His/Her free time activities such as time with friends or time watching T.V.?

P-C

Conflict

C1S_PCC4/ C2S_PCC4

His/Her problem behavior like being stubborn or disobeying rules?

P-C

Conflict

C1S_PCC5/ C2S_PCC5

How well [Target Child] gets along with his/her brother/sister/siblings?

P-C

Conflict

Version 7

Page 369

For parents of children ages 3 to 5:


Subscale

C3S_PCC1

During the past month, how often did you have conflicts with your child about helping to clean up, such as picking up his/her toys or games after playing?

P-C

Conflict

C3S_PCC2 During the past month, how often did you have conflicts with your child about his/her behavior in preschool, daycare, or with a caregiver?

P-C

Conflict

C3S_PCC3 During the past month, how often did you have conflicts about his/her free time activities such as time with friends or time watching T.V.?

P-C

Conflict

C3S_PCC4 During the past month, how often did you have conflicts about your child’s problem behavior like being stubborn or disobeying rules?

P-C

Conflict

C3S_PCC5 During the past month, how often did you have conflicts about how well your child gets along with his/her brother/sister?

P-C

Conflict

ITEM VALUES

Version 7

Page 370

Almost never = 1

Rarely = 2

Sometimes = 3

Frequently = 4

Almost always = 5

Don’t know = -4

Refused = -7

SCORING OF SCALE

Frequency of conflict can be examined by domain or can be examined across domains by either averaging or summing the items. Higher sums indicate more conflict in the parent-child relationship. In the 10 years of the Penn State Family Relationships Project (PIs: Nan Crouter & Susan McHale), mean replacement was used when 80% of the items were complete. The original scale, however, had 11 to 12 items; the scale here has been reduced to 4 to 5 items. For P-C conflict, mean replacement was used if 3 out of 4 items were complete.

Target child is age 10-17:

PC Conflict = (SCC1S_PCCONF):

IF NMISS(of C1S_PCC1 C1S_PCC2 C1S_PCC3 C1S_PCC4)=0 THEN

SCC1S_PCCONF=sum(of C1S_PCC1 C1S_PCC2 C1S_PCC3 C1S_PCC4);

Version 7

Page 371

SCC1S_PCCONFi=

IF NMISS(of C1S_PCC1 C1S_PCC2 C1S_PCC3 C1S_PCC4)<=1 THEN

SCC1S_PCCONFi=mean(of C1S_PCC1 C1S_PCC2 C1S_PCC3 C1S_PCC4)*4;


PC Conflict = (SCC2S_PCCONF):


SCC2S_PCCONF=sum(of C2S_PCC1 C2S_PCC2 C2S_PCC3 C2S_PCC4);

SCC2S_PCCONFi=


SCC2S_PCCONFi=mean(of C2S_PCC1 C2S_PCC2 C2S_PCC3 C2S_PCC4)*4;


PC Conflict = (SCC3S_PCCONFA):


SCC3S_PCCONFA=sum(of C3S_PCC1 C3S_PCC2 C3S_PCC3 C3S_PCC4);

Version 7

Page 372

SCC3S_PCCONFAi=


SCC3S_PCCONFAi=mean(of C3S_PCC1 C3S_PCC2 C3S_PCC3 C3S_PCC4)*4;

Item Variables Target child is age 10-17: C1S_PCC1 - C1S_PCC5

Target child is age 6-9: C2S_PCC1 – C2S_PCC5

Target child is age 3-5: C3S_PCC1 - C3S_PCC5




Description


Item 5 was dropped and “conflicts” was changed to “arguments or disagreements” in all items.

Version 7

Page 373

For parents of children ages 3-5:

Due to low reliability in 1.0 sites, items were piloted with parents of 3 to 5 year olds to determine which items were the most relevant and produced an acceptable alpha, as well as if it was more appropriate to label the interactions “struggles” versus “conflicts”.

NOTE: In June 2010, we began recruiting 9 year old children for the home interviews and daily diaries, so parents of 9 year olds were then added to the parents of 10-17 year olds group and asked the corresponding questions. (The parents of 10-17 year olds group became parents of 9-17 year olds and the parents of 6-9 year olds group became parents of 6-8 year olds.)

Items



Subscale

During the past month, how often did you have arguments or disagreements with [Target Child] about …

C1S_PCC1/ C2S_PCC1

Household chores? P-C

Conflict

C1S_PCC2/ C2S_PCC2

School such as his/her homework or grades? P-C

Conflict

C1S_PCC3/ C2S_PCC3

His/Her free time activities such as time with friends or time watching T.V.?

P-C

Conflict

Version 7

Page 374

C1S_PCC4/ C2S_PCC4

His/Her problem behavior like being stubborn or disobeying rules?

P-C

Conflict

For parents of children ages 3 to 5:


Subscale

C3S_PCC1

During the past month, how often did you have struggles with your child about helping to clean up, such as picking up his/her toys or games after playing?

P-C

Conflict

C3S_PCC2 During the past month, how often did you have struggles with your child about his/her activities or routines such as bedtime, mealtime, or playtime?

P-C

Conflict

C3S_PCC3 During the past month, how often did you have struggles with your child about his/her behavior like being stubborn or disobeying rules?

P-C

Conflict

C3S_PCC4 During the past month, how often did you have struggles with your child about transitions such as leaving the house, coming in from outdoors, or leaving a friend’s house?

P-C

Conflict

C3S_PCC5 During the past month, how often did you have struggles with your child about talking back to you or

P-C

Version 7

Page 375

being disrespectful to you?

Conflict

Scoring of Scale

Frequency of conflict can be examined by domain or can be examined across domains by either averaging or summing the items. Higher sums indicate more conflict in the parent-child relationship. For target children aged 10-17 and 6-9, mean replacement was used if 3 out of 4 items were complete. For target children aged 3-5, mean replacement was used if 4 out of 5 items were complete.

Baseline

* 4 Age-Group Specific Scales (1 age group (3-5) variaes by 1.0 and 2.0+)

* 4 Mean-Imputed Age-Group Specific Scales

* 1 Combined age group (6-17) scale, and 1 mean imputed combine age (6-17) group scale;

IF C1S_PCC1 > . OR C2S_PCC1 > . THEN CS_PCC1 = MAX(OF C1S_PCC1 C2S_PCC1) ;




LABEL

CS_PCC1 = 'SPB: ARGUE ABOUT HOUSEHOLD CHORES: AGES 6-17'

CS_PCC2 = 'SPB: ARGUE ABOUT SCHOOL: AGES 6-17'

Version 7

Page 376

CS_PCC3 = 'SPB: ARGUE ABOUT FREE TIME ACTIVITIES: AGES 6-17'

CS_PCC4 = 'SPB: ARGUE ABOUT PROBLEM BEHAVIOR: AGES 6-17'

;

IF NMISS(OF C1S_PCC1 C1S_PCC2 C1S_PCC3 C1S_PCC4) = 0 THEN SCC1S_PCCONF = SUM(OF C1S_PCC1 C1S_PCC2 C1S_PCC3 C1S_PCC4) ;

ELSE IF NMISS(OF C1S_PCC1 C1S_PCC2 C1S_PCC3 C1S_PCC4) < 4 THEN SCC1S_PCCONF = .M ;

IF NMISS(OF C1S_PCC1 C1S_PCC2 C1S_PCC3 C1S_PCC4) <= 1 THEN SCC1S_PCCONFi = MEAN(OF C1S_PCC1 C1S_PCC2 C1S_PCC3 C1S_PCC4)*4 ;

ELSE IF NMISS(OF C1S_PCC1 C1S_PCC2 C1S_PCC3 C1S_PCC4) < 4 THEN SCC1S_PCCONFi = .M ;

IF NMISS(OF C2S_PCC1 C2S_PCC2 C2S_PCC3 C2S_PCC4) = 0 THEN SCC2S_PCCONF = SUM(OF C2S_PCC1 C2S_PCC2 C2S_PCC3 C2S_PCC4) ;

ELSE IF NMISS(OF C2S_PCC1 C2S_PCC2 C2S_PCC3 C2S_PCC4) < 4 THEN SCC2S_PCCONF = .M ;

IF NMISS(OF C2S_PCC1 C2S_PCC2 C2S_PCC3 C2S_PCC4) <= 1 THEN SCC2S_PCCONFi = MEAN(OF C2S_PCC1 C2S_PCC2 C2S_PCC3 C2S_PCC4)*4 ;

ELSE IF NMISS(OF C2S_PCC1 C2S_PCC2 C2S_PCC3 C2S_PCC4) < 4 THEN SCC2S_PCCONFi = .M ;

IF SITE1 = 1 THEN DO ;

IF NMISS(OF C3S_PCC1 C3S_PCC2 C3S_PCC3 C3S_PCC4) = 0 THEN SCC3S_PCCONFA = SUM(OF C3S_PCC1 C3S_PCC2 C3S_PCC3 C3S_PCC4) ;

ELSE IF NMISS(OF C3S_PCC1 C3S_PCC2 C3S_PCC3 C3S_PCC4) < 4 THEN SCC3S_PCCONFA = .M ;

IF NMISS(OF C3S_PCC1 C3S_PCC2 C3S_PCC3 C3S_PCC4) <= 1 THEN SCC3S_PCCONFAi = MEAN(OF C3S_PCC1 C3S_PCC2 C3S_PCC3 C3S_PCC4)*4 ;

ELSE IF NMISS(OF C3S_PCC1 C3S_PCC2 C3S_PCC3 C3S_PCC4) < 4 THEN SCC3S_PCCONFAi = .M ;

SCC3S_PCCONFB = . ;

Version 7

Page 377

SCC3S_PCCONFBi = . ;

END ;

ELSE IF SITE1 = 0 THEN DO ;

SCC3S_PCCONFA = . ;

SCC3S_PCCONFAi = . ;

IF NMISS(OF C3S_PCC1 C3S_PCC2 C3S_PCC3 C3S_PCC4 C3S_PCC5) = 0 THEN SCC3S_PCCONFB = SUM(OF C3S_PCC1 C3S_PCC2 C3S_PCC3 C3S_PCC4 C3S_PCC5) ;

ELSE IF NMISS(OF C3S_PCC1 C3S_PCC2 C3S_PCC3 C3S_PCC4 C3S_PCC5) < 5 THEN SCC3S_PCCONFB = .M ;

IF NMISS(OF C3S_PCC1 C3S_PCC2 C3S_PCC3 C3S_PCC4 C3S_PCC5) <= 1 THEN SCC3S_PCCONFBi = MEAN(OF C3S_PCC1 C3S_PCC2 C3S_PCC3 C3S_PCC4 C3S_PCC5)*5 ;

ELSE IF NMISS(OF C3S_PCC1 C3S_PCC2 C3S_PCC3 C3S_PCC4 C3S_PCC5) < 5 THEN SCC3S_PCCONFBi = .M ;

END ;

IF SCC1S_PCCONF > . THEN SCCS_PCCONF = SCC1S_PCCONF ;

ELSE IF SCC2S_PCCONF > . THEN SCCS_PCCONF = SCC2S_PCCONF ;

IF SCC1S_PCCONFi > . THEN SCCS_PCCONFi = SCC1S_PCCONFi ;

ELSE IF SCC2S_PCCONFi > . THEN SCCS_PCCONFi = SCC2S_PCCONFi ;

LABEL

SCC1S_PCCONF = 'SPB: PARENT-CHILD CONFLICT: AGE 10-17: SCALE'

SCC1S_PCCONFi = 'SPB: PARENT-CHILD CONFLICT: AGE 10-17: SCALE: IMPUTED'

Version 7

Page 378

SCC2S_PCCONF = 'SPB: PARENT-CHILD CONFLICT: AGE 6-9: SCALE'

SCC2S_PCCONFi = 'SPB: PARENT-CHILD CONFLICT: AGE 6-9: SCALE: IMPUTED'

SCC3S_PCCONFA = 'SPB: PARENT-CHILD CONFLICT: 1.0: AGE 3-5: 4-ITEM SCALE'

SCC3S_PCCONFAi = 'SPB: PARENT-CHILD CONFLICT: 1.0: AGE 3-5: 4-ITEM SCALE: IMPUTED'

SCC3S_PCCONFB = 'SPB: PARENT-CHILD CONFLICT: 2.0+: AGE 3-5: 5-ITEM SCALE'

SCC3S_PCCONFBi = 'SPB: PARENT-CHILD CONFLICT: 2.0+: AGE 3-5: 5-ITEM SCALE: IMPUTED'

SCCS_PCCONF = 'SPB: PARENT-CHILD CONFLICT: AGE 6-9: SCALE'

SCCS_PCCONFi = 'SPB: PARENT-CHILD CONFLICT: AGE 6-9: SCALE: IMPUTED';

* Creating Z-scores of Parent-Child Conflict Variables that contain different numbers of response items;

DATA data.spconfZ ; SET data.spconf;

KEEP SP_ZRID SCCS_PCCONF SCCS_PCCONFi SCC3S_PCCONF SCC3S_PCCONFi;run;

DATA data.spconfZ ; SET data.spconfZ;

SCCS_PCCONFZ = SCCS_PCCONF ;

SCCS_PCCONFiZ = SCCS_PCCONFi ;

PROC STANDARD DATA=data.spconfZ MEAN = 0 STD = 1 OUT = data.SCONFZ ;

VAR SCCS_PCCONFZ SCCS_PCCONFiZ ;

RUN ;

PROC SORT DATA=data.SCONFZ ;

Version 7

Page 379

BY SP_ZRID ;

RUN ;

DATA data.spconf ;

MERGE data.spconf data.SCONFZ ;

BY SP_ZRID ;

SCCS_PCCONFLICTZ = MAX(OF SCCS_PCCONFZ SCC3S_PCCONFZ) ;

SCCS_PCCONFLICTiZ = MAX(OF SCCS_PCCONFiZ SCC3S_PCCONFiZ) ;

LABEL

SCCS_PCCONFZ = 'SP12M: PARENT-CHILD CONFLICT (EXCL AGE 3-5): Z-SCORE OF SCALE'

SCCS_PCCONFiZ = 'SP12M: PARENT-CHILD CONFLICT (EXCL AGE 3-5): Z-SCORE OF SCALE: IMPUTED'

SCC3S_PCCONFZ = 'SP12M: PARENT-CHILD CONFLICT (AGES 3-5): Z-SCORE OF SCALE'

SCC3S_PCCONFiZ = 'SP12M: PARENT-CHILD CONFLICT (AGES 3-5): Z-SCORE OF SCALE: IMPUTED'

SCCS_PCCONFLICTZ = 'SP12M: PARENT-CHILD CONFLICT (ALL AGES): Z-SCORE OF SCALE'

SCCS_PCCONFLICTiZ = 'SP12M: PARENT-CHILD CONFLICT (ALL AGES): Z-SCORE OF SCALE: IMPUTED';

6-months and beyond

* 4 Age-Group Specific Scales (1 age group (3-5) variaes by 1.0 and 2.0+)

* 4 Mean-Imputed Age-Group Specific Scales

* 1 Combined age group (6-17) scale, and 1 mean imputed combine age (6-17) group scale;

Version 7

Page 380





LABEL

CS_PCC1 = 'SP12M: ARGUE ABOUT HOUSEHOLD CHORES: AGES 6-17'

CS_PCC2 = 'SP12M: ARGUE ABOUT SCHOOL: AGES 6-17'

CS_PCC3 = 'SP12M: ARGUE ABOUT FREE TIME ACTIVITIES: AGES 6-17'

CS_PCC4 = 'SP12M: ARGUE ABOUT PROBLEM BEHAVIOR: AGES 6-17';

IF NMISS(OF C1S_PCC1-C1S_PCC4) = 0 THEN SCC1S_PCCONF = SUM(OF C1S_PCC1-C1S_PCC4) ;

ELSE IF NMISS(OF C1S_PCC1-C1S_PCC4) < 4 THEN SCC1S_PCCONF = .M ;

IF NMISS(OF C1S_PCC1-C1S_PCC4) <= 1 THEN SCC1S_PCCONFi = MEAN(OF C1S_PCC1-C1S_PCC4)*4 ;

ELSE IF NMISS(OF C1S_PCC1-C1S_PCC4) < 4 THEN SCC1S_PCCONFi = .M ;





Version 7

Page 381





IF SCC1S_PCCONF > . THEN SCCS_PCCONF = SCC1S_PCCONF ;

ELSE IF SCC2S_PCCONF > . THEN SCCS_PCCONF = SCC2S_PCCONF ;

IF SCC1S_PCCONFi > . THEN SCCS_PCCONFi = SCC1S_PCCONFi ;

ELSE IF SCC2S_PCCONFi > . THEN SCCS_PCCONFi = SCC2S_PCCONFi ;

LABEL

SCC1S_PCCONF = 'SP12M: PARENT-CHILD CONFLICT: AGE 10-17: SCALE'

SCC1S_PCCONFi = 'SP12M: PARENT-CHILD CONFLICT: AGE 10-17: SCALE: IMPUTED'

SCC2S_PCCONF = 'SP12M: PARENT-CHILD CONFLICT: AGE 6-9: SCALE'

SCC2S_PCCONFi = 'SP12M: PARENT-CHILD CONFLICT: AGE 6-9: SCALE: IMPUTED'

SCC3S_PCCONF = 'SP12M: PARENT-CHILD CONFLICT: AGE 3-5: 5-ITEM SCALE'

SCC3S_PCCONFi = 'SP12M: PARENT-CHILD CONFLICT: AGE 3-5: 5-ITEM SCALE: IMPUTED'

SCCS_PCCONF = 'SP12M: PARENT-CHILD CONFLICT: SCALE'

SCCS_PCCONFi = 'SP12M: PARENT-CHILD CONFLICT: SCALE: IMPUTED';

Version 7

Page 382

* Creating Z-scores of Parent-Child Conflict Variables that contain different numbers of response items;

DATA data.spconfZ ; SET data.spconf;

KEEP SP_ZRID SCCS_PCCONF SCCS_PCCONFi SCC3S_PCCONF SCC3S_PCCONFi;run;

DATA data.spconfZ ; SET data.spconfZ;

SCCS_PCCONFZ = SCCS_PCCONF ;

SCCS_PCCONFiZ = SCCS_PCCONFi ;

RUN ;

PROC STANDARD DATA=data.spconfZ MEAN = 0 STD = 1 OUT = data.SCONFZ ;

VAR SCCS_PCCONFZ SCCS_PCCONFiZ ;

RUN ;

PROC SORT DATA=data.SCONFZ ;

BY SP_ZRID ;

RUN ;

DATA data.spconf ;

MERGE data.spconf data.SCONFZ ;

BY SP_ZRID ;

SCCS_PCCONFLICTZ = MAX(OF SCCS_PCCONFZ SCC3S_PCCONFZ) ;

SCCS_PCCONFLICTiZ = MAX(OF SCCS_PCCONFiZ SCC3S_PCCONFiZ) ;

LABEL

Version 7

Page 383

SCCS_PCCONFZ = 'SP12M: PARENT-CHILD CONFLICT (EXCL AGE 3-5): Z-SCORE OF SCALE'

SCCS_PCCONFiZ = 'SP12M: PARENT-CHILD CONFLICT (EXCL AGE 3-5): Z-SCORE OF SCALE: IMPUTED'

SCC3S_PCCONFZ = 'SP12M: PARENT-CHILD CONFLICT (AGES 3-5): Z-SCORE OF SCALE'

SCC3S_PCCONFiZ = 'SP12M: PARENT-CHILD CONFLICT (AGES 3-5): Z-SCORE OF SCALE: IMPUTED'

SCCS_PCCONFLICTZ = 'SP12M: PARENT-CHILD CONFLICT (ALL AGES): Z-SCORE OF SCALE'

SCCS_PCCONFLICTiZ = 'SP12M: PARENT-CHILD CONFLICT (ALL AGES): Z-SCORE OF SCALE: IMPUTED';


N/A


No changes.

Version 7

Page 384


N/A


NOTE: The table below indicates which variables are only at baseline (mainly the conflict variable for parents of 3-5 year olds in the first work site that was changed) and the names of variables at baseline for worksites 2.0 and beyond that equal the same questions at 6 months and beyond.

BASELINE 6-MONTHS AND BEYOND

C1S_PCC1 C1S_PCC1

C1S _PCC2 C1S _PCC2

C1S _PCC3 C1S _PCC3

C1S _PCC4 C1S _PCC4

C2S_PCC1 C2S_PCC1

C2S _PCC2 C2S _PCC2

C2S _PCC3 C2S _PCC3

C2S _PCC4 C2S _PCC4

C2S_PCC1 C2S_PCC1

C2S _PCC2 C2S _PCC2

C2S _PCC3 C2S _PCC3

C2S _PCC4 C2S _PCC4

SCC1S_PCCONF SCC1S_PCCONF

SCC1S_PCCONFi SCC1S_PCCONFi

SCC2S_PCCONF SCC2S_PCCONF

SCC2S_PCCONFi SCC2S_PCCONFi

SCC3S_PCCONFA

Version 7

Page 385

SCC3S_PCCONFAi

SCC3S_PCCONFB SCC3S_PCCONF

SCC3S_PCCONFBi SCC3S_PCCONFi

SCCS_PCCONF SCCS_PCCONF

SCCS_PCCONFi SCCS_PCCONFi

SCCS_PCCONFZ SCCS_PCCONFZ

SCCS_PCCONFiZ SCCS_PCCONFiZ

SCC3S_PCCONFBZ SCC3S_PCCONFZ

SCC3S_PCCONFBiZ SCC3S_PCCONFiZ

SCCS_PCCONFLICTZ SCCS_PCCONFLICTZ

SCCS_PCCONFLICTiZ SCCS_PCCONFLICTiZ

TOMO BASELINE

Subscale

# Items

Mean (SD)

Median

Mode

Min

Max

Skew

Kurt

Alpha

N (scale calculate

d)

N (Miss data)

N (Scale N/A)

C1S_PCC1 1 2.659

(1.054)

3 3 1 5 -0.111 -0.751 N/A 132 0 323

C1S_PCC2 1 2.015

(1.026)

2 1 1 5 0.787 0.036 N/A 132 0 323

C1S_PCC3 1 2.318

(0.960)

2 2 1 5 0.216 -0.657 N/A 132 0 323

C1S_PCC4 1 2.182

(1.040)

2 1 1 5 0.496 -0.572 N/A 132 0 323

C1S_PCC5 1 2.125

(0.991)

2.5 3 1 3 -0.312 -2.358 N/A 8 0 447

C2S_PCC1 1 2.613

(0.875)

3 3 1 4 -0.358 -0.479 N/A 62 0 393

C2S_PCC2 1 2.226

(0.999)

2 3 1 4 0.137 -1.154 N/A 62 0 393

C2S_PCC3 1 2.452

(0.986)

3 3 1 5 0.033 -0.528 N/A 62 0 393

Version 7

Page 386

C2S_PCC4 1 2.371

(0.996)

2 3 1 5 0.318 -0.017 N/A 62 0 393

C2S_PCC5 1 2.000

(1.414)

2 - 1 3 - - N/A 2 0 453

C3S_PCC1

1 3.240

(0.970)

3 3 1 5 0.070 0.387 N/A 25 0 430

C3S_PCC2 1 2.720

(0.843)

3 3 1 5 0.141 1.779 N/A 25 0 430

C3S_PCC3 1 2.880

(0.971)

3 3 1 5 -0.040 -0.008 N/A 25 0 430

C3S_PCC4 1 2.280

(1.021)

2 3 1 4 0.145 -1.092 N/A 25 0 430

C3S_PCC5 1 2.280

(1.021)

2 2 1 5 0.910 0.867 N/A 25 0 430

SCC1S_PCCONF

4 9.17 (3.07) 9 8 4 17 .17 -.42 Site1: .49

Site2+: .76

132 0 323

SCC1S_PCCONFi

4 9.17 (3.07) 9 8 4 17 .17 -.42 N/A 132 0 323

SCC2S_PCCONF

4 9.66 (3.04) 10 12 4 16 -.12 -.64 Site1: .46

Site2+: .81

62 0 393

SCC2S_PCCONFi

4 9.66 (3.04) 10 12 4 16 -.12 -.64 N/A 62 0 393

SCC3S_PCCA

(Site 1)

4 9 .00 (1.00) 9 -- 8 10 0 N/A -.44 3 0 452

SCC3S_PCCAi

4 9 .00 (1.00) 9 -- 8 10 0 N/A N/A 3 0 452

SCC3S_PCCB

(Site 2+)

5 13.73 (3.37) 14 14 8 19 -.03 -.73 .71 22 0 433

SCC3S_PCCBi

5 13.73 (3.37) 14 14 8 19 -.03 -.73 N/A 22 0 433

SCCS_PCCONF

4-5 9.32 (3.04) 9 8 4 17 0.08 -0.51 N/A 197 0 258

SCCS_PCCONFi

4-5 9.32 (3.04) 9 8 4 17 0.08 -0.51 N/A 197 0 258

SCCS_PCCON 4-5 0 (1) -.11 -.44 - 2.52 .08 -.51 N/A 197 0 258

Version 7

Page 387

FZ 1.75

SCCS_PCCONFiZ

4-5 0 (1) -.11 -.44 -1.75

2.52 .08 -.51 N/A 197 0 258

SCC3S_ PCCONFBZ

5 0 (1) .08 .08 -1.70

1.57 -.03 -.73 N/A 22 0 433

SCC3S_ PCCONFBiZ

5 0 (1) .08 .08 -1.70

1.57 -.03 -.73 N/A 22 0 433

SCCS_PCCONFLICTZ

4-5 0 (1) -.11 -.44 -1.75

2.52 .07 -.54 N/A 219 0 236

SCCS_PCCONFLICTiZ

4-5 0 (1) -.11 -.44 -1.75

2.52 .07 -.54 N/A 219 0 236

TOMO 6 MONTHS

N/A

TOMO 12 MONTHS

Subscale

# Items

Mean (SD)

Median

Mode

Min

Max

Skew

Kurt

Alpha

N (scale

calculated)

N (Miss data)

N (Scale N/A)

C1S_PCC1 1 2.63

(1.02)

3 3 1 5 0.10 -0.46 N/A 99 0 235

C1S_PCC2 1 1.92

(0.97)

2 1 1 4 0.72 -0.54 N/A 99 0 235

Version 7

Page 388

C1S_PCC3 1 2.36

(1.01)

2 3 1 5 0.23 -0.53 N/A 99 0 235

C1S_PCC4 1 2.08

(1.00)

2 2 1 5 0.78 0.45 N/A 99 0 235

C1S_PCC5 1 0 0 334

C2S_PCC1 1 2.43

(0.93)

2.5 3 1 4 -0.07 -0.81 N/A 44 0 290

C2S_PCC2 1 2.11

(0.87)

2 3 1 4 0.00 -1.22 N/A 44 0 290

C2S_PCC3 1 2.41

(0.82)

2 2 1 4 0.17 -0.34 N/A 44 0 290

C2S_PCC4 1 2.32

(1.03)

2 2 1 5 0.78 0.53 N/A 44 0 290

C2S_PCC5 1 0 0 334

C3S_PCC1

1 3.12

(0.93)

3 4 1 4 -0.79 -0.08 N/A 17 0 317

C3S_PCC2 1 2.65

(1.00)

2 2 1 5 0.83 0.61 N/A 17 0 317

C3S_PCC3 1 2.53

(0.72)

3 3 1 4 -0.12 0.16 N/A 17 0 317

C3S_PCC4 1 2.29

(0.77)

2 2 1 4 1.26 1.56 N/A 17 0 317

C3S_PCC5 1 2.24

(0.83)

2 2 1 4 0.24 -0.15 N/A 17 0 317

SCC1S_PCCONF

4 8.99

(3.12)

9 10 4 18 0.28 -0.20 Site1: .67

Site2+: .79

99 0 235

SCC1S_PCCONFi

4 8.99

(3.12)

9 10 4 18 0.28 -0.20 N/A 99 0 235

SCC2S_PCCONF

4 9.27

(2.76)

10 10 4 14 -0.03 -0.51 Site1: .84

Site2+: .74

44 0 290

SCC2S_PC 4 9.27 10 10 4 14 -0.03 -0.51 N/A 44 0 290

Version 7

Page 389

CONFi (2.76)

SCC3S_PCCONF

5 12.82

(2.63)

13 12 6 18 -0.60 2.29 .59 17 0 317

SCC3S_PCCONFI

5 12.82

(2.63)

13 12 6 18 -0.60 2.29 N/A 17 0 317

SCCS_PCCONF

4-5 9.08

(3.01)

9 10 4 18 0.19 -0.29 N/A 143

0 191

SCCS_PCCONFi

4-5 9.08

(3.01)

9 10 4 18 0.19 -0.29 N/A 143

0 191

SCCS_PCCONFZ

4-5 0 (1) -0.03 0.31 -1.69 2.97 0.19 -0.29 N/A 143

0 191

SCCS_PCCONFiZ

4-5 0 (1) -0.03 0.31 -1.69 2.97 0.19 -0.29 N/A 143

0 191

SCC3S_ PCCONFZ

5 0 (1) 0.07 -0.31 -2.60 1.97 -0.60 2.29 N/A 17 0 317

SCC3S_ PCCONFiZ

5 0 (1) 0.07 -0.31 -2.60 1.97 -0.60 2.29 N/A 17 0 317

SCCS_PCCONFLICTZ

4-5 0 (1) -0.03 0.31 -2.60 2.97 0.12 -0.12 N/A 160

0 174

SCCS_PCCONFLICTiZ

4-5 0 (1) -0.03 0.31 -2.60 2.97 0.12 -0.12 N/A 160

0 174

TOMO 18 MONTHS

N/A

Version 7

Page 390

*********************************************************************************************


LEEF BASELINE

Subscale

# Items

Mean (SD)

Median

Mode

Min

Max

Skew

Kurt

Alpha

N (scale calculate

d)

N (Miss data)

N (Scale N/A)

C1S_PCC1 1 2.76

(1.12)

3 3 1 5 0.18 -0.36 N/A 129 0 275

C1S_PCC2 1 2.20

(1.13)

2 2 1 5 0.86 0.23 N/A 129 0 275

C1S_PCC3 1 2.29

(1.08)

2 2 1 5 0.64 -0.17 N/A 129 0 275

C1S_PCC4 1 2.43

(1.07)

2 2 1 5 0.39 -0.39 N/A 129 0 275

C1S_PCC5 1 2.75

(1.58)

2.5 1 1 5 0.54 -1.02 N/A 8 0 396

C2S_PCC1 1 2.86

(1.06)

3 3 1 5 -0.31 -0.60 N/A 37 0 367

C2S_PCC2 1 2.03

(1.04)

2 1 1 4 0.57 -0.90 N/A 37 0 367

Version 7

Page 391

C2S_PCC3 1 2.08

(1.01)

2 1 1 4 0.34 -1.14 N/A 37 0 367

C2S_PCC4 1 3.03

(0.93)

3 3 1 5 -0.72 0.86 N/A 37 0 367

C2S_PCC5 1 4.00

(-)

4 4 4 4 - - N/A 1 0 403

C3S_PCC1

1 3.30

(0.97)

3 3 1 5 -0.36 0.22 N/A 23 0 381

C3S_PCC2 1 2.83

(1.40)

3 3 1 5 0.23 -1.10 N/A 23 0 381

C3S_PCC3 1 2.78

(1.13)

3 3 1 5 0.05 0.04 N/A 23 0 381

C3S_PCC4 1 2.04

(1.11)

2 1 1 5 1.01 0.76 N/A 23 0 381

C3S_PCC5 1 2.23

(1.07)

2 3 1 5 0.54 0.36 N/A 22 0 382

SCC1S_PCCONF 4 9.69

(3.22)

10 8 4 20 0.79 1.27 0.71 129 0 275

SCC1S_PCCONFi 4 9.69

(3.22)

10 8 4 20 0.79 1.27 N/A 129 0 275

SCC2S_PCCONF 4 10.00

(2.76)

10 10 4 17 0.08 0.29 0.61 37 0 367


(2.76)

10 10 4 17 0.08 0.29 N/A 37 0 367

SCC3S_PCCA

(Site 1)

4 - - - - - - - - 3 0 -

SCC3S_PCCAi

4 - - - - - - - N/A - - -

SCC3S_PCCB

(Site 2+)

5 - - - - - - - - - - -

SCC3S_PCCBi

5 - - - - - - - N/A - - -

SCCS_PCConfz 4-5 0.00

(1)

0.08 0.08

-1.85

3.28

0.67 1.11 N/A 166 0 238

SCCS_PCConfzi 4-5 0.00

(1)

0.08 0.08

-1.85

3.28

0.67 1.11 N/A 166 0 238

Version 7

Page 392

LEEF 6 MONTHS

N/A

LEEF 12 MONTHS

Subscale

# Items

Mean (SD)

Median

Mode

Min

Max

Skew

Kurt

Alpha


N (Miss data)

N (Scale N/A)

C1S_PCC1 1 2.644

(1.171)

3 3 1 5 0.273 -0.471 N/A 59 0 125

C1S_PCC2 1 2.121

(1.010)

2 1 1 5 0.597 -0.214 N/A 58 1 125

C1S_PCC3 1 2.220

(1.068)

2 3 1 5 0.244 -0.883 N/A 59 0 125

C1S_PCC4 1 2.305

(1.103)

2 2 1 5 0.636 -0.033 N/A 59 0 125

C1S_PCC5 1 . . . . . . . N/A 0 0 184

C2S_PCC1 1 2.917

(1.240)

3 3 1 5 -0.158 -0.611 N/A 12 0 172

C2S_PCC2 1 2.167 2 2 1 5 1.505 3.212 N/A 12 0 172

Version 7

Page 393

(1.115)

C2S_PCC3 1 2.333

(1.155)

2 2 1 5 0.913 1.364 N/A 12 0 172

C2S_PCC4 1 3.000

(0.953)

3 3 2 5 0.755 0.161 N/A 12 0 172

C2S_PCC5 1 . . . . . . . N/A 0 0 184

C3S_PCC1 1 3.250

(0.886)

3 3 2 5 1.026 1.851 N/A 8 0 176

C3S_PCC2 1 2.500

(1.309)

2.5 3 1 5 0.764 0.875 N/A 8 0 176

C3S_PCC3 1 2.500

(1.069)

2 2 1 4 0.468 -0.831 N/A 8 0 176

C3S_PCC4 1 2.375

(0.916)

3 3 1 3 -0.999 -1.039 N/A 8 0 176

C3S_PCC5 1 2.250

(1.035)

2 2 1 4 0.386 -0.448 N/A 8 0 176


(3.445)

10 10 4 20 0.605 0.729 Site 1.0 = 0.577 Site 2.0 = 0.796

58 1 125


(3.419)

10 10 4 20 0.627 0.791 59 0 125


(3.288)

9.5 8 7 18 1.085 1.074 Site 1 = N/A Site 2+ = 0.732

12 0 172


(3.288)

9.5 8 7 18 1.085 1.074 N/A 12 0 172

SCC3S_PCCA (Site 1)

4 . . . . . . . . . . .

SCC3S_PCCAi 4 . . . . . . . . . . .

Version 7

Page 394

SCC3S_PCCB (Site 2+)

5 . . . . . . . . . . .

SCC3S_PCCBi 5 . . . . . . . . . . .

SCCS_PCCONFZ 4- 0.000

(1)

0.146 0.146 -1.608 3.069 0.620 0.667 N/A 70 1 113

SCCS_PCCONFiZ 4- 0.000

(1)

0.153 0.153 -1.611 3.093 0.640 0.716 N/A 71 0 113

LEEF 18 MONTHS

N/A

Version 7

Page 395

Page last updated: 01/24/2013 Prepared by: Yin Liu, Michelle Blocklin, Kelly Davis, & Soomi Lee

PARENTAL KNOWLEDGE

DESCRIPTION

The 9-item Parental Knowledge scale was used by Stattin and Kerr (2000) for parents to provide estimates of how much they knew about their children’s daily experiences in the past year using a 5-point scale (1 = almost never, 5 = almost always).

For Phase II, we selected 4 of the knowledge items. Wording of the items was changed to the past tense to reflect the change in time frame (past month).

This measure is used when the target child is age 10-17.


Reliabilities for estimates of knowledge were .85 and .83 for fathers and mothers from the Family Relationships Project, respectively. Reliabilities using the four items selected for Phase II ranged from .75 to .89 in the Family Relationships Project. The parental knowledge variable created using these four items had a significant negative correlation (r = -.29 to -.41; p < .0001) with risky behavior in the Family Relationships Project.

Version 7

Page 396

PI USE OF MEASURE

Penn State Family Relationships Project (Middle Childhood Phase 6; Nan Crouter & Susan McHale).


Currently, this scale has been used with a Swedish sample and European American sample.

ASSOCIATED PAPERS


Z, DV


Stattin, H. & Kerr, M. (2000). Parental monitoring: A reinterpretation. Child Development, 71, 1072-1085.

--


Kerr, M. & Stattin, H. (2000). What parents know, how they know it, and several forms of adolescent adjustment:

--

Version 7

Page 397

Further support for a reinterpretation of monitoring. Developmental Psychology, 36, 366-380.


--







Subscale

During the past month, how often did you know…

C1S_PK1 What [Target Child] did during his/her free time?

Parental Knowledge

C1S_PK2 Who [Target Child] hung out with during his/her free time?

Parental Knowledge

Version 7

Page 398

C1S_PK3 Where he/she went with friends?

Parental Knowledge

C1S_PK4 What he/she did after school?

Parental Knowledge

ITEM VALUES

Almost never = 1

Rarely = 2

Sometimes = 3

Frequently = 4

Almost always = 5

Don’t know = -4

Refused = -7

SCORING OF SCALE

Version 7

Page 399

Items are summed; higher numbers reflect greater knowledge. In the Family Relationships Project, we used mean-replacement when at least 75% of the items were complete (7 out of the 9 items). Stattin and Kerr (2000) used the mean of items; their 2000 article does not mention how to handle missing data. Mean replacement was used if 3 out of 4 items were complete.

Knowledge = (SCC1S_PK):

IF NMISS(OF C1S_PK1-C1S_PK4) = 0 THEN SCC1S_PK = SUM(OF C1S_PK1-C1S_PK4) ;

SCC1S_PKi:

IF NMISS(OF C1S_PK1-C1S_PK4) <= 1 THEN SCC1S_PKi = MEAN(OF C1S_PK1-C1S_PK4)*4 ;




Version 7

Page 400

NOTE: In June 2010, we began recruiting 9 year old children for the home interviews and daily diaries, so parents of 9 year olds were then added to the parents of 10-17 year olds group and asked the corresponding questions, including these knowledge questions.


N/A


No changes.


N/A


Version 7

Page 401

TOMO BASELINE

Subscale

# Items

Mean (SD)

Median

Mode

Min

Max

Skew

Kurt

Alpha


N (Miss data)

N (Scale N/A)

SCC1S_PK 4 18.05 (2.48)

19 20 10 20 -1.26

.89 .79 132 0 323

SCC1S_PKi 4 18.05 (2.48)

19 20 10 20 -1.26

.89 N/A 132 0 323

TOMO 6 MONTHS

N/A

TOMO 12 MONTHS

Version 7

Page 402

Subscale

# Items

Mean (SD)

Median

Mode

Min

Max

Skew

Kurt

Alpha


N (Miss data)

N (Scale N/A)

SCC1S_PK 4 17.68

(2.60)

18 20 8 20 -1.15

1.20 .88 99 0 235

SCC1S_PKi 4 17.68

(2.60)

18 20 8 20 -1.15

1.20 N/A 99 0 235

TOMO 18 MONTHS

N/A

*********************************************************************************************


Version 7

Page 403

LEEF BASELINE

Subscale

# Items

Mean (SD)

Median

Mode

Min

Max

Skew

Kurt

Alpha


N (Miss data)

N (Scale N/A)

SCC1S_PK 4 17.13

(3.57)

18 20 4 20 -1.54

1.99 0.89 126 3 275

SCC1S_PKi 4 17.17

(3.56)

18.50 20 4 20 -1.56

2.05 N/A 128 1 275

LEEF 6 MONTHS

N/A

LEEF 12 MONTHS

Subscale

# Items

Mean (SD)

Median

Mode

Min

Max

Skew

Kurt

Alpha


N (Miss data)

N (Scale N/A)

Version 7

Page 404

SCC1S_PK 4 18.254

(2.425)

20 20 11 20 -1.344 0.755 0.837 59 0 125

SCC1S_PKi 4 18.254

(2.425)

20 20 11 20 -1.344 0.755 N/A 59 0 125

LEEF 18 MONTHS

N/A

Version 7

Page 405



PARENTING

DESCRIPTION

We included the Parenting Scale developed by Arnold and colleagues (1993) to assess dysfunctional parenting. The items represent “mistakes” that parents can make when parenting. Arnold et al. confirmed three subscales – overreactivity, laxness, and verbosity. We included items from 2 of the 3 subscales—overreactivity and laxnesss. The first is over-reactivity, which involves yelling, getting into long arguments, and not letting things go with one’s child. The second subscale is laxness, which is similar to a permissive parenting style (e.g., giving in to the child). Given space limitations we did not include the third subscale and we had to reduce the number of items in the two selected subscales. The overreactivity subscale included 10 items and the laxness subscale included 11 items. We selected 5 items of each subscale based on the factor loadings shown in Table 1 of the Arnold et al. (1993) article.

The original response options was a 7-point scale anchored with the “mistake” (e.g., “When my child misbehaves, I am picky and on my child’s back”) to the effective parenting strategy (e.g., “When my child misbehaves, I am no more picky than usual.”). We changed the questions so that parents refer to how often they engaged in each behavior in the past month. The response scale was a 5-point scale with 1 = almost never and 5 = almost always. We made these changes to keep the response format similar to the other parenting scales. The Parenting-overreactivity subscale questions are asked if participants have a target child in any of the three age groups: 10-17, 6-9, or 3-5. The Parenting-laxness subscale questions are only asked if participants have a target child aged 6-9 or 3-5. We do not ask if the target child is age 10-17 because we ask parental knowledge questions and wanted to keep the total number of questions for participants with a child in each age group approximately the same.


Version 7

Page 406

With the sample of 168 mothers, Arnold et al. (1993) found coefficient alphas of .82 and .83 for overreactivity and laxness, respectively. The parenting scale scores were related significantly to observed parenting behavior and child misbehavior. Karazsia et al. (2008) used a confirmatory factor analysis to investigate whether the same factor structure held for parents of children ages 2-16. Indeed, the same three-factor structure emerged. Further, the structure did not vary by child sex, age, and parental race.

PI USE OF MEASURE

N/A


Arnold et al. confirmed three subscales using a sample of 168 mothers of children ages 18 to 48 months. Karazsia et al. confirmed the same factor structure for parents of children aged 2-16, for both child genders, and parental race.

ASSOCIATED PAPERS

Version 7

Page 407


Z, DV


Arnold, D. S., O’Leary, S. G., Wolff, L. S., & Acker, M. M. (1993). The Parenting Scale: A measure of dysfunctional parenting in discipline situations. Psychological Assessment, 5, 137-144.

--


Karazsia, B. T., van Dulmen, M. H. M., & Wildman, B. G. (2008). Confirmatory factor analysis of Arnold et al.’s Parenting Scale across race, age, and sex. Journal of Child and Family Studies, 17, 500-516.

--


--






Version 7

Page 408


Subscale

During the past month, how often did you …

C1S_PAR1/

C2SPAR1/

C3SPAR1

Get picky and on [Target Child]'s back when you were upset or under stress?

Overreactivity

C1S_PAR2/

C2SPAR2/

C3SPAR2

Get into a long argument with [Target Child] when he/she misbehaved?

Overreactivity

C1S_PAR3/

C2SPAR3/

C3SPAR3

Raise your voice or yell when [Target Child] misbehaved?

Overreactivity

C1S_PAR4/

C2SPAR4/

C3SPAR4

Hold a grudge after there had been a problem with [Target Child]?

Overreactivity

C1S_PAR5/

C2SPAR5/

C3SPAR5

Say things you didn't mean when there was a problem with [Target Child]?

Overreactivity

C2SPAR6/

C3SPAR6

Coax or beg [Target Child] to stop when you wanted him/her to stop doing something?

Laxness

C2SPAR7/

C3SPAR7

Let it go when [Target Child] did something you didn’t like?

Laxness

C2SPAR8/ End up doing it yourself when [Target Child] didn’t do Laxness

Version 7

Page 409

C3SPAR8 what you asked?

C2SPAR9/

C3SPAR9

Offer [Target Child] something nice if saying “No” didn’t work so he/she would behave?

Laxness

C2SPAR10/

C3SPAR10

Back down and given into [Target Child] if he/she got upset when you said “No”?

Laxness

ITEM VALUES

Almost never = 1

Rarely = 2

Sometimes = 3

Frequently = 4

Almost always = 5

Don’t know = -4

Refused = -7

SCORING OF SCALE

Version 7

Page 410

Items are summed. Higher numbers represent more overreactive parenting or more laxness in parenting. Arnold (2000) did not specify how to handle missing data, but we have changed the response scale and the wording of the items quite a bit and therefore may not have been applicable if he did. For overreactivity and laxness, mean replacement was used if 4 out of 5 items were complete.


Overreactivity = (SCC1S_PAROVER):

IF NMISS(of C1S_PAR1 C1S_PAR2 C1S_PAR3 C1S_PAR4 C1S_PAR5)=0 THEN

SCC1S_PAROVER=mean(of C1S_PAR1 C1S_PAR2 C1S_PAR3 C1S_PAR4 C1S_PAR5);

SCC1S_PAROVERi:

IF NMISS(of C1S_PAR1 C1S_PAR2 C1S_PAR3 C1S_PAR4 C1S_PAR5)<=1 THEN SCC1S_PAROVERi=mean(of C1S_PAR1 C1S_PAR2 C1S_PAR3 C1S_PAR4 C1S_PAR5);



IF NMISS(of C2SPAR1 C2SPAR2 C2SPAR3 C2SPAR4 C2SPAR5)=0 THEN

SCC2S_PAROVER=mean(of C2SPAR1 C2SPAR2 C2SPAR3 C2_PAR4 C2SPAR5);

SCC2S_PAROVERi:

IF NMISS(of C2SPAR1 C2SPAR2 C2SPAR3 C2SPAR4 C2SPAR5)<=1 THEN

Version 7

Page 411

SCC2S_PAROVERi=mean(of C2SPAR1 C2SPAR2 C2SPAR3 C2SPAR4 C2SPAR5);

Laxness (SCC2S_PARLAX):


SCC2S_PARLAX=mean(of C2SPAR6 C2SPAR7 C2SPAR8 C2SPAR9 C2SPAR10);

SCC2S_PARLAXi:


SCC2S_PARLAXi=mean(of C2SPAR6 C2SPAR7 C2SPAR8 C2SPAR9 C2SPAR10);




SCC3S_PAROVER=mean(of C3SPAR1 C3SPAR2 C3SPAR3 C3SPAR4 C3SPAR5);

SCC3S_PAROVERi:


SCC3S_PAROVERi=mean(of C3SPAR1 C3SPAR2 C3SPAR3 C3SPAR4 C3SPAR5);

Laxness = (SCC3S_PARLAX):


Version 7

Page 412

SCC3S_PARLAX=mean(of C3SPAR6 C3SPAR7 C3SPAR8 C3SPAR9 C3SPAR10);

SCC3S_PARLAXi:


SCC3S_PARLAXi=mean(of C3SPAR6 C3SPAR7 C3SPAR8 C3SPAR9 C3SPAR10);

*Note: The scale names including children of all ages are: SCCS_PAROVER and SCCS_PARLAX

Item Variables Target child is age 10-17: C1S_PAR1 – C1S_PAR5

Target child is age 6-9: C2SPAR1 – C2SPAR10

Target child is age 3-5: C3SPAR1 – C3SPAR10



Version 7

Page 413


Description

Wording for item 4 was changed, because participants were confused by “grudge.”


Items


Subscale

During the past month, how often did you …

C1S_PAR4/

C2SPAR4/

C3SPAR4

Continue to feel upset after there had been a problem with [Target Child]?

Overreactivity

Scoring of Scale

No change.

Version 7

Page 414


N/A


No changes.


N/A


Version 7

Page 415

TOMO BASELINE

Subscale

# Items

Mean (SD)

Median

Mode

Min

Max

Skew

Kurt

Alpha

N (scale calculate

d)

N (Miss data)

N (Scale N/A)

SCC1S_PAROVER 5 2.09 (.67)

2.0 1.8 1.0 4.4 .35 .00 .81 130 2 323

SCC1S_PAROVERi 5 2.07 (.67)

2.0 1.8 1.0 4.4 .36 -.03 N/A 132 0 323


2.25 2.75 1.0 3.5 -.03 -.80 .68 62 0 393


2.25 2.75 1.0 3.5 -.03 -.80 N/A 62 0 393


2.0 1.6 1.0 3.4 .21 -1.31 .82 25 0 430


2.0 1.6 1.0 3.4 .21 -1.31 N/A 25 0 430

SCC2S_PARLAX 5 2.10 (.61)

2.2 2.2 1.0 3.6 .12 -.41 .71 62 0 393

SCC2S_PARLAXi 5 2.10 (.61)

2.2 2.2 1.0 3.6 .12 -.41 N/A 62 0 393

SCC3S_PARLAX 5 2.39 (.75)

2.4 1.4 1.2 4.2 .32 -.10 .77 24 1 430

SCC3S_PARLAXi 5 2.38 (.74)

2.4 1.4 1.2 4.2 .38 -.01 N/A 25 0 430

TOMO 6 MONTHS

N/A

Version 7

Page 416

TOMO 12 MONTHS

Subscale

# Items

Mean (SD)

Median

Mode

Min

Max

Skew

Kurt

Alpha

N (scale

calculated)

N (Miss

data)

N (Scale N/A)

SCC1S_PAROVER 5 2.07

(0.66)

2 2 1 3.6 0.26 -0.31 .81 99 0 235

SCC1S_PAROVERi 5 2.07

(0.66)

2 2 1 3.6 0.26 -0.31 N/A 99 0 235


(0.55)

2.2 2.2 1 3.4 0.17 0.06 .72 44 0 290


(0.55)

2.20 2.20 1 3.4 0.17 0.06 N/A 44 0 290


(0.59)

2.2 2.4 1.2 3.4 0.34 -0.03 .71 17 0 317


(0.59)

2.2 2.4 1.2 3.4 0.34 -0.03 N/A 17 0 317

SCC2S_PARLAX 5 2.10

(0.52)

2.2 2.2 1 3.2 -0.26 -0.44 .63 44 0 290

SCC2S_PARLAXi 5 2.10

(0.52)

2.2 2.2 1 3.2 -0.26 -0.44 N/A 44 0 290

SCC3S_PARLAX 5 2.15

(0.63)

2.4 2.6 1 3 -0.55 -1.07 .62 17 0 317


(0.63)

2.4 2.6 1 3 -0.55 -1.07 N/A 17 0 317

Version 7

Page 417

TOMO 18 MONTHS

N/A

*********************************************************************************************


LEEF BASELINE

Subscale

# Item

s

Mean (SD)

Median

Mode

Min

Max

Skew

Kurt

Alpha


N (Mis

s data

)

N (Scal

e N/A)

SCC1S_PAROVER 5 2.04 2 1.6 1 3.6 0.35 -0.58 0.73 129 0 275

Version 7

Page 418

(0.65)


(0.65)

2 1.6 1 3.6 0.35 -0.58 N/A 129 0 275


(0.71)

1.8 1.4 1 3.8 0.62 -0.15 0.78 37 0 367


(0.71)

1.8 1.4 1 3.8 0.62 -0.15 N/A 37 0 367


(0.52)

1.8 1.8 1 2.8 0.44 -0.56 0.70 23 0 381


(0.52)

1.8 1.8 1 2.8 0.44 -0.56 N/A 23 0 381

SCC2S_PARLAX 5 2.21

(0.88)

2.2 1.4 1 4.2 0.63 -0.05 0.80 37 0 367


(0.88)

2.2 1.4 1 4.2 0.63 -0.05 N/A 37 0 367

SCC3S_PARLAX 5 2.17

(0.62)

2.2 2.6 1 3 -0.25 -1.18 0.53 23 0 381


(0.62)

2.2 2.6 1 3 -0.25 -1.18 N/A 23 0 381

LEEF 6 MONTHS

Version 7

Page 419

N/A

LEEF 12 MONTHS

Subscale

# Items

Mean (SD)

Median

Mode

Min

Max

Skew

Kurt

Alpha

N (scale calculat

ed)

N (Miss data)

N (Scale N/A)


(0.709)

2 1.2 1 3.4 0.231 -1.096 0.833 59 0 125


(0.709)

2 1.2 1 3.4 0.231 -1.096 N/A 59 0 125


(0.820)

2.3 1.6 1.2 4 0.537 -0.225 0.808 12 0 172


(0.820)

2.3 1.6 1.2 4 0.537 -0.225 N/A 12 0 172


(0.271)

1.9 2 1.4 2.2 -0.294 -1.078 -0.132 8 0 176


(0.271)

1.9 2 1.4 2.2 -0.294 -1.078 N/A 8 0 176

SCC2S_PARLAX 5 2.550

(0.883)

2.4 1.4 1.4 4 0.444 -0.662 0.764 12 0 172


(0.883)

2.4 1.4 1.4 4 0.444 -0.662 N/A 12 0 172

SCC3S_PARLAX 5 2.150 1.8 1.8 1.2 3.6 0.585 -1.014 0.908 8 0 176

Version 7

Page 420

(0.880)


(0.880)

1.8 1.8 1.2 3.6 0.585 -1.014 N/A 8 0 176

LEEF 18 MONTHS

N/A

Version 7

Page 421



TIME SPENT CARING FOR CHILD(REN)

DESCRIPTION

We created two items to capture average time spent per week with the target child and total time with all children (when respondents had more than one child).


N/A

PI USE OF MEASURE

These questions are novel to the study.

Version 7

Page 422


N/A

ASSOCIATED PAPERS

N/A



[No instructions.]

Version 7

Page 423


Subscale

C1S_PCT1/

C2S_PCT1/

C3S_PCT1

During the past month, how many hours per week did you spend caring for or doing something with [Target Child]?

C3S_PC T1flag Response may be an outlier or may be outside of logical range – 0/1 Indicator

C1S_PCT2/

C2S_PCT2/

C3S_PCT2

During the past month, how many hours per week did you spend caring for or doing something with all of your children?

C1S_PCT2flag

C2S_PCT2flag

Response may be an outlier or may be outside of logical range – 0/1 Indicator

Item Variables C1S_PCT1 and C1S_PCT2: Target child is age 10-17

C2S_PCT1 and C2S_PCT2: Target child is age 6-9

C3S_PCT1 and C3S_PCT2: Target child is age 3-5

ITEM VALUES

Version 7

Page 424

SCORING OF SCALE

No scale.




Description

Items were added, because participants seemed to have difficulty computing the average number of hours across the entire week.

Version 7

Page 425

NOTE: These items were added in time for Leef 2.0 sites, but after Tomo 2.0 and 3.0 had begun.


Items


Subscale

C1S_PCT3/

C2S_PCT3/

C3S_PCT3

During the past month, how many hours did you spend with [Target Child] on the average weekday or school day?

C1S_PCT3flag Response may be an outlier or may be outside of logical range – 0/1 Indicator

C1S_PCT3week/

C2S_PCT3week/

C3S_PCT3week

WEEKLY: 5 * Hours spent with tgt child on avg weekday/school day

C1S_PCT4/

C2S_PCT4/

C3S_PCT4

During the past month, how many hours did you spend with [Target Child] on the average Saturday?


C1S_PCT5/

C2S_PCT5/

C3S_PCT5

During the past month, how many hours did you spend with [Target Child] on the average Sunday?

Version 7

Page 426


C1S_PCT6/

C2S_PCT6/

C3S_PCT6

During the past month, how many hours did you spend with all your children on the average weekday or school day?


C1S_PCT6week/

C2S_PCT6week/

C3S_PCT6week

WEEKLY: 5 * Hours spent with all children on avg weekday/school day

C1S_PCT7/

C2S_PCT7/

C3S_PCT7

During the past month, how many hours did you spend with all your children on the average Saturday?


C1S_PCT8/

C2S_PCT8/

C3S_PCT8

During the past month, how many hours did you spend with all your children on the average Sunday?


Scoring of Scale

Items are summed. Higher numbers represent more time with children. Mean replacement is not appropriate here.

Version 7

Page 427

Note: for items C1S_PCT3, C2S_PCT3, C3S_PCT3, C1S_PCT6, C2S_PCT6, and C1S_PCT6, scores were multiplied by 5 to obtain a value for the number of hours spent with the children total on all five weekdays.


Time with TC = (SCC1S_PCTTGTC):

IF NMISS(OF C1S_PCT3-C1S_PCT5) < 3 THEN SCCS_PCTTGTC = SUM(OF C1S_PCT3week, C1S_PCT4, C1S_PCT5) ;

IF NMISS(OF C1S_PCT1)= 0 THEN SCCS_PCTTGTC = C1S_PCT1 ;

IF (C1S_PCT1 NE . OR NMISS(OF C1S_PCT3-C1S_PCT5) < 3) THEN SCC1S_PCTTGTC = SCCS_PCTTGTC ;

Time with all children = (SCC1S_PCTALL):

IF NMISS(OF C1S_PCT6-C1S_PCT8) < 3 THEN SCCS_PCTALL = SUM(OF C1S_PCT6week C1S_PCT7 C1S_PCT8) ;

ELSE IF NMISS(OF C1S_PCT2)= 0 THEN SCCS_PCTALL = C1S_PCT2 ;

IF (C1S_PCT2 NE . OR NMISS(OF C1S_PCT6-C1S_PCT8) < 3) THEN SCC1S_PCTALL = SCCS_PCTALL ;




ELSE IF NMISS(OF C2S_PCT1)= 0 THEN SCCS_PCTTGTC = C2S_PCT1 ;

Version 7

Page 428




ELSE IF NMISS(OF C2S_PCT2)= 0 THEN SCCS_PCTALL = C2S_PCT2 ;





ELSE IF NMISS(OF C3S_PCT1) = 0 THEN SCCS_PCTTGTC = C3S_PCT1 ;




ELSE IF NMISS(OF C3S_PCT2) = 0 THEN SCCS_PCTALL = C3S_PCT2 ;


Version 7

Page 429

*Note: Time with children (for all ages) = SCCS_PCTALL

Item Variables

C1S_PCT3 - C1S_PCT8: Target child is age 10-17




N/A


No changes.


Version 7

Page 430

N/A


TOMO BASELINE

Subscale

# Items

Mean (SD)

Median

Mode

Min

Max

Skew

Kurt

Alpha


N (Miss data)

N (Scale N/A)

C1S_PCT3 1

5.63

(17.09) 3 2 0 168 9.23 88.35 N/A 96 0 359

C2S_PCT3 1

4.57

(4.46) 3 3 1 24 3.70 14.75 N/A 47 0 408

C3S_PCT3 1

9.74

(6.80) 7 12 2 24 0.10 0.14 N/A 19 0 436

C1S_PCT3week 1

28.13

(85.44) 15 10 0 840 9.23 88.35 N/A 96 0 359

C2S_PCT3week 1 22.87 15 15 5 120 3.70 14.75 N/A 47 0 408

Version 7

Page 431

(22.28)

C3S_PCT3week 1

48.68

(33.99) 35 60 10 120 0.10 0.14 N/A 19 0 436

C1S_PCT4 1

7.05

(10.04) 6 6 0 96 7.61 67.02 N/A 95 0 360

C2S_PCT4 1

9.66

(4.99) 8 12 3 24 1.35 2.37 N/A 47 0 408

C3S_PCT4 1

15.53

(6.82) 14 24 4 24 0.11 -1.41 N/A 19 0 436

C1S_PCT5 1

7.50

(10.16) 5 4 0 96 7.26 62.37 N/A 95 0 360

C2S_PCT5 1

9.49

(4.93) 8 12 2 24 1.44 2.91 N/A 47 0 408

C3S_PCT5 1

14.47

(7.04) 12 12 4 24 0.18 -1.23 N/A 19 0 436

C1S_PCT6 1

7.61

(20.98) 4 4 0 168 7.56 58.61 N/A 62 0 393

C2S_PCT6 1

5.46

(4.06) 5 3 2 24 3.24 13.51 N/A 33 0 422

C3S_PCT6 1

12.09

(8.55) 12 24 2 24 0.49 -1.31 N/A 11 0 444

C1S_PCT6week 1

38.07

(104.91) 20 20 0 840 7.56 58.61 N/A 62 0 393

C2S_PCT6week 1

27.27

(20.31) 25 15 10 120 3.24 13.51 N/A 33 0 422

C3S_PCT6week 1

60.46

(42.75) 60 120 10 120 0.49 -1.31 N/A 11 0 444

C1S_PCT7 1 9.42 7.5 12 0 96 6.28 45.20 N/A 62 0 393

Version 7

Page 432

(12.05)

C2S_PCT7 1

10.61

(4.63) 12 12 3 24 1.20 2.73 N/A 33 1 421

C3S_PCT7 1

15.27

(7.39) 12 24 4 24 0.18 -1.51 N/A 11 0 444

C1S_PCT8 1

9.839

(12.207) 8 12 0 96 5.97 41.85 N/A 62 1 392

C2S_PCT8 1

10.39

(4.64) 10 12 3 24 1.27 3.06 N/A 33 1 421

C3S_PCT8 1

14.55

(8.19) 12 24 4 24 0.09 -1.68 N/A 11 0 444

SCC1S_PCTTGTC

Site 1

Site 2+

1

3

20.29 (19.44)

20.09 (32.77)

15

15

15

8

1

0

100

359

2.53

8.86

7.85

90.51

N/A

N/A

35

131

1

1

419

323

SCC2S_PCTTGTC

Site 1

Site 2+

1

3

23.57 (16.36)

23.69 (14.07)

25.50

21

30

19

2

2

54

72

.21

1.48

-1.09

3.27

N/A

N/A

14

61

1

1

440

393

SCC3S_PCTTGTC

Site 1

Site 2+

1

3

54.17 (50.64)

43.20 (23.23)

40

36

20

36

5

5

140

140

1.04

1.74

.49

4.66

N/A

N/A

6

25

0

0

449

430

SCC1S_PCTALL

Site 1

Site 2+

1

3

34.71 (30.37)

29.31 (40.72)

21.50

20.5

20

20

1

0

150

360

2.30

6.48

7.06

50.22

N/A

N/A

28

90

1

1

426

364

SCC2S_PCTALL

Site 1

Site 2+

1

3

52.75 (49.51)

31.59 (25.84)

37.50

27

-

29

16

11

168

168

2.22

3.98

5.38

19.72

N/A

N/A

8

41

1

1

446

413

Version 7

Page 433

SCC3S_PCTALL

Site 1

Site 2+

1

3

26.93 (.42)

42.86 (22.97)

40

38

20

72

20

10

80

80

.42

.33

-2.19

-1.38

N/A

N/A

5

16

0

0

450

439

SCCS_PCTTGTC 1 or 3

23.76 (29.01)

18 8 0 360 7.80 84.61 N/A 217 2 236

SCCS_PCTALL 1 or 3

31.42 (35.57)

23 20 0 360 6.19 51.57 N/A 147 2 306


Response may be an outlier or may be outside of logical range

C1S_PCT3flag Frequency Percent Cumulative Frequency

Cumulative Percent

0 454 99.78 454 99.78

1 1 0.22 455 100.00




Cumulative Percent

0 454 99.78 454 99.78

1 1 0.22 455 100.00




Cumulative Percent

Version 7

Page 434



Cumulative Percent

0 454 99.78 454 99.78

1 1 0.22 455 100.00




Cumulative Percent

0 454 99.78 454 99.78

1 1 0.22 455 100.00




Cumulative Percent

0 454 99.78 454 99.78

1 1 0.22 455 100.00




Cumulative Percent

0 454 99.78 454 99.78

1 1 0.22 455 100.00

Version 7

Page 435



Cumulative Percent


TOMO 6 MONTHS

N/A

TOMO 12 MONTHS

Subscale

# Items

Mean (SD)

Median

Mode

Min

Max

Skew

Kurt

Alpha

N (scale calculate

d)

N (Miss data)

N (Scale N/A)

C1S_PCT3 1

3.32

(3.17) 2 2 0 24 3.41 18.43 N/A 99 0 235

C2S_PCT3 1

4.16

(3.92) 3 3 1 24 3.59 16.07 N/A 44 0 290

C3S_PCT3 1

7.76

(4.12) 8 4 2 15 0.33 -1.21 N/A 17 0 317

C1S_PCT3week 1 16.62 10 10 0 120 3.41 18.43 N/A 99 0 235

Version 7

Page 436

(15.87)

C2S_PCT3week 1

10.80

(19.59) 15 15 5 120 3.59 16.07 N/A 44 0 290

C3S_PCT3week 1

38.82

(20.58) 40 20 10 75 0.33 -1.21 N/A 17 0 317

C1S_PCT4 1

5.22

(4.03) 4 2 0 24 1.40 3.64 N/A 99 0 235

C2S_PCT4 1

8.20

(5.20) 8.5 10 1 24 1.13 1.97 N/A 44 0 290

C3S_PCT4 1

11.06

(4.79) 10 12 5 24 1.22 2.25 N/A 17 0 317

C1S_PCT5 1

5.73

(4.09) 5 8 0 24 1.17 2.76 N/A 99 0 235

C2S_PCT5 1

8.57

(5.09) 9.5 12 1 24 1.05 1.98 N/A 44 0 290

C3S_PCT5 1

11.06

(3.38) 10 8 5 18 0.47 0.12 N/A 17 0 317

C1S_PCT6 1

4.16

(3.37) 3 3 0 24 3.45 18.70 N/A 63 1 270

C2S_PCT6 1

4.79

(2.60) 4 3 1 24 2.60 7.86 N/A 30 0 304

C3S_PCT6 1

9.91

(4.72) 12 14 2 15 -0.69 -1.09 N/A 11 0 323

C1S_PCT6week 1

20.79

(16.85) 15 15 0 120 3.45 18.70 N/A 63 0 271

C2S_PCT6week 1

26.5

(23.97) 20 15 5 120 2.60 7.86 N/A 30 0 304

C3S_PCT6week 1 49.55 60 70 10 75 -0.69 -1.09 N/A 11 0 323

Version 7

Page 437

(23.61)

C1S_PCT7 1

6.95

94.080 7 8 0 24 1.21 3.58 N/A 63 1 270

C2S_PCT7 1

9.57

(4.92) 10 12 3 24 1.03 1.39 N/A 30 0 304

C3S_PCT7 1

10.91

(3.91) 12 12 5 16 -0.63 -1.05 N/A 11 0 323

C1S_PCT8 1

7.27

(4.04) 7 8 0 24 1.05 3.27 N/A 63 1 270

C2S_PCT8 1

10.1

(4.79) 10 12 3 24 0.94 1.28 N/A 30 0 304

C3S_PCT8 1

11.55

(3.14) 12 12 5 16 -0.79 0.55 N/A 11 0 323

SCC1S_PCTTGTC 3

27.57

(22.66)

23

18 0 168 2.90 14.61 .93 99 0 235

SCC2S_PCTTGTC 3

37.57

(26.36) 38 45 7 168 2.92 13.37 .85 44 0 290

SCC3S_PCTTGTC 3

60.94

(22.82) 56 84 20 98 0.03 -1.07 .65 17 0 317

SCC1S_PCTALL 3

35.02

(23.89) 31 20 0 168 2.86 14.54 .95 63 0 271

SCC2S_PCTALL 3

46.17

(32.39) 40.5 18 11 168 2.26 6.42 .95 30 0 304

SCC3S_PCTALL 3

72

(27.03) 84 98 20 98 -0.88 -0.39 .80 11 0 323

SCCS_PCTTGTC 3

33.86

(25.76) 26 18 0 168 2.16 8.05 N/A 160 0 174

SCCS_PCTALL 3

42.14

(29.00) 36 18 0 168 1.95 5.64 N/A 104 0 230

Version 7

Page 438

TOMO 18 MONTHS

N/A

*********************************************************************************************


LEEF BASELINE

Subscale

# Items

Mean (SD)

Median

Mode

Min

Max

Skew

Kurt

Alpha


N (Miss data)

N (Scale N/A)

C1S_PCT3 1

4.56

(3.93) 4 2 0 24 2.66 9.79 N/A 120 0 284

C2S_PCT3 1 5.36 5 6 0 16 1.22 1.07 N/A 33 1 370

Version 7

Page 439

(4.19)

C3S_PCT3 1

8.15

(6.96) 5 3 2 24 1.48 1.15 N/A 20 1 383

C1S_PCT3week 1

22.79

(19.64) 20 10 0 120 2.66 9.79 N/A 120 0 284

C2S_PCT3week 1

26.82

(20.95) 25 30 0 80 1.22 1.07 N/A 33 0 371

C3S_PCT3week 1

40.75

(34.80) 25 15 10 120 1.48 1.15 N/A 20 0 384

C1S_PCT4 1

8.47

(5.64) 8 16 0 24 0.51 -0.34 N/A 120 0 284

C2S_PCT4 1

9.58

(5.65) 8 8 0 24 0.15 -0.11 N/A 33 1 370

C3S_PCT4 1

9.80

(5.55) 9 12 0 24 0.65 1.16 N/A 20 1 383

C1S_PCT5 1

8.91

(5.61) 8 16 0 24 0.55 -0.12 N/A 120 0 284

C2S_PCT5 1

10.24

(5.23) 10 8 0 24 0.12 0.31 N/A 33 1 370

C3S_PCT5 1

10.85

(6.24) 12 12 0 24 0.38 0.50 N/A 20 1 383

C1S_PCT6 1

5.97

(5.01) 5 6 0 24 1.89 3.84 N/A 75 0 329

C2S_PCT6 1

7.39

(4.95) 6 6 2 20 1.08 0.49 N/A 23 1 380

C3S_PCT6 1

7.70

(6.52) 5.5 4 2 24 1.99 4.51 N/A 10 0 394

C1S_PCT6week 1 29.87 25 30 0 120 1.89 3.84 N/A 75 0 329

Version 7

Page 440

(25.04)

C2S_PCT6week 1

36.96

(24.76) 30 30 10 100 1.08 0.49 N/A 23 0 381

C3S_PCT6week 1

38.50

(32.58) 27.5 20 10 120 1.99 4.51 N/A 10 0 394

C1S_PCT7 1

9.88

(5.08) 10 12 1 24 0.50 -0.10 N/A 75 0 329

C2S_PCT7 1

11.78

(4.27) 12 8 4 20 -

0.15 -0.89 N/A 23 1 380

C3S_PCT7 1

13.00

(5.44) 12 12 4 24 0.54 1.29 N/A 10 0 394

C1S_PCT8 1

9.71

(4.84) 10 12 1 24 0.47 0.47 N/A 75 0 329

C2S_PCT8 1

12.00

(4.02) 12 8 4 20 -

0.23 -0.43 N/A 23 1 380

C3S_PCT8 1

13.80

(4.47) 12 12 8 24 1.43 2.43 N/A 10 0 394

SCC1S_PCTTGTC 1 38.95

(27.14)

35

23 2 168 2.05 7.08 N/A 129 0 275


(26.29)

42.5 20 0 128 1.16 1.99 N/A 36 0 368


(40.30)

42 36 10 168 1.62 2.10 N/A 22 0 382

SCC1S_PCTALL 1 47.28

(31.91)

44 30 2 168 1.73 4.06 N/A 83 0 321


(29.53)

51.5 72 18 140 1.03 0.99 N/A 26 0 378


(41.49)

47 36 10 168 1.86 4.66 N/A 11 0 393

SCCS_PCTTGTC 1 42.48

(29.32)

38 57 0 168 1.89 5.22 N/A 187 0 217

SCCS_PCTALL 1 50.72

(32.50)

45.5 30 2 168 1.57 3.21 N/A 120 0 284

Version 7

Page 441

LEEF 6 MONTHS

N/A

LEEF 12 MONTHS

Subscale

# Items

Mean (SD)

Median

Mode

Min

Max

Skew

Kurt

Alpha

N (scale calculat

ed)

N (Miss data)

N (Scale N/A)

C1S_PCT3 1 4.305

(3.041)

4 2 1 18 2.070 6.828 N/A 59 0 125

C2S_PCT3 1 6.583

(6.501)

5.5 6 1 24 2.056 4.580 N/A 12 0 172

C3S_PCT3 1 7.250

(5.148)

7 . 0 16 0.286 -0.180 N/A 8 0 176

C1S_PCT3week 1 21.525

(15.207)

20 10 5 90 2.070 6.828 N/A 59 0 125


(32.506)

27.5 30 5 120 2.056 4.580 N/A 12 0 172

Version 7

Page 442


(25.739)

35 . 0 80 0.286 -0.180 N/A 8 0 176

C1S_PCT4 1 7.983

(5.582)

8 8 0 24 0.770 0.627 N/A 59 0 125

C2S_PCT4 1 10.545

(6.502)

9 4 4 24 1.135 0.500 N/A 11 1 172

C3S_PCT4 1 8.250

(6.861)

7 0 0 18 0.195 -1.410 N/A 8 0 176

C1S_PCT5 1 8.119

(5.537)

7 4 0 24 0.824 0.586 N/A 59 0 125

C2S_PCT5 1 12.818

(5.288)

12 9 8 24 1.166 0.549 N/A 11 1 172

C3S_PCT5 1 9.000

(6.655)

8.5 0 0 18 -0.209 -0.994 N/A 8 0 176

C1S_PCT6 1 5.441

(3.323)

5 4 1 18 2.062 5.715 N/A 34 0 150

C2S_PCT6 1 7.556

(7.316)

6 1 1 24 1.656 2.816 N/A 9 0 175

C3S_PCT6 1 9.000

(6.218)

9 . 2 16 0.000 -2.433 N/A 4 0 180


(16.615)

25 20 5 90 2.062 5.715 N/A 34 0 150


(36.581)

30 5 5 120 1.656 2.816 N/A 9 0 175


(31.091)

45 . 10 80 0.000 -2.433 N/A 4 0 180

C1S_PCT7 1 10.206

(5.547)

10 12 3 24 0.743 0.353 N/A 34 0 150

Version 7

Page 443

C2S_PCT7 1 12.625

(6.391)

10.5 8 6 24 0.977 -0.230 N/A 8 1 175

C3S_PCT7 1 13.250

(1.893)

12.5 12 12 16 1.659 2.615 N/A 4 0 180

C1S_PCT8 1 10.029

(4.840)

8 8 3 24 0.698 0.414 N/A 34 0 150

C2S_PCT8 1 14.125

(5.617)

13 . 8 24 0.783 -0.382 N/A 8 1 175

C3S_PCT8 1 13.250

(1.893)

12.5 12 12 16 1.659 2.615 N/A 4 0 180


(22.491)

36 12 5 126 1.266 3.083 0.826 59 0 125


(40.196)

47 48 21 160 1.906 3.950 0.820 12 0 172


(34.467)

47 . 0 112 0.421 0.451 0.851 8 0 176


(22.255)

45 28 20 126 1.507 3.504 0.757 34 0 150


(45.635)

48 . 21 160 1.403 1.760 0.850 9 0 175


(33.481)

69 . 36 112 0.325 -1.837 0.890 4 0 180

SCCS_PCTTGTC 1 41.772

(27.604)

40 46 0 160 1.665 4.343 N/A 79 0 105

SCCS_PCTALL 1 52.191

(29.272)

46 36 20 160 1.653 3.359 N/A 47 0 137

Version 7

Page 444

LEEF 18 MONTHS

N/A

Version 7

Page 445


Prepared by: Yin Liu, Soomi Lee, Kelly Davis & Michelle Blocklin

TARGET CHILD’S PHYSICAL HEALTH SYMPTOMS

DESCRIPTION

We asked spouses/partners to rate the target child’s physical health symptoms in the past month. We adapted Larsen and Kasimatis (1991) symptoms checklist, the same checklist used in the Daily Inventory of Stressful Experiences for Youth (Almeida, 1998). We selected 4 symptoms that are the most prevalent among children. We changed the response format from whether the child had the particular symptom in the past 24 hours to how often the child has had the symptoms in the past month.

This measure was used for spouses with children of all ages: 3-5, 6-9, and 10-17.


It is a checklist of symptoms and therefore there is no reliability info.

PI USE OF MEASURE

Version 7

Page 446

Daily Inventory of Stressful Experiences for Youth (Almeida, 1998)

Hotel Work and Well-being Study (PIs: Dave Almeida & Nan Crouter)


NSDE – adult self-report

Hotel workers and their children – self- not other-report

ASSOCIATED PAPERS


Z, DV


Larsen, R. J., & Kasimatis, M. (1991). Day-to-day physical symptoms: Individual differences in the occurrence, duration, and emotional concomitants of minor daily illnesses. Journal of Personality, 59, 387-423.

--


--

Version 7

Page 447


Almeida, D. M. (1998). Daily Inventory of Stressful Events (DISE) expert coding manual. Tucson, AZ: Division of Family Studies and Human Development, University of Arizona.

--





The next section is about [Target Child]'s health in the past month. For each question, you can say: Almost never, rarely, sometimes, frequently, or almost always.


Subscale

In the past month, how often has [Target Child] …

C1S_PHC1/

C2S_PHC1/

C3S_PHC1

Had headaches?

Physical health

symptoms

C1S_PHC2/ Had problems with allergies or asthma? Physical health

Version 7

Page 448

C2S_PHC2/

C3S_PHC2

symptoms

C1S_PHC3/

C2S_PHC3/

C3S_PHC3

Had a cough, sore throat, runny nose, fever, chills, or other problems like a cold?

Physical health

symptoms

C1S_PHC4/

C2S_PHC4/

C3S_PHC4

Had a stomach ache or stomach problems such as feeling like he/she was going to throw up, having diarrhea, or feeling too sick to eat?

Physical health

symptoms

ITEM VALUES

Almost never = 1

Rarely = 2

Sometimes = 3

Frequently = 4

Almost always = 5

Don’t know = -4

Refused = -7

SCORING OF SCALE

Version 7

Page 449

Items are summed, representing greater frequency of child physical health problems in the past month. Mean replacement was used if 3 out of 4 items were complete.

Target child is 10-17:

Physical Health Symptoms (SCC1S_PHC):

IF NMISS(OF C1S_PHC1-C1S_PHC4) = 0 THEN SCC1S_PHC = SUM(OF C1S_PHC1-C1S_PHC4) ;

SCC1S_PHCi:

IF NMISS(OF C1S_PHC1-C1S_PHC4) <= 1 THEN SCC1S_PHCi = MEAN(OF C1S_PHC1-C1S_PHC4)*4 ;




SCC2S_PHCi:




Version 7

Page 450


SCC3S_PHCi:


Final Symptoms Scale (all ages combined)

SCCS_PHC= if SCC1S_PHC = . and SCC2S_PHC = . and SCC3S_PHC = . then SCCS_PHC = .;

else if SCC1S_PHC = . and SCC2S_PHC = . then SCCS_PHC = SCC3S_PHC;



SCCS_PHCi= if SCC1S_PHCi = . and SCC2S_PHCi = . and SCC3S_PHCi = . then SCCS_PHCi = .;

else if SCC1S_PHCi = . and SCC2S_PHCi = . then SCCS_PHCi = SCC3S_PHCi;



Item Variables

Target child is 10-17: C1S_PHC1 – C1S_PHC4


Version 7

Page 451





Description

For item 1, backaches and sore muscles were added.


Items

Variable Name Item text Reverse- Subscale

Version 7

Page 452

coded

In the past month, how often has [Target Child] …

C1S_PHC1/

C2S_PHC1/

C3S_PHC1

Had headaches, backaches, or sore muscles?

Physical health

symptoms

Scoring of Scale

No changes.


N/A


No changes.

Version 7

Page 453


N/A


TOMO BASELINE

Subscale

# Items

Mean (SD)

Median

Mode

Min

Max

Skew

Kurt

Alpha


N (Miss data)

N (Scale N/A)

SCC1S_PHC 4 7.50 (2.52)

7 6 4 14 .58 -.18 N/A 132 0 323

SCC1S_PHCi 4 7.50 (2.52)

7 6 4 14 .58 -.18 N/A 132 0 323

SCC2S_PHC 4 6.48 (2.39)

6 4 4 14 1.18 1.51 N/A 62 0 393

SCC2S_PHCi 4 6.48 (2.39)

6 4 4 14 1.18 1.51 N/A 62 0

393

SCC3S_PHC 4 6.36 6 4 4 12 .98 .93 N/A 25 0 430

Version 7

Page 454

(2.10)

SCC3S_PHCi 4 7.50 (2.52)

7 6 4 14 .58 -.18 N/A 132 0 323

TOMO 6 MONTHS

N/A

TOMO 12 MONTHS

Subscale

# Items

Mean (SD)

Median

Mode

Min

Max

Skew

Kurt

Alpha

N (scale calculat

ed)

N (Miss data)

N (Sca

le N/A

)

SCC1S_PHC 4 7.42

(2.48)

7 4 4 13 0.34 -0.65 .52 99 0 235

SCC1S_PHCi 4 7.42

(2.48)

7 4 4 13 0.34 -0.65 N/A 99 0 235

SCC2S_PHC 4 6.89

(2.54)

7 7 4 16 1.34 2.65 .61 44 0 290

Version 7

Page 455

SCC2S_PHCi 4 6.89

(2.54)

7 7 4 16 1.34 2.65 N/A 44 0

290

SCC3S_PHC 4 6.94

(1.95)

7 5 4 10 0.38 -1.04 .17 17 0 317

SCC3S_PHCi 4 6.94

(1.95)

7 5 4 10 0.38 -1.04 N/A 17 0 317

TOMO 18 MONTHS

N/A

*********************************************************************************************


Version 7

Page 456

LEEF BASELINE

Subscale

# Items

Mean (SD)

Median

Mode

Min

Max

Skew

Kurt

Alpha

N (scale calculat

ed)

N (Miss data)

N (Scale N/A)

SCC1S_PHC 4 7.78

(2.66)

8 4 4 15 0.33

-0.52 N/A 129 0 275

SCC1S_PHCi 4 7.78

(2.66)

8 4 4 15 0.33

-0.52 N/A 129 0 275

SCC2S_PHC 4 7.05

(2.32)

7 8 4 13 0.51

-0.13 N/A 37 0 367

SCC2S_PHCi 4 7.05

(2.32)

7 8 4 13 0.51

-0.13 N/A 37 0

367

SCC3S_PHC 4 6.48

(1.81)

6 6 4 9 0.06

-1.44 N/A 23 0 381

SCC3S_PHCi 4 6.48

(1.81)

6 6 4 9 0.06

-1.44 N/A 23 0 381

LEEF 6 MONTHS

Version 7

Page 457

N/A

LEEF 12 MONTHS

Subscale

# Items

Mean (SD)

Median

Mode

Min

Max

Skew

Kurt

Alpha

N (scale calculated

)

N (Miss data)

N (Scale N/A)

SCC1S_PHC 4 7.542

(2.120)

8 8 4 12 -0.022 -0.781 0.360 59 0 125

SCC1S_PHCi 4 7.542

(2.120)

8 8 4 12 -0.022 -0.781 N/A 59 0 125

SCC2S_PHC 4 6.917

(2.109)

7 5 4 10 0.201 -1.414 0.408 12 0 172

SCC2S_PHCi 4 6.917

(2.109)

7 5 4 10 0.201 -1.414 N/A 12 0 172

SCC3S_PHC 4 8.000

(1.604)

8.5 9 5 10 -0.831 0.389 -0.583 8 0 176

SCC3S_PHCi 4 8.000

(1.604)

8.5 9 5 10 -0.831 0.389 N/A 8 0 176

LEEF 18 MONTHS

Version 7

Page 458

N/A

Version 7

Page 459


Prepared by: Yin liu, Kelly Davis, Michelle Blocklin, & Soomi Lee

TARGET CHILD’S POSITIVE AND NEGATIVE AFFECT

DESCRIPTION

We asked spouses/partners to rate the target child’s positive (4 items) and negative (6 items) affect in the past month. These items were taken from the Watson, Clark, & Tellegen (1988) and Laurent et al. (1999) PANAS measures used in the daily diary interviews in which respondents rate the intensity of negative and positive affect experienced during the interview day. For the spouse interview, items were changed so that parents were reporting on their children instead of themselves, and the time frame was changed to the past month instead of today. The response scale was also changed from none of the time - all of the time to almost never – almost always.

This measure was used for spouses with children of all ages: 3-5, 6-9, and 10-17.


We do not have psychometric info. for parents’ report of child’s affect using the PANAS. In Phase I, parents and children reported on their individual positive and negative affect; parents did not rate their children’s affect.

Version 7

Page 460

PI USE OF MEASURE

Hotel Work and Well-being Study (PIs: Dave Almeida & Nan Crouter) - but not parent report of child


NSDE – adult self-report

Hotel workers and their children – self- not other-report

ASSOCIATED PAPERS


Z, DV


Laurent, J., Catanzaro, S. J., Joiner, T. E. Jr., Rudolph, K. D., Potter, K. I., Lambert, S., Osborne, L., & Gathright, T. (1999). A measure of positive and negative affect for children: Scale development and preliminary validation. Psychological Assessment, 11, 326-338.

--

Version 7

Page 461

Watson, D., Clark, L. A., & Tellegen, A. (1988). Development and validation of brief measures of positive and negative affect: The PANAS scales. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54, 1063-1070.


--


--





[No separate instructions.]


Subscale

In the past month, how often did he/she seem …

C1S_PAC1/

C2S_PAC1/

Upset or troubled?

Negative affect

Version 7

Page 462

C3S_PAC1

C1S_PAC2/

C2S_PAC2/

C3S_PAC2

Irritable? Negative affect

C1S_PAC3/

C2S_PAC3/

C3S_PAC3

Stressed out or anxious? Negative affect

C1S_PAC4/

C2S_PAC4/

C3S_PAC4

Angry? Negative affect

C1S_PAC5/

C2S_PAC5/

C3S_PAC5

Sad? Negative affect

C1S_PAC6/

C2S_PAC6/

C3S_PAC6.

Unfriendly or unsociable?

Negative affect

C1S_NAC1/

C2S_NAC1/

C3S_NAC1

Interested or wrapped up in something? Positive affect

C1S_NAC2/

C2S_NAC2/

C3S_NAC2

Happy? Positive affect

C1S_NAC3/

C2S_NAC3/

C3S_NAC3

Proud?

Positive affect

Version 7

Page 463

C1S_NAC4/

C2S_NAC4/

C3S_NAC4

Confident?

Positive affect

ITEM VALUES

Almost never = 1

Rarely = 2

Sometimes = 3

Frequently = 4

Almost always = 5

Don’t know = -4

Refused = -7

SCORING OF SCALE

For positive affect, mean replacement was used if 3 out of 4 items were complete. For negative affect, mean replacement was used if 5 out of 6 items were complete.


Version 7

Page 464

Child Positive Affect (SCC1S_PAC):

IF NMISS(OF C1S_NAC1-C1S_NAC4) = 0 THEN SCC1S_PAC = SUM(OF C1S_NAC1-C1S_NAC4) ;

SCC1S_PACi:

IF NMISS(OF C1S_NAC1-C1S_NAC4) <= 1 THEN SCC1S_PACi = MEAN(OF C1S_NAC1-C1S_NAC4)*4 ;

Child Negative Affect (SCC1S_NAC):

IF NMISS(OF C1S_PAC1-C1S_PAC6) = 0 THEN SCC1S_NAC = SUM(OF C1S_PAC1-C1S_PAC6) ;

SCC1S_NACi:

IF NMISS(OF C1S_PAC1-C1S_PAC6) <= 1 THEN SCC1S_NACi = MEAN(OF C1S_PAC1-C1S_PAC6)*6 ;




SCC2S_PACi:


Version 7

Page 465



SCC2S_NACi:





SCC3S_PACi:




SCC3S_NACi:


Version 7

Page 466

*Note: The scale names including parents of children of all ages are: SCCS_PAC and SCCS_NAC.

Item Variables

Target child 10-17: C1S_PAC1 – C1S_PAC6; C1S_NAC1 – C1S_NAC4






NOTE: In June 2010, we began recruiting 9 year old children for the home interviews and daily diaries, so parents of 9 year olds were then added to the parents of 10-17 year olds group and asked the

Version 7

Page 467

corresponding questions. (The parents of 10-17 year olds group became parents of 9-17 year olds and the parents of 6-9 year olds group became parents of 6-8 year olds.)


N/A


No changes.


N/A


Version 7

Page 468

TOMO BASELINE

Subscale

# Items

Mean (SD)

Median

Mode

Min

Max

Skew

Kurt

Alpha


N (Miss data)

N (Scale N/A)

SCC1S_PAC 4 14.16 (2.70)

14 14 6 20 -.50 .60 .72 132 0 323

SCC1S_PACi 4 14.16 (2.70)

14 14 6 20 -.50 .60 N/A 132 0 323

SCC1S_NAC 6 13.17 (4.00)

13 12 6 23 .28 -.57 .85 132 0 323

SCC1S_NACi 6 13.17 (4.00)

13 12 6 23 .28 -.57 N/A 132 0 323

SCC2S_PAC 4 15.43 (2.36)

16 16 9 20 -.39 .09 .65 61 1 393

SCC2S_PACi 4 15.33 (2.46)

16 16 9 20 -.47 .11 N/A 62 0 393

SCC2S_NAC 6 11.77 (3.67)

12 9 6 20 .10 -.99 .82 61 1 393

SCC2S_NACi 6 11.75 (3.64)

12 9 6 20 .11 -.96 N/A 62 0 393

SCC3S_PAC 4 15.71 (1.88)

16 14 12 19 -.01 -.90 .50

24 0 431

SCC3S_PACi 4 15.71 (1.88) 16 14 12 19 -.01 -.90 .50

24 0 431

SCC3S_NAC 6 10.79 (3.43)

10 9 6 18 .42 -.40 .78 24 0 431

SCC3S_NACi 6 10.79 (3.43)

10 9 6 18 .42 -.40 .N/A 24 0 431

SCCS_PAC 4 14.69 (2.60)

15 16 6 20 -.54 .63 N/A 217 1 237

Version 7

Page 469

SCCS_PACi 4 14.66 (2.62)

15 16 6 20 -.54 .57 N/A 218 0 237

SCCS_NAC 6 12.51 (3.93)

12 13 6 23 .29 -.55 N/A 217 1 237

SCCS_NACi 6 12.50 (3.92)

12 13 6 23 .30 -.54 N/A 218 0 237

TOMO 6 MONTHS

N/A

TOMO 12 MONTHS

Subscale

# Items

Mean (SD)

Median

Mode

Min

Max

Skew

Kurt

Alpha

N (scale

calculated)

N (Miss data)

N (Scale N/A)

SCC1S_PAC 4 15.30

(2.38)

15 15 8 20 -0.14 0.35 .72 99 0 235

SCC1S_PACi 4 15.30(2.38)

15 15 8 20 -0.14 0.35 N/A 99 0 235

SCC1S_NAC 6 13.17

(3.90)

13 12 6 25 0.40 0.19 .87 98 1 235

SCC1S_NACi 6 13.13

(3.91)

13 12 6 25 0.42 0.17 N/A 99 0 235

Version 7

Page 470

SCC2S_PAC 4 15.43

(1.85)

15 15 11 20 0.21 0.23 .51 44 0 290

SCC2S_PACi 4 15.43

(1.85)

15 15 11 20 0.21 0.23 N/A 44 0 290

SCC2S_NAC 6 12.07

(3.64)

13 13 6 18 -0.22 -1.18 .82 44 0 290

SCC2S_NACi 6 12.07

(3.64)

13 13 6 18 -0.22 -1.18 N/A 44 0 290

SCC3S_PAC 4 16.29

(2.23)

16 19 12 19 -0.34 -0.89 .65

17 0 317

SCC3S_PACi 4 16.29

(2.23) 16 19 12 19 -0.34 -0.89 N/A

17 0 317

SCC3S_NAC 6 11.35

(2.62)

12 12 7 16 -0.01 -0.12 .71 17 0 317

SCC3S_NACi 6 11.35

(2.62)

12 12 7 16 -0.01 -0.12 .N/A 17 0 317

SCCS_PAC 4 15.44

(2.23)

15 15 8 20 -0.12 0.27 N/A 160 0 174

SCCS_PACi 4 15.44

(2.23)

15 15 8 20 -0.12 0.27 N/A 160 0 174

SCCS_NAC 6 12.67

(3.75)

13 13 6 25 0.31 0.09 N/A 159 0 175

SCCS_NACi 6 12.65

(3.76)

13 13 6 25 0.32 0.07 N/A 160 0 174

TOMO 18 MONTHS

Version 7

Page 471

N/A

*********************************************************************************************


LEEF BASELINE

Subscale

# Items

Mean (SD)

Median

Mode

Min

Max

Skew

Kurt

Alpha


N (Miss data)

N (Scale N/A)

SCC1S_PAC 4 14.85

(2.69)

15 16 4 20 -0.70 1.66 0.69 129 0 275

SCC1S_PACi 4 14.85

(2.69)

15 16 4 20 -0.70 1.66 N/A 129 0 275

SCC1S_NAC 6 13.02

(4.29)

13 13 6 29 0.57 0.77 0.86 128 1 275

SCC1S_NACi 6 13.03

(4.27)

13 13 6 29 0.56 0.79 N/A 129 0 275

SCC2S_PAC 4 15.59

(2.39)

16 14 11 20 0.01 -0.71 0.66 37 0 367

SCC2S_PACi 4 15.59

(2.39)

16 14 11 20 0.01 -0.71 N/A 37 0 367

Version 7

Page 472

SCC2S_NAC 6 13.47

(3.84)

13.5 12 6 20 0.04 -0.84 0.74 36 1 367

SCC2S_NACi 6 13.63

(3.90)

14 12 6 20 0.00 -0.91 N/A 37 0 367

SCC3S_PAC 4 16.39

(2.31)

16 16 12 20 -0.24 -0.32 0.73

23 0 381

SCC3S_PACi 4 16.39

(2.31) 16 16 12 20 -0.24 -0.32 N/A 23 0 381

SCC3S_NAC 6 12.35

(3.27)

13 11 6 18 -0.44 -0.26 0.75 23 0 381

SCC3S_NACi 6 12.35

(3.27)

13 11 6 18 -0.44 -0.26 .N/A 23 0 381

SCCS_PAC 4 15.19

(2.63)

15 16 4 20 -0.58 1.31 N/A 189 0 215

SCCS_PACi 4 15.19

(2.63)

15 16 4 20 -0.58 1.31 N/A 189 0 215

SCCS_NAC 6 13.02

(4.08)

13 12 6 29 0.44 0.57 N/A 187 0 217

SCCS_NACi 6 13.06

(4.09)

13 12 6 29 0.43 0.52 N/A 189 0 215

LEEF 6 MONTHS

N/A

LEEF 12 MONTHS

Version 7

Page 473

Subscale

# Items

Mean (SD)

Median

Mode

Min

Max

Skew

Kurt

Alpha


N (Miss data)

N (Scale N/A)

SCC1S_PAC 4 15.034

(2.356)

15 15 10 20 0.425 -0.197 0.659 59 0 125

SCC1S_PACi 4 15.034

(2.356)

15 15 10 20 0.425 -0.197 N/A 59 0 125

SCC1S_NAC 6 12.763

(4.150)

13 15 6 24 0.452 -0.114 0.858 59 0 125

SCC1S_NACi 6 12.763

(4.150)

13 15 6 24 0.452 -0.114 N/A 59 0 125

SCC2S_PAC 4 14.833

(2.082)

15.5 16 11 18 -0.461 -0.487 0.436 12 0 172

SCC2S_PACi 4 14.833

(2.082)

15.5 16 11 18 -0.461 -0.487 N/A 12 0 172

SCC2S_NAC 6 13.750

(5.190)

12 9 9 26 1.412 1.585 0.903 12 0 172

SCC2S_NACi 6 13.750

(5.190)

12 9 9 26 1.412 1.585 N/A 12 0 172

SCC3S_PAC 4 16.500

(2.726)

17.5 15 11 19 -1.270 1.397 0.854 8 0 176

SCC3S_PACi 4 16.500

(2.726)

17.5 15 11 19 -1.270 1.397 N/A 8 0 176

SCC3S_NAC 6 11.750

(4.132)

10.5 9 7 18 0.415 -1.624 0.888 8 0 176

SCC3S_NACi 6 11.750

(4.132)

10.5 9 7 18 0.415 -1.624 N/A 8 0 176

SCCS_PAC 4 15.152 15 15 10 20 0.206 -0.470 N/A 79 0 105

Version 7

Page 474

(2.370)

SCCS_PACi 4 15.152

(2.370)

15 15 10 20 0.206 -0.470 N/A 79 0 105

SCCS_NAC 6 12.810

(4.288)

12 12 6 26 0.681 0.326 N/A 79 0 105

SCCS_NACi 6 12.810

(4.288)

12 12 6 26 0.681 0.326 N/A 79 0 105

LEEF 18 MONTHS

N/A

Version 7

Page 475


Prepared by: Yin Liu, Soomi Lee, Kelly Davis & Michelle Blocklin

PARENTHOOD PLANS

DESCRIPTION

The Hotel Work and Well-Being Project created these items to explore cognitions and behaviors around settling down and starting families. This section is used when spouses do not have children. Data from the Hotels and Home Lives pilot indicated that interviewees mentioned delayed childbearing and a reluctance to have additional children due to the challenges of working in the hotel industry. Penn State developed these questions to further understand this phenomenon.

In Phase II, Penn State asked spouses/partners about their intention to have children and the extent to which several factors play into these decisions, such as work demands. Items are rated on a 5-point Likert scale. In Phase II, we added the fifth introductory question (“Does your spouse’s work situation play a role in your decision to become a parent?”) and the fourth scale question (“Your spouse/partner’s work demands right now would make it difficult to have a child.”). In the first introductory question, “have children” was changed to “have or adopt children” to be more inclusive of family situations. For the same reason, in the second introductory question, “have your first child” was changed to “have or adopt your first child”. In the scale items, for the second item, wording was changed from “having children now” to “being a parent now”; for item 5, wording was similarly changed from “having a child” to “being a parent”, and for the 6th item, “have a child” was changed to “become a parent”.


Version 7

Page 476

The items were not intended to create a scale, but when combined, the alpha for the 6-item measure was .77 for hotel managers in Phase I.

PI USE OF MEASURE

The Hotel Work and Well-Being Project (Dave Almeida, Nan Crouter, Susan McHale, Laura Klein)


Hotel employees and managers without children

ASSOCIATED PAPERS

There are no associated papers because this measure was only recently developed for Phase I.


Version 7

Page 477


[No instructions.]


Subscale

C4SEXP1 Looking ahead, do you hope to have or adopt children some day?

1. Yes 2. No

C4SEXP2 If it were up to you, how old would you like to be when you have or adopt your first child?

C4SEXP3 How many children do you hope to have altogether?

C4SEXP4 Does your work situation play a role in your decision to become a parent?

1. Yes 2. No

C4SEXP5 Does your spouse’s work situation play a role in your decision to become a parent?

1. Yes 2. No

For the next set of questions, please tell me whether you strongly agree, agree, neither agree nor disagree, disagree, or strongly disagree with each of the following statements.

Version 7

Page 478


Subscale

C4SEXP6 You enjoy your life and are in no rush to start a family.

R Parenthood

Expectations

C4SEXP7 You do not have time to think about being a parent now, but hope to do that in the future.

R Parenthood

Expectations

C4SEXP8 Your work demands right now would make it hard for you to give time and attention to a child.

R Parenthood

Expectations

C4SEXP9 Your spouse/partner’s work demands right now would make it difficult to have a child.

R Parenthood

Expectations

C4SEXP10 At this point in your life, devoting yourself to your job is more important than being a parent.

R Parenthood

Expectations

C4SEXP11 Your work situation is not the problem, you just don’t feel ready to become a parent.

R Parenthood

Expectations

C4SEXP12 You would like to become a parent soon, but your spouse/partner is not ready to do that.

R Parenthood

Expectations

ITEM VALUES

Version 7

Page 479

For items C4SEXP6 – C4SEXP12:

Strongly Agree = 1

Agree = 2


Disagree = 4


Don’t know = -4

Refused = -7

SCORING OF SCALE

This is not intended to be a scale and should not be treated as a scale because the reliability is very low (Cronbach’s alpha= .32). It captures the extent to which individuals describe the reasons for engaging in or delaying starting/expanding a family.



Version 7

Page 480


Description

After 1.0 data collection, a skip was added so that questions were not asked of spouses aged 45 years or older as these questions did not seem appropriate for this age demographic. Also, spouses were not asked item 3 and item 6 after 1.0 data collection.

Scoring of Scale

This is not intended to be a scale and should not be treated as a scale.


N/A


Version 7

Page 481

No changes.


N/A


TOMO BASELINE

Subscale

Label

N

Mean (SD)

Median

Mode

Min

Max

Skew

Kurt

C4SEXP2rc Age would you like to be when you have or

19 34.58 (4.38)

35 35 27 45 .54 .87

Version 7

Page 482

adopt your first child

C4SEXP3rc How many children do you hope to have altogether?

-- -- -- -- -- -- -- --

C4SEXP6rev You enjoy your life and are in no rush to start a family

-- -- -- -- -- -- -- --

C4SEXP7rev You do not have time to think about being an parent now (but hope to in the future)

35 3.91 (1.31)

4 5 1 5 -1.07 .03

C4SEXP8rev Your work demands right now would make it hard for you to give time and attention to a child

35 3.60 (1.14)

4 4 1 5 -.76 -.15

C4SEXP9rev Your spouse/partner’s work demands right now would make it difficult to have a child

35 3.40 (1.22)

3 3 1 5 -.22 -.94

*Note. After Site 1, participants over the age of 45 or with children in or out of the home were no longer asked these items. Participants who were 45 or older or with kids in or out of the home who answered these questions (at Site 1) were changed to missing to be consistent. The new variable names are C4SEXP1rc, C4SEXP2rc, C4SEXP3rc, C4SEXP4rc, C4SEXP5rc, C4SEXP6rev, C4SEXP7rev, C4EXP8rev, C4SEXP9rev.


R hopes to have/adopt (more) children some day

C4SEXP1rc Frequency Percent Cumulative Frequency

Cumulative Percent

1 19 55.88 19 55.88

Version 7

Page 483



Cumulative Percent

2 15 44.12 34 100.00

Work situation plays role in decision to become parent


Cumulative Percent

1 13 37.14 13 37.14

2 22 62.86 35 100.00

Emp's work situation plays role in decision become parent


Cumulative Percent

1 11 31.43 11 31.43

2 24 68.57 35 100.00

TOMO 6 MONTHS

Version 7

Page 484

N/A

TOMO 12 MONTHS

Subscale

Label

N

Mean (SD)

Median

Mode

Min

Max

Skew

Kurt

C4SEXP2rc Age would you like to be when you have or adopt your first child

10 4.29

(0.44)

34 35 27 43 0.44 1.52


-- -- -- -- -- -- -- --


-- -- -- -- -- -- -- --


18 1.89

(1.18)

1 1 1 4 0.96 -0.66

C4SEXP8rev Your work demands right now would make it hard for you to give time and attention

18 2.67

(1.08)

2 2 1 5 0.76 -0.46

Version 7

Page 485

to a child


18 2.5

(1.25)

2 2 1 5 0.92 -0.02




Cumulative Percent

1 10 55.56 10 55.56

2 8 44.44 18 100.00



Cumulative Percent

1 7 38.89 7 38.89

2 11 61.11 18 100.00


Version 7

Page 486


Cumulative Percent

1 6 33.33 6 33.33

2 12 66.67 18 100.00

TOMO 18 MONTHS

N/A

*********************************************************************************************


LEEF BASELINE

Version 7

Page 487

Subscale

Label

N

Mean (SD)

Median

Mode

Min

Max

Skew

Kurt


41 28.51

(3.75)

29 30 20 36 -0.12 -0.25


-- -- -- -- -- -- -- --


-- -- -- -- -- -- -- --


57 3.19

(1.32)

4 4 1 5 -0.27 -1.21


57 2.82

(1.31)

2 2 1 5 0.24 -1.20


57 3.18

(1.23)

4 4 1 5 -0.17 -1.29



Cumulative Percent

Version 7

Page 488



Cumulative Percent

1 43 78.18 43 78.18

2 12 21.82 12 100.00




Cumulative Percent

1 30 52.63 30 52.63

2 27 47.37 57 100.00




Cumulative Percent

1 25 43.10 25 43.10

2 33 56.90 58 100.00


Version 7

Page 489

LEEF 6 MONTHS

N/A

LEEF 12 MONTHS

Subscale

Label

N

Mean (SD)

Median

Mode

Min

Max

Skew

Kurt


15 29.533

(4.580)

30 30 19 37 -0.527 0.848


-- -- -- -- -- -- -- --


-- -- -- -- -- -- -- --


18 2.111

(1.023)

2 2 1 4 0.869 -0.053


18 2.333

(1.029)

2 2 1 5 1.053 1.522


18 2.833

(0.985)

3 2 1 4 -0.046 -1.318

Version 7

Page 490

RECODED (corrected sample): R hopes to have/adopt (more) children some day


Cumulative Percent

YES 15 83.33 15 83.33

NO 3 16.67 18 100.00


RECODED (corrected sample): Work situation plays role in decision to become parent


Cumulative Percent

YES 5 27.78 5 27.78

NO 13 72.22 18 100.00


RECODED (corrected sample): Emps work situation plays role in decision become parent


Cumulative Percent

YES 9 50.00 9 50.00

NO 9 50.00 18 100.00


LEEF 18 MONTHS

N/A