Search results

The quality of community life in the Detroit metropolitan area and factors influencing it were the main focus for this Detroit Area Study. To gauge perceptions of the quality of life in the Detroit tri-county area, respondents were asked how satisfied or dissatisfied they were with the tri-county area in general, with their neighborhoods, and with the quality of local community services, such as quality of local roads, public schools, police and garbage collection. In addition, the survey measured respondents' satisfaction or dissatisfaction with their own education, income, health, amount of leisure time, marriage, family life, job, home, and other aspects of their lives. Respondents also were questioned about their expectations for the future, their friendships in the tri-county area, friendliness with neighbors, use of recreational facilities, and where their children played. The survey also sought respondents' opinions on a wide range of other issues such as race relations, social stratification, abortion, the benefits of the free enterprise system, whether or not the United States was a meritocracy, and the meaning and value of democracy. Additional information gathered by the survey includes duration of residence in the tri-county area and at the current residence, place of previous residence, home ownership, rent payments, value of the home, number of separate bedrooms, motor vehicle ownership and use, use of public transportation, employment status, occupation and industry, independence and authority at work, number of siblings ever born, religious preference, social class identification, political preference, and information on age, sex, place of birth, income, race, ethnicity, and household composition.

This survey of adult management tasks began in 1995 as part of a larger national project (MIDUS) to investigate the patterns, predictors, and consequences of midlife development in the areas of physical health, psychological well-being, and social responsibility. Conducted in Boston, the survey was designed to examine how adults manage tasks in three domains of life -- work, family, and health. Further goals were to describe the subjective experience of goal attainment in midlife and to link it with objective measures of short-term longitudinal changes and cognitive functioning. During the national study, the Boston area was intentionally oversampled in order to create a subset to be used for in-depth study of management processes in midlife.

The Boston study began six months after the national study, and consisted of three interviews: a 30-minute phone interview followed by a 20-minute mail questionnaire (Time 1), a 90-minute in-person combination of cognitive tests, cortisol testing, photograph taking, and interview (Time 2), and a 30-minute phone interview (Time 3), conducted at six-month intervals. The focus was on projects related to family, work, and health that participants were working on during the period of the study. Each successive interview investigated participants' assessments of their progress in the present, recollection of six months in the past, and prediction six months into the future. Two waves of data collection were completed for this study. There were 151 respondents who participated in the first wave, 151 respondents who participated in both waves, and 26 additional respondents who participated in the second wave of data collection.

At Time 1, participants generated a list of two important family, work, and health tasks, then chose one of each as the most important in that domain. For each of the most important tasks, questions were asked about deadlines, whether participants were doing tasks because they had to do them, felt that they should do them, or chose to do them, and whether participants were doing tasks for themselves, others, or both. All six projects were ranked according to importance, and participants divided all their time into percentages spent on family, work, and health. The majority of questions on the mail questionnaire at Time 1 were taken from the Midlife Development Inventory (MIDI), the instrument created for the national study.

Respondents were asked to rate their control over health, to make assessments about present, past, and future health, to list any serious illnesses, and to indicate their physical health status. Study participants also rated their mental health, and discussed stressful life events in the last six months for self, spouse/significant other, parents, and children. Other questions focused on depression, mastery and constraints, community involvement, family, work, and life satisfaction. Scales used included the Ryff Well-Being Scales, the Eysenck Personality Inventory, the Staudinger and Baltes Wisdom Scale (1995), and the Ways of Coping Scale.

Time 2 was done in-person, and included a 50-minute series of cognitive tests followed by a 40-minute interview. The cognitive testing consisted of nine measures of cognitive ability completed in the following order: WAIS Forward Digit Span, WAIS Backward Digit Span, WAIS Vocabulary, counting backwards test, letter comparison test, dual-task test involving the counting backwards and letter comparison tests, WAIS Digit Symbol, Schaie-Thurston Letter Series, and Raven's Advanced Progressive Ma Matrices.

The Time 2 interview began with a series of questions asking about each of the family, work, and health tasks elicited from the participants in Time 1. Many questions were repeated from the MIDI including rating physical health, family life, work situation, and life overall, rating physical and mental health from poor to excellent, and a measure of stressful life events in the last six months for self, spouse/significant other, parents, and children. Participants were asked to rate how old they felt and how old they looked and to indicate their total yearly household income. Lastly, a series of open-ended questions asked about best and worst aspects of family, work, and health, how participants managed their daily life, the most challenging aspect of life and how it was managed, and what participants found most helpful in carrying out their daily life. Photographs were taken of participants at the conclusion of the interview.

Time 3 asked again about each of the most important family, work, and health tasks elicited from the participants in Time 1. Newly developed questions asked participants about ideas related to middle age, including when the participant believed middle age begins and ends, whether the participant was younger than, in, or older than middle age, the biggest changes in middle age, the best and worst aspects of middle age, whether the participant knew anyone who had had a "midlife crisis," and whether he or she would have or had had a midlife crisis. Participants were asked to rate how often they had problems and how often things went well with respect to a list of 26 domains, and how much stress and how much control they had in these domains. Lastly, participants were asked whether they had ever returned to a degree-oriented educational program after being out of school for five or more years, whether they were presently taking classes to further their education, and whether being a participant in the study had influenced the ways they thought about their family, work, and health projects.

This longitudinal data collection supplies information on the educational, vocational, and personal development of young people who were high school seniors in 1972 and examines the kinds of factors -- personal, familial, social, institutional, and cultural -- that may affect that development. The collection provides a broad spectrum of information on each student and covers areas such as ability, socioeconomic status, home background, community environment, ethnicity, significant others, current activity at time of survey, educational attainment, school experiences, school performance, work status, work performance and satisfaction, goal orientations, marriage and the family, and military experience.

Data collected in the base-year (1972) focus on factors relating to the student's personal/family background, education and work experiences, plans, aspirations, attitudes, and opinions. The first follow-up, which was conducted in 1973, offers information on the respondent's activity state (education, work, etc.), socioeconomic status, work and educational experience since leaving high school, future plans, and expectations. The second follow-up (1974) probes respondents on similar measures but is augmented by additional variables pertaining to work and education. The third follow-up (1976) contains additional items on graduate school application and entry, job supervision, sex roles, sex and race biases, and a subjective rating of high school experiences. The fourth follow-up (1979) offers data similar to the other follow-ups but includes some variables that were modified to elicit unique information. For the fifth follow-up, the sample members averaged 32 years of age and had been out of high school for 14 years. In addition to covering the same subject areas as the previous surveys, this follow-up includes additional questions on marital history, divorce, child support, and economic relationships in modern families.

Part 1 of this collection contains base-year data as well as data collected during four subsequent follow-ups undertaken in 1973, 1974, 1976, and 1979, while Part 11 contains fifth follow-up data for 1986. Part 2, the School File, contains information obtained from the respondent's high school and also from high school counselors. Data are available on school organization and enrollment, course offerings, special services and programs, library and other resources, time scheduling, and grading systems. Counselor information is supplied on work loads, counseling practices and facilities, experience with student financial aid programs, age, ethnicity, training, and experience. A supplementary School District Census File, Part 3, contains 1970 Census data tabulated by school district boundaries. In addition, the collection includes a FICE Code File and a CEEB Institutional Data Base File that can be used in conjunction with the student file to supply contextual information about respondents' colleges. The Institutional Data Base File offers data for colleges and universities on items such as enrollment, income and revenues, expenses, tuition and fees, and median student scores on standardized tests. Parts 7, 8, 9 and 10 contain transcript data from each postsecondary institution reported by sample members in the first through fourth follow-up surveys. Data are available for several types of postsecondary institutions, ranging from short-term vocational or occupational programs through major universities with graduate programs and professional schools. Data in these four rectangular files -- Student, Transcript, Term, and Course Files -- are organized to be used in combination hierarchically. Information is available on terms of attendance, fields of study, specific courses taken, and grades and credits earned. The Fifth Follow-Up Teaching Supplement (Parts 12) surveyed those members of the original 1972 sample who had obtained teaching certificates and/or who had teaching experience. Respondents were asked questions about their qualifications, experience, and attitudes toward teaching.