The Relationship between Family Health, Familist Values, and Outlook on Marriage in Female University Students

 

Shinhong Min*, Soonyoung Yun

Baekseok University, Nursing department, 76, Munam-ro, Cheonan, Korea

ABSTRACT:

Background/Objectives: Healthy society is preceded by healthy families. This study aims to identify the relationship between family health, familist values and outlook on marriage, to help university students form healthy values.

Methods/Statistical analysis: This study conducted a research targeting the 268 female university students. The data study used the following analysis method using SPSS18.0 statistic program. A t-test and ANOVA verification were conducted to examine the differences in family strength, familism values and marital values according to the target’s sociodemographic characteristics. And a correlation analysis was conducted to investigate the relationship between family strength, familism values and marital values.

Findings: In school year, the 2^nd year topped the list with 35.4%, followed by the 1^st year, 4^th year, and 3^rd year. The family strength was 3.72 points, family cohesiveness, the subordinate of family strength, was 3.93 points, family adaptation was 3.54 points, and family communication was 3.61 points. The familism values showed 2.80 points and marital values showed 3.30 points. A meaningful correlation was shown between family strength and marital values and among the subordinate concepts of family strength, family cohesiveness, family communication and marital values had a meaningful correlation. The family cohesiveness showed a meaningful correlation with familism values and familism values also showed a high level of correlation with marital values.

Improvements/Applications: Therefore, this study intends to examine the relationship between family strength, familism values and marital values and investigate their correlation.

 

 

 

1. INTRODUCTION:

In modern times, family instability is higher than ever due to the variety of life styles and rapid changes in values. Family problems and conflicts arise from various types of families due to social change. Family problems such as increasing divorce, avoiding marriage and childbirth, and low fertility due to the difficulty of raising children are already becoming social problems¹.

There is a growing interest in family health in modern society where negative and pathological aspects of the family are manifested, and personal growth and development of the individual and the smooth and functional family interaction at the personal dimension or family relationship dimension are considered to be the main concepts. A healthy society is preceded by healthy families. Family health has the characteristics of family that can communicate with each other with appropriate flexibility and cohesiveness based on shared values and trust between family members². In other words, family health is defined as a family whose happiness is high in both family members and in parent-child relationships, and satisfies each other's needs sufficiently³. Family values are desirable, general and sustained beliefs about the family, and it shows the values of various aspects related to the family from spouse selection in the early stages of family formation to family-centered thinking, family relationship, and generation relationship⁴. As Korea becomes a modern society, the traditional family values are gradually weakening. In the past, Korean society was based on the familistic tradition dividing male and female roles and all economic activities were carried out on a family basis. It was individually and socially strongly oriented toward familyism and each individual has been described as being a part of the family, a member of the identity rather than being an independent self of 'I'⁵. But now, based on the idea of equality between men and women, changes in consciousness and social consciousness within the family have led many functions to be transformed into social responsibility⁶. In other words, the values of women on family are changing due to changes in individualistic values, low marriage rates, high divorce rates, low fertility rates, higher education for women, and improved social status.

 

Marriage is an important lifelong task for achieving a family that is the basic unit of society, and the value of marriage for college students is an important measure that can predict the future of our society. Marriage is defined as the emotional and legal accountability of two people sharing emotional and physical intimacy and various tasks and economic resources⁴. Outlook on marriage can be described as a value for marriage and spouse choice to make a home, and in contrast to the old generation, which considered marriage as a mandatory precursor to a family, recent marriage is predominantly perceived as choice⁷, and there is a trend of easier divorce. In a long recession and employment crisis, marriage became an option, not a necessity, and often the case is that a healthy outlook on marriage cannot be formed due to lack of preparation in youth, the preparation stage for marriage⁸. Therefore, early adulthood college students are the responsible adults who will make a family in the near future, and they will form a desirable outlook on marriage as a leader of this society, which will lead to a healthy society.

 

Therefore, this study aims to identify the relationship between familial health, familist values and outlook on marriage, to help college students form healthy values.

 

2. MATERIALS AND METHODS:

2.1. Research subjects:

This study conducted a research targeting the 268 female 4-year college students in C region to examine the relationship between their family strength, familism values and marital values.

 

 

2.2. Research period:

The period of research was set from November 1^st 2016 to November 10^th 2016 and an internet survey was conducted after explaining the purpose and content of the research and getting their agreement.

 

2.3. Measurement tools:

The sociodemographic characteristics were set as school year, religion, existence of parents, willingness to marriage, and the parents’ marital state. To measure the family strength, an instrument modified and supplemented by Cho⁹, which modified the ICPS family functioning scale, and each category was classified into ‘Strongly disagree’ 1 point, ‘disagree’ 2 points, ‘neutral’ 3 points, ‘agree’ 4 points, and ‘strongly agree’ 5 points. Among the total of 20 questions, 11 are positive and 9 are negative and the negative questions were inversely calculated. The subordinate concepts of family strength criterion are family cohesiveness, family adaptation, and family communication. The family cohesiveness refers to emotional intimacy or an individual toward other members of family and family adaptation refers to ability to adjust to difference situations while family communication refers to the sharing of information, thoughts, and emotions between the family members. The criterions of family strength show that the higher the points indicated the more effective family strength and each subordinate factor is shown accordingly. The credibility of this research showed Cronbach's⍺ =.85.

 

The familism values are the criterion that gives the value to a family and this study used the instrument developed by Jin¹⁰. Each category was classified into ‘Strongly disagree’ 1 point, ‘disagree’ 2 points, ‘neutral’ 3 points, ‘agree’ 4 points, and ‘strongly agree’ 5 points. The higher points showed that the values were more traditional. The credibility of this research showed Cronbach’α=. 88.

 

For marital values, a measure developed by Yoon Kyung Jung was employed¹¹. Each category was classified into ‘Strongly disagree’ 1 point, ‘disagree’ 2 points, ‘neutral’ 3 points, ‘agree’ 4 points, and ‘strongly agree’ 5 points.The higher the points indicated the more conservativeness about the marriage while the lower the points showed more openness about the marriage. The credibility of this research showed Cronbach's ⍺ =.78.

 

2.4. Data analysis:

The data collected for the purpose of this study used the following analysis method using SPSS18.0 statistic program.

 

First, an average and percentage of the target sociodemographic characteristics were calculated.

 

Second, an average and a standard deviation were calculated to analyze the target’s family strength, familism values, and marital values.

 

Third, a t-test and ANOVA verification were conducted to examine the differences in family strength, familism values and marital values according to the target’s sociodemographic characteristics.

 

Fourth, a correlation analysis was conducted to investigate the relationship between family strength, familism values and marital values.

 

3. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION:

3.1. Sociodemographic characteristics of subjects:

The sociodemographic characteristics such as school year, religion, existence of parents, willingness to marriage and the current state of parents are shown in Table 1. In school year, the 2^nd year topped the list with 35.4%, followed by the 1^st year, 4^th year, and 3^rd year. Those with a religion were 56.3% and those without were 43.7%. 94.4% of the target had both parents alive and 5.6% of them had only one of the parents alive. In the questions of willingness to marriage, ‘agree’ topped the list with 34.3%, followed by ‘strongly agree,’ ‘neutral,’ ‘disagree,’ and ‘strongly disagree.’ And ‘happy’ topped the questions of the current state of parents with 35.1%, followed by ‘neutral,’ ‘very happy,’ ‘unhappy,’ and ‘very unhappy.’

 

Table 1: Sociodemographic characteristics of subjects

	Category	N	%
School year	1st	67	25.0
	2nd	95	35.4
	3rd	48	17.9
	4th	58	21.6
Religion	Have	151	56.3
	None	117	43.7
Survival state of parents	Both parents alive	253	94.4
	Only one of the parents alive	15	5.6
Willingness to marriage	Strongly disagree	10	3.7
	Disagree	20	7.5
	Neutral	60	22.4
	Agree	92	34.3
	Strongly agree	86	32.1
Current state of parents	Very happy	55	20.5
	Happy	94	35.1
	Neutral	82	30.6
	Unhappy	32	11.9
	Veryunhappy	5	1.9

 

3.2. The family strength, familism values and marital values of the target:

The family strength, familism values and marital values of the target of this research are shown in Table 2. The family strength was 3.72 points, family cohesiveness, the subordinate of family strength, was 3.93 points, family adaptation was 3.54 points, and family communication was 3.61 points. The familism values showed 2.80 points and marital values showed 3.30 points.

 

Table 2: The family strength, familism values and marital values of the target

 

3.3. The differences in family strength, familism values and marital values based on sociodemographic characteristics:

3.3.1. The differences in family strength based on sociodemographic characteristics:

The differences in family strength based on sociodemographic characteristics of the research target are shown in Table 3.They depended on having a religion or not, willingness to marriage and the current marital state of the parents. Those with a religion showed higher family strength than those without one and ‘strongly agree’ topped the question of willingness to marriage. Also, those who answered ‘very happy’ in the questions of the current marital state of the parents showed the highest rate of family strength.

 

Table 3: The differences in family strength based on sociodemographic characteristics

	Category	M	SD	T/F
School year	1st	3.77	0.49	0.329
	2nd	3.72	0.54
	3rd	3.69	0.59
	4th	3.71	0.48
Religion	Have	3.78	0.55	2.302*
	None	3.64	0.48
Survival state of parents	Both parents alive	3.73	0.52	1.230
	Only one of the parents alive	3.57	0.60
Willingness to marriage	Strongly disagree	3.75	0.62	3.222* (d<e)
	Disagree	3.69	0.49
	Neutral	3.63	0.53
	Agree	3.64	0.45
	Strongly agree	3.87	0.56
Current state of parents	Very happy	4.08	0.43	33.295** (a>b, a>c, a>d, a>e, b>c, b>d, b>e)
	Happy	3.86	0.39
	Neutral	3.50	0.46
	Unhappy	3.25	0.46
	Very unhappy	3.02	0.83

 

 

3.3.2. The differences in familism values based on sociodemographic characteristics:

The differences in familism based on sociodemographic characteristics of the research target are shown in Table 4.The differences were also shown according to the school year, having a religion or not, and willingness to marriage. In school year, the 3^rd year ranked the highest and statistically meaningful differences were shown between the 2^nd and 3^rd year, and also between the 2^nd and 4^th year. In the question of having a religion or not, those with a religion showed a higher points while in the question of willingness to marriage, ‘strongly agree’ topped the list.

 

Table 4: The differences in familism values based on sociodemographic characteristics

	Category	M	SD	T/F
School year	1st	2.76	0.55	5.046** (b<c,b<d)
	2nd	2.62	0.71
	3rd	3.02	0.71
	4th	2.95	0.67
Religion	Have	2.97	0.68	4.947**
	None	2.57	0.61
Survival state of parents	Both parents alive	2.78	0.67	-1.898
	Only one of the parents alive	3.12	0.71
Willingness to marriage	Strongly disagree	1.97	0.66	41.298** (a<d,a<e,b<d,b<e,c<d,c<e,d<e)
	Disagree	2.01	0.54
	Neutral	2.46	0.52
	Agree	2.81	0.46
	Strongly agree	3.30	0.60
Current state of parents	Very happy	2.90	0.79	0.987
	Happy	2.84	0.67
	Neutral	2.69	0.62
	Unhappy	2.73	0.61
	Very unhappy	2.88	0.76

 

 

3.3. 3. The differences in marital values based on sociodemographic characteristics:

The differences in marital values based on sociodemographic characteristics of the research target are shown in Table 5.The differences were shown depending to the school year, having a religion or not, willingness to marriage, and the current marital state of the parents. In school year, the 3^rd year ranked the highest and statistical differences were shown between the 2^nd and 3^rd year, and also between the 2^nd and 4^th year. Also, those with a religion showed a higher point while in the question of willingness to marriage, ‘strongly agree’ topped the list. In the questions of the current marital state of the parents, ‘very unhappy’ topped the list and a meaningful difference was shown between those who answered ‘very happy’ and those who answered ‘neutral.’

 

Table 5: The differences in marital values based on sociodemographic characteristics

	Category	M	SD	T/F
School year	1st	3.25	0.37	7.765** (b<c,b<d)
	2nd	3.17	0.43
	3rd	3.46	0.41
	4th	3.45	0.48
Religion	Have	3.42	0.41	4.975**
	None	3.16	0.43
Survival state of parents	Both parents alive	3.30	0.44	-1.206
	Only one of the parents alive	3.44	0.43
Willingness to marriage	Strongly disagree	2.73	0.59	43.710** (a<d,a<e,b<d,b<e,c<d,c<e,d<e)
	Disagree	2.88	0.25
	Neutral	3.07	0.32
	Agree	3.28	0.31
	Strongly agree	3.66	0.38
Current state of parents	Very happy	3.48	0.49	5.429** (a>c)
	Happy	3.34	0.41
	Neutral	3.15	0.35
	Unhappy	3.24	0.52
	Very unhappy	3.51	0.43

 

 

3.4. The relationship between family strength, familism values and marital values:

The correlation between family strength, familism values and marital values is shown in Table 6.A meaningful correlation was shown between family strength and marital values and among the subordinate concepts of family strength, family cohesiveness, family communication and marital values had a meaningful correlation. The family cohesiveness showed a meaningful correlation with familism values and familism values also showed a high level of correlation with marital values.

 

 

Table 6: The relationship between family strength, familism values and marital values

	Family strength	Subordinate of family strength	Family adaptation	Family communication	Familism values	Marital  values
Family  strength	1	0.885**	0.809**	0.853**	0.096	0.224**
Subordinate of family strength		1	0.569**	0.644**	0.197**	0.326**
Family adaptation			1	0.534**	-0.043	0.084
Family communication				1	0.066	0.136*
Familism values					1	0.693**
Marital values						1

 

 

 

4. CONCLUSION:

The purpose of this study was to identify the self-perceived family health of early adulthood college students who grew up in various backgrounds and to determine the effect of this family health on their familist values and outlook on marriage. As shown in the results of the study by Jo (2007), it was found that family health had a significant effect on outlook on marriage, and among demographic variables, religion was found to be a meaningful parameter. This can be interpreted as that a healthy value for outlook on marriage can be expected from healthy families and that it is due to the religious formation of values on outlook on marriage. Also, it could be seen that parental marriage had a significant effect on the family health and outlook on marriage in children. In other words, the more the parents have a happy marriage, the more their children will be positively affected by family health and future outlook on marriage.

 

So that early adulthood college students who will lead our society in the future will build a healthy family and build awareness of healthy family values and outlook on marriage, in addition to family members, socially, there needs to be policy support, healthy family campaigns, and education to establish healthy family values and outlook on marriage.

 

5. ACKNOWLEDGMENT:

This research was supported by Baekseok University in Korea.

 

6. REFERENCES:

1.       Kim S K, Yoo Y J, The effects of family of origin's emotional health and ego identity on psychological wellbeing of married young adults, Korean Journal of Family Relations Association, 2001, 6(1), pp. 43-64.

2.       Song I S, Hong D, Park H S, The Effects of Family Strength on Happiness as Perceived by College Students, Korean Journal of Family Welfare, 2013, 18(4), pp. 579-598.

3.       Yoo Y J, Lee I S, Kim S K, Choi H J, Development of Korea Family Strengths Scale(KFSS), Journal of Korean Management Association, 2013, 31(4), pp.113-129.

4.       Steinmetz S K, Sussman M B, Handbook of Marriage and the Family, Plenum Press-New York and London, 1986.

5.       Jeon H S, The Effects of Familism and Sense of intimacy to older parents on Filial Responsibility of Korean Women, Journal of Digital Convergence, 2016, 14(5), pp. 501-506.

6.       Daly M, What Adult Worker Model? A Critical Look at Recent Social Policy Reform in Europe from a Gender and Family Perspective, Social Politics, 2011 18(1), pp. 1-23.

7.       Kim H, Hong Y S, Attitude to Reproductive health, Value of Marriage and Children of University students, The Journal of Korean Society for School Health Education, 2013, 14(1), pp. 13-24.

8.       Do M H, The Effect of College Students` Awareness on Marriage and Childbirth to Future Marriage and Childbirth, Korean Journal of Family Welfare, 2011, 16(4), pp.163-178.

9.       Cho E S, The Effect of the Perceived Family Strength on Marital and Family Values among College Students, Daegu University, and Unpublished master's Thesis, 2007.

10.     Jin D R, A study on the willingness of marriage formation among never married workers.-focusing on family friendly institution at work and marriage encouraging policy, Sungshin Women's University, Unpublished master's Thesis, 2013.

11.     http://libproxy.bu.ac.kr/90a6552/_Lib_Proxy_Url/www.riss.kr/link?id=T13261034.

12.     Chung Y K, Choi J H, The effect of parents’ marital quality on married womens marital adjustment and perspective toward marriage, Korean Journal of Woman Psychology, 2010, 15(3), pp. 331-353.

 

 

 

 

Accepted on 27.08.2017        © RJPT All right reserved