As the study of fathering has matured in recent years, fathering scholars have recognized the need for richer, broader measures of the construct of father involvement (Hawkins & Palkovitz, 1999). In an effort to create a measure sensitive to affective, cognitive, and direct and indirect behavioral components of involvement, 100 items were initially generated. Of these, 43 were selected for the "Inventory of Father Involvement" (IFI). Fathers (N = 723) reported on "how good a job" they were doing on the 43 indicators of father involvement. Exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses yielded nine relatively distinct first-order factors, indicating a single, global second-order factor of father involvement. The final model confirms a shorter, 26-item version of the IFI that reflects a multi-dimensional concept of father involvement.

Father involvement has been conceptualized and measured primarily as a temporal and directly observable phenomenon. This paper describes the problems associated with this narrow conceptualization and argues for the need to explore broader, more diverse, and inclusive conceptualizations and measures of father involvement. We review nascent, recent scholarship that supports this assertion, outline ways to improve conceptualization and measurement, and specify the benefits that would flow from this effort.

This research is based in part on a thesis submitted by the author to the Department of Psychology, Rutgers University, in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy The writing of this article was supported in part by released time from teaching responsibilities at Sterling College dunng the January term of 1983. I am especially grateful for the support and guidance of Richard Lore throughout the research effort. I also gratefully acknowledge the contributions of Drew Pieros in data collection and Am Froese, Rob Goffigon, and an anonymous reviewer for their critical readings of previous versions of the manuscript. Requests for reprints should be sent to Rob Palkovitz, Individual and Family Studies, College of Human Resources,

We focused on coparenting support, partner relationship quality, and father engagement in families with young children that did not change structurally over 4 years of participation in the Fragile Families and Child Wellbeing study (N = 1,756). There was a significantly stronger and more robust positive association between fathers' perceived coparenting support at age 1 and father engagement at age 3 among nonresidential nonromantic parents compared with residential (married or cohabiting) and nonresidential romantic parents. There was a significantly stronger and positive association between relationship quality at age 1 and father engagement at age 3 among nonresidential nonromantic parents compared with residential parents. The findings emphasize the importance of considering both family structure and romantic involvement contexts of fathering when tracking father engagement over time.

The authors used a subsample of fathers (n = 652) who participated during the 1-year follow-up of the Fragile Families and Child Wellbeing study to assess the influence of risk and resilience factors on unmarried, nonresident fathers' involvement with their infants. They examined the additive, multiplicative, and moderating models of risk and resilience in relation to paternal involvement. Fathers' relationship to the child's mother was conceptualized as a risk or resilience factor. Fathers in acquaintance relationships with the mother and fathers who scored higher on the additive risk index were less involved in child care. Fathers who scored higher on the additive resilience index were more involved in child care. There was a multiplicative effect of relationship status and the risk index on fathers' involvement. The findings point to the importance of programs that address risk and resilience conditions affecting nonresident fathers in interaction with the quality of relationships they have with their children's birth mother.

No abstract

No abstract

Although empirical studies have not consistently documented differences in mothering and fathering, differences in conceptualizations, opportunities for enactment, and meanings of mothering and fathering can be clearly demonstrated through family systems as well as feminist theories and qualitative research traditions. We argue that employing the same measures to assess fathering and mothering behaviors will document considerable differences in the involvement of mothers and fathers while masking differences in the roles, meanings, and processes associated with those behaviors. The employment of convergent behavioral measures can profitably occur in conjunction with efforts to identify theoretically rich areas where mothering and fathering are distinct in terms of processes and meanings; this will allow us to document essential differences noted in the lived experiences of family members.