Create a detailed, annotated outline (full sentences, complete t

Running head: ANNOTATED OUTLINE 1

EXAMPLE OF AN ANNOTATED OUTLINE

ANNOTATED OUTLINE 2

Annotated Outline

I. Background

A. Family had existed before written history

a. Maguara cave paintings in Bulgaria

b. Rock paintings in Northern America

B. Origins of the term family

a. Probably originated around 1400 A.C.E.

www.dictionary.com

2. Fluid and dynamic construct

3. Advocates moving towards a more abstract view of family

Sprey, J. (2000). Theorizing in family studies: discovering process. Journal

of Marriage and the Family, 62, 18-31

4. Discusses the underlying assumptions of family

Weigal, D.J. (2008). The concept of family: an analysis of laypeople’s and

their importance in research on family. Journal of Family Issues, 29(11),

1426-1447. Doi: 10.1177/0192513X08318488

C. Statement of Problem

a. Misunderstanding the construct

Posits there is a disconnect between how families live their lives and the way

that researchers theorize about them.

Daly, K. (2003). Family theory versus the theories families live by. Journal of

Marriage & Family, 65(4), 771-784.

b. Addresses the need to minimize bias when researching family. Need to move

away from the “traditional family” as a measuring stick.

Biblarz, T. J., & Stacey, J. (2010). Ideal families and social science ideals.

Journal of Marriage & Family, 72(1), 41-44. doi:10.1111/j.1741-

3737.2009.00682.x

Smith, D.E., (1993). The standard north american family as an ideological

code. Journal of Family Issues, 14: 50-65

c. Family is a fluid and dynamic construct

Harris, S.R., (2008). What is family diversity? objective and interpretive

approaches. Journal of Family Issues, 29: 1407-1425

D. Purpose of Statement

a. Describe the everyday experience of a family

b. Multi-cultural approach

c. Explore the unique interpretations of each communal unit

d. Explore what is important to the participant in “family”

E. Research Question and sub questions

ANNOTATED OUTLINE 3

a. How is “family” interpreted by the communal unit and how do the actions,

beliefs, values, and assumptions of the unit create and maintain the construct,

“family”?

a. How do you know you are a family?

b.What does “family” mean?

c. What are some of the activities that others would recognize you belong

to a “family”

d.Who taught you about “family”

e. What traditions / rituals help to create “family”

F. Nature of Study

1. Qualitative Research

a. A research approach that provides detailed narrative descriptions and

explanations of the phenomena investigated. Methods used to collect

qualitative data include ethnographic practices such as observing and

interviewing.

Creswell, J.W. (2007). Qualitative Inquiry and Research Design (2 nd

ed).

Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications

2. Ethnography

The study of a cultural group or social group that is based on the

interactions and observations. The objective is to generate a cultural portrait

that is holistic and explored in the context of a larger cultural picture.

Creswell, J.W. (2007). Qualitative Inquiry and Research Design (2 nd

ed).

Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications

G. Rationale, Relevance and Significance

a. The general focus of research about “family” is on differences and

weaknesses.

Often family studies concentrate on one aspect without considering the

context. Marks, S. R. (1996). The problem and politics of wholeness in family

studies. Journal Of Marriage & Family, 58(3), 565-571.

Challenges the assumption that a quantitative study cannot be inclusive.

White, J.M. & Marshall, S.K., (2001). Consciously inclusive family research:

can we get there from here? Journal of Marriage and Family, 63(3): 895-899

b. Attempts to define “family” have not been successful.

Family is not a concrete entity. Harris, S.R., (2008). What is family

diversity? objective and interpretive approaches. Journal of Family Issues,

29: 1407-1425

ANNOTATED OUTLINE 4

c. Scholars have offered multiple definitions of family.

Wiegal, D.J. The concept of family: an analysis of laypeople’s views of

family. Journal of Family Issues, 29. doi: 10.11777/0192513X08318488

H. Definition of terms

1. Communal unit: Individuals who are participating in, sharing a relationship

that is defined by in the unique perspective of the individual

I. Assumptions and Limitations

1. Diversity does not mean fragmentation

2. Possible to focus on similarities while honoring uniqueness.

Murchinson, J.M. (2010). Ethnography essentials; designing, conducting, and

presenting your research. San Francisco, CA: Jossey – Bass

3. Access to families may be limited by the participant’s definitions of what is

private and public.

4. Issues of personal identity and power

Descartes, L. (2009). Reward and challenges of using ethnography in family

research. American Association of Family and Consumer Sciences. DOI:

10.1177/1077727X07303488

Literature Review

I. Introduction

A. Overview

1. Origins of the term family probably originated around 1400 A.C.E.

www.dictionary.com

2. Family is a fluid and dynamic construct

Harris, S.R., (2008). What is family diversity? objective and interpretive

approaches. Journal of Family Issues, 29: 1407-1425

3. Move towards a more abstract view of family

Sprey, J. (2000). Theorizing in family studies: discovering process.

Journal of Marriage and the Family, 62, 18-31

4. Discuss the underlying assumptions of family

Weigal, D.J. (2008). The concept of family: an analysis of laypeople’s

and their importance in research on family. Journal of Family Issues,

29(11), 1426-1447. Doi: 10.1177/0192513X08318488

B. Overview of research question

1. How is “family” interpreted by the communal unit and how do the

actions, beliefs, values, and assumptions of the unit create and maintain

the construct, “family”?

2. Describe the everyday experience of a family from a multi-cultural

perspective

ANNOTATED OUTLINE 5

3. Explore what is important to the participant and the unique

interpretations of each communal unit

C. Overview of literature

1. The intent of this study is to explore the construct of family across the

dimensions of culture.

2. A review of literature has shown that there is no agreement on what

constitutes “family” and, much like an outline; the construct is colored

and shaded by influences including history, culture, society, and

individual experience.

3. This diversity has been studied in terms of challenges to families,

however little research has been done to explore how different cultures

experience the construct of family in the United States.

II. Theoretical Framework

A. Misunderstanding the construct

B. Posits there is a disconnect between how families live their lives and the way

that researchers theorize about them.

Daly, K. (2003). Family theory versus the theories families live by. Journal Of

Marriage & Family, 65(4), 771-784.

C. Addresses the need to minimize bias when researching family. Need to move

away from the “traditional family” as a measuring stick.

Biblarz, T. J., & Stacey, J. (2010). Ideal families and social science ideals.

Journal Of Marriage & Family, 72(1), 41-44. doi:10.1111/j.1741-

3737.2009.00682.x

Smith, D.E., (1993). The standard north american family as an ideological code.

Journal of Family Issues, 14: 50-65

III. Overview of Literature

A. History

1. Discusses the place of historical input to research and the contextual

view of history to understand the topic being researched. A review of

the historical research in the development of family will illustrate the

complexity of the topic as well as offer perspective and balance.

Coontz, S. (2000). Historical perspectives on family studies. Journal Of

Marriage & Family, 62(2), 283-297.

2. Considers the ramifications of family studies that have been done in the

past that reinforced societal norms. Lombardo, P. (2001). Pedigrees,

propaganda, and paranoia: family studies in a historical context. Journal

Of Continuing Education In The Health Professions, 21(4), 247-255.

Smith, D.E., (1993). The standard north american family as an

ideological code. Journal of Family Issues, 14: 50-65

ANNOTATED OUTLINE 6

3. Address how the past is created and recreated within socio-cultural

contexts. Erll, A. (2011). Locating family in cultural memory studies.

Journal Of Comparative Family Studies, 42(3), 303-318.

B. Diversity and Multi-Culturalism

1. Explore interpretive practices will help to increase understanding about

how families are created through converting ambiguity into their own

realities. Harris, S.R., (2008). What is family diversity? objective and

interpretive approaches. Journal of Family Issues, 29: 1407-1425

2. Intergenerational transmission of family values and cultural beliefs.

Schneiderman, G & Barrera, M. (2009). Family traditions and

generations. Family & Community Health, 32(4). 354-357. DOI:

10.1097/FCH.0b013e3181b91fe3

3. Identifies perspectives on extended family and fictive kinship. Allen,

K.R., Bliezner, R., & Roberto, K.A., (2011). Perspectives on extended

family and fictive kin in the later years: strategies and meanings of kin

reinterpretation. Journal of Family Issues, 32(9).

Doi:10.1177/0192513X11404335

4. Discusses the need to study families holistically Murry, V., Smith, E., &

Hill, N. E. (2001). Race, ethnicity, and culture in studies of families in

context. Journal Of Marriage & Family, 63(4), 911.

5. How families define the boundaries of “the family”. Singh, R. (2009).

Constructing ‘the family’ across culture. Journal Of Family Therapy,

31(4), 359-383. doi:10.1111/j.1467-6427.2009.00473.x

C. Issues in Family Research

1. Discusses the responsibilities of researchers in studying families.

Bernardes, J., (1993). Responsibilities in studying postmodern families.

Journal of Family Issues, 14:35-39.

Doi: 10:1177/0192513X93014001004

2. There is a need to continue to engage the intersections of race, class,

gender, sexual orientation and age when defining cultural diversity.

Allen, K. R. (2000). A conscious and inclusive family studies. Journal

Of Marriage & Family, 62(1), 4.

3. Identifies and discusses the embedded norm of the “Standard North

American Family”. Smith, D.E., (1993). The standard north american

family as an ideological code. Journal of Family Issues, 14: 50-65

ANNOTATED OUTLINE 7

4. The questions that researchers ask will be extended if imagination and

metaphor are integrated into the process. Sprey, J. (2000). Theorizing in

family studies: discovering process. Journal Of Marriage & Family,

62(1), 18.

5. Discusses the disconnect between the realities of family life and the way

researchers theorize about them. Daly, K. (2003). Family theory versus

the theories families live by. Journal Of Marriage & Family, 65(4), 771-

784.

D. Research Methodologies

1. Most of the studies are qualitative that utilize interviews

2. Review of existing literature

E. Evaluation of viable research designs.

1. The study would fit several research designs

a. Phenomenological

b. Case study

c. Ethnography

2. Ethnography gives the opportunity to explore the realities of family life

among different cultural heritages.

F. Summary

Research Design and Methodology

I. Overview of Research Design and Rationale

A. Ethnography

1. Based in cultural anthropology

2. Opportunity to join with families and to interact in their own

environment.

B. Symbolic Interactionism

1. Meaning is the product of social interaction and requires active

interpretation to be acted upon.

2. Each individual is an actor who interprets situations and elements with

themselves to determine his or her role interactions

Particular interactions take place in particular contexts. Dennis, A.,

(2011). Symbolic interactionism and ethnomethodology. Symbolic

Interaction, 34(3): 349-356. Doi: 10.1525/si.2011.34.3.349

Creswell, J.W. (2007). Qualitative Inquiry and Research Design (2 nd

ed). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications

ANNOTATED OUTLINE 8

Murchinson, J.M. (2010). Ethnography Essentials; Designing,

conducting, and presenting your research. San Francisco, CA: Jossey –

Bass

II. Sampling Design

A. Random purposeful

B. Recruited through gatekeepers

1. Tribal counsel

2. Pastors / Priests

3. Community organizations

III. Data Collection

A. Review of historical literature regarding family

B. Observation

C. Interviews

D. Participation in family daily life and rituals.

Murchinson, J.M. (2010). Ethnography Essentials; Designing,

conducting, and presenting your research. San Francisco, CA: Jossey –

Bass

Creswell, J.W. (2007). Qualitative Inquiry and Research Design (2 nd

ed).

Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications

IV. Data Instrumentation

A. Genograms to explore traditions, rituals, actions, assumptions of family

V. Data Analysis Plan

A. Create and organize files for data

B. Read through the texts and make notes to begin to form initial themes

C. Describe the settings, actors, and events using rich descriptive text.

D. Analyze for essential themes

E. Interpret findings

F. Present the findings in narrative form

Creswell, J.W. (2007). Qualitative Inquiry and Research Design (2 nd

ed).

Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications

Murchinson, J.M. (2010). Ethnography Essentials; Designing,

conducting, and presenting your research. San Francisco, CA: Jossey –

Bass

IV. Limitations of Research Design

A. Small sample may not be representative of culture

B. Possibility of adjusting actions due to presence of researcher

ANNOTATED OUTLINE 9

V. Internal and External Validity

A. Use of multiple methods of data collection and analysis

B. Acknowledgment of personal bias, assumptions

C. Acknowledgment of impact on family

D. Use of independent review

Murchinson, J.M. (2010). Ethnography Essentials; Designing, conducting, and

presenting your research. San Francisco, CA: Jossey – Bass

VI. Ethical Considerations

A. Information and data produced through human interaction

1. Informed consent

B. Researcher impact on family system

C. Exercise reasonable care to protect participants

D. Awareness of issues of privacy and confidentiality

E. IRB protocols

F. Murchinson, J.M. (2010). Ethnography Essentials; Designing, conducting, and

presenting your research. San Francisco, CA: Jossey – Bass

VII. Conclusions

ANNOTATED OUTLINE 10

References

Adams, B. N. (2004). Families and family study in international perspective. Journal Of

Marriage & Family, 66(5), 1076-1088. doi:10.1111/j.0022-2445.2004.00079.x

Allen, K. R. (2000). A conscious and inclusive family studies. Journal Of Marriage & Family,

62(1), 4.

Allen, K,R., Bliezner, R., & Roberto, K.A., (2011). Perspectives on extended family and fictive

kin in the later years: strategies and meanings of kin reinterpretation. Journal of Family

Issues, 32(9). Doi:10.1177/0192513X11404335

Bernardes, J., (1993). Responsibilities in studying postmodern families. Journal of Family

Issues, 14:35-39. Doi: 10:1177/0192513X93014001004

Biblarz, T. J., & Stacey, J. (2010). Ideal families and social science ideals. Journal Of Marriage

& Family, 72(1), 41-44. doi:10.1111/j.1741-3737.2009.00682.x

Brossoie, N., Graham, B., & Lee, S. (2005). Families and communities: an annotated

bibliography. Family Relations, 54(5), 666-675. doi:10.1111/j.1741-3729.2005.00350.x

Coontz, S. (2000). Historical perspectives on family studies. Journal Of Marriage & Family,

62(2), 283-297.

Creswell, J.W. (2007). Qualitative Inquiry and Research Design (2 nd

ed). Thousand Oaks, CA:

Sage Publications

Daly, K. (2003). Family theory versus the theories families Live By. Journal Of Marriage &

Family, 65(4), 771-784.

Dekovic, M. (2005). Multiple perspectives within the family: family relationship patterns.

Journal of Family Issues, 26(4). 467-490. doi: 10.1177/0192513X04272617

Dennis, A., (2011). Symbolic interactionism and ethnomethodology. Symbolic Interaction,

34(3): 349-356. Doi: 10.1525/si.2011.34.3.349

Descartes, L. (2009). Reward and challenges of using ethnography in family research.

American Association of Family and Consumer Sciences. DOI:

10.1177/1077727X07303488

ANNOTATED OUTLINE 11

Erll, A. (2011). Locating family in cultural memory studies. Journal Of Comparative Family

Studies, 42(3), 303-318.

Gabb, J. (2010). Home truths: ethical issues in family research. Qualitative Research, 10(4).

461-478. doi: 10.1177/1468794110366807

(2006). Talking bbout “doing” family. Journal Of Marriage & Family, 68(4), 796-799.

doi:10.1111/j.1741-3737.2006.00293.x

Hahr, H.M. & Hahr, K.S., (1996). A paradigm of family transcendence. Journal of Marriage

and Family, 58(3)

Harris, S.R., (2008). What is family diversity? objective and interpretive approaches. Journal of

Family Issues, 29: 1407-1425

Lombardo, P. (2001). Pedigrees, propaganda, and paranoia: family studies in a historical context.

Journal Of Continuing Education In The Health Professions, 21(4), 247-255.

Marks, S. R. (1996). The problem and politics of wholeness in family studies. Journal Of

Marriage & Family, 58(3), 565-571.

Murry, V., Smith, E., & Hill, N. E. (2001). Race, ethnicity, and culture in studies of families in

context. Journal Of Marriage & Family, 63(4), 911.

Murchinson, J.M. (2010). Ethnography Essentials; Designing, conducting, and Presenting Your

Research. San Francisco, CA: Jossey – Bass

Schneiderman, G & Barrera, M. (2009). Family traditions and generations. Family &

Community Health, 32(4). 354-357. DOI: 10.1097/FCH.0b013e3181b91fe3

Singh, R. (2009). Constructing ‘the family’ across culture. Journal Of Family Therapy, 31(4),

359-383. doi:10.1111/j.1467-6427.2009.00473.x

Smith, D.E., (1993). The standard north american family as an ideological code. Journal of

Family Issues, 14: 50-65

Sprey, J. (2000). Theorizing in family studies: discovering process. Journal Of Marriage &

Family, 62(1), 18.

ANNOTATED OUTLINE 12

White, J.M. & Marshall, S.K., (2001). Consciously inclusive family research: can we get there

from here? Journal of Marriage and Family, 63(3): 895-899

Wiegal, D.J. The concept of family: an analysis of laypeople’s views of family. Journal of

Family Issues, 29. doi: 10.11777/0192513X08318488

Wu, Z. (2005). Generalized linear models in family studies. Journal of Marriage and Family,

67(4), 1029-1047