(eBook PDF) Exploring Family Theories

4th Edition
Go to download the full and correct content document:
https://ebooksecure.com/product/ebook-pdf-exploring-family-theories-4th-edition/
More products digital (pdf, epub, mobi) instant
download maybe you interests ...

(eBook PDF) Family Theories: An Introduction 4th

http://ebooksecure.com/product/ebook-pdf-family-theories-an-
introduction-4th/

(eBook PDF) Family Theories: An Introduction 4th

Edition

http://ebooksecure.com/product/ebook-pdf-family-theories-an-
introduction-4th-edition/

(eBook PDF) Exploring Lifespan Development 4th Edition

http://ebooksecure.com/product/ebook-pdf-exploring-lifespan-
development-4th-edition/

(eBook PDF) Nursing Theories and Nursing Practice 4th

Edition

http://ebooksecure.com/product/ebook-pdf-nursing-theories-and-
nursing-practice-4th-edition/
(eBook PDF) Practice Guidelines for Family Nurse
Practitioners 4th Edition

http://ebooksecure.com/product/ebook-pdf-practice-guidelines-for-
family-nurse-practitioners-4th-edition/

(eBook PDF) Second Language Learning Theories: Fourth

Edition 4th Edition

http://ebooksecure.com/product/ebook-pdf-second-language-
learning-theories-fourth-edition-4th-edition/

(Original PDF) International Relations Theories

Discipline and Diversity 4th Edition

http://ebooksecure.com/product/original-pdf-international-
relations-theories-discipline-and-diversity-4th-edition/

Progress in Heterocyclic Chemistry Volume 29 1st

Edition - eBook PDF

https://ebooksecure.com/download/progress-in-heterocyclic-
chemistry-ebook-pdf/

(eBook PDF) Exploring Geology 4th Edition by Stephen

Reynolds

http://ebooksecure.com/product/ebook-pdf-exploring-geology-4th-
edition-by-stephen-reynolds/
 Acknowledgments

If you look deeply into the palm of your hand, you will see your parents and all generations of
your ancestors. All of them are alive in this moment. Each is present in your body. You are
the continuation of these people.
Thich Nhat Hanh, Vietnamese Monk, Activist and Writer

We thank our grandparents and parents (Ken and Linda Smith, Ray and Pat Kunkle) for
the part they played in our lives and the values and beliefs they instilled in us, such as the
significance of hard work, a sense of curiosity and the importance of education. We thank
our husbands, Brett and Jeff, for their support, patience, and understanding as we worked
on this new edition. Thanks also go to our children, who allowed us to take time away
from them so that we could focus on writing. May they see the values we have worked
hard to instill in them in the palms of their hands as they move forward in their lives.

Education makes us free. The world of knowledge and of the intellect is where all people can
meet and converse. Education liberates people from prejudice.
Daisaku Ikeda, Buddhist Leader, Peacebuilder, Poet and Educator

We thank Sherith Pankratz at Oxford University Press for her encouragement and guid-
ance in regard to the project as we attempt to provide an educational tool that will create
conversation and further knowledge for students in the social sciences. We thank our
fellow educators in our departments for their support of this project and for their devotion
to educating students in a way that prepares them to help people and liberates them from
prejudice. Specifically, we thank the human development department at Washington State
University Vancouver in Vancouver, Washington, and the human development and family
science department at Messiah College in Mechanicsburg, Pennsylvania. We also acknowl-
edge Bron Ingoldsby and Beth Miller, who were co-authors with Suzanne Smith on the
first edition of this book. Without their scholarship and friendship, this book would never
have been written. Finally, we thank the many colleagues who graciously gave of their
time and shared their knowledge by reviewing the book as we sought feedback to inform
our revisions for the fourth edition.
• Kelly Campbell, California State University, San Bernardino
• Jean Dawson, Franklin Pierce University
• Debi Grebenik, Newman University

vii

00-Smith-Hamon-FM.indd 7 9/12/16 10:54 AM

 viii Ack now l ed gm en ts

• Michael Merten, Oklahoma State University

• Monica Miller-Smith, University of Connecticut
• Francis A. O’Connor, LaGrange College
• Candace Philbrick, North Dakota State University
• Tyler M. Smith, Baylor University
• Anthony Walker, Indiana State University

00-Smith-Hamon-FM.indd 8 9/12/16 10:54 AM

 About the Authors

Suzanne R. Smith is an associate professor of human development at Washington State

University Vancouver, where she serves as the director of academic planning and special
assistant to the vice chancellor. She earned her Ph.D. from the University of Georgia. In
addition to serving as an administrator, she teaches courses on human development theo-
ries and family diversity. Dr. Smith’s primary area of research is parent–child relation-
ships, but recently she has spent significant time providing professional development to
teachers in Burundi, Africa, so they can teach positive youth development via the use of
school gardens. She has served as president of both the Northwest Council on Family
Relations and the Teaching Family Science Association and as a member of the Board of
the National Council on Family Relations.
Raeann R. Hamon is a professor of family science and gerontology and chair of the
human development and family science department at Messiah College in Pennsylvania.
Dr. Hamon earned her Ph.D. from Virginia Tech. A certified family life educator, she
teaches courses on family theories, family life education methodology, interpersonal rela-
tionships, marital relationships, and aging. Her research is related to intergenerational re-
lationships, families in later life, issues related to the discipline of family science, teaching
pedagogy, and Bahamian families. Dr. Hamon is an active member of the National Coun-
cil on Family Relations, of which she is a Fellow, and the Family Science Association.

ix

00-Smith-Hamon-FM.indd 9 9/12/16 10:54 AM

 New to the Fourth Edition

In addition to minor changes throughout each chapter, the fourth edition of Exploring
Family Theories features the following major changes:
• Multiple chapters have been reorganized so content is more clear and
understandable.
• The sections on current areas of research have been updated to reflect the most
recent research.
• The majority of supplemental readings now come from more recent publications.
• The history section of multiple chapters has been expanded to include develop-
ments since the last edition of the book.
• More application activities and guiding/reflecting questions for supplemental read-
ings were added.
• An instructor’s manual is now available with related assignments, experiential ac-
tivities, and a test bank.

00-Smith-Hamon-FM.indd 10 9/12/16 10:54 AM

 EX PLOR I NG FA M I LY
THEOR IES

00-Smith-Hamon-FM.indd 11 9/12/16 10:54 AM

00-Smith-Hamon-FM.indd 12 9/12/16 10:54 AM
 Introduction

“Why do you do that?” “Why does our family insist on doing things that way?” Q ­ uestions
about people’s behaviors are the essence of social science inquiry. The focus may be on
individuals, families, social groups, communities, or cultures. To engage in the process of
social science inquiry, you need two things: research and theory. Before we enter into a
discussion of social science theory, specifically family theory, we first must have a discus-
sion about theory in general.

W H AT IS T H EORY?

A theory is a tool used to understand and describe the world. More specifically, a theory
is a general framework of ideas and how they relate to each other. Theories can be used to
ask and answer questions about particular phenomena. You probably are familiar with
many theories already, such as the theory of evolution, the theory of relativity, the theory
of the big bang, and the theory of plate tectonics. Theories are also important in the social
sciences, particularly those that help us to study families.
Theories have identifiable components that make up their structures. Assumptions are
beliefs that are taken for granted or believed to be true. They form the foundation under-
lying the theory. Concepts are the terms and specific ideas used in building the theory.
Propositions are statements that demonstrate how concepts fit together in a context. They
are the relationships between the concepts, the “glue” holding the theory together. Thus,
a theory is based on assumptions and should be composed of clearly defined concepts that
fit together in the form of propositions. For these propositions to be useful, they must be
specific enough to help describe, explain, and predict phenomena and to ask questions
that would guide their research in deductive ways.
A theory’s ability to help us generate questions is known as its heuristic value. A
theory can help us decide what to research; the results of that research can, in turn, lead
to the development of new theories, which again can lead to new research. In other words,
theories must be empirically testable. Variables and relationships within the propositional
statements must be operationalized, and the researcher must develop measures to assess
the components outlined. A theory should also be flexible enough to grow and change, so
that new information can be fed back into the theory, causing it to adapt and change in
an inductive feedback loop; but a theory also must be general enough to apply to a wide
variety of specific cases. In short, the usefulness of a theory is determined by its ability to

01-Smith-Hamon-Introduction.indd 1 9/12/16 4:50 PM

 2 EX PL OR I NG FA M I LY T H EOR I ES

describe more, rather than less, detail; to predict with more, rather than less, accuracy;
and to apply to a broader, rather than a narrower, range of specific cases.
It is also true that theories have a certain point of view, or lens. Depending on our
emphasis, the perspective may be more broad (macro) or more narrow (micro). The lens
we choose is often a function of the question we are asking and so, again, a theory’s use-
fulness depends on the subject at hand. In the social sciences, human situations are com-
plex, and it is difficult to find one theory that can explain or predict every emotion,
behavior, interaction, process, and event. Because of this, social theories function as lenses
we can use to help us interpret or focus on the components of human interactions in
conceptual ways.
Although theories are abstract, they do serve important purposes in our understand-
ing of social phenomena. Theories provide a general framework for understanding data in
an organized way and show us how to intervene (Burr 1995). In social sciences, it is rare
to find someone who believes that there is only one way to understand social phenomena,
particularly phenomena as complicated as individuals and families. Thus, the frustrating
but truthful response to many questions in social science is “It depends.” Indeed, it does
depend on one’s point of view, but that is not the same as one’s opinion. For example,
someone may believe that divorce sets a bad example for children. As scholars, we know
that divorce is too complex to be labeled merely good or bad and that questions about the
effects of divorce on children cannot be easily answered. We need more complex ideas to
analyze such situations, and we must consider multiple elements within families to study
aspects of divorce, its development, and its effects. To decide which theory to use, we
consider the usefulness of the theory, or how well it enables us to answer the questions at
hand. How “well” a theory explains a situation depends on the researcher’s point of view,
or his or her lens. Thus, two social scientists may each choose a different theory to explain
the same situation.
Each theory allows us to look at different aspects of family life. One theory might
suggest that we focus on the roles people play, whereas another might suggest that we
focus more on the individual’s gains and losses. Looking through the lens of the theory
enables us to see how the world looks from that perspective. Each theory has underlying
basic assumptions that focus the lens, just as each has concepts and propositions that
guide what we analyze. Each theory has been developed within a historical context and
has asked different questions; thus, each theory has a different research history. Because
of this, each theory can give us a different answer to our question, which is why “It
depends.”

Where Do Theories Come From?

Theories generally do not emerge fully formed. Instead, they build slowly over time, as
scholars gather data through observation and analysis of evidence, relating concepts to-
gether in different ways. This type of reasoning, moving from specific bits of information
toward a general idea, is known as inductive reasoning. Once the theory exists, scholars use
the general ideas of the theory to generate more specific questions, often in the form of
research questions, thereby moving in the opposite direction. Taking a general idea from
a theory and testing it to tease out the details is known as deductive reasoning. Both kinds
of thinking patterns are common in theory construction and development, and once
again, they demonstrate the link between research and theory.

01-Smith-Hamon-Introduction.indd 2 9/12/16 4:50 PM

 I n t roduc t ion 3

Theory
(Generalities)

Inductive Deductive
reasoning reasoning

Research
(Specifics)
The cycle of theory building.

However, as you can see from the figure, “The cycle of theory building,” theories are
not stagnant. Theories help us to formulate questions that we test via research. The re-
search generates data, which filter back into the cycle and help us to further refine the
theory. Such a beneficial relationship is called a symbiotic relationship. Research poses ques-
tions and then tries to answer them by making observations and collecting data. When
enough data have been collected, patterns emerge, and a theory is developed to try to
explain the patterns that are observed. Thus, theory helps us explain “what’s going on”
and can allow us to predict “what’s going to happen” when certain conditions are present.
As our theoretical ideas change, so do our research questions. There is a continuous feed-
back loop between discovery and confirmation, disconfirmation, or modification. It is also
important to remember that theories do not exist in a cultural vacuum, but that they are
the products of humans and their experiences. As humans redefine their values, their
theories are influenced by those changes. This is particularly evident in theories of social
science but can be seen in natural science theories as well. After all, it was once believed
that the world was flat and that the earth was the center of the universe.
Radical changes or shifts in scientific views are known as paradigm shifts (Kuhn 1970).
These shifts occur after significant data that do not fit the current theory have been gath-
ered. Thus, a new theory is needed to explain the data. According to Kuhn, in the natural
sciences, paradigm shifts change science dramatically, as did Einstein’s theory of relativity
or the fact that Columbus did not, in fact, fall off the end of the earth.
In the social sciences, paradigm shifts are not as obvious, because we do not evaluate
our theories from the standpoint of truth, but rather from how useful they are. We, as
scholars, cannot define what is true for all humans or families, so neither can our theo-
retical perspectives. At times, significant changes in culture or human experience can
change theoretical perspectives in radical ways. For instance, it is not uncommon to see
shifts in the most popular theories employed. While reviewing theories in family geron-
tology during the 1990s, Roberto and colleagues (2006) noted a decline in the use of
certain theories and an increase in others. Over time, certain theories can fall out of favor
and be replaced by more relevant and helpful frames of reference. You will note that
between the third and fourth editions of this text, some theories have been used more
heavily than others.

01-Smith-Hamon-Introduction.indd 3 9/12/16 4:50 PM

 4 EX PL OR I NG FA M I LY T H EOR I ES

What Are the Functions of Theory?

Theories have a variety of functions in helping us to generate knowledge about families.
Stan Knapp (2009) identifies the “generative” capacity of family theory in each of the fol-
lowing five functions: descriptive function, sensitizing function, integrative function, ex-
planatory function, and value function. Relative to its descriptive function, theories help
name, classify, and organize phenomena in such a way that we can understand them. By
articulating basic concepts and the relationship between events, theory helps us to de-
scribe what we hope to study. As part of a sensitizing function, theory can help us to be
aware of processes, events, and phenomena that we may not have otherwise noticed. It
sensitizes us to matters that we might have missed without calling our attention to them.
The integrative function helps us make connections between events or processes that appear
to be distinct and unrelated. It identifies the interrelatedness of disparate concepts and
propositions, tying together ideas in a new way to make sense of data. The explanatory
function is probably the best known role of theory. Its unique purpose is to explain data.
It attempts to answer the questions “how” and “why,” or why do things happen as they
do? It also attempts to make predictions about phenomena that can be tested in future
research. Finally, theory possesses a value function. Knapp (2009) notes that theories
“become receptacles for valued ideas in making sense of our world” (135). The values
embedded in theoretical assumptions, descriptions of concepts, and the like advocate for
certain value stances. Thus, it is important to be aware of the underlying values espoused
within a particular theory. According to Knapp, we must see the many functions of
theory and not just be consumed by its integrative and explanatory functions or we will
miss the potential to better understand our subject.

How Do We Evaluate Theories?

It is always important to continue to evaluate the theories we are using. How do we do
this? Doherty et al. (1993, 24–26) delineate seventeen criteria that are helpful in assessing
the value and quality of theories in the family field and social sciences in general. Below,
we list these criteria and then explain them in more detail.
1. Richness of ideas refers to the general appeal that a theory offers to its user. Is the
theory original? Does it offer the depth and unique understanding for which a
scholar is looking?
2. Clarity of concepts relates to the extent to which concepts are well defined. Are the
concepts clear and distinct enough from each other that scholars are able to com-
municate about them?
3. Coherence of connections among concepts refers to the ability of the concepts to logically
or intuitively relate well to one another. How easy is it to see the relationships
between theoretical concepts?
4. Simplicity or parsimony refers to the need to weigh a theory’s simplicity against its
effectiveness and utility. Does the theory express its ideas parsimoniously without
being too reductionistic?
5. Clarity of theoretical assumptions and presuppositions relates to how well the origina-
tors of the theory have conveyed their philosophy of science and their assumptions

01-Smith-Hamon-Introduction.indd 4 9/12/16 4:50 PM

 I n t roduc t ion 5

about family relationships. What are the authors’ underlying assumptions about
human behavior and family dynamics?
6. Consistency with its own assumptions and presuppositions refers to the extent to which
fundamental assumptions are supportive of and related to one another. Is there
internal coherence between underlying assumptions and presuppositions outlined
in the theory?
7. Acknowledgment of its sociocultural context represents the cultural context from which
the theory emerged. What was the cultural context when the theory was devel-
oped? What implications does that have for the theory’s use in light of the current
cultural context?
8. Acknowledgment of underlying value positions refers to the extent to which theorists
have made their values known. What are the values represented in this theory?
What is good? What is right? What is worthwhile?
9. Acknowledgment of theoretical forebears refers to the need to reference the work of
those who have contributed to the continuing development of the theory. Whose
ideas have contributed to the origination and refinement of this theory? Are there
scholars against whom this theorist is reacting in its development?
10. Potential for validation and current level of validation refers to the extent to which
research observations are able to affirm a theory. Does the theory actually seem to
reflect what transpires in the lives of families?
11. Acknowledgment of limits and points of breakdown refers to the critical eye needed to
identify the limits of the theory and its presuppositions. How does the theory fail
to enlighten our understanding of phenomena under consideration?
12. Complementarity with other theories and levels of explanation refers to the extent to
which a theory is able to interface with other conceptual frameworks that exist
within the field. How does the theory fit together with other theoretical frame-
works in the field?
13. Openness to change and modification refers to the willingness to refine, modify, revise,
and even abandon ideas over time, rather than voraciously defend them. Are the
theory’s proponents willing to discuss its merits and shortcomings with others
and modify the theory accordingly?
14. Ethical implications relate to the assumptions about morality on which the theory
is based. What impact does this theory have on the rights and responsibilities of
families and their members? How can the theory be ethically applied to enhance
our understanding of family life?
15. Sensitivity to pluralistic human experience refers to the ability of a theory to accom-
modate a vast range of human and family experiences. To what extent is the
theory sensitive to pluralistic human experiences as related to things like gender,
race, ethnicity, age, social class, and sexual orientation?
16. Ability to combine personal experience and academic rigor refers to the extent to which
a theory enables the scholar to move back and forth between lived personal expe-
riences within families and professional reasoning. How able is the theory to ac-
commodate shifting back and forth between personal immersion and academic
objectivity and distance?

01-Smith-Hamon-Introduction.indd 5 9/12/16 4:50 PM

 6 EX PL OR I NG FA M I LY T H EOR I ES

17. Potential to inform application for education, therapy, advocacy, social action, or public
policy refers to the theory’s ability to help theorizers translate theory and related
data into actions that benefit families. Does the theory help to improve the lives
of families via education, therapy, public policy, and advocacy? Can the theory be
applied to real families?
It is important to recognize that no single theory is likely to measure up on all these
items. Nonetheless, these criteria offer one way to more fully appreciate and assess each theory.

The Need for Theorizing

If theories are so important for enhancing our understanding of relationships and the
world around us, how does one tackle this assignment? According to Jetse Sprey (1990),
“theorizing first and foremost is an intentional activity” (22). We must commit ourselves
to the work of developing and testing theory. Many agree that theorizing is a process, not
just a product (Bengtson et al. 2005; Roberto, Blieszner, and Allen 2006). It is something
you do, an activity in which you engage.
Many of the world’s greatest minds, those whose ideas literally changed the way we
understand the world, were theoreticians. For example, we live in a post-Freudian world:
Freud’s theories revolutionized our understanding of the mind, sexuality, and how we deal
with stress. Karl Marx suggested that communism is an alternative to social injustice and
oppression and a method by which all humans could achieve a humane and equitable life.
Freud and Marx brought about significant shifts in the way we thought about issues in
society and human behavior that are still valued today, although we do not believe every
aspect of Freudian psychology, and Marx’s Communist Manifesto is considered to have its
limitations. Similarly, Piaget brought about another paradigm shift in the area of cognitive
development with his insight that children think in ways that are qualitatively different
from adult processes. His theory has undergone modifications, and many researchers still
use his work as a basis for their research, but some of them have also gone beyond his work
and expanded on his ideas. In this way, we evaluate theories based on their useful aspects.
Bengtson et al. (2005) likened theorizing to putting together the pieces of a puzzle.
Each puzzle piece is composed of a bit of family research data. Alone and disorganized,
the pieces do not make sense and are perplexing. However, when assembled in a meaning-
ful way, the puzzle provides a more coherent image or picture. Thus, theorizers use ideas
or abstractions to make sense of data. Because theories are intellectual constructs that are
subject to change as a new puzzle piece or evidence is introduced, theorizers’ work is never
complete. In fact, theories should never be considered static and unchanging. Theorizers
must always scrutinize theories for their utility and relevance across diverse groups and
over the course of time (Bengtson et al. 2005). We need family scholars who commit
themselves to theorizing—assembling, disassembling, and then reassembling the puzzles
of life. Can you imagine yourself as a family theorizer?

FA M ILY T H EORY

James White (2015) argues that it is essential to develop family theories that are distinct
from those used to examine social groups, as used in the fields of sociology. After all, the
family is a unique type of grouping. According to White, Klein, and Martin (2015),

01-Smith-Hamon-Introduction.indd 6 9/12/16 4:50 PM

 I n t roduc t ion 7

families differ from other social groups in four ways: Families last much longer than most
social groups and require lifetime memberships. Families are intergenerational, unlike
other social groups, and virtually ensure a range of ages. Although most social groups are
primarily based on affinity, families represent biological and affinal (e.g., legal) relation-
ships. Finally, families are connected to larger kinship networks.
So, why study family theory? The family is certainly the most important and endur-
ing of all human social groupings. What, then, could be more fascinating than attempt-
ing to understand family dynamics? Nothing affects our personalities and happiness more
than our family relationships. Why is kinship always the center of any human society?
How do these interactions work, and why are they so influential in our lives?
Because there are so many perspectives to consider, it is not a simple thing to develop
a coherent theory of family interaction. Social science is made even more difficult because
we are attempting to understand ourselves. Whereas in the natural sciences we are exam-
ining objects and life forms that are less complex than we are, in human development we
do not have the advantage of a higher intelligence than the subject to get a good metaper-
spective. With groups like families, there is the added complexity of looking beyond the
individual to the relationships between individuals. All of this makes family theory de-
velopment difficult at best.
We are also hindered by the difficulty of not even having a good and commonly ac-
cepted definition of the term family. An oft-used definition is “two or more people related
by birth, marriage, or adoption residing in the same unit” (Welsh 2012, 557). However,
there is ongoing scientific and political debate on what we mean when we say “family.” As
we will see, each theory has its own variation on the definition.
This is also a good example of why we need more than one family theory. First, there
is more than one type and one definition of family. Second, even if you agree on how to
define the family, you may disagree on which particular aspect of their interactions or
behaviors your attention should be focused on. Finally, each theory offers an insight that
others cannot provide because of their different lenses.
The purpose of this text is to provide a basic introduction to the major theories per-
taining to the family among professionals today. Each theory addresses different aspects
of family life and answers different questions. Humans are extremely complex, and it is
difficult to analyze ourselves; therefore, every theory will be imperfect. But each one
brings us closer to understanding and being able to make positive change where needed
in family life. Each theory has its own basic assumptions and concepts and is a product of
its own historical context as well. Each is used in answering specific research questions
that other theories may not answer or may answer differently. It will be up to you to try
on the lens of each theory and determine how well you think it explains human and
family behavior.

T EXT ORGA NIZ ATION

We will discuss ten theories about the family that have been widely used and accepted
over the past fifty years. We present these ten theories in a loosely chronological order. It
is difficult to be more precise because most of them experienced a gradual emergence, and
some had long histories as general social theories before they were used to study the
family as a specific social phenomenon. Our order of placement is determined based on

01-Smith-Hamon-Introduction.indd 7 9/12/16 4:50 PM

 8 EX PL OR I NG FA M I LY T H EOR I ES

the time when significant publications discussing the theory from a family perspective
appeared.
Symbolic interaction theory is one of the first and most influential theories in the
field of family science. Its roots stem from the pragmatic philosophers of the early 1900s,
and it is based on the belief that we construct our own realities. Events and relationships
take on different meanings based on an individual’s perceptions and the context of a situ-
ation. Symbolic interactionism continues to be a popular family theory today.
Shortly after the Depression and World War II and in the infancy of family theory
building, several other theories took center stage. Structural functionalism, which comes
from sociology and anthropology, takes a macro view of the family within culture. It
looks at the family through the lens of asking what the family does to justify its existence
in society.
Family development theory applies basic-stage theory from psychology to families. It
considers how families change over time in response to normative family events. Al-
though its widespread use comes later, family stress theory, which looks at how the family
as a system deals with challenging situations or events, was developed while studying
family reactions to the Depression and later to wartime during World War II.
In the late 1950s and well into the 1960s, several theories took more of an inside look
at family communication and interaction. First, family systems theory derived from com-
munication and clinical work. It made a micro analysis of how family members relate to
each other in a complex world of multicausality. Rooted in systems theory, ecological
theory emerged with the growing recognition of the need to examine individuals and
families within their environments, primarily the home. Next, conflict theory came from
a sociological perspective and focused on how people and families create stability and
instability in their relationships because of differences in status. Then, social exchange
theory took its inspiration from behaviorism and economics in analyzing family decision
making as a rational process of choosing between rewards and costs.
Our final two theoretical approaches began to receive significant notice in the 1970s.
Feminist theorists began their investigations with the perspective that women’s experi-
ences are central to our understanding of families and focused on the influences of social
situations and politics. Most recently, the biosocial perspective, with its roots in the work
of Charles Darwin, maintains as its general premise that, although humans are driven by
innate structures, the family and cultural environment influence their behaviors.
Each chapter begins with a fictional vignette to introduce a way of using that particu-
lar theory for understanding an aspect of family life. It is followed by a brief history of the
development of the theory and then an explanation of the basic assumptions that under-
gird it. The primary terms and concepts used in understanding the theory are provided.
The usefulness of each theory is highlighted by examples of research and application
within the particular framework. Every theory is critiqued, and its principal problems
and strengths are discussed. Finally, the reader is provided with a series of questions and
exercises designed to relate the implications of the theory to the vignette and to his or her
own personal and family life.
A highlight of this book is the integration of research with theory and practice. After
each chapter, a professional article is included. Each research article illustrates how new
information about families is gained when researchers and practitioners use theories to
guide their efforts. Whereas in the first edition of this text a classic article was included
after each chapter, for this edition, we have chosen more contemporary readings. The

01-Smith-Hamon-Introduction.indd 8 9/12/16 4:50 PM

 I n t roduc t ion 9

epilogue links the chapters together, using a conceptual model for comparing and con-
trasting the theories. This model indicates how each theory can be useful for understand-
ing and guiding intervention for particular situations from its viewpoint.
It is important to remember that anyone can collect facts, but being a scholar re-
quires understanding the facts in a way that allows for research, testing, comprehension,
and practical application. To be useful, data must be ordered within a theoretical frame-
work. Which theories will you enjoy the most and find the most useful? There is only one
way to find out!

R EFER ENC ES

Bengtson, V., A. C. Acock, K. R. Allen, P. Dilworth-Anderson, and D. M. Klein. 2005. Theory

and theorizing in family research: Puzzle building and puzzle solving. In Sourcebook of family
theory and research, ed. V. L. Bengtson, A. C. Acock, K. R. Allen, P. Dilworth-Anderson, and
D. M. Klein, 3–33. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Burr, W. R. 1995. Using theories in family science. In Research and theory in family science, ed. R. D. Day,
K. R. Gilbert, B. H. Settles, and W. R. Burr, 73–88. Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks–Cole.
Doherty, W. J., P. G. Boss, R. LaRossa, W. R. Schumm, and S. K. Steinmetz. 1993. Family theories
and methods: A contextual approach. In Sourcebook of family theories and methods: A contextual
approach, ed. P. G. Boss, W. J. Doherty, R. LaRossa, W. R. Schumm, and S. K. Steinmetz,
3–30. New York: Plenum.
Knapp, S. J. 2009. Critical theorizing: Enhancing theoretical rigor in family research. Journal of
Family Theory and Review 1: 133–145.
Kuhn, T. S. 1970. The structure of scientific revolutions. 2nd ed. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Roberto, K. A., R. Blieszner, and K. R. Allen. 2006. Theorizing in family gerontology: New op-
portunities for research and practice. Family Relations 55: 513–525.
Sprey, J. (ed.). 1990. Fashioning family theory. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Welsh, K. J. 2012. Family life now. 2nd ed. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
White, J. M., D. M. Klein, and T. F. Martin. 2015. Family theories. 4th ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

01-Smith-Hamon-Introduction.indd 9 9/12/16 4:50 PM

 1

Symbolic Interactionism Theory

Keiko and Thanh are leaving the house to attend a cocktail party sponsored by
Thanh’s company. It is important that he be there because he is up for a big pro-
motion this year and wants to make sure those in charge know who he is and can
connect his face with his name because his name is unusual in the United States.
Keiko is tired from working all day and taking care of the children’s needs before
they leave the house, so she is dreading the party. Thanh, however, is excited.
They are greeted at the door by the company vice president and a loud band.
Thanh introduces his wife with pride and accepts champagne for both of them
to sip as they mingle in the crowd. He is really in his element, speaking to every-
one he passes, introducing his wife, and keeping his hand on the small of her
back to make sure she feels comfortable and included. Because she does not
know anyone there, he wants to make sure she is close so he can introduce her
to everyone and make her feel like a part of the group. He is enjoying the music
and expensive champagne and cannot wait for the dancing to begin. Thanh says
to his wife, “Isn’t this the best party you’ve ever been to? And can you believe
who is here—all the important people, and I’ve gotten to talk to all of them.
I can’t imagine a more perfect evening!”
As Keiko looks at him, he knows something is wrong. He asks, “Aren’t you en-
joying yourself?” She does not know what to say to him. The place is too loud
and too crowded, and people are drinking way too much. She wonders how he
can stand knowing that everyone he speaks to is judging both of them. And why
does he have to be so controlling of her? Everywhere they go, he is right by her
side, as if he does not trust her to go out on her own for fear she will say some-
thing that would make him look bad. It is one of the worst nights of her life! How
can two people at the same party in the same place have such different opinions
about what is going on?
So, who was right—was it the best party they had ever been to or a night of feel-
ing controlled and judged? Was the party incredible or incredibly boring? The
answer to those questions, according to symbolic interactionism, is that they are
both right. People define situations based on their personal experiences and
sense of self. Thus, two people can be in the same situation and have different
interpretations of what is going on. We will learn more about this as we discuss
this multifaceted and exciting theory.

10

02-Smith-Hamon-Chap01.indd 10 9/12/16 10:57 AM

 S y m bol ic I n ter ac t ion i sm T h eory 11

HISTORY

Of all the theories discussed in this text, symbolic interactionism has probably had the
greatest impact on the study of families. Not only is this theory rich in history because it
has been in use since the early 1900s, but also it is still one of the most commonly used
theoretical perspectives in the field today, perhaps because it continues to develop (Fine
1993). The longevity and popularity of this theory are in part a result of its emphasis on a
conceptual framework that is not only rich in content but also adaptable to any time period.
Such success as a theory also comes from the fact that symbolic interactionism was uniquely
born out of both qualitative and quantitative research (LaRossa and Reitzes 1993).
Unlike most theories, there is no one person who is most commonly associated with
the development of symbolic interactionism. Thus, we must review the work of many
people to fully understand the basic assumptions of this theory. Although who is covered
in this section will vary from one writing to the next, this particular discussion is based
on the guidance of LaRossa and Reitzes (1993).
Symbolic interactionism has its earliest roots in the United States in the pragmatic
philosophers of the early 1900s, such as William James, John Dewey, Charles Peirce, and
Josiah Royce (Vander Zanden 1987). Not only were these scholars themselves influential
in the development of the theory, but also, perhaps more importantly, they trained their
students, who in turn became the primary contributors to the assumptions and concepts
that make this theory what it is today. The pragmatists did, however, contribute four
important ideas that laid the foundation for the development of symbolic interactionism.
The first important contribution of the pragmatists was to view the world as always
changing, rather than as a static structure whose history was predetermined. Second, the
pragmatists argued that social structure is not fixed in time, but constantly changing and
developing. Third, they were perhaps the first to suggest that meaning comes not from
objects themselves, but from our interactions with objects. For example, the meaning of a
table depends on the person who is viewing or using the table at the time. Finally, “they
exhibited an ideological commitment to progress and to democratic values” (La Rossa and
Reitzes 1993, 136) that could be advanced through science. Thus arose the notion that we
could use research to figure out how societies and people grow and change and how they
do so within the confines of a democratic society that is always evolving.
These four ideas came about at a time in history when people were desperate for in-
formation about how the changing structure of society was going to affect them. This was
the time of the industrial revolution, when people were going from working at home on
the farm to working at the factory, which also meant moving from rural areas to urban
areas closer to work (Mintz and Kellogg 1988). These changes left people feeling that
they had little or no control over their lives, which also meant that they probably had
little control over society. However, the ideas of symbolic interactionism allowed people
to feel as if they gained back a little more of that control because the theory was based on
the idea that people are not victims of some predetermined course of history, but are in-
stead able to change how things happen in society through communication and interac-
tion (LaRossa and Reitzes 1993).
Not only did these ideas appeal to society in general, but they were also accepted by
scholars because they were grounded in research. Symbolic interactionism provided the
means by which to study social interactions in a scientific fashion. It was at this time that
people began to study the family just as a scientist would study a specimen or an

02-Smith-Hamon-Chap01.indd 11 9/12/16 10:57 AM

 12 EX PL OR I NG FA M I LY T H EOR I ES

astronomer would study a constellation (LaRossa and Reitzes 1993). This empirical posi-
tion is still appealing to researchers today and continues to be one of the greatest strengths
of the theory (Burnier 2005).
As previously stated, one thing that makes symbolic interactionism unique is that it
is a combination of the efforts of many different researchers. Although many people made
important contributions to the development of this theory, we will focus on just a few:
George Herbert Mead, Charles Horton Cooley, William Isaac Thomas, Erving Goffman,
and Herbert Blumer.
George Herbert Mead, whose primary contributions focused on the self, is probably
the most recognized of all those who have influenced symbolic interactionism. He be-
lieved that we learn about ourselves through interactions with others that are based on
gestures (Mead 1934/1956). A gesture can be thought of as any action that causes a re-
sponse or reaction in another person. We can all think of certain finger gestures that are
sure to create a response in others, but Mead used the term more broadly to include such
things as language and facial expressions as well. We develop a sense of self-consciousness
when we can anticipate how other people will respond to our gestures. Because of this, it
takes interactions with others to fully develop a sense of self.
How does this process take place? Mead believed that people follow two stages to
develop a sense of self. In the first, the play stage, the child tries to use gestures to practice
the behaviors associated with different roles, such as that of mother, father, firefighter, or
teacher (Vander Zanden 1987). For example, if you have ever watched preschool children
play house, you have probably seen a girl imitate things she has seen her mother do, such
as cooking dinner, changing a baby’s diaper, or helping another child with homework.
Boys, in contrast, if they are in the dramatic play area of the preschool classroom at all,
are likely to be doing such things as pretending to drive the family to an event or orga-
nizing a play activity for the children. While engaged in this dramatic play experience,
children are able to imagine the attitudes of their parent or learn to take on the perspec-
tive of another person. During this stage, children usually assume the role of only one
person at a time.
In the second stage, however, children begin to take on the perspectives of many
people at one time and to see how the individual fits within that group (Mead 1934/1956).
This is called the game stage, and almost any childhood game is a good example. For in-
stance, when you play soccer, you need to think about not only what you are doing on the
field or the purpose of your position, but also what everyone else is doing. Another good
example is that of the family. During the game stage, children can understand what each
person’s role in the family is, including their own, and how the behavior of one family
member affects the interactions of other family members.
The final step in this process is being able to anticipate how one’s behaviors affect not
only those individuals in our immediate environment, but also those in society at large.
Mead (1934/1956) called this being able to take on the role of the “generalized other,”
which means understanding social norms and expectations so that one can guess how
other people will react to a specific gesture or interaction. One example is a young man
who had a schedule change and had to attend an important off-campus meeting at the
last minute. He had never been to the meeting place before and barely made it in time,
taking the first parking place he could find so he would not be late. As he left the build-
ing after the meeting, surrounded by people he considered important members of the
community, he walked up to his car and discovered he had parked in a handicapped

02-Smith-Hamon-Chap01.indd 12 9/12/16 10:57 AM

Another random document with
no related content on Scribd:
Patrol would be glad to set up, on any desired number of these
barren planets, as many atomic power plants as the Cahuitans
wanted; with controls set either to let go in an hour or to maintain
stability for twenty five thousand Galactic Standard years.
The Cahuitans would immediately extinguish all vortices not
containing products, and would move all living products to the new
planets as soon as the promised incubators were ready.
“Products indeed—they’re babies!” Joan insisted, when Cloud
stepped the information down to her level. “And how can they
possibly move them?”
“Easily enough,” the fulfillment told Cloud. “Blankets of force will
retain the warmth necessary for such short trips, provided each new
incubator is waiting, warm, and ready.”
“I see. But there’s one question I want to ask for myself,” and
Cloud went on to explain about the unbelievably huge sphere that
crossed Civilization’s vast expanse of space. “What’s the reason for
it?”
“To save time and effort. The product Medury devoted much of
both to the evaluation of a sufficiently productive, esthetically
satisfying, and mathematically correct construction. It would not be
logical to waste time and labor in seeking a variant or an alternate,
especially since Medury’s work showed, almost conclusively, that his
was in fact the most symmetrical construction possible. Now
symmetry, to us, is what you might, perhaps, call a ruling passion in
one of your own races.”
“Symmetry? The first twelve vortices were symmetrical, of
course, but from there on—nothing.”
“Ah—that is due to the differences between our thinkings;
particularly in our mathematical and philosophical thinkings. The
circle, the sphere, the square, the cube—all such elementary forms
—are common to both but the likenesses are few. The differences
are many; so many that it will require several thousands of your
Galactic Standard years for certain of my fellows and me to tabulate
them and to make whatever may be possible of reconciliation.”
“Well . . . thanks. One more question . . . maybe I shouldn’t ask it,
but . . . this that we have laid out is a wide-reaching and extremely
important program. Are you sure that you are able to speak for all
the Cahuitans who will be affected?”
“I am sure. Since we are a logical race we all think alike—
logically. On the other hand, your race does not seem to me at the
moment to be at all a logical one. Can you speak for it?”
“In this matter I can; and you, in my mind, will know that I can,”
and in this case Cloud could indeed speak for the Patrol. Philip
Strong, after one glance in Cloud’s mind, would issue the necessary
orders himself and would explain later—to anyone capable of
accepting the true explanation.
“Very well. We will destroy the empty incubators at once, and will
go ahead with the rest of the project whenever you are ready.”
The Cahuitan broke contact and vanished.
In the ship, Cloud got up. So did Joan. Without exchanging a
word or a thought they went hungrily into each other’s arms.
After a time, and still keeping one arm around his Joan, Cloud
reached out and punched a button on his intercom.
“Captain Ross?”
“Ross speaking.”
“Cloud. Mission accomplished. Return to Tellus, please, at full
touring blast.”
“Very well, sir.”
And “Storm” Cloud, Vortex Blaster, was out of a job.

A The reader will please understand that I am doing the best I can
with words we all know. E.E.S.

TRANSCRIBER NOTES
 Misspelled words and printer errors have been corrected. Where
multiple spellings occur, majority use has been employed.
Punctuation has been maintained except where obvious printer
errors occur.
 *** END OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK MASTERS OF
THE VORTEX ***

Updated editions will replace the previous one—the old editions will
be renamed.

Creating the works from print editions not protected by U.S.

copyright law means that no one owns a United States copyright in
these works, so the Foundation (and you!) can copy and distribute it
in the United States without permission and without paying copyright
royalties. Special rules, set forth in the General Terms of Use part of
this license, apply to copying and distributing Project Gutenberg™
electronic works to protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG™ concept
and trademark. Project Gutenberg is a registered trademark, and
may not be used if you charge for an eBook, except by following the
terms of the trademark license, including paying royalties for use of
the Project Gutenberg trademark. If you do not charge anything for
copies of this eBook, complying with the trademark license is very
easy. You may use this eBook for nearly any purpose such as
creation of derivative works, reports, performances and research.
Project Gutenberg eBooks may be modified and printed and given
away—you may do practically ANYTHING in the United States with
eBooks not protected by U.S. copyright law. Redistribution is subject
to the trademark license, especially commercial redistribution.

START: FULL LICENSE

THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE
 PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK

To protect the Project Gutenberg™ mission of promoting the free

distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work (or
any other work associated in any way with the phrase “Project
Gutenberg”), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full
Project Gutenberg™ License available with this file or online at
www.gutenberg.org/license.

Section 1. General Terms of Use and

Redistributing Project Gutenberg™
electronic works
1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg™
electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree
to and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property
(trademark/copyright) agreement. If you do not agree to abide by all
the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or
destroy all copies of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works in your
possession. If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a
Project Gutenberg™ electronic work and you do not agree to be
bound by the terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from
the person or entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in
paragraph 1.E.8.

1.B. “Project Gutenberg” is a registered trademark. It may only be

used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people
who agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement. There are a
few things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg™ electronic
works even without complying with the full terms of this agreement.
See paragraph 1.C below. There are a lot of things you can do with
Project Gutenberg™ electronic works if you follow the terms of this
agreement and help preserve free future access to Project
Gutenberg™ electronic works. See paragraph 1.E below.
1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation (“the
Foundation” or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the
collection of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works. Nearly all the
individual works in the collection are in the public domain in the
United States. If an individual work is unprotected by copyright law in
the United States and you are located in the United States, we do
not claim a right to prevent you from copying, distributing,
performing, displaying or creating derivative works based on the
work as long as all references to Project Gutenberg are removed. Of
course, we hope that you will support the Project Gutenberg™
mission of promoting free access to electronic works by freely
sharing Project Gutenberg™ works in compliance with the terms of
this agreement for keeping the Project Gutenberg™ name
associated with the work. You can easily comply with the terms of
this agreement by keeping this work in the same format with its
attached full Project Gutenberg™ License when you share it without
charge with others.

1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also
govern what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most
countries are in a constant state of change. If you are outside the
United States, check the laws of your country in addition to the terms
of this agreement before downloading, copying, displaying,
performing, distributing or creating derivative works based on this
work or any other Project Gutenberg™ work. The Foundation makes
no representations concerning the copyright status of any work in
any country other than the United States.

1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg:

1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other

immediate access to, the full Project Gutenberg™ License must
appear prominently whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg™
work (any work on which the phrase “Project Gutenberg” appears, or
with which the phrase “Project Gutenberg” is associated) is
accessed, displayed, performed, viewed, copied or distributed:
 This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United
States and most other parts of the world at no cost and with
almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away
or re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License
included with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org. If you
are not located in the United States, you will have to check the
laws of the country where you are located before using this
eBook.

1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg™ electronic work is derived

from texts not protected by U.S. copyright law (does not contain a
notice indicating that it is posted with permission of the copyright
holder), the work can be copied and distributed to anyone in the
United States without paying any fees or charges. If you are
redistributing or providing access to a work with the phrase “Project
Gutenberg” associated with or appearing on the work, you must
comply either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1 through
1.E.7 or obtain permission for the use of the work and the Project
Gutenberg™ trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.

1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg™ electronic work is posted

with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution
must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any
additional terms imposed by the copyright holder. Additional terms
will be linked to the Project Gutenberg™ License for all works posted
with the permission of the copyright holder found at the beginning of
this work.

1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project

Gutenberg™ License terms from this work, or any files containing a
part of this work or any other work associated with Project
Gutenberg™.

1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this

electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without
prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with
active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project
Gutenberg™ License.
1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary,
compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form,
including any word processing or hypertext form. However, if you
provide access to or distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg™ work
in a format other than “Plain Vanilla ASCII” or other format used in
the official version posted on the official Project Gutenberg™ website
(www.gutenberg.org), you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense
to the user, provide a copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means
of obtaining a copy upon request, of the work in its original “Plain
Vanilla ASCII” or other form. Any alternate format must include the
full Project Gutenberg™ License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1.

1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying,

performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg™ works
unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.

1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing

access to or distributing Project Gutenberg™ electronic works
provided that:

• You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from
the use of Project Gutenberg™ works calculated using the
method you already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The
fee is owed to the owner of the Project Gutenberg™ trademark,
but he has agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to
the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty
payments must be paid within 60 days following each date on
which you prepare (or are legally required to prepare) your
periodic tax returns. Royalty payments should be clearly marked
as such and sent to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive
Foundation at the address specified in Section 4, “Information
about donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive
Foundation.”

• You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who

notifies you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that
s/he does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg™
License. You must require such a user to return or destroy all
 copies of the works possessed in a physical medium and
discontinue all use of and all access to other copies of Project
Gutenberg™ works.

• You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of

any money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in
the electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90
days of receipt of the work.

• You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free
distribution of Project Gutenberg™ works.

1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project Gutenberg™

electronic work or group of works on different terms than are set
forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing from
the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the manager of
the Project Gutenberg™ trademark. Contact the Foundation as set
forth in Section 3 below.

1.F.

1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend

considerable effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe
and proofread works not protected by U.S. copyright law in creating
the Project Gutenberg™ collection. Despite these efforts, Project
Gutenberg™ electronic works, and the medium on which they may
be stored, may contain “Defects,” such as, but not limited to,
incomplete, inaccurate or corrupt data, transcription errors, a
copyright or other intellectual property infringement, a defective or
damaged disk or other medium, a computer virus, or computer
codes that damage or cannot be read by your equipment.

1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except

for the “Right of Replacement or Refund” described in paragraph
1.F.3, the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner
of the Project Gutenberg™ trademark, and any other party
distributing a Project Gutenberg™ electronic work under this
agreement, disclaim all liability to you for damages, costs and
expenses, including legal fees. YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO
REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT LIABILITY, BREACH OF
WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE
PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH 1.F.3. YOU AGREE THAT THE
FOUNDATION, THE TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY
DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE LIABLE
TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL,
PUNITIVE OR INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE
NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGE.

1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you

discover a defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it,
you can receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by
sending a written explanation to the person you received the work
from. If you received the work on a physical medium, you must
return the medium with your written explanation. The person or entity
that provided you with the defective work may elect to provide a
replacement copy in lieu of a refund. If you received the work
electronically, the person or entity providing it to you may choose to
give you a second opportunity to receive the work electronically in
lieu of a refund. If the second copy is also defective, you may
demand a refund in writing without further opportunities to fix the
problem.

1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth in
paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you ‘AS-IS’, WITH NO
OTHER WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED,
INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF
MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE.

1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied

warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of damages.
If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement violates the
law of the state applicable to this agreement, the agreement shall be
interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or limitation permitted
by the applicable state law. The invalidity or unenforceability of any
provision of this agreement shall not void the remaining provisions.
1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the
Foundation, the trademark owner, any agent or employee of the
Foundation, anyone providing copies of Project Gutenberg™
electronic works in accordance with this agreement, and any
volunteers associated with the production, promotion and distribution
of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works, harmless from all liability,
costs and expenses, including legal fees, that arise directly or
indirectly from any of the following which you do or cause to occur:
(a) distribution of this or any Project Gutenberg™ work, (b)
alteration, modification, or additions or deletions to any Project
Gutenberg™ work, and (c) any Defect you cause.

Section 2. Information about the Mission of

Project Gutenberg™
Project Gutenberg™ is synonymous with the free distribution of
electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of
computers including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers.
It exists because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and
donations from people in all walks of life.

Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the

assistance they need are critical to reaching Project Gutenberg™’s
goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg™ collection will
remain freely available for generations to come. In 2001, the Project
Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a
secure and permanent future for Project Gutenberg™ and future
generations. To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary
Archive Foundation and how your efforts and donations can help,
see Sections 3 and 4 and the Foundation information page at
www.gutenberg.org.

Section 3. Information about the Project

Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation
The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non-profit
501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the
state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal
Revenue Service. The Foundation’s EIN or federal tax identification
number is 64-6221541. Contributions to the Project Gutenberg
Literary Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent
permitted by U.S. federal laws and your state’s laws.

The Foundation’s business office is located at 809 North 1500 West,

Salt Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887. Email contact links and up
to date contact information can be found at the Foundation’s website
and official page at www.gutenberg.org/contact

Section 4. Information about Donations to

the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive
Foundation
Project Gutenberg™ depends upon and cannot survive without
widespread public support and donations to carry out its mission of
increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can
be freely distributed in machine-readable form accessible by the
widest array of equipment including outdated equipment. Many small
donations ($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax
exempt status with the IRS.

The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating

charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United
States. Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a
considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and
keep up with these requirements. We do not solicit donations in
locations where we have not received written confirmation of
compliance. To SEND DONATIONS or determine the status of
compliance for any particular state visit www.gutenberg.org/donate.

While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where

we have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no
prohibition against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in
such states who approach us with offers to donate.

International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make

any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from
outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff.

Please check the Project Gutenberg web pages for current donation
methods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of
other ways including checks, online payments and credit card
donations. To donate, please visit: www.gutenberg.org/donate.

Section 5. General Information About Project

Gutenberg™ electronic works
Professor Michael S. Hart was the originator of the Project
Gutenberg™ concept of a library of electronic works that could be
freely shared with anyone. For forty years, he produced and
distributed Project Gutenberg™ eBooks with only a loose network of
volunteer support.

Project Gutenberg™ eBooks are often created from several printed

editions, all of which are confirmed as not protected by copyright in
the U.S. unless a copyright notice is included. Thus, we do not
necessarily keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper
edition.

Most people start at our website which has the main PG search
facility: www.gutenberg.org.

This website includes information about Project Gutenberg™,

including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary
Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how
to subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks.