Computers And The Family Life: A Family Development Perspective*

There remains little doubt that computer technology will increasingly pervade the lives of individuals, institutions and societies in the future. The last ten years has witnessed a dramatic and unprecedented proliferation of computer-based technology, arguably the most influential being the personal or micro-computer. Whether one considers PCs (personal computers), automated banking machines or related computer based technologies, it becomes clear that computer technology has left the relatively few hands of highly skilled technicians and hobbyists to become a common instrument of daily living for a vast proportion of our society. In as much as this expansive trend can be anticipated to continue, it becomes valuable to consider the impact and influence of computer technology on families. As one of society's primary socializing agents, families may provide a relatively unique perspective with which to gain valuable insights about potential future trends in the ways in which this increasingly pervasive technology is used and understood. This paper proposes to explore the ways in which computer technology influences and is influenced by families across the life course. Do computers bring families together or do they tend to separate members from one another? Are children increasingly separated from their parents' realm by virtue of their greater understanding of and involvement with computers? Or do computers more often provide an additional platform upon which family members can assist and interact with one another? Much like "computer widows", could there be "computer orphans", or children "lost to computers"? Or is a computer an adaptive advantage families can utilize in order to maximize their functioning within and outside of the family? These and other related questions need to be explored in the future in an effort to acquire a better understanding of the impact of computers on families. The meager existing literature on the impact of computer technology on the family most often assumes a narrow focus and treats the family as a relatively homogeneous unit of analysis. In contrast, this paper utilizes a structural perspective based on the family life course as put forward by family development scholars such as Hill and Rodgers (1964), Duvall (1977), Aldous (1996), Mattessich and Hill (1987) , White (1991) and Rodgers and White (1993). The rationale for adopting this approach stems from a understanding that families go through a developmental process which involves significant change and adaptation on the part of the family at each stage of development. In this paper, a typology of discrete family stages is employed in an effort to provide a more in-depth examination of the diverse effects and issues brought about by the introduction of a home computer into the family household. In addition, other sources of heterogeneity within and between families are discussed, such as generation, social class and gender. THEORY One of the most difficult problems facing researchers in this area is that there has been almost no attempt at theoretical formulation. One of the most basic functions of theory is to provide categories and concepts with which to organize data and issues. Data never speaks for itself but must be "contextualized" by an intellectual framework. Theories provide descriptive taxonomic categories for collecting data into what are theoretically relevant and meaningful clusters. Furthermore, theory provides concepts and relations; the rudimentary tools for understanding and explanation. The literature on the impact of computers on the family has thus far lacked such organization and as a result lacks coherence and focus. Family development theory (and its corresponding individual level life course approach) is the only extant theoretical framework in the area of the family that incorporates time as a significant dimension. As we will see from our review, many studies of computers and families assume that the "family" is some sort of homogenous and time invariant cluster. …