十年中期理论与方法特刊简介

IF 2.7 1区 社会学 Q1 FAMILY STUDIES Journal of Marriage and Family Pub Date : 2024-10-08 DOI:10.1111/jomf.13039
Liana C. Sayer
{"title":"十年中期理论与方法特刊简介","authors":"Liana C. Sayer","doi":"10.1111/jomf.13039","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>This issue, Volume 86, number 5, is the sixth contribution to the Journal of Marriage and Family's tradition of mid-decade issues on theory and method. The objective of the mid-decade Special Issues is to showcase theoretical and methodological advances in family research over the last decade, with the aim of guiding future family science research. Like the five previous issues, the 2024 issue includes invited and author-initiated contributions. The JMF Editorial Board and deputy editors provided suggestions on topics and authors of potential contributions. Invited and author-initiated contributions went through the standard review process, some through multiple rounds, and were evaluated by experienced reviewers selected for their topic and methodological expertise. The issue is stronger because of the reviewers' intellectual contributions.</p><p>The issue includes work elaborating theoretical developments, the relation between theory and method, issues in research design, advances in measurement and analytic strategies, and original empirical studies that integrate conceptual and analytic advances. Many contributions are from early career scholars, a promising signal of the vibrant future of family science research. Much of the featured work engages with how best to conceptualize, measure, analyze, or center diverse families in our scholarship, including diversity within social groups, across both meso and macro contexts. Collectively, the work underscores the need to act on measurement and analytic developments to advance inclusion and equity for minoritized individuals and families in our contemporary world.</p><p>Work that represents theoretical developments includes Letiecq's exposition of “marriage fundamentalism” as a central mechanism of family inequality; Dow and Gordon's discussion of the core components of Critical Race Theory (CRT) and their implications for family scholarship; and Robinson and Stone's conceptualization of a trans family systems framework to highlight how cisnormative investments and divestments influence trans individuals' relations with family and how these processes might be reimagined or disrupted. In addition, Qian and Hu develop a multi-level digital ecology of family life framework and show how this framework can be used to investigate the practices, presentation, and implications of “online” families and meso-level online communities situated within macro-level systems.</p><p>Six articles focus on the relation between theory and method. Doan, Quadlin, and Khanna discuss the trade-offs inherent in the novel (to family science) experimental approach and provide a guide to best practices in design to generate sound data capable of testing causal effects. Williams, Curtis, Boe, and Jensen highlight QuantCrit as a necessary corrective theoretical and analytic approach for studying processes of structural racial inequities and marginalized families broadly. Goldberg and Allen highlight key trends in qualitative family science research and elaborate on how practicing analytic flexibility in the design, analysis, and reporting of qualitative research allows for creative discoveries in the research process that might be suppressed through rigid adherence to institutionalized templates. Homan, Everett, and Brown develop a framework of structural racism, sexism, and sexual and gender minority oppression, offer generative approaches for conceptualizing and measuring structural inequities at different levels and across different contexts, and present a roadmap for applying a structural inequities framework. Riina synthesizes theoretical perspectives on the link between neighborhoods and families and provides guidance on defining, measuring, and analyzing the mechanisms through which neighborhoods affect and interact with family processes and outcomes. Thomeer, Brantley, and Hernandez highlight the benefits of multi-method approaches and offer step-by-step blueprints for mixed-methods research, including examples of research questions across multi-part studies and guidance on how to carefully attend to decisions on the timing of different parts of mixed-methods studies.</p><p>Williams discusses strategies to reduce trade-offs between designing large and diverse samples that generate rich data on family dynamics and outcomes and high respondent burden. The solutions offered are innovative use of existing data and collecting primary data through remote observation, digital trace data, and “big-team” collaborations. Three articles interrogate cultural, political, and legal definitions of family and propose measurement approaches intended to disrupt the sedimentation of the “Standard, North-American Family.” Fish, Reczek, and Ezra call for researchers to challenge uncritical presentations of cisgender, heterosexual, White, often middle-class individuals and families as “representative.” Compton and Kaufman show how an improved measure of relationship status and analysis of open-text data can provide new insights on the prevalence of and change in queer families, unmarried partnerships, nonmonogamous relationships, and more accurate representations of heterosexual relationships. Julian, Kamp Dush, and Manning critically overview current advances in the measurement of sexual and gender minority families in five population-based surveys, provide best practices for analyses of these data, and offer recommendations to further improve representation of sexual and gender diverse (SGD) families in population-level data.</p><p>Three articles offer advances in analytic strategies. Sun makes the case for using supervised machine learning to address the inherent limitations of confirmatory research testing complex, multifaceted theories with regression-based analytic strategies that demand parsimony. Mund, Park, and Nestler compare different approaches to studying between- and within-person variation in family science research, develop and apply dyadic extensions of Cross-Lagged Panel Models (CLPM), and offer guidance on assessing the appropriateness, feasibility, and “interpretability” of different approaches to analyzing complex relationships between individuals and families in context and over time. Fallesen, Andersen, and Elwert elaborate methodological advances that move beyond identifying average treatment effects and instead can be used to examine effect heterogeneity across observed and unobserved variables and treatment effect heterogeneity across covariates.</p><p>Last, three studies offer integrative advances: original empirical analyses that showcase how the theoretical/analytic advances produce insights obscured by previous theoretical and analytical approaches. Madhavan develops the novel space–time continuum (STC) framework and applies it in her analysis of kinship support in Kenya. Barber and Liao refine and extend Life Course Theory and use sequence analysis and between-within regression analysis of intensive longitudinal data from the Relationship Dynamics and Social Life Study, representing “micro life courses” of aspects of pregnancy risk. Fasang, Gruijters, and Van Winkle develop “the life course boat” perspective that conceptualizes structural factors, meso-level factors, and individual agency as interactive mechanisms that shape family life courses over historical time, place, and social location. The article applies the life course boat perspective to a qualitative case study of fertility trends in Senegal and a quantitative sequence analysis of the destandardization of US family life courses among Baby Boomer and Millennial cohorts.</p><p>I will close with a heartfelt thank you to our community of reviewers. This issue would not have come to fruition without the many reviewers who offered developmental and critical feedback to the authors. I am deeply grateful for their intellectual work and time in service to the family science community. I have learned a tremendous amount from a close reading of the initial submissions, the thoughtful reviews, and the final versions of the groundbreaking work in the issue. I am optimistic that the featured articles collectively offer the theoretical and methodological insights and tools necessary to guide innovative, timely, and much-needed family scholarship into the decade to come.</p>","PeriodicalId":48440,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Marriage and Family","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/jomf.13039","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Introduction to mid-decade Special Issue on Theory and Methods\",\"authors\":\"Liana C. Sayer\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/jomf.13039\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>This issue, Volume 86, number 5, is the sixth contribution to the Journal of Marriage and Family's tradition of mid-decade issues on theory and method. The objective of the mid-decade Special Issues is to showcase theoretical and methodological advances in family research over the last decade, with the aim of guiding future family science research. Like the five previous issues, the 2024 issue includes invited and author-initiated contributions. The JMF Editorial Board and deputy editors provided suggestions on topics and authors of potential contributions. Invited and author-initiated contributions went through the standard review process, some through multiple rounds, and were evaluated by experienced reviewers selected for their topic and methodological expertise. The issue is stronger because of the reviewers' intellectual contributions.</p><p>The issue includes work elaborating theoretical developments, the relation between theory and method, issues in research design, advances in measurement and analytic strategies, and original empirical studies that integrate conceptual and analytic advances. Many contributions are from early career scholars, a promising signal of the vibrant future of family science research. Much of the featured work engages with how best to conceptualize, measure, analyze, or center diverse families in our scholarship, including diversity within social groups, across both meso and macro contexts. Collectively, the work underscores the need to act on measurement and analytic developments to advance inclusion and equity for minoritized individuals and families in our contemporary world.</p><p>Work that represents theoretical developments includes Letiecq's exposition of “marriage fundamentalism” as a central mechanism of family inequality; Dow and Gordon's discussion of the core components of Critical Race Theory (CRT) and their implications for family scholarship; and Robinson and Stone's conceptualization of a trans family systems framework to highlight how cisnormative investments and divestments influence trans individuals' relations with family and how these processes might be reimagined or disrupted. In addition, Qian and Hu develop a multi-level digital ecology of family life framework and show how this framework can be used to investigate the practices, presentation, and implications of “online” families and meso-level online communities situated within macro-level systems.</p><p>Six articles focus on the relation between theory and method. Doan, Quadlin, and Khanna discuss the trade-offs inherent in the novel (to family science) experimental approach and provide a guide to best practices in design to generate sound data capable of testing causal effects. Williams, Curtis, Boe, and Jensen highlight QuantCrit as a necessary corrective theoretical and analytic approach for studying processes of structural racial inequities and marginalized families broadly. Goldberg and Allen highlight key trends in qualitative family science research and elaborate on how practicing analytic flexibility in the design, analysis, and reporting of qualitative research allows for creative discoveries in the research process that might be suppressed through rigid adherence to institutionalized templates. Homan, Everett, and Brown develop a framework of structural racism, sexism, and sexual and gender minority oppression, offer generative approaches for conceptualizing and measuring structural inequities at different levels and across different contexts, and present a roadmap for applying a structural inequities framework. Riina synthesizes theoretical perspectives on the link between neighborhoods and families and provides guidance on defining, measuring, and analyzing the mechanisms through which neighborhoods affect and interact with family processes and outcomes. Thomeer, Brantley, and Hernandez highlight the benefits of multi-method approaches and offer step-by-step blueprints for mixed-methods research, including examples of research questions across multi-part studies and guidance on how to carefully attend to decisions on the timing of different parts of mixed-methods studies.</p><p>Williams discusses strategies to reduce trade-offs between designing large and diverse samples that generate rich data on family dynamics and outcomes and high respondent burden. The solutions offered are innovative use of existing data and collecting primary data through remote observation, digital trace data, and “big-team” collaborations. Three articles interrogate cultural, political, and legal definitions of family and propose measurement approaches intended to disrupt the sedimentation of the “Standard, North-American Family.” Fish, Reczek, and Ezra call for researchers to challenge uncritical presentations of cisgender, heterosexual, White, often middle-class individuals and families as “representative.” Compton and Kaufman show how an improved measure of relationship status and analysis of open-text data can provide new insights on the prevalence of and change in queer families, unmarried partnerships, nonmonogamous relationships, and more accurate representations of heterosexual relationships. Julian, Kamp Dush, and Manning critically overview current advances in the measurement of sexual and gender minority families in five population-based surveys, provide best practices for analyses of these data, and offer recommendations to further improve representation of sexual and gender diverse (SGD) families in population-level data.</p><p>Three articles offer advances in analytic strategies. Sun makes the case for using supervised machine learning to address the inherent limitations of confirmatory research testing complex, multifaceted theories with regression-based analytic strategies that demand parsimony. Mund, Park, and Nestler compare different approaches to studying between- and within-person variation in family science research, develop and apply dyadic extensions of Cross-Lagged Panel Models (CLPM), and offer guidance on assessing the appropriateness, feasibility, and “interpretability” of different approaches to analyzing complex relationships between individuals and families in context and over time. Fallesen, Andersen, and Elwert elaborate methodological advances that move beyond identifying average treatment effects and instead can be used to examine effect heterogeneity across observed and unobserved variables and treatment effect heterogeneity across covariates.</p><p>Last, three studies offer integrative advances: original empirical analyses that showcase how the theoretical/analytic advances produce insights obscured by previous theoretical and analytical approaches. Madhavan develops the novel space–time continuum (STC) framework and applies it in her analysis of kinship support in Kenya. Barber and Liao refine and extend Life Course Theory and use sequence analysis and between-within regression analysis of intensive longitudinal data from the Relationship Dynamics and Social Life Study, representing “micro life courses” of aspects of pregnancy risk. Fasang, Gruijters, and Van Winkle develop “the life course boat” perspective that conceptualizes structural factors, meso-level factors, and individual agency as interactive mechanisms that shape family life courses over historical time, place, and social location. The article applies the life course boat perspective to a qualitative case study of fertility trends in Senegal and a quantitative sequence analysis of the destandardization of US family life courses among Baby Boomer and Millennial cohorts.</p><p>I will close with a heartfelt thank you to our community of reviewers. This issue would not have come to fruition without the many reviewers who offered developmental and critical feedback to the authors. I am deeply grateful for their intellectual work and time in service to the family science community. I have learned a tremendous amount from a close reading of the initial submissions, the thoughtful reviews, and the final versions of the groundbreaking work in the issue. I am optimistic that the featured articles collectively offer the theoretical and methodological insights and tools necessary to guide innovative, timely, and much-needed family scholarship into the decade to come.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48440,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Marriage and Family\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-08\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/jomf.13039\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Marriage and Family\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jomf.13039\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"FAMILY STUDIES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Marriage and Family","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jomf.13039","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"FAMILY STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本期(第 86 卷第 5 期)是《婚姻与家庭杂志》关于理论和方法的十年中期特刊传统的第六期。十年中期特刊的目的是展示过去十年家庭研究在理论和方法上的进展,以指导未来的家庭科学研究。与前五期一样,2024 年特刊包括特邀稿件和作者倡议稿件。JMF 编辑委员会和副主编就潜在稿件的主题和作者提出了建议。受邀稿件和作者自发稿件都经过了标准审稿流程,有些稿件还经过了多轮审稿,并由经验丰富的审稿人根据他们在主题和方法论方面的专业知识进行评估。本期内容包括阐述理论发展、理论与方法之间的关系、研究设计中的问题、测量和分析策略方面的进展,以及整合了概念和分析进展的原创性实证研究。许多文章来自职业生涯初期的学者,这是家庭科学研究充满活力的未来的良好信号。大部分特色作品涉及如何在我们的学术研究中以最佳方式对多元化家庭进行概念化、测量、分析或以其为中心,包括社会群体内部的多元化,跨越中观和宏观背景。总体而言,这些作品强调了在当代世界中,需要根据测量和分析方面的发展来促进少数群体个人和家庭的包容与公平。代表理论发展的著作包括莱蒂克(Letiecq)对 "婚姻原教旨主义 "作为家庭不平等核心机制的阐述;道(Dow)和戈登(Gordon)对批判种族理论(Critical Race Theory,CRT)核心内容及其对家庭学术的影响的讨论;罗宾逊(Robinson)和斯通(Stone)对变性家庭系统框架的概念化,以强调顺式规范投资和撤资如何影响变性个人与家庭的关系,以及如何重新想象或破坏这些过程。此外,钱和胡建立了一个多层次的家庭生活数字生态框架,并展示了该框架如何用于研究 "在线 "家庭和位于宏观系统中的中层在线社区的实践、呈现和影响。Doan、Quadlin 和 Khanna 讨论了新颖(对家庭科学而言)的实验方法中固有的权衡问题,并提供了最佳设计实践指南,以生成能够检验因果效应的可靠数据。Williams、Curtis、Boe 和 Jensen 强调,QuantCrit 是研究结构性种族不平等和边缘化家庭过程的一种必要的纠正性理论和分析方法。戈德伯格和艾伦强调了定性家庭科学研究的主要趋势,并详细阐述了在定性研究的设计、分析和报告中如何灵活运用分析方法,从而在研究过程中实现创造性的发现,而这些发现可能会因为严格遵守制度化的模板而受到压制。霍曼(Homan)、埃弗雷特(Everett)和布朗(Brown)制定了结构性种族主义、性别歧视以及性和性别少数压迫的框架,提供了在不同层面和不同背景下概念化和衡量结构性不平等的生成方法,并提出了应用结构性不平等框架的路线图。Riina 综述了有关邻里与家庭之间联系的理论观点,并为界定、衡量和分析邻里影响家庭进程和结果并与之相互作用的机制提供了指导。Thomeer、Brantley 和 Hernandez 强调了采用多种方法的益处,并提供了混合方法研究的分步蓝图,包括多部分研究的研究问题范例,以及如何谨慎决定混合方法研究不同部分的时间安排的指导。Williams 讨论了如何减少在设计大型多样化样本以产生丰富的家庭动态和结果数据与高应答负担之间的权衡策略。提供的解决方案是创新使用现有数据,通过远程观察、数字跟踪数据和 "大团队 "合作收集原始数据。三篇文章探讨了家庭的文化、政治和法律定义,并提出了旨在打破 "标准北美家庭 "沉淀的测量方法。Fish、Reczek 和 Ezra 呼吁研究人员挑战不加批判地将顺性别、异性恋、白人、中产阶级个人和家庭视为 "代表 "的做法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Introduction to mid-decade Special Issue on Theory and Methods

This issue, Volume 86, number 5, is the sixth contribution to the Journal of Marriage and Family's tradition of mid-decade issues on theory and method. The objective of the mid-decade Special Issues is to showcase theoretical and methodological advances in family research over the last decade, with the aim of guiding future family science research. Like the five previous issues, the 2024 issue includes invited and author-initiated contributions. The JMF Editorial Board and deputy editors provided suggestions on topics and authors of potential contributions. Invited and author-initiated contributions went through the standard review process, some through multiple rounds, and were evaluated by experienced reviewers selected for their topic and methodological expertise. The issue is stronger because of the reviewers' intellectual contributions.

The issue includes work elaborating theoretical developments, the relation between theory and method, issues in research design, advances in measurement and analytic strategies, and original empirical studies that integrate conceptual and analytic advances. Many contributions are from early career scholars, a promising signal of the vibrant future of family science research. Much of the featured work engages with how best to conceptualize, measure, analyze, or center diverse families in our scholarship, including diversity within social groups, across both meso and macro contexts. Collectively, the work underscores the need to act on measurement and analytic developments to advance inclusion and equity for minoritized individuals and families in our contemporary world.

Work that represents theoretical developments includes Letiecq's exposition of “marriage fundamentalism” as a central mechanism of family inequality; Dow and Gordon's discussion of the core components of Critical Race Theory (CRT) and their implications for family scholarship; and Robinson and Stone's conceptualization of a trans family systems framework to highlight how cisnormative investments and divestments influence trans individuals' relations with family and how these processes might be reimagined or disrupted. In addition, Qian and Hu develop a multi-level digital ecology of family life framework and show how this framework can be used to investigate the practices, presentation, and implications of “online” families and meso-level online communities situated within macro-level systems.

Six articles focus on the relation between theory and method. Doan, Quadlin, and Khanna discuss the trade-offs inherent in the novel (to family science) experimental approach and provide a guide to best practices in design to generate sound data capable of testing causal effects. Williams, Curtis, Boe, and Jensen highlight QuantCrit as a necessary corrective theoretical and analytic approach for studying processes of structural racial inequities and marginalized families broadly. Goldberg and Allen highlight key trends in qualitative family science research and elaborate on how practicing analytic flexibility in the design, analysis, and reporting of qualitative research allows for creative discoveries in the research process that might be suppressed through rigid adherence to institutionalized templates. Homan, Everett, and Brown develop a framework of structural racism, sexism, and sexual and gender minority oppression, offer generative approaches for conceptualizing and measuring structural inequities at different levels and across different contexts, and present a roadmap for applying a structural inequities framework. Riina synthesizes theoretical perspectives on the link between neighborhoods and families and provides guidance on defining, measuring, and analyzing the mechanisms through which neighborhoods affect and interact with family processes and outcomes. Thomeer, Brantley, and Hernandez highlight the benefits of multi-method approaches and offer step-by-step blueprints for mixed-methods research, including examples of research questions across multi-part studies and guidance on how to carefully attend to decisions on the timing of different parts of mixed-methods studies.

Williams discusses strategies to reduce trade-offs between designing large and diverse samples that generate rich data on family dynamics and outcomes and high respondent burden. The solutions offered are innovative use of existing data and collecting primary data through remote observation, digital trace data, and “big-team” collaborations. Three articles interrogate cultural, political, and legal definitions of family and propose measurement approaches intended to disrupt the sedimentation of the “Standard, North-American Family.” Fish, Reczek, and Ezra call for researchers to challenge uncritical presentations of cisgender, heterosexual, White, often middle-class individuals and families as “representative.” Compton and Kaufman show how an improved measure of relationship status and analysis of open-text data can provide new insights on the prevalence of and change in queer families, unmarried partnerships, nonmonogamous relationships, and more accurate representations of heterosexual relationships. Julian, Kamp Dush, and Manning critically overview current advances in the measurement of sexual and gender minority families in five population-based surveys, provide best practices for analyses of these data, and offer recommendations to further improve representation of sexual and gender diverse (SGD) families in population-level data.

Three articles offer advances in analytic strategies. Sun makes the case for using supervised machine learning to address the inherent limitations of confirmatory research testing complex, multifaceted theories with regression-based analytic strategies that demand parsimony. Mund, Park, and Nestler compare different approaches to studying between- and within-person variation in family science research, develop and apply dyadic extensions of Cross-Lagged Panel Models (CLPM), and offer guidance on assessing the appropriateness, feasibility, and “interpretability” of different approaches to analyzing complex relationships between individuals and families in context and over time. Fallesen, Andersen, and Elwert elaborate methodological advances that move beyond identifying average treatment effects and instead can be used to examine effect heterogeneity across observed and unobserved variables and treatment effect heterogeneity across covariates.

Last, three studies offer integrative advances: original empirical analyses that showcase how the theoretical/analytic advances produce insights obscured by previous theoretical and analytical approaches. Madhavan develops the novel space–time continuum (STC) framework and applies it in her analysis of kinship support in Kenya. Barber and Liao refine and extend Life Course Theory and use sequence analysis and between-within regression analysis of intensive longitudinal data from the Relationship Dynamics and Social Life Study, representing “micro life courses” of aspects of pregnancy risk. Fasang, Gruijters, and Van Winkle develop “the life course boat” perspective that conceptualizes structural factors, meso-level factors, and individual agency as interactive mechanisms that shape family life courses over historical time, place, and social location. The article applies the life course boat perspective to a qualitative case study of fertility trends in Senegal and a quantitative sequence analysis of the destandardization of US family life courses among Baby Boomer and Millennial cohorts.

I will close with a heartfelt thank you to our community of reviewers. This issue would not have come to fruition without the many reviewers who offered developmental and critical feedback to the authors. I am deeply grateful for their intellectual work and time in service to the family science community. I have learned a tremendous amount from a close reading of the initial submissions, the thoughtful reviews, and the final versions of the groundbreaking work in the issue. I am optimistic that the featured articles collectively offer the theoretical and methodological insights and tools necessary to guide innovative, timely, and much-needed family scholarship into the decade to come.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
12.20
自引率
6.70%
发文量
81
期刊介绍: For more than 70 years, Journal of Marriage and Family (JMF) has been a leading research journal in the family field. JMF features original research and theory, research interpretation and reviews, and critical discussion concerning all aspects of marriage, other forms of close relationships, and families.In 2009, an institutional subscription to Journal of Marriage and Family includes a subscription to Family Relations and Journal of Family Theory & Review.
期刊最新文献
Issue Information Introduction to mid-decade Special Issue on Theory and Methods Intersectional bonds: Delinquency, arrest, and changing family social capital during adolescence “Doing authority”: Stories of parental authority across three generations The ties that bind: Questions for studying families in neighborhood contexts
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1