%FDFNCFS

International Journal of Brief Therapy and Family ScienceVol. 8, No. 2, 2018

CONTENTS
Original Paper: Research and ExperimentAttempt to apply Integrated Information Theory to family system: Focus on marital relationship
Koubun Wakashima Kazuma Sakamoto Taku Hiraizumi Norimasa Itakura,
Michiko Ikuta Kohei Sato Ryoko Hanada. ............................................................................. 49-69

Original Paper: Research and Experiment
The Effect of way of mother’s communication with father’s image to their children on
father’s image and family function
Miki Hagidai Masako Okuno Koubun Wakashima ................................................................ 70-86

Original Paper: Research and Experiment
Factors affecting workers’ mental health based on gender differences-From the perspective of workplace satisfaction, marital coping, and WLBNorimasa Itakura Haruka Maruyama .................................................................................... 87-101

International Journal of Brief Therapy and Family Science
2018 Vol. 8, No.2, 49-69< Original Paper: Research and Experiment >Attempt to apply Integrated Information Theory to family system: Focus on marital relationship
Koubun Wakashima1)

Kazuma Sakamoto1) Taku Hiraizumi2) Norimasa Itakura3)

Michiko Ikuta4)

Kohei Sato5) Ryoko Hanada6)

1)

Graduate School of Education, Tohoku University

2)

Tohoku Fukushi University

3)

Gifu University

4)

Kanagawa University of Human Services

5)

Yamagata University

6)

Tokyo Woman's Christian University

ABSTRACT: The purpose of this study is to apply the schema of integrated information theory which explains the stereoscopic
phenomena of consciousness to the family system and to examine “what kind of properties the family system with high problem
solving abilities possess?”. The integrated information theory assumes that consciousness phenomena are caused by neuron’s
differences and interaction. The hypothesis in this study is that “the couple who has the higher score in both difference andcommunication has higher problem solving abilities and resilience than the other couples”. In study 1, a questionnaire survey was
conducted with 111 married couples (average age of 45.04) and in study 2, a questionnaire survey was conducted with 82 college
students (average age of 20.14) asking about the relationship between parents. As a result of the analysis, it was shown that there
are three differences between the couple: “way of thinking”, “preference” and “ability”. Although the hypothesis of this study was
not supported, it was suggested that the couple’s “way of thinking” and “preference” are small and the couple communicates has apositive relationship with problem solving abilities and family resilience. We will discuss the way to catch the difference andadvance our study.
KEY WORDS: Integrated information theory, Family system, Difference, Communication, Problem Solving,

Introduction

and family psychology, the theory that gives a

Families face various problems and areclear explanation to the question “what kind of

constantly looking for clues to solutions. It isproperties the family system with high problem

very important support and the essence of caresolving abilities possess?” has not beenfor such family to draw out the ability to solve

completed. Establishing the theory to explain

family problems. However, in family therapy

this question will clarify and realize the method

CORRESPONDENCE

of support for the family with the problem and

TO: Wakashima, K. Graduate

School of Education, Tohoku University. 27-1 Kawauchi,
Aoba Ward, Sendai City, Miyagi Prefecture, 980-8576, Japan.
e-mail: k_wakashima@sed.tohoku.ac.jp

49

it will be useful for family support.
First, we will briefly explain system theory infamily therapy. Family therapy developed

50

Wakashima.

under the influence of general system theory(2004) and Tononi, Boly, Massimini & Kochand cybernetics introduced by Bateson (1972).

(2016).

In family therapy, we refer to system theory

information theory was presented by Tononi

such as chaos theory of Prigogine (1980),(2004) while brain science researchers explain

autopoiesis of

the phenomenon of consciousness. The number

Maturana & Varela (1980) , and have a clinicalof neurons in the whole brain is about 100

and research history on the development ofbillion. About 80 billion neurons are lined up in

family system theory. And the application of

the cerebellum. The thalamus-skin systemgeneral system theory so far to families wasconsists of the cerebral cortex and the thalamus,

about self-regulation and change. Bateson’s

where about 20 billion neurons line up. Whentheorythat

cerebellum is removed due to some reason,

amplification of deviations in which thelanguage and exercise become difficult. On the

differences produce amplifiable differences. In

other hand, consciousness phenomenon has no

the dissipative structure theory and complex

problem. In other words, the stereoscopic

system of Prigogine, it is also explained thatphenomenon of consciousness cannot be

due to the action of motion called fluctuation,

explained by the number of neurons. This

the slight difference is cumulatively amplified

integrated information theory is a theory which

through the positive feedback process, and aelucidates such a problem. In this theory, it issimple initial condition develops into a moreassumed that phenomena of consciousness arecomplex and unpredictable structure. Using

caused by neuronal differences (diversity) andthese system theories as the backgrounds, weinteraction.

focused on the concept of time, and an

difference and comprehensive action. This

information recurrent model that explains theagrees with the viewpoint of the system theory

system based on the speed at which information

which considers “the whole is not the sum ofrecurrents within the system (Wakashima, Satothe parts.” This study is an attempt to apply&

brain’s integrated information theory to familyofschismogenesis

Hasegawa,

2000;

explains

Wakashima,

2001;

In

recentyears,

Consciousness

the

is

integrated

createdby

Wakashima & Matsui, 2003; Wakashima &system.

Matsui, 2004; Wakashima & Matsui, 2005) has

In this study, we apply integrated information

been presented. However, after that, family

theory’s schema to family system. First of all,therapy has become a trend of shifting

we target couples and measure the difference

paradigm from system theory to narrative

between them and the amount of interaction for

theory, and in recent years there has been no

and clarify how these are related to family’s

progress in the development of family systemproblem solving abilities and family resilience.

theory.

The problem arises as “What is the difference?”

In such circumstances, the authors’ attention“What is interaction?” “What is createdis the integrated information theory of Tononi

stereoscopically (like consciousness)?” when“Attempt to apply Integrated Information Theory to family system”

applying

of

integrated

kind of properties the family system with highfamilysystems.

problem solving abilities possess”. We measure

Unfortunately, we do not have complete

the difference and the amount of interaction

answers to these questions. We repeated the

between marital couple, and we examine how

discussion, but this study is in chaos. Under

these are related to family’s problem solving

such circumstances, in this study, when

ability and family resilience. The hypothesis in

applyingofstudy 1 is “The married couple who has highconsciousness in the brain to the family system,

score in couple’s difference and interaction has

we selected the family problem solving abilities

higher problem solving abilities and family

and family resilience as variables to measure

resilience compared to the other couples .”information

theframework

51

theorythetostereoscopic

function

the function of the family system. The reason
for this is that it is necessary to assume

Methodvariables that measure the function itself, rather

A questionnaire survey was conducted for 111

than the structure of the family, such as

married couples living in the Kanto, Chubu andsatisfaction or cohesiveness.

Tohoku districts (222 of people, average

In contrast, the hypothesis is clear. In order to

45.04±11.24 years old). On the cover page ofverify the following hypothesis, this study was

the questionnaire, we attached explanations on

carried out. “The married couple who has highthe survey (survey purpose, introduction ofscore in couple’s difference and communication

counselinghas higher problem solving abilities and family

information, feedback of results, agreement)

resilience compared to the other couples”.

and request to answer only with agreement. We

Differences between married couple may

sent a questionnaire by mail and asked to send

increase information volume, but may reduce

it back with a sealed envelope regardless ofinteraction. If interaction is not done, couple’s

whether or not it was answered.

agency,handlingof

personal

problem solving and resilience will decline. On
the other hand, if interaction occurs even if

Scalethere is a difference between married couple,

The following five scales were used. ①Scalethe increased amount of informationisto measure difference between married couple

considered to have a positive influence on(21 items, 5 point scale) , ②Communication

couple’s problem solving and resilience. The

Scale (14 items, 7 point scale) ③ Problem

main point of this study is to examine thisSolving Inventory (33 items, 5 point scale)point.

(Hayashi,

1985)④ Family

Resilience

Inventory (30 items, 4 point scale) (Ohyama &(Study 1: For married couples)

Nozue,

2013)⑤ Itemsformeasuring

Purposedesirability (1 item, 5 point scale).

The purpose of study 1 is to examine “whatThese scales was created and examined by 12

52

Wakashima.

graduateclinicalquestionnaires were created on the fifth talk.

psychology divided into two groups (A group“The scale to measure the difference between

and B group) of 6 people. Group A was in

the couple" was created, and it is five-point

charge of creating and discussing the scale toscale from "1. the same" to "5. different". Also,

measure the difference between married couple,

in order to eliminate the influence of the bias ofgroup B chose Communication Scale, Problem

social desirability on the data obtained, we set

Solving Inventory, Family Resilience Inventory.

five-point items (from “1. not agree” to “5.

In addition to discussion in each group, we set

totally agree”) to measure the extent to whichupathe married couple applies about the idea

psychological researcher and both groups twice.

"married couple's opinions must agree inAt the general review meeting the validity ofgeneral”. In the meantime, we have conducted

the scale content prepared and examined by

two general discussion meetings and amended

each group was reviewed. Below is the process

item contents and categories.

astudents

generalmajoring

reviewinmeetingwithof scale creating and discussion in each group.
Group B: Selection of scale to measure
Group A: Creating a scale to measure marriedCommunication Scale and family problem

couple’s differences

solving ability

Six graduate students examined what kind ofFirst, six people were divided into two groups

difference between married couples affects the(α group and β group). The α group was incouple's conflict situation. Discussions werecharge of selecting the Communication Scale,

held five times in total. In the first round ofand the β group was in charge of selecting thetalks, we discussed about "difference" between

scale measuring the family problem solving

married couple. In the second round of

ability. Initially, we chose a scale for reference

discussion, we examined what to ask and how

in each group. We set up two discussion

tomarriedmeetings in group B, and discussed the validity

couples, with reference to the measure ofof using that scale. As a result, we adopted themarital interaction (Itakura, 2013). In the third

total of 14 items with reference to 12 items ofround, we examined that point in more detail,"direct communication Scale" of Itakura (2013),

as a result, we discussed to grasp theand 2 items of “father and mother spend a lot ofdifferencesbytime to talk together”, “father and mother often

category, and to assume to distinguish between

eat dinner together”, the subscale of the scale

couple by five categories (personality, ability,for "good relationship between father andmoney usage, preference, way of thinking). In

mother",the fourth round of discussion, we examined

questioning the relationship between the father

the items included in those five categories andand the mother” of Hida & Kariya (1992). As a

finally

scale to measure the problem solving ability ofmeasuredifferences

betweenadopted21

betweenmarrieditems.

couples

After

that,

from

"paternal

relationship

“Attempt to apply Integrated Information Theory to family system”

53

the family, we chose 33 items which Hayashi

factors extracted by Takahashi et al. (2013) (a(1985) analyzed the problem solving inventory

factor of Confirm possibility of problem

prepared by Heppner & Peterson (1982), andhandling, a factor of Confidence about family

applied to the family. We adopted the four

capacity, a factor of Anxiety about problem

Table 1: Factor analysis result of scale to measuring difference between married couple(Factor pattern after Promax rotation)
I

II

III

.780

-.143

.014

17. Parenting policy

.744

.035

-0.54

20. Policy of life

.648

.135

-.252

.625

.104

.080

.617

-.189

.094

.563

.197

.107

.562

.128

-.100

.383

.309

.083

15. Preference of outside going out

-.015

.811

-.085

11. Food preference

-.095

.638

-.007

13. Interior preference

.087

.630

.017

14. TV program preference

-.050

.618

.076

16. Hobby

.006

.617

.049

12. Clothing preference

.047

.592

.063

2. Academic ability

-.169

.186

.528

4. Life skill (housework, self management)

.174

-.062

.520

3. Physical ability

-.140

.064

.486

5. Mental strength

.287

-.127

.421

I

II

III

-

.626

.312

-

.318

I. Way of thinking (α=.86)
7. Thinking of educational expenses

8. Thinking of savings
18. How to engage with parents' home
6. Concept of living (food, clothing and house) cost
19. Thinking of way to spend after retirement
9. How to spend money for hobbies
II. Preference (α=.82)

III. Ability (α=.58)

Factor correlation
I
II
III

-

54

Wakashima.

solving, a factor of Sense of difficulty grasping

going out", "food preference", " interior

the problem) as hypostatic factors. In addition

preference", etc., we interpreted them as theto this, we also adopted Family Resilience

factors of “preference”. As the items showing

Inventory of Ohyama & Nozue (2013).

high factor loading for factor III were
"Academic ability", "Life skill (housework, self

Resultmanagement)", "Physical ability" etc., we(1)Examination of the factor structure of theinterpreted them as the factors of “ability”.

scale to measure difference between married
couple(2)Examination of reliability of each scale

In order to examine the factor structure of the

Next, we examined the reliability of ②

difference between the married couple, factor

Communication Scale, ③ Problem Solving

analysis of the scale for measuring theInventory, and ④ Family Resilience Inventory

difference between the married couple was(Table 2). Communication Scale, subscale ofconducted. First, 10 people who has missing

Problem Solving Inventory : "Confirming

values were excluded from the analysis. Next,

possibility of problem handling", "Confidence

we excluded 15 people who answered "5.

about family capacity", subscale of Family

totally agree" to the item that measures

Resilience Inventory : "Connection", "Trust indesirability (married couple's opinions mustfamily ability" were confirmed as α= 0.7 oragree in general) from the analysis. As a result,more, the sufficient reliability was verified. On

197 people were chosen for analysis. Factor

the other hand, the subscales of the Problem

analysis by the principal factor method was

Solving Inventory : "Anxiety about problem

carriedthesolving", "Sense of difficulty grasping the

eigenvalue head and the content of the items

problem", the subscale of the Family Resilience

included in each factor, factor analysis using

Inventory : "Balance between relationships and

out.

And

after

considering

the main factor method and promax rotation

Table 2: Consideration of reliability

was performed again based on three factors② Communication scaleαwith high contribution ratio. As a result, three

1. Communication scale.948

items that did not show a sufficient loading③ Problem Solving Inventory (PSI)

amount (.35) for any factor were excluded, andthree factors 18 items were extracted (Table 1).
As the items showing a high factor loading
for factor I were "thinking of educational
expenses", "parenting policy", "Policy of life",
etc., we interpreted them as the factors of “wayof thinking”. As the items showing a highfactor loading for factor II were "preference ofα

1. Confirm possibility of problem handling.844

2. Confidence about family capacity.837

3. Anxiety about problem solving.621

4. Sense of difficulty grasping the problem.609④ Family Resilience Inventory (FRI)α

1. Connection.821

2. Trust in family ability.890

3. Balance between relationships and individuals.227

4. Spirituality.655

5. Socio-economic resources.496

“Attempt to apply Integrated Information Theory to family system”

55

individuals", "Spirituality", "Socio-economic
resources" were below α= 0.7, and sufficient

Table 3: Crosstab of "Way of thinking" and "Communication"
Communication

reliability could not be obtained. It isconsidered that the α coefficient became low

Way of thinking

since the number of items was small in any of
the subscales for which reliability could not be

low

high

total

low

9

78

87

high

6

11

17

total

15

89

104

obtained. In consideration of the above, in thisthose who answered "5. totally agree" to items

study all subscales were used for analysis.

that measure desirability (married couple's
opinions must agree in general). As a result,(3)Examination“Couple'sofrelationshipdifference”,

between104 pairs were analyzed.

“Communication”,

Round ”way of thinking”", "preference ",“Problem Solving Abilities” and “Family"ability", which are subscales of the ①scale to

Resilience”

measureFirst, for each subscale on the scale of ① tocouples, and pairs above the pair score 4 points④, the average score of husband and wife was(corresponding to "4. slightly different" in the 5calculated and used as a pair score for analysis.

methods) were grouped into high difference

Also, we complemented the missing value by

couple, and pairs with less than 4 points were

mean. Next, we excluded 7 pairs includinggrouped into low difference couple. In addition,thedifference

betweenmarriedTable 4: Result of two way analysis of variance: "Way of thinking" and "Communication" as independent variables
Way of thinking

low

high

main effectCommunication

low

high

low

high

Way ofthinking

Confirm possibility on problem handling

3.44

3.88

3.13

3.68

2.83

10.44***

0.16(0.52)(0.46)(0.57) (0.67)

3.57

4.05

3.22

4.76*

9.10***

0.00(0.62)(0.46)(0.54) (0.77)

2.80

2.73

2.86

0.27

0.09

0.02

(0.70)(0.52)(0.48) (0.55)

2.31

2.25

2.67

5.05*

0.02

0.17

(0.53)(0.64)(0.61) (0.69)

3.21

3.59

2.97

7.01**

7.33**

0.31(0.41)(0.34)(0.47) (0.52)

2.94

3.29

2.90

1.44

5.13*

0.73

(0.43)(0.34)(0.39) (0.39)

3.17

3.57

2.80

7.00**

14.46****

0.19(0.47)(0.36)(0.34) (0.51)

2.90

3.21

2.70

2.00

5.57*

0.00

(0.59)(0.41)(0.46) (0.35)
0.01

1.09

1.39

Confidence about family capacity
Anxiety about problem solving
Sense of difficulty grasping the problem
Connection
Trust in family ability
Balance between relationships and individuals
Spirituality
Socio-economic resources
upper row: average

2.83
2.77
3.22
3.06
3.30
3.03

3.14

3.46

3.29

(0.52)(0.45)(0.46) (0.47)

lower row: standard deviation*p <.05, **p <.01, ***p <.005, ****p <.001

3.70

3.27

Communicationinteraction

56

Wakashima.

round ②the Communication Scale scores andfamily resilience was high). In the "Sense ofpairs

pointsdifficulty grasping the problem", the score in(corresponding to "4. a little" in the 7 methods)

the low group of “way of thinking” waswere grouped into high communication couple,

significantly lower than that in the high groupand pairs with less than 5 points were grouped(problem solving abilities was high). In

into low communication couple.

addition, the main effect of “communication”

above

the

pair

score

5

was significant on "Confirm possibility of
1. “way of thinking” and “communication” asproblem handling" (F (1,100) = 10.44, p <.005),

independent variables“Confidence about family capacity” (F (1,100)

The crosstabulation table after grouping is= 9.10, p < .005), "Connection" (F (1,100) =shown below (Table 3). A χ2 test of binary

7.33, p <.01), "Trust in family ability" (Farrangement of high / low in “way of thinking”(1,100) = 5.13, p <.05), "Balance between

× high / low in “communication” wasrelationships and individuals" (F (1,100) =performed, and it was significant (χ2 = 7.17, df

14.46, p <.001), "Spirituality"(F (1,100) = 5.57,= 1, p <. 01), and it indicated that there was ap<.05),

lot of “communication” with the low in “way of“communication” was significantly higher than

thinking”. Since each cell was n=5 or more, 2 ×

that in the low couple (problem solving abilities

2 analysis of variance was performed with theand family resilience was high).

the

score

in

high

coupleon“way of thinking” and “communication” as
independent variables, the Problem Solving

2. “preference” and “communication” as

Inventory and Family Resilience Inventory as

independent variables

dependent variables.

The crosstabulation table after grouping is

As a result of analysis (Table 4), no

shown below (Table 5). A χ2 test of binaryinteraction was observed. The main effect ofarrangement of high / low in “preference " ×

the “way of thinking” was significant onhigh / low of “communication" was performed,"Confidence about family capacity" (F (1,100)

and it was significant (χ2 = 4.64, df = 1, p <. 05),

= 4.76, p <.05), "Sense of difficulty graspingandthe problem" (F (1,100) = 5.05, p <.05 ),“communication” with the group low in"Connection" (F (1,100) = 7.01, p <.01),“preference”. Since each cell was n=5 or more,"Balance between relationships and individual"

2 × 2 analysis of variance was performed with(F (1,100) = 7.00, p <.01). The score in the low

the “preference” and “communication” ascouple of “way of thinking” was significantly

independent variables, the Problem Solving

higher than that in the high couple inInventory and Family Resilience Inventory as"Confidence

dependent variables.

aboutfamilycapacity",itindicated

that

there

was

more

"Connection", "Balance between relationships

Since the interaction in "Anxiety about

and individuals"(problem solving abilities andproblem solving" (F (1,100) = 4.09, p <.05)

“Attempt to apply Integrated Information Theory to family system”

was significant in the analysis results (Table 6),

Table 5: Crosstab of "Preference" and "Communication"

simple main effects were examined. As a result,

Communicationin the low "communication” score couples, thecouples with the low scores in “preference” had57

Preference

significantly lower score in “Anxiety about

low

high

total

7

66

73

high

8

23

31

total

15

89

104

low

problem solving” than those with high scores(problem solving abilities was high) (F (1,100)

10.67, p <.005), “Confidence about family= 4.95, p <.05). Next, the main effect of

capacity” (F (1,100) = 11.96, p <.005.),"preference" was significant in "Confirm“Connection” (F(1,100) = 13.44, p<.001),

possibility of problem handling" (F (1,100) =“Trust in family ability” (F (1,100) = 8.76,

8.27, p <. 01), the score with low couple inp<.005), "Balance between relationships and“preference” was significantly higher than that

individuals"(F (1,100) = 19.17, p <.001),

with high couple (problem solving abilities was"Spirituality" (F (1,100) = 6.89, p <.05), thehigher). In addition, the main effect ofscore in the “communication” high couple was“communication” was significant in "Confirm

higher than the “communication” low couple

possibility of problem handling" (F (1,100) =(problem solving abilities and family resilience

Table 6: Result of two way analysis of variance: "Preference" and "Communication" as independent variables
Preference

low

high

Communication

low

high

low

high

Confirm possibility of problem handling

3.57

3.93

3.09

3.63

Confidence about family capacity(0.53) (0.43)(0.48) (0.58)

3.51

3.35

4.06

(0.80) (0.44)
Anxiety about problem solving

Sense of difficulty grasping the problem

2.50

2.74

Balance between relationships and individuals

2.66

3.55

3.18

(0.51) (0.34)(0.32) (0.38)

3.14

2.91

3.55

3.23

3.50

2.79

3.07

(0.54) (0.43)

3.18

3.22

3.46

10.67****

0.39

1.73

11.96***

0.05

4.04*

0.17

4.09*

1.90

0.30

0.98

2.28

13.44****

1.30

0.54

8.7***

0.07

1.46

19.17****

0.68

1.08

6.89*

0.09

0.03

2.59

0.22

(0.25) (0.35)(0.56) (0.39)

lower row: standard deviation*p <.05, **p <.01, ***p <.005, ****p <.001

3.51

2.91

(0.51) (0.46)
upper row: average

2.98

3.00

3.29

8.27**(0.52) (0.57)(0.40) (0.40)

2.88

Socio-economic resources

2.37(0.45) (0.38)(0.60) (0.41)
Spirituality

2.74

2.21

3.27

Trust in family ability

3.10(0.45) (0.60)

2.30

interaction(0.37) (0.67)(0.61) (0.49)(0.57) (0.70)
Connection

3.83

main effectPreference Communication

3.37(0.49) (0.46)

58

Wakashima.

was high).

Table 7: Crosstab of "Ability" and "Communication"
Communication

3.

“ability”

and“communication”

asAbility

independent variables
The crosstabulation table after grouping is

low

high

total

low

3

22

25

high

12

67

79

total

15

89

104

shown below (Table 7). A χ2 test of binaryarrangement of high / low in “ability" × high /“communication” couple (n=12), high “ability”

low of “communication" was performed, and it- high “communication” couple (n=67) as

showed no significant difference. Since the cell

independent variables and the Problem Solving

which

and

Inventory and Family Resilience Inventory as“communication” was less than n=5, binary

dependent variables.As the result of analysis

arrangement

was(Table 8), “Confirm possibility of problem

considered inappropriate. Three pairs of low

handling” (F (2, 98) = 7.2, p <.005),“ability” couple- low “communication” couple“Confidence about family capacity" (F (2, 98)

were excluded from the analysis, and one-way= 6.95, p <.005), “Connection” (F(2, 98) = 5.65,

analysis of variance was performed with threep <.01), "Trust in family ability" (F (2, 98) =groups of low “ability” - high “communication”

5.35, p <. 01), “Balance between relationships

coupleand individuals” (F (2, 98) = 11.19, p<.001),

is

low

in

both

analysis(n=22),

highof“ability”
variance“ability”-

low

Table 8: Result of one-way analysis of variance: "Ability" and "Communication"
low Abilityhigh Abilityhigh Communication low Communication

Ability
Confirm possibility of problem handling
Confidence about family capacity
Anxiety about problem solving
Sense of difficulty grasping the problem
Connection
Trust in family ability
Balance between relationships and individuals
Spirituality
Socio-economic resources
upper row: average

lower row: standard deviation*p <.05, **p <.01, ***p <.005, ****p <.001high Abilityhigh Communication

F value
7.20***

3.92

3.28

3.83

(0.56)(0.56)(0.47)

3.90

3.42

4.04

(0.42)(0.67)(0.54)

2.79

2.82

2.72

(0.34)(0.66)(0.57)

2.42

2.44

2.28

(0.61)(0.63)(0.68)

3.49

3.14

3.56

(0.46)(0.48)(0.36)

3.16

2.94

3.30

(0.41)(0.45)(0.33)

3.44

2.98

3.57

(0.46)(0.49)(0.36)

3.11

2.85

3.22

(0.47)(0.57)(0.38)

3.47

3.25

3.42

(0.50)(0.52)(0.45)

6.95***
0.24
0.54
5.65**
5.35**
11.19****
4.05*
0.88

“Attempt to apply Integrated Information Theory to family system”

59“Spirituality”(F (2, 98) = 4.05, p<.05) was(Examination of reliability of each scale)significant.

First

of

all,

sufficientreliability

wasMultiple comparisons were performed byconfirmed

in

"way

thinking"

andTukey's HSD method (5% level). In "Confirm"preference" on the scale to measure difference

possibility of problem handling", "Confidence

betweenabout family capacity", "Connection", "Balancesomewhat lower in "ability", and it was

between relationships and individuals", theconsidered to cause due to few items. On thescore"Communication" scale, high reliability was

with

high

“ability”–

lowmarriedcouple.

theReliability was“communication” couple was significantly

confirmed.

lower than the one with other two groups

Inventory", sufficient reliability was confirmed(problem solving abilities and family resiliencein

was low). In "Trust in family ability" andhandling" and "Confidence about family"Spirituality", the score with high “ability” –capacity". On the other hand, the reliability was

low “communication” couple was significantly

somewhat lower in "Anxiety about problem

lower than the one with high “ability” – highsolving" and the "Sense of difficulty grasping“communication” couple (family resilience was

the problem". On the Family Resiliencelow). From the above results, it was shown that

Inventory, high reliability was confirmed in

the “communication” high couple had higher"Connection" and "Trust in family ability". On

scores of dependent variables (problem solving

the other hand, the reliability was low in

abilities and family resilience was high) than

"Balance

the low “communication” couple.

individuals",

the

On

of

"Problem"Confirm possibility of

betweenSolvingproblem

relationships"Spirituality",

and
and

"Socio-economic resource". The reason why
Discussion

the reliability is low with some factors is(Examination of the factor structure of theconsidered to be that the number of items isscale to measure difference between marriedsmall.

couple)Three factors were extracted as a result of(Examinationofrelationshipfactor analysis of the scale to measure“Couple'sdifference between married couple, "way of“Problem Solving abilities” and “Family

thinking", "preference", and "ability". It is

Resilience”)

considered that the couple's "way of thinking"In order to examine “what kind of propertiesand "preference" are cognitive dimensional

the family system with high problem solving

differences, and "ability" is a behavioral

abilities possess?”, we conducted analysis ofdimension difference.

variance with "Difference between married

difference”,

between“Communication”,

couples" and "communication" as independent
variables, and "Problem solving abilities" and60

Wakashima.

"Family resilience" as dependent variables. The

individuals” of "Family Resilience Inventory",

hypothesis in this study was " the group withitems related to the execution of action tohigh score in different between couples andsolution, the sense of difficulty grasping thecommunication has the higher problem solving

problem, and the moderate connection ofabilities between couple and family resiliencefamilies are summarized in these factors. Basedcompared to other groups”, but there was noon the above, it was shown that families withresult to support this hypothesis.

small difference of "way of thinking" between

In this study, the following results were

married couple have a moderate connection

obtained. The first point is that the couple with

between family members and less sense ofa high "communication" has higher problem

difficulty grasping the problem and execute thesolving abilities and family resilience than theaction to solutions compared to families withlow couple. The factors showed a significant

large differences.

differenceof

The third point is that the couple with low inproblem handling” and “Confidence about"preference" has higher problem solving

familyabilities than the high couple. The factors

were“Confirm

capacity”

ofpossibility"ProblemSolving

Inventory", and “Connection” and “Trust in

showedfamilyResilience"preference" was “Confirm possibility ofInventory". In these factors, items related to the

problem handling” factor of "Problem Solving

execution of action to solution, the sense of

Inventory". In this factor, items related to theeffectiveness of problem solutions, and theexecution of action to solution are summarized.

moderateare

From the above, it was shown that families

summarized. Based on the above, it was shownwith small difference of “preference” between

that families that take a lot of communication

married couples execute actions to solution

between married couple have a moderatecompared to the other families.

connection between family members and high

The fourth point is that the result showed thatsense of effectiveness of problem solutions, andthe couple who has low "communication" andexecute the action to solutions.

low difference of "preference" has lower

The second point is that the couple with low"Anxiety about problem solving" than the otherin “way of thinking” has the higher problem

couples.

solving abilities and family resilience than thecommunication between married couple ishigh couple. The factors showed a significant

small, it was shown that families with small

difference in the "way of thinking" were“preference” between couple has lower anxiety“Confidence about family capacity” and “Sense

about solving the problem.

ability”

ofconnection"Familyoffamiliesof difficulty grasping the problem” of "Problem
Solving Inventory", and “Connection” and“Balance

betweenrelationships

andasignificant

Even

when

difference

the

in

amounttheof

“Attempt to apply Integrated Information Theory to family system”

61(Study 2: Evaluating parents (couple) from a

Items for ① Scale of measuring difference

child’s perspective)

between married couple, ② Communication
Scale, ④ Measuring desirability, prepared in

Purposestudy 1 were used and they evaluated on their

The purpose of study 2 is to examine “whatparents. ③ Problem Solving Inventory was

kind of properties the family system with highevaluated about their families.

problem power possess?” as in study 1, from achild’s perspective. As in study 1, theResulthypothesis in study 2 is "the married couple(1) Examination of the factor structure of the

who has high score in couple’s difference andscale to measure difference between marriedcommunication has higher problem solving

coupleabilities and family resilience compared to the

In order to examine the factor structure of theother couples". The reason for conducting thedifference between the couple, factor analysis

same study as study 1 from the child'sof the scale to measure difference between

perspective is as follows. It is because there is amarried couple was conducted. First, 3 people

possibility that children who are third parties

who has missing values were excluded from thethan couple themselves may be able to properly

analysis. Next, we excluded 6 people who

grasp the couple's difference and the amount ofanswered "5. totally agree" to the item ④communication.

Measuring desirability (my parents believe thatmarried couple's opinions must agree in

Methodgeneral) from the analysis. As a result, 70

A questionnaire survey was conducted for 82

people were chosen for analysis.

university students (average 20.14 ± 1.42 years

Factor analysis by the principal factor methodold). The survey sheets were distributed at

was carried out. And after considering thelecture time and after the explanation of survey

eigenvalue head and the content of the items

they were asked to respond only withincluded in each factor, factor analysis using

agreement.

the main factor method and promax rotation
was performed again based on three factors

Scalewith high contribution ratio. As a result, 4 items

The following five scales were used. ①

not showing sufficient factor loading (.35) for

Scale to measure difference between married

any factor were excluded, and 12 items of 3

couple②

factors were extracted (Table 9).Items that

Communication Scale (14 items, 7 point scale) ,showed high factor loading for factor I were

③ Problem Solving Inventory (33 items, 5interpreted as factors related to “preference”

methods) (Hayashi, 1985), ④

Items forsince they are "Food preference", "Interior

measuring desirability (1 item, 5 methods).

preference", "Clothing preference" etc. Items(21

items,

5

point

scale),

62

Wakashima.

that showed a high factor loading for factor II

beliefs”,“Lifewere interpreted as factors related to "way ofmanagement)”.

skill(housework,

selfthinking" since they are "Thinking of way tospend after retirement", "Academic ability",(2) Examination of reliability of each scale"How to engage with parents’ home" etc. Items

Next, we examined the reliability of the ②that showed high factor loading for factor III

Communication Scale and the ③ Problem

were interpreted as factors related to “ability”

Solvingsince they are “Mental strength”, “Religious

Communication

Inventory
Scale,(Table

10).

The

the

subscaleof

Table 9: Factor analysis result of scale to measure difference between married couple(Factor pattern after promax rotation)
I

II

III

.959

-.026

-.198

11. Food preference

.663

-.109

.174

13. Interior preference

.502

.180

.011

12. Clothing preference

.391

.062

.053

-.056

.804

-.035

-.021

.640

-.064

.013

.586

-.047

18. How to engage with parents' home

.201

.502

.127

20. Policy of life

.200

.395

.220

5. Mental strength

.119

-.231

.727

21. Religious beliefs

-.141

.205

.520

-.055

.082

.485

Factor correlation

I

II

III

I

-

.499

.430

-

.559

I. Preference (α=.73)

14. TV program preference
II. Way of thinking (α=.77)
19. Thinking of way to spend after retirement
2. Academic ability

6. Concept of living (food, clothing & house) costIII. Ability (α=.58)

4. Life skill (housework, self management)

II
III

-

“Attempt to apply Integrated Information Theory to family system”

63"Problem Solving Inventory" : "Confirm
Table 10: Consideration of reliability

possibility of problem handling", "Confidence
about family capacity" were confirmed to be② Scale to measure the Communication volume
1. Communication volumeα.921

α=0.7 or more, and sufficient reliability was③ Problem Solving Inventory (SPI)

confirmed. On the other hand, the subscale of

1. Confirm possibility of problem handling.883

the "Problem Solving Inventory" : "Anxiety

2. Confidence about family capacity.764

3. Anxiety about problem solving.575

4. Sense of difficulty grasping the problem.619

about problem solving" and "Sense of difficultyαgrasping the problem" were less than α=0.7,
and sufficient reliability was not obtained. It is

Measuring desirability (my parents believe thatconsidered that the α coefficient became low

married couple's opinions must agree insince the number of items was small in any ofgeneral) from the analysis. As a result, 76

the subscales for which reliability could not be

people were chosen for analysis.

obtained. In addition, the fact that the number

The "preference", "way of thinking", "ability",of samples was slightly small is also consideredwhich is a subscale of the scale ①Measuring

to be one factor to lower the α coefficient. In

the difference between married couple wereconsideration of the above, all subscales wererounded, and the scales with more than 4 points

used for analysis in this study.

(corresponding to “4. Slightly different” in 5
methods) was grouped in high difference(3) Examination of relationship between

couple and the scales less than 4 points were

"Couple's difference", Communication" andgrouped in low difference couple. In addition,"Problem solving abilities"
Table 11: Crosstab of "Preference" and "Communication"

First, we complemented the missing value ofCommunication① the scale to measure difference between
married couple by mean. We excluded 6 people

Preference

who answered "5. totally agree" to the item ④

low

high

total

low

11

37

48

high

13

15

28

total

24

52

76

Table 12: Result of two way analysis of variance: "Preference" and "Communication" as independent variables
low

Preference
Communication
Confirm possibility of problem
handling
Confidence about family capacity

Anxiety about problem solving
Sense of difficulty grasping the
problemupper row: average

high

low

high

low

high

3.42

3.56

3.23

3.36

(0.78)

0.81

0.68

0.59

3.29

3.72

3.26

3.40

(0.98)(0.53)(0.71)(0.55)

2.55

2.47

2.67

2.53

(0.90)(0.71)(0.62)(0.65)

2.18

2.21

2.40

2.31

(0.87)(0.79)(1.00)(0.64)

lower row: standard deviation*p <.05, **p <.01, ***p <.005, ****p <.001

main effectPreference Communicationinteraction

1.04

0.50

0.00

1.13

2.97

0.79

0.26

0.33

0.02

0.60

0.02

0.07

64

Wakashima.

round ② Communication Scale scores and theTable 13: Crosstab of "Way of thinking" and "Communication"

scales with more than 5 points (corresponding

Communication

to “5. A little bit” in 7 methods) was grouped inhigh communication couple and the scales with

Way of thinking

less than 5 points was grouped in low
communication couple.

independent variables
The crosstabulation table after grouping isshown below (Table 11). A χ2 test of binaryarrangement of high / low in “preference" ×high / low in "communication" was performed
and it was significant (χ2 = 17.05, df = 1,
p<.001), it indicated that low couple in“preference” has more "communication". Since
each cell was n=5 or more, 2 × 2 analysis of
with

the

high

total

low

17

39

56

high

7

13

20

total

24

52

76

effect of communication were not seen.

1. “preference” and “communication” asvariance

low"preference"and"communication" as independent variables, and"Problem Solving Inventory" as dependent
variable was performed. The results of theanalysis (Table 12) with the preference (highgroup / low group) and communication (highgroup / low group) as independent variables,
the interaction, the preference, and the main

2. “way of thinking” and “communication” as
independent variables
The crosstabulation table after grouping isshown below (Table 13). A χ2 test of binaryarrangement of high / low in “way of thinking"× high / low in "communication" wasperformed, but it was not significant. Since
each cell was n=5 or more, 2 × 2 analysis ofvariance with the "way of thinking" and"communication" as independent variables, and"Problem Solving Inventory" as dependent
variable was performed.
As a results of analysis (Table 14), nointeraction was observed. The main effect ofthe "way of thinking" was significant in“Confidence about family capacity” (F (1,72) =16.96,

p<.001),“Anxiety

about

problem

Table 14: Result of two way analysis variance: "Way of thinking" and "Communication" as independent variables
Way of thinking

low

high

main effectCommunication

low

high

low

high

Confirm possibility on problem handling

3.44

3.58

3.01

3.27

(-0.46)(-0.77)(-1.12) (-0.70)

3.51

3.77

2.71

(-0.49)(-0.49)(-1.21) (-0.53)

Confidence about family capacity

Anxiety about problem solving

2.43

2.44

3.05

(-0.56)(-0.74)(-0.99) (-0.50)

Sense of difficulty grasping the problem

upper row: average

3.22

2.64

2.13

2.14

2.71

(-1.04)(-0.79)(-0.39) (-0.52)

lower row: standard deviation*p <.05, **p <.01, ***p <.005, ****p <.001

2.54

Way of thinking Communicationinteraction

3.31

0.95

0.08

16.96****

5.47*

0.54

4.61*

1.11

1.16

5.06*

0.15

0.18

“Attempt to apply Integrated Information Theory to family system”

solving" (F (1,72) = 4.61 , p<.05), "Sense of

65

Table 15: Crosstab of "Ability" and "Communication"difficulty grasping the problem" (F (1,72) =Communication

5.06,

low

high

total

p<.05).

"Confidenceaboutfamilycapacity" was significantly higher in the low

Abilitycouple of "way of thinking" than in the highcouple (problem solving abilities was high).
"Anxiety about problem solving" and "sense ofdifficulty grasping problems" were significantly
lower in the low couple of "way of thinking"than in the high couple (problem solving
abilities was high). Also, the main effect ofcommunication was significant in "Confidence
about family capacity" (F (1,72) = 5.47, p<.05).
The score of "communication" high couple wassignificantly higher than the low couple(problem solving abilities was high).
3.

“ability”

and

low

14

36

50

high

10

16

26

total

24

52

76

"ability"and "communication" as independent
variables, and "Problem Solving Inventory" as
dependent variable was performed .
From the results of the analysis (Table 16),
the significant difference were not observed
neither in interaction, the main effect of"ability" and "communication".
Discussion(Examination of the factor structure of thescale to measure difference between married“communication”

asindependent variables
The crosstabulation table after grouping isshown below (Table 15). A χ2 test of binaryarrangement of high / low of “ability" × high /low of "communication" was conducted but it
was not significant. Since each cell was n=5 ormore, 2 × 2 analysis of variance with thecouple)Three factors were extracted as a result of theexamination of the factor structure of the scale
to measure difference between married couple,"preference", "way of thinking", and "ability".
The same factors were extracted from study 1
which was the survey conducted from married
couples’ perspective. It was shown that the
couple and the child recognize the same three

Table 16: Result of two way analysis of variance: "Ability" and "Communication" as independent variables
Abilitylow

Communication

low

Confirm possibility on problem handling
Confidence about family capacity
Anxiety about problem solving
Sense of difficulty grasping the problem
upper row: averagelowmain effecthighAbilityCommunicationinteraction

0.28

0.37

2.50

0.65

3.27

2.32

1.05

0.20

1.68

1.52

0.06

0.44

3.15

3.56

3.55

3.37

(6.20)(0.67)(0.81)(0.93)

3.11

3.67

3.50

3.55

(0.87)(0.52)(0.74)(0.63)

2.79

2.47

2.37

2.52

(0.69)(0.60)(0.79)(0.87)

2.46

2.27

2.07

2.16

(0.97)(0.77)(0.87)(0.72)

lower row: standard deviation*p <.05, **p <.01, ***p <.005, ****p <.001

high
high

66

Wakashima.

differences as the difference between theresilience compared to the other couples”, but

couple.

there was no result to support this hypothesis.
In this study, the following results were

(Examination of reliability of each scale)
First

of

all,

was

a high "communication" has higher problem

confirmed in "preference" and "way ofsolving abilities than the low couple. The factor

thinking" on the scale to measure difference

showedbetween married couples. On the other hand,“Confidence about family capacity” and items

the reliability was somewhat lower in "ability"

relatedand it is considered to have low reliability due

summarized in this factor. Based on the above,

to few items. In the "communication" scale,it was shown that families with large volume ofhigh"communication" between married couple feel

reliability

sufficientwasreliability

obtained. The first point is that the couple withconfirmed.
Inventory",On"ProblemSolvingreliability

wasconfirmed

inpossibilityofproblem

handling"

the

a
to

significant
solutiondifference
effectiveness

was
are

sufficient

highly effective in solving problems.

"Confirm

The second point is that the couple with a low

anddifference of “way of thinking”

has the higher"Confidence about family capacity". On the

problem solving abilities than the couple with aother hand, reliability was somewhat lower inhigh difference of "way of thinking". The"Anxiety about problem solving" and "Sense offactors showed a significant difference weredifficulty grasping the problem". The reason“Confidence about family capacity”, “Anxiety

why the reliability is low with some factors isabout problem solving” and “Sense of difficulty

considered to be that the number of items is

grasping the problem”. In these factors, items

small.

related to the sense of solution effect, anxiety
about not being able to solve, and sense of not(Examinationofrelationshipbetween

being

able

to

grasp

the

problemare"Couple's difference", "Communication" andsummarized. From the above, it was shown that

"Problem solving abilities")families with a low differ “way of thinking”

In order to examine "what kind of properties

between married couples feel the high solution

the family system with high problem solving

effectiveness and do not feel anxiety or sense ofabilities possess?", we conducted analysis of

not being able to grasp the problem.

variance with "Difference between married
couples" and "communication" as independent

Comprehensive Discussion

variables, and "Problem Solving Inventory" as

1. Result summary and hypothesis verification

dependent variables. The hypothesis in thisThe purpose of this study was to examinestudy was " The married couple who has high“what kind of properties the family system withscore in couple' s difference and interaction has

high problem solving abilities possess?”. The

higher problem solving abilities and family

hypothesis was " The married couple who has

“Attempt to apply Integrated Information Theory to family system”

high

score

in

couple’s

difference

and

67

refine the scale to measure difference between

interaction has higher problem solving abilities

married couples.

and family resilience compared to the other

From the results of this study, it was

couples”, but there was no result to support thisunderstood that small difference in “way of

hypothesis. The results obtained in this study

thinking” and “preference” between married

generally showed that "a couple with a lot of

couple and large volume of "communication"communication" and "a couple with smallshows a generally positive relationship todifferences of way of thinking and preferences"

problem solving and family resilience. This

have high problem solving abilities and family

result is generally obvious result. We made an

resilience.

assumption that differences and interactions
increase the amount of information, but, in our

2. Achievement in family researchdaily life, there are few scenes that require a lot

In this study, we got suggestions for theofquestion "What is the difference in couple?".

demonstrate the high amount of information

From this study, it was shown that there are

may be in special circumstances or urgent

three differences between married couples,

circumstances. It is necessary to advance the"way of thinking", "preference", and "ability".

research assuming a context that requires a lot

There has not been any family research thatof information volume.

focused on the differences between married

Next, when assuming a family system, how tocouple and worked on the measurement. This

think about the difference is the biggest

study will be the foundation of the researchchallenge point. After finishing this study, we

focusing on the differences between marriedcame to assume two alternatives for differences.

couples. Also, the scale to measure differenceFirst, the existence of individual itself is a

between the married couple developed in thisunique existence, and the difference similar to

study will be a useful tool for research focusing

the difference in the characteristics of neurons

on the differences between married couples.

is the possibility of being established by the

information

volume.

Functionsthat

individual itself. In that case, as a research
3. Challenges point in applying integrated

design, we set the existence of two or more

information theory to family systems

members, and think that the number of

There will be room for improvement in theindividuals is the magnitude of the difference.

scale to measure difference between theSecondly, in the case of family systems, it ismarried couple developed in this study. In thisnecessary to measure the differences in the

study, the reliability of "ability" factor was

roles of each member in their families. Fromsomewhat low. The fact that the number ofthe viewpoint on how various differences are

items was small may be one of the factors. It iscreating some difference in the family system,

necessary to increase the number of items andit is considered that assuming differences in68

Wakashima.

roles is more direct than measuring "way of

Investigation of the reliability and validity.

thinking", "preference" and "ability". In thisJapanese Journal of Family Psychology, 27,

study, the suggestion on clinical implications isNo.1, 57-70.

refrained until clarifying the above problem.
We will review the above issues again and willcontinuetoattempt

applying

integrated

information theory to family system.

Prigogine, I. 1980. From being to becoming.
Freeman.
Takahashi, Y., Takahashi, H., Hayashi, H. &Nagasawa, R. 2013. The approach ofproblem solving for counseling. Komazawa

References

Annual Reports of Psychology, 15, 1-6.

Bateson, G. 1972. Steps to an ecology of mind.
University of Chicago Press.

Tononi, G. 2004. An information integration
theoryHayashi, K. 1985. Monndaikaiketsu ni tsuitenoof

consciousness.

BMC

Neuroscience, 5, 42.

gakusei no taido to kunnrenn. JapaneseTononi, G., Boly., M., Massimini, M. & Koch,

Journal of Counseling Science, 17, No.2, 7−

C. 2016. Integrated information theory:

15. (In Japanese)

From consciousness to its physical substrate.

Heppner, P. P. & Petersen, C. H. 1982. The

Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 17, 450-461.

Develpoment and implications of a Personal

Wakashima, K. 2001. Individual therapy in the

Problem-Solving

Inventory.

Journalofsystemic approach: An attempt to reconsider

Counseling Psychology, 29, No.1, 66-75.

system theory based on the concept of time.

Hida, M. & Kariya, Y. 1992. Perceived

The Japanese Journal of School Counseling,interparental

concordanceandrelationships

with

in

parents

the4, 37-42.

femaleWakashima, K. & Matsui, H. 2003 ． A

adolescents. Bulletin of the Faculty oftheoretical study of speed of "information

Education,

recurrent model". The Journal of the

Fukushima

University,

Education, psychology, 51, 55-63.

Psychological Institute, Rissho University, 1,

Itakura, N. 2013. Examining the Association

43-67.

of direct and indirect communication in

Wakashima, K. & Matsui, H. 2004. A case

Family with Adolescents. Annual Report ofstudy of group transition model and speed

Graduate School of Education, Tohoku

of information recurrent model. The Journal

University, 62, No.1, 273-282.

of the Psychological Institute, Rissho

Maturana,

H.R.

&

Varela,

F.J.

1980.

Autopoiesis and cognition: The realizationoftheliving.

D.

ReidelPublishing

Company.
aFamilyWakashima, K. & Matsui, H. 2005. Kazoku no
kyoukai toha nanika zyouhoukaiki no
sokudo. L'esprit D'aujourd'hui, Rinnsyouno

Ohyama, N. & Nozue, T. 2013. Development
ofUniversity, 2, 41-53.

Resilience

Inventory:

Goyouronn, 454, 185-190. (In Japanese)
Wakashima, K., Sato, A. & Hasegawa, K. 2000.

“Attempt to apply Integrated Information Theory to family system”

A case of school refusal as improved bybrief family therapy: A study by new systemmodel includes conception of time –information recurring velocity model -.
Psychosomatic Medicine, 4, 373-378.
Acknowledgments
This study received the following grant. We
appreciate this grant.
JSPS KAKENHI Grant Number JP 17K04191

69International Journal of Brief Therapy and Family Science
2018 Vol. 8, No.2, 70-86< Original Paper: Research and Experiment >The Effect of way of mother’s communication with father’s image to their children on
father’s image and family function
Miki Hagidai1) Masako Okuno2) Koubun Wakashima 3)
1)

Graduate School of Education, Tohoku University

2)

Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences, Iwate University

3)

Faculty of Education, Tohoku University

ABSTRACT. In this research, the purpose was to examine the influence of father’s image transfer from mother to child ing father
image of their child.

We focused on two aspects of how to convey father’s image by mother, management side and content side.

A questionnaire survey was conducted for 217 college students (97 males, 120 females). As a result of the factor analysis, themanagement aspect of how to convey father’s image by mother was constructed with “Peaceful” “Callousness ” “Involving”“awkwardness” “serious” in management side and “reference to father’s presence” “mother’s perspective to the father” in thecontent aspect. Covariance structure analysis was conducted to examine the effect of mother’s father image transmission on family
function through mediation of father’s image. As a result, it was suggested that referring to father’s day-to-day situation on thecontent side and "peaceful" "serious" on the management side by mothers promotes family functions by mediating a positive
father’s image perceived by their child.
KEY WORDS: mother, father’s image, adolescents, management communication

Introduction-ng to Minuchin(1974), who focused on the

1．Characteristics of fatherless homestructure of the family and advocated structured

In Japan, there are situations that oftenfamily therapy, the healthy family has stronger"mother-child adherence / father absence". Thisparents

is the situation where the distance between

relationships and clear generation boundaries,

mother and child is close and father is absent inand with the two extreme states such as thethe family. The term "absence of father" as used

relationshipherein includes not only physical absence offather-child is adhesion or poor it may cause

home

also

pathology

tothefamily.

psychological/functional absence, it has been

adherence/

fatherabsence"discussed as a cause of various problems heldequivalent to the family structure showing thisby children and parent-child relationship withpathology, and it can be said that there is a risk

mother-child adherence (Ogata, 2011). Accordiof family problems. Empirical studies on the

CORRESPONDENCE TO: Hagidai Graduate School ofrelationship between parent-child relationship

Education, Tohoku University, 27-1, Kawauchi, Aoba-ku,

and psychological adaptation of children

Sendai-city, 980-8576, JAPAN.

suggest that the discord between father-childe-mail: m.hagidai@gmail.com

relationships is related to low self-esteem and

for

work

etc.

but

70

relationships

thanbetweenparent-childmother-childor"Mother-childisexactly“THE WAY OF MOTHER’S COMMUNICATION WITH FATHER’S IMAGE”

71

emotional instability of the child (Maejima，

relationship of father-child and a vicious circle

Oguchi,like escalating the pathology of families and2001),

and

young

man

who

experienced with hikikomori tends to have achildren.

negative image against his father (Hanashima,

In order to prevent families from falling2007). On the other hand, it has been reported

into such a vicious circle, it is important forthat young female who are close to theirfather to involve with the family and to make amothers and have a low sense of self-control

good relationship with the wife and child.

alsomentalHowever, in many cases it is practicallyindependence and high in degree of depressiondifficult for many fathers who have work to(Mizumoto，Yamamoto, 2010). Therefore, it

spend time to communicate with their families.

canfather-childAccording to the survey by Kajiwara andrelationship or mother-child adherence will

Matsubara (2007), it indicates that 71% of theincrease the risk of child’s inclination tosubject answered “unable to spare time to takepathology. Regarding family relationship, it iscare of child due to the volume of work” andshown that the relationship between two parties

27% of the subject answered “consider theis related to the relationship with other family

childcare is a women’s job” as the reason formembers.

At the result of examination onfather’s childcare rate is low in Japan. Based

connection between parent-child relationshipon these results, the reason why father does notandadolescenceparticipate in childcare is compiled into two

performed by Itakura and Hasegawa (2012), it

points that the difficult situation caused by thewas reported that there were no connection

long working hours and the traditional role

between parents’ ties and mother-child ties but

consciousness of Japan which childcare is aa positive correlation was observed between

mother’s

parents’ ties and father-child ties. In addition,

Noguchi, 2008). As for the latter, it includes asince a negative correlation was found between

vicious circle as father acquires the identity as

mothers’s

father"earnings" by leaving childcare to mother, but

evaluated by the youth and the positiveon the other hand, they cannot acquire theevaluation of mother evaluated by the youth, it

identity as “father” since there is not enoughwas pointed out that mother-child adherence

communication with the child at home and it

was established by sharing the negative

makes them to concentrate on the role as aevaluation of the father between mother and“income provider” and become isolated fromchild (Tobita ＆ Kariya, 1992; Itakura ＆the family even more (Wakashima, Suenaga,＆

Hasegawa, 2012). Therefore, it can be said that

Noguchi，2008).

father-child relationship is related to father’s

father’s traditional role consciousness results inevaluation by mothers and marital relationship,

increasing working hours and decreasing

mother-childinvolvement in families.

have

be

low

said

in

that

degreefesteringparents’ relationshipnegativeinevaluation

adherenceofofcausesweakrole(Wakashima,

Suenaga, ＆Therefore, the strength ofFurthermore, when a72

Hagidai.

father encounters child’s problem, he leaves it

subjectivity and that it is being created by

to a mother who has a large amount ofinteraction between individuals and others

information about child, or even if he exercises(Hasegawa,

authority in the family it doesn’t work in theintervened that the mother told the children

circumstance that the intimacy from early

about father’s past brave episode, as the motherchildhood is lacking between child and father

felt the father feeble in the family whose childand it even cuts off the emotional exchange

had

with

the

child,

mother-child

it

ends

adherence1991).

Hasegawa

problem behavior.

(2005)As a result, thetostrengthen

problem behavior of child improved, so it can

andweakenbe thought that by referring to the brave aspect

father-child relationship (Tamura, 1997).

Inof the father by mother, child’s father’s image

other words, when a father encounters child’s

shifted from the “weak father” to the "father

problem, even if father is not actuallywith a brave aspect", the reality for child was

physically absent, father will leave child’sreconstructed. In families father is physicallyproblem to mother, so that the relationshipabsent, unless a conversation about father isbetween fathers will be weaken. Meanwhile,heldeven if father is involved, there is a situation

informatively absence and the sense of father’sthat child lacks intimacy and does not workabsence will be strengthened. Such a situation

effectively.

Therefore, in order to prevent

leads the communication between father andsuch a situation and to maintain a goodother family members to a difficult direction

relationship of father and child it is necessary toand creates a situation where no direct

consider a method of preventing the dilution of

conversation is carried out between father andthe existence of father in the family when thethe family even if father is present. At thisdirect communication is difficult between

time, as information against father’s real

father and child.

existence, fathers and other family members

by

the

families,

fatherwillbetreat as if father is not there, and it can be said
2．Transmission of father’s image from motherthat communication is done with father’s

to their childabsence. Therefore, based on the position that

Hasegawa (2005) states the problem of

the reality is formed by the interaction of“absence of father” in Japanese families is that

communication, in the case where it is difficult

not actual absence of father but father’sfor father and child to direct communicate, it isexistence is not mentioned or mentioned

possibility

negatively.

constructed informationally by mother tellingIn

addition,hestatestheimportance of mothers composing child’s father
statue based on constructivism perspective.

thatfather’s

image

can

be

child about father.
A few studies have been conducted as

Constructivism is the idea that the reality is a"indirect

communication"

aboutworld that is perceived through individual

communication that mother convey father’s

“THE WAY OF MOTHER’S COMMUNICATION WITH FATHER’S IMAGE”

image to their child.

73

It has been reported thattheory of human communication (Watzlawick,for the group with little direct communication

Bavelas, & Jakson, 1967) proposes five axioms

between father and child, young people in theas means by which communication influencesgroup with more information transmission on

the behavior of others.

father between mother and child have higher

axiom "All communications have aspects offamily satisfaction than the group with lesscontent and relations, the latter classifies theinformation transmission (Itakura, 2013). The

former, it is meta communication," it is said

high degree of family satisfaction associates isthat there are two aspects of communication.

related to the the strength of the connection

They are the content aspect which is the

between child and father and the strength of theconversation content itself and a management

connection between the parents (Koiwa, 2010),

aspect which is the meaning attached to theit is considered that child strengthens theconversation

connection with father as the image of father

communication that manages a conversation

existing as information by mother conveying

and it is called "management communication"

the image of father to their child. In addition,(Hasegawa,

since

information

communication, in non-language includes bodytransmission on father between mother andmovement such as nod or gesture, facechild increase the cohesiveness of family

expression, tone or gaze, in language includes(Itakura, 2010), an informational father image

particles, auxiliary verbs, interjections, andis considered to enhance family function.

nodding (Okuno, 2013).

Hasegawa (2005)

However, empirical studies have not been madestate that management

communication is

on the influence on the family function throughmore important, not communication content.

child’s image of father created by the

Furthermore, he is advocating the effectiveness

transmission of father’s image from mother toof topic-free model that problems are solved bytheir child.

not

it

is

reported

that

Therefore, in this research we

contents.

intervening

Based on the 2ndThe2003).

withlatterisaManagement

thecontentofexamine the influence of the transmission ofcommunication, but by intervening in thatfatherss image from mother to their on the

management（Hasegawa, 2005）. In addition, it

family function by mediating father’s image

is suggested that management communication

perceived by children.

can be used as a means to change the system ina psychological clinical setting (Wakashima,

3．Introduction of communication theory1997).

Regarding communication that mothers

Therefore, it is necessary to consider notconvey father’s image to their child, focus isonly the content of information but also theplaced on the positive and the negative of

way of communicating by nothing the point of

information, and the point of "how to"how to communicate" about how to convey

communicate" has not been considered. The

the image of father by mother. Therefore, in74Hagidai.

this research, we conduct a study “how” toMethods

convey rather than “what” to convey while

1．Preliminary survey

mother conveys father’s image, by focusing on1）Survey target

the management aspect and content side of

42 university students in Japan (42 valid

communication based on the theoretical point

responses, 17 men, 25 females, M=20.19,

of view of the theory of human communication.

SD=1.58) was survey target.
2）Questionnaire form

4．Hypothesis of this study

We request to reply with free description on

In this research, we examine the influence

the following with the instruction of “pleaseof mother’s communication of father’s image torespond to the recent situation of the family” ontheir child is conveyed on the family function

the survey.

through mediation of fathers image. on themother talking about her hasband, we asked forfamily function through child’s image of father

answer what and how mother talks about her

created by the way mother’s communication of

hasband on the following 8 items on freefather’s image to their child, in order to present

description. The 8 items were ①Contents ②

theReason ③ Frequency ④ Status ⑤ Phrase ⑥

findingthatmother’s’s

way

of

Regarding the circumstance ofcommunication of father’s image is to prevent

Attitude ⑦Facial expression ⑧Gaze.

the pathology of child and family due to theAnalysis: The results obtained were classified

absence of father. Furthermore, the following

by using the KJ method, and question items

hypothesis model was set up based on thewere created. We referred Itakura (2013) who

indication that the management aspect and thecreatedconversation contents are related to each otherinformation transmission between mother and(Okuno, 2009) on how to convey father’schild when creating question items on theimage by mother.

content side.

question

Figure 1: Hypothesis model in this study

items

on

father-related

“THE WAY OF MOTHER’S COMMUNICATION WITH FATHER’S IMAGE”

2．The survey

75

We asked to answer in the 5 methods of1）Survey subjects: We analyzed 217 people“absolutely not (1 point)” to “always (5who answered that their parents are healthy (97points)” on 10 items of adaptability, 10 items ofmen, 120females, M=19.89, SD=1.06) after

cohesiveness, the total of 20 items.

distributing questionnaires to 237 college3）Analysis

students.

The factors were extracted by conducted the2）Questionnaire form

factor analysis on management aspect and the

We distributed the questionnaires using acontent aspect from the questions about how

part of the lecture time of the university. Also,mother conveys father’s image. Furthermore,

we explained and gained consent that themultiple regression analysis was performed

individual is not specified because the answer

with father’s image, extracted factor, family

is processed statistically and that the survey

function as dependent variable. Based on the

result is not used except for research.

prediction of multiple regression analysis, we（1）Face sheet

tried to construct a model by covariance

We

asked

for

gender,age,

familystructure analysis using Amos from the four

composition.

aspects of management aspect of father image（2）Question regarding how mother convey

transmission by mother, content aspect father

father’s image

image transmission by mother, father image

It is a question about how to convey theand family function.

image of father by mother created from thepreliminary survey. We asked for responses inResults

the six laws of "management does not apply at

1．Consideration on how to convey father’sall (1 point)" to "very applicable (6 points)" forimage by mother45 items on the management side and 13 items

1）Management sideon the content side.

From the 45 items on the management side,（3）Question on father’s image (Hanashi -ma,average values and standard deviations were2007)

calculated for each item in order to exclude

Five items with large factor loads wereitems where extreme score bias was observed.

selected for "strict nonflexibility", "intimacy",

The 3 items of “When mother talks about the"respect and trust", "emotion understanding",

father, she gets stuck in a story.” (=0.93), “The"affection" and "facing attitude", respectively.

mother looks down when she talks about the

We asked to answer in the 6 methods of "notfather.”(=0.94), “The mother talks like aapplicable at all (1 point)" to "very applicablesolioquy(6 points)" for all 30 items.

father.”(=0.93), shows the floor effect and were（4）Family function measurement scale (Kusa

deleted. After that, the factor analysis on 42da, Okado, 1993)

items on the management side was performed

when

she

talks

about

the

76

Hagidai.

using maximum likelihood method and promax

by .40 or more. At the end five factors wererotation. As a result, 5 factors (23 items) were

determined from 23 items.

extracted considering the attenuation rate of

final factor pattern and factor correlation after

eigenvalues and interpretability.

promax rotation.

To select

Table 1 shows thefactor items, factor analysis by maximum

The first factor was labelled “peaceful” as it

likelihood method and promax rotation wasshows mother talks about the father in bright

performed repeatedly with the condition of theatmosphere like " When the mother talks about

contribution ratio of each factor is contributed

the father, she smiles ", " When the mother

Table 1: Results of factor analysis on the items of management aspect of how to convey father’s image
by mother
Item description

F1

F2

F3

F4

F5

peaceful α=.901
When the mother talks about the father, she smiles.

0.92

-0.05

-0.09

0.04

0.05

When the mother talks about the father, she has sweet expression.

0.9

-0.04

-0.09

0.1

0.14

The mother talks humorously and funny about the father.

0.86

0.21

0.01

0.02

-0.08

The mother talks happily about the father.

0.77

-0.18

0.11

0.13

-0.11

When the mother talks about the father, she has light and bright tone

0.74

0.07

-0.06

-0.01

-0.07

When the mother talks about the father, she is not active.

-0.57

0.09

-0.03

0.13

0.1

The mother talks about the father when he is.

0.55

0.05

0.21

-0.11

0.04

When the mother talks about the father, she rolls her eyes.

0.14

1.01

-0.04

-0.18

0.13

When the mother talks about the father, she uses cool tone.

0.11

0.95

0.01

0.03

0.16

When the mother talks about the father, she has unpleasant expression.

-0.13

0.68

0

0.15

-0.07

When the mother talks about the father, she looks tired.

-0.16

0.67

-0.01

0.1

-0.04

When the mother talks about the father, she looks sullne.

-0.12

0.66

0.01

0

-0.1

When the mother talks about the father, she do not sound pleasant.

0.07

0.6

-0.08

0.2

-0.1

When the mother talks about the father, she uses the phrase to look him down.

0.01

0.6

0.22

-0.11

-0.07

0.08

Callousness α=.902

Involving α=.760
When the mother talks about the father, she asks you for agreement.

-0.02

0.04

0.89

-0.04

When the mother talks about the father, she asks you for opinion.

0.03

-0.13

0.81

0.16

0.02

When the parents cannot communicate well, the mother talks to you about the father.

0.06

0.18

0.49

-0.06

-0.12

-0.08

awkwardness α=.749
When the mother talks about the father, she talks hesitate.

-0.04

0.02

0.07

0.75

When the mother talks about the father, she talks too formally

0.11

-0.15

0.01

0.75

0.14

When the mother talks about the father, she talks with more nervous than usual.

-0.02

0.2

-0.02

0.67

-0.01

When the mother talks about the father, she talks calm.

0.09

-0.08

0.03

-0.09

0.77

When the mother talks about the father, she talks coldly with bland tone.

-0.19

0.08

-0.15

0.09

0.58

When the mother talks about the father, she has serious expression.

-0.12

0.11

0.16

0.19

0.54

F2

F3

F4

F5

-0.62

0.06

-0.39

-0.01

0.27

0.42

-0.12

0.01

-0.25

serious α=.630

factor correlation
F1
F2
F3
F4

F1

0.27

“THE WAY OF MOTHER’S COMMUNICATION WITH FATHER’S IMAGE”

talks

about

the

father,

she

has

sweet

the father, she talks too formally”.

77

The fifth

expression", " The mother talks humorously

factor was labelled “serious” as it shows theand funny about the father".

The second was“When the mother talks about the father, shelabelled “Callousness”as it shows mother’s’s

talks hesitate”, ”When the mother talks about

negative attitude against the father like “Whenhigh load on the items indicating serious

the mother talks about the father, she rolls her

atmosphere like “When the mother talks abouteyes”, “When the mother talks about the father,

the father, she talks calm”, “When the mothershe uses cool tone”, “When the mother talks

talks about the father, she talks coldly with

about

unpleasant

bland tone”. On cronbach’s coefficient alpha,

The third factor was labelled

the results were followings, "peaceful";α=.901,“Engulfment” as it is an act to involve child“Callousness”; α=.902 , "Involving"; α=. 760,

into parent relationship like “When the mother"awkwardness";talks about the father, she asks you for

The third factor, the fourth factor and the fifth

agreement”, “When the mother talks about thefactor have an cronbach’s coefficient alpha offather, she asks you for opinion”, “When the

0.8 or less, and it is necessary to pay attention

parents cannot communicate well, the motherto statistical interpretation, but we will use ittalks to you about the father”. The fourth factor

foris labelled “awkwardness" as it shows high load

management aspect in detail.

theexpression ”.

father,shehasanalysis

α=.749,inorder“serious”;α=.630.

toexaminetheon the items indicating passive attitudes like

Table 2: Results of factor analysis on the items of content aspect of how to convey father’s image bymotherItem description

F1

F2

My mother talks about what my father is interested in.

0.89

-0.2

My mother talks about my father's hobby.

0.88

-0.12

My mother talks about memory with my father.

0.57

0.08

My mother talks about my father's past episode.

0.53

0.29

My mother talks about what my father thinks.

0.48

0.21

My mother talks about my father's day-to-day situation.

0.42

0.04

My mother talks to about her dissatisfaction with my father.

-0.15

0.69

My mother talks frankly about my father.

0.05

0.62

My mother talks about my father's character.

0.29

0.44

I

II

Reference to father’s presence α=.813

mother’s perspective to the father α=.633

Factor correlation
F1

0.36

78

Hagidai.

2）Content aspectin ”, “ My mother talks about my father’s

To exclude items with extreme bias in score

hobby ”, “ My mother talks about memory withfrom 13 items of content side, the average

my father”.

value“reference to father presence”.

andcalculated.

thestandard

deviation

wereTherefore, it was labeled as
The second

No floor effect or ceiling effectfactor consists of 3 items, and it shows highwas seen. Factor analysis was conducted onload on the content which shows how mother’s

13 items on the content side by maximum

thinks about father such as “My mother talks tolikelihood method and promax rotation. As aabout her dissatisfaction with my father ”,

result, two factors were extracted considering“mother talks frankly about my father”.

the

and

Therefore, it was beled as “mother’s viewpointinterpretability. To select factor items, factor

on father”. On cronbach’s coefficient alpha,analysis based on maximum likelihood method

the results were followings,

and promax rotation was performed repeatedly,

father presence” ;α=.813, “mother’s viewpointwith the contribution ratio of each factor

on father” ; α=.633.

attenuation

rateof eigenvalues

contributing more than .40.

“reference toFinally, two

factors were determined from nine items.

2．Model structure on how to convey father’s

Table 2 shows the final factor pattern and factor

image by mother, father’s image, and familycorrelation after promax rotation.

function

The first factor consists of 6 items, and it

Based on the hypothetical model (Fig. 1),

shows high load on the content of father’s

we constructed a related model of how mothers

interest or his day-to-day situation such as “ Mytransmit father’s image to their child , father

mother talks about what my father is interested

images, and family functions. We analyzed

Figure 2: Prediction model of relation between how to convey father’s image by mother tochilren, father’s image, and family function

“THE WAY OF MOTHER’S COMMUNICATION WITH FATHER’S IMAGE”

79

using data of 97 males and 119 females, total of

After that, we corrected the model.

216 people (M = 19.89, SD = 1.067) and input

When making modifications, we removed

the average value for the missing values fornot meaningful paths and added paths

convenience of the analysis. In constructing

within a range that is theoreticallythe model, we conducted multiple regression

understandable with reference to theanalysis by stepwise method with management

correction index.

aspect and content aspect of father’s image told

constructed with "peaceful" "serious" forby mother to child as explanatory variables and“how to convey the father’s image byfather’s image as dependent variable.

Inmother to child” as management aspect

addition, multiple regression analysis wasand “reference to father’s presence” asperformed using father’s image as explanatory

content

aspect,“intimacy”“emotionvariable and family function as dependent

understanding”“affection”“facingvariable.

We constructed the model by

attitude”

father’s

image,

predicting

themultiple“cohensiveness” “adaptability” for family

regression analysis. The model at this time isfunction in the final model. The model

shown in Fig.2. In the following models, theat this time is shown in Fig.3.

correlation coefficient between explanatory

fitness index of the final model was χ 2variables is omitted due to the complication of(22) = 30.805 (p = .100), GFI = .971, AGFI

the notation.

The general fitness criteria of= .940, CFI =. 987, RMSEA = .043, AIC =the model was set as GFI> .90, AGFI> .90,

76.805. Since model fitness improved, we

RMSEA <.05. At this time, the fitness index

adopted a model.

results

of

these

for

As a result, it wasof the model was χ 2 (38) = 100.980 (p <.000),
GFI = .931, AGFI = .858, CFI = .925, RMSEA= .088, AIC = 180.980.

Figure 3: Final model of relation between how to convey father’s image by mother to children,
father’s image, and family function.

The

80

Hagidai.

Discussion

However, if it is "involving" when referring to1）Communication behavior on how to convey

the positive aspect of father, it is considered tofather’s image from mother to childhave a positive effect on father’s image and it is

As a result of investigating on factors how

necessary to examine the management items

mother’s transmission of father image to theirmore carefully. "Awkwardness" is composedchild is composed, 5 factors “peaceful”

of factors such as mother talking uncomfortably,“coldness”

talking too formally, and is an avoidance“involving”“awkwardness”“serious” for management aspect, 2 factors

attitude towards the reference to father.

“reference to father’s presence” “mother’s

Finally, "serious" consists of items such as

viewpoint of father” for content aspect weremother talking calmly, serious expression,

extracted.

which shows that the interpersonal distanceIn the previous study, it waspointed out that the scene where of mentioning

with their child is centrifugal.

father between mother and child was the scene

factors, it can be considered to contain aspects

where mother praises father or talks positive

how is mother’s perception of father and how

image of father, or the involving scene whichshemother complains about father to child wheninterpersonal

parents fight(Toda et al. 2002; Yamamoto ＆management action related to the way mother

Ito, 2012). In other words,

transmits father’s image to child.

the information

maintains

andsystemFrom thesecommunicates

the

with

the

child

in

on father was either positive or negative.

In content aspect, In “reference to father’s

However, in this study, we can say that bypresence”, mother shows father’s day-to-day

focusing on the management and content

situation and father’s specific episode. On the

aspects of communication, it was possible toother hand, "mother’s perspective to father”

show the characteristics of mother’s’s moreshows her viewpoint of father. Therefore, it

specific behavior when conveying father’s

indicates that there are two methods ofinformation from mother to child.

presenting information such by talking father’s"Peaceful"fromday-to-day situation or his hobby or by talking

management aspect are composed with items

her perspective and thought of father whenthat show mother’s perception of father, and it

mother conveys the information of father tocan prove to indicate parents’ relationshipchild.

directly.

and"coldness""Involving" is an action that motherseeks consent from child and it involves child2）How to communicate effectively to improvein parents’ relationship.

father’s image that their child perceives

Moreover, it isconsidered to be an action to involve child in

In this study, It is shown that mother talking

the married couple’s conflict as it contains theabout father peacefully with a smile or brightitem “When the parents cannot communicate

tone, or mother talking calmly and seriously

well, the mother talks to you about the father”.

with a serious expression is effective to“THE WAY OF MOTHER’S COMMUNICATION WITH FATHER’S IMAGE”

81

improve father’s image that child perceives.

communication that elicits independence of the

From this, it is considered that even thoughconversation partner while maintaining thetalking “peacefully” on a daily basis, talking

sense of distance with the conversation partner.

“seriously” when you need to tell father’s

This is a communication used by experts infeeling or thought to child will improve father’s

medical and educational situations, while

image that child perceives. Having motherindicating afferent using nod or gaze, etc. intalking about father “peacefully” doesn’t only

non-language

constitutes child’s good father’s image but alsointerpersonal relationship), it also indicatesleads to mother showing a good relationshipefferent using affirm and honorific expression

with father, and it promotes the clarification ofat the end of sentence in language.

intergenerational boundaries (Minuchin, 1974).

communication behavior of "serious" obtained

It is also indicated from the fact thatin this research is also "interactional space

management aspect’s "peaceful" has bigger

communication", it seems that movement ofinfluence on father’s image than content

system in the opposite direction exists in

aspect’s “reference to father’s presence”.

Inlanguage and non-language. In other words,

other words, in addition to the actions tothere is a possibility that it may be afferent withconvey father’s information, parent’s good

non-language such as gaze and nodding. For

relationshipbythe convenience of the questionnaire survey, wemanagement aspect “peacefully”, and it isare unable to clarify the distinction in this study,

considered to affect father’s image that childbut the communication behavior of "serious”

perceives positively.

This is consistent withenable to convey the necessary information to

the finding (Toda et al., 2002) that the mother’s

the other person clearly while mother talks

function to adjust father and child influences

about father without increasing the intimacy,

image of fathers recognized by their child by

and maintaining the interpersonal distance.

istransmitted

to

child

mediating parents’ good relationship.

(directiontomaintainIf theIn the content aspect regarding how toFurthermore, among mother’s way of

convey father’s image by mother, sincecommunicating father’s image, "seriousness""reference to father’s presence" was included

was also shown to be a mother’s management

but "mother’s viewpoint of father" was not

behavior to improve father’s image of child.

included in the model it is considered that

"Serious" is composed of items such as "talkmother talking about father’s hobby or father’scalmly" "talk coldly with bland tone" "being asituation to child is more effective thanserious expression", at first glance it seems tomother’s perspective to father to improveact in a centrifugal (direction to collapse

father’s image of child.

In addition, sinceinterpersonal relationship) in the interpersonal"reference

father’spresence"system.

moderately

positivecorrelation

However, Okuno (2008) proposes"interactional space communication" as a

to

has

a

with

management aspect "peaceful", it shows that

82

Hagidai.

content aspect and management aspect ofcalled"mother-childadherence/

fathermother’s transmission of father’s image to theirabsence", but by utilizing its characteristics,

child are mutually related.

mother can communicate father’s information
to child to increase family cohesiveness.

3）Relationship with family function evaluation

In addition, this study suggested that a

The family function scale used in this study

youth’s good father’s image has a positivewas created by Kusada ＆ Okado (1993)

influence on adaptability evaluation of familytranslating Olson’s FACES III into Japanese.

function.

Olson’s circular model consists of three

adaptability refers to how to solve family

dimensions of cohesion, adaptability, andproblems adaptively.

communication.
emotional

CohesivenessconnectionofAs

mentioned

above,

familyIt is reported that such

is

the

problem solving is highly evaluated by children

familiesandin youth who consider that fathers haveadaptability indicates coping with problems andauthoritychanges. The circular model assumes a curve

Katsurada, 2008). Father’s authority mentioned

linear hypothesis that familial function works

here is regarded as on father’s presence and an

best when adaptability and cohesiveness are

influence on the ultimate decision - making

intermediate levels. However, as a result ofauthority on the family. A good relationshipexamining the reliability and validity in

between father and his family is necessary as aJapanese families, the curve linear hypothesis isprecondition for the decision power of father tonot demonstrated and the stability is confirmed

effectively work on family problem solving.

as a linear scale that the higher the cohesion isIf the relationship between father and his

better (Kusada ， 1995) .

In addition, infamily is not good, the problem solving by

Noguchi (2009), it is reported that the stronger

father will stay in the pretending situation thatthe family ties, the higher the youth’s family

the family superficially or temporarily follows

satisfaction is. Therefore, we will consider it

theassuming that higher cohesiveness is positive

Therefore, how to convey father’s image tofor family in this study.

From the results of

their child from mother becomes important.

this study, it is shown that “peaceful” andBased on the results of this study, it is“serious” in mother’s way of communicating

important to show the good relationship offather’s image promotes cohesiveness of child’s

parents by management of reference aboutfamily recognition by mediating child’ s good

father in the situations like mother talking

father’s image.

Therefore, how mother tells

positive information on father in a brightchild about father is considered to haveatmosphere, sometimes talking about father

influence on emotional ties in the family.

seriously.

Inin

decision

It

their

of

is

families

father(Nakami ＆(Tamura,consideredthat1997).

these

Japan, it is said that mother-child relationship ismanagement behaviors by mothers constitutes astronger than father-child relationship as it isgood father’s image of youth and brings

“THE WAY OF MOTHER’S COMMUNICATION WITH FATHER’S IMAGE”

83

awareness of family relationship that father’ssuggests the possibility that the way mother toinfluence acts on family problem solving

mention on father may help to change theeffectively.

family system by promoting recognition offamily functions by mediating child’s father

4）Clinical implications

image.

In this study, it was shown that the way
mother conveys father’s image to child has anConclusion

influence on father’s mage of the youth and

In

this

study,

itpresented

thefurthermore has a positive influence on thecommunication relate to how mother conveys

evaluation of the family function recognized byfather’s image to their child and how thethe youth. In case father-child relationship iscommunication improves their child’s image of

not well due to lack of communication orfather and family function.

conflict, mother’s peaceful transmission oftransmitting father’s image, it is effective tofather’s good image increases the intimacy

convey it peacefully and seriously.

between father and child. Sometimes, talking

shows that the evaluation of the family function

calmly with a serious expression also has anof the young is also enhanced with positive

influence on father’s image and family function

father’s image created by the way motherrecognition of child.

communicated.

In the way of
And itOn the other hand, in families whose father

However, in this reserach, there is no focus

tends to be away due to work, directon the direct communication between father

communication between father and child isand child.

reduced. Moreover, it is difficult to show theclarify the effect of transmission of father’s

good relationship between parents directly.

image by mother to their children by inputting

Therefore, it can be said that it shows the

direct communication of father-child as apossibility that mother influences the positive

variable in order to investigate whether father’s

father’s image of their child and improves theimage of a youth is composed by theevaluationbytransmission of father’s image by mother toconsidering how mother to convey father’schildren. Furthermore, based on the findings

image to their child. Furthermore, whenobtained in this study, it will be important totreating family problems in psychologicalaccumulate case studies that have been utilized

clinical situations, when the presence of afor actual clinical site support.

of

the

familyfunctionIn the future, it is necessary tofather and the position are weak, from thefamily structure approach it is assumed that the

Appendix

relationship between father and other members

This

paper

is

with

additionalandin the family is sparse, we can intervene on

modification from a part of the graduation

how mother refers to father.

thesisThis researchsubmitted

totheDepartment

of

84

Hagidai.

Humanities and Social Sciences of Iwate

ョンのマネージメント側面．Bulletin of

University in 2015. We would like to express

Clinical Psychology Center ， Graduate

our

School of Education， Tohoku University，sinceregratitude

toeveryone

who

First issue，3-9．(In Japanese)cooperated in the research.

Hasegawa，K（2006）．Solution Bank：
Reference

ブリーフセラピーの哲学と新展開．

Kajiwara，Y．
，＆Matsubara，Y．
（2007）

kaneko syobo．(In Japanese)

The Fathers’ Childcare （ 1）． J ． ofHida，M．
，＆Kariya，Y．
（1992）．Perceived

Kyushu Univ ．of Health and Welfare，interparental concordance and the

8:89~94．

relationships with parents in female

Kusada，H．
（1995）．The Reliability andadolescents． Bulletin of the Faculty of

Validity of FACESⅢ for Japanese．

Education， Fukushima University． 51，

Japanese Journal of Counseling Science，

55-61．

28，154-162．

Itakura，N．
（2010）．Relationship Between

Kusada，H．
，＆Okado，T．
（1993）家族

Indirect and Direct Communication

関係査定法．Okado（Ed）．心理検査

Between Parents from Their Child’s

学．Kakiuchisyuppann．pp，573-581．

Point of View．The Japanese Journal of(In Japanese)

Family therapy，27（3），50-59．

Kozuka，T．
（2011）．Family structure andcommunicationinadolescence:

Itakura ， N ．（ 2013 ）． Examining the
Association of Direct and Indirect

examination with family stress．The

Communication

Japanese Journal of Family Psychology，

Adolescents ； Focused on Relations25（1），30-44．

with Family Satisfaction ． Annualin

FamilywithHanashima，H．
（2007）．The father-son

Report Graduate School of Education，

relationships that are seen fromTohoku University， 62（1），273-282．

Hikikomori males and their fathers:

Itakura，N．
，＆ Hasegawa，K．
（2012）．

some features of the father-son

Examining

relationships

ofFather-MotherandHikikomori．The Japanese Journal of

Relationships

inFamily Psychology，21（2），77-94．

Japanese Journal of Interpersonal and

in

the

familyHasegawa，K．
（1991）．構成主義と言葉，短期療法の関係．Hasegawa，H．
（Ed）
．

the

Associationof

Parent-Child

Adolescence ．

Social Psychology，12，85-81．
Maejima，K．
，＆Oguch，T．
（2001）．The

現代のエスプリ 287．構成主義－ことEffectばと短期療法－．Shibundou．pp，5-16．

Children’s(In Japanese)

Emotionality，and Aggression．The

Hasegawa，K．（1991）．コミュニケーシ

ofMaritalDiscordSelf-esteemon，Japanese Journal of Family Psychology，

“THE WAY OF MOTHER’S COMMUNICATION WITH FATHER’S IMAGE”

15（1），45-56．

85

58（1），177-195．

Minuchin，S．
（1974）．Family and Family

Okuno，M．（2013）専門家が用いる合意

Therapy．Cambrige，MA；Harvard形成を目的としたコミュニケーション

University Press．

に関する臨床心理学的研究．

Mizumoto，M．
，＆Yamamoto，R．
（2010）．

Nakanishiya Shuppan．(In Japanese)

Mother-Daughter Distance and the

Takahashi，N．
（1998）．The Correlation

Psychological

Adjustment

and
Adult

AutonomyofEmerging

Daughters

．

The

among

Interparental

Parent-Child

Relationships

and
and

of

Child’s Mental Health．The Japanese

Developmental Psychology ， 21 （ 3 ），journal of family psychology，12（2），254-265．

109-123．

Japanese

Nakami，H．
，＆Katsurada，E．
（2008）．

Tamura，T．（1997）Gender Role in the

University students’ perception ofabsent Father Families : Masculine

fathers and family function ． The

construct in the Family System ．

Japanese Journal of Family Psychology，Japanese journal of family therapy，14（2），22（1），42-51．

95-103．

Noguchi，S．
（2009）．The study of family

Toda，K．，Makino，T．，＆Sugano，E．

structure and social power from（ 2002 ）． The Relation of Mental

adolescent’s perspective．The Japanese

Health， Mental-Physical Disorder，

Journal of Family Psychology，23（2），and Family Relationship in Late

91-109．

Adolescence． Bulletin of the Integrated

Ogata，K．
（2011）．父親の心理学．Kitaooji
Shobo Publishing．(In Japanese)
Okuno，M．（2008）コミュニケーション

Center for Educational Research andTraining ，

Hokkaido University of

Education，3，221-223．

における言語と非言語の関係性についWakashima ， K ．（ 1997 ） Nonverbalて―言語・非言語操作を行った場面の“Manafement” Communications and

検 討 か ら ― ． Bulletin of ClinicalthePsychology Center， Graduate School of

Recognition among Interlocutors: In

Education，Tohoku University，6，39-56．

Search of Second-Order Change in(In Japanese)

the Family System． Japanese Journal

Okuno，M．
（2009）． Communication that

InfluenceofRelationalof Counseling Science，30，227-233．

persuaders use when they recognize

Wakashima，K．
，Sunaga，N．
，＆Noguchi，consensus: from the view point of an

S．
（2008）．A Proposal to the Problem

examinationquestionnaire

Resolution of Population Declining

Annual Report Graduate

Society : From the Research Team in

School of Education，Tohoku University，

Steering Committee for 24th Annual

surveys ．

of86Hagidai.

Conference ． Japanese Association of
Family Psychology Annual Progress ofFamily Psychology，26，193-205．
Watzlawick，P．
，Bavelas，J．
，&Jakson，
D．D．1967 Pragmatics of humancommunication:

A

study

of

interactional patterns， pathologies，and paradox． New York:W．W．
Norton．
Yamamoto ， M ．， ＆ Ito ， Y ．（ 2012 ）．
Relationship
MaritalbetweenConflicts

Parents’

Witnessedby

Adolescents and their Psychological
Health．The Japanese Journal of Family
Psychology，26（1），83-93．

International Journal of Brief Therapy and Family Science
2018 Vol. 8, No.2, 87-101< Original Paper: Research and Experiment >Factors affecting workers’ mental health based on gender differences-From the perspective of workplace satisfaction, marital coping, and WLBNorimasa Itakura 1) Haruka Maruyama 2)
1)

Gifu University Faculty of education

2)

General Association Sustainable Support

ABSTRACT. Correlations among workplace satisfaction, marital coping, and Work-Life Balance (WLB) were examined based on
gender to identify factors affecting workers’ mental health. The results indicated that “job content” in workplace satisfaction and“delegated dyadic coping by the self” as well as “negative dyadic coping by the partner” in marital coping directly affected themental health of male workers. On the other hand, job content and “delegated dyadic coping of the partner” as well as “negative
dyadic coping by the partner” directly affected the mental health of female workers. Moreover, it was suggested that in both men
and women, job content and negative dyadic coping by the partner might affect workers’ mental health, mediated by “commitment
to work,” which is one WLB factors.
KEY WORDS:workplace satisfaction, marital coping, work-life balance, mental health levels

Introduction

working

time,

human

relationships

inThe current economic situation is severe, andworkplaces, support of the boss and colleagues,

problems related to workers’ mental healththe workload, discretion, and pay, among others

have been attracting attention. Based on the(Fujino, Horie, & Hoshuyama et al., 2006).

Charter for Work-Life Balance and the Action

Moreover, Faragher, Cass, and Cooper (2005)

Guidelines for Promoting Work-Life Balance,

conducted a meta-analysis and indicated that

the Cabinet Office (2015) has been conducting

the satisfaction with work was strongly related

measures to achieve work-life balance (WLB).

to mental and psychological issues. Job

It has been indicated that the deterioration ofsatisfaction is an important factor that affects

WLB

anxietyworkers’ mental health. When job satisfaction

disorders, and psychological stress responses

is high, mental health improves. On the other(Shimizu, 2014). Therefore, it is consideredhand, when job satisfaction is low, workers’

necessary to maintain an appropriate WLB to

mental health deteriorates.

could

increase

depression,sustain the mental health of workers.

Factors related to the home in addition to

Various factors have been identified as

work-related factors should be considered whenaffecting workers’ mental health. These include

discussing workers’ mental health and WLB.

CORRESPONDENCE TO: Itakura Gifu University, Faculty

Marital relationships are known to highlyof education, 1-1, yanagito, gifu-shi, Gifu, 501-1193, Japan.

influence the mental health of married people,

e-mail: 1takura313@gmail.com(Ito, Sagara, & Ikeda, 2004). Kawashima,

87

88

Itakura.

Yoshitake, and Matsumoto (2014) examined

indicated that negative spillover from work tocorrelations

andhome was positively correlated one year later

depression and indicated that when thewith psychological stress responses in men. On

frequency

copingthe other hand, psychological stress responses

increases, depressive tendencies decrease, andin women one year later had a positive

when the frequency of negative marital coping

correlation with qualitative load at home,increases, depressive tendencies also increase.

whereas it had a negative correlation with

It has also been suggested that affirmative

discretion at home. Also, Ito et al. (2004)

marital coping might decrease correlations

suggested

betweenbetweenofstressmaritalaffirmative

maritalangersatisfaction

withmaritalasrelationships might have stronger effects on

Meuwly,&women’s subjective well-being than workplace

Bradbury et al., 2010). These results suggest

satisfaction. Moreover, Kato and Kanei (2006)

that dyadic coping between a husband and afocused on coping behaviors with Work-Family

wife might be one of the factors affecting

Conflict (WFC) and indicated that flexible role

workers’ mental health.

assignment between a husband and wife had(Bodenmann,

as

that

well

aggressivenessandcopingOkubo, Matsuzaka and Takahashi et al

positive effects on mental health and marital(2011) surveyed workers’ depression. The

satisfaction in women. It is suggested that

results indicated that workplace factors such as

marital coping increases commitment to thejob and workplace satisfaction, workload, andhome, which leads to an improvement inwork discretion affected depression in men

mental health levels.

under 39 years of age, whereas workplace

However, only a few studies to date havefactors did not affect the depression in womencomprehensively examined the correlations

working in the same workplace, but the healthamonglevels and family/friend satisfaction levels

workplace factors, and home factors. Moreover,affected depression in women. It is considered

the effects of workplace factors and homethat the effects of workplace factors on mental

factors on the achievement of WLB have nothealth are stronger in men, compared to women.

been clarified (Kato, 2009). Kanei (2002)

On

more

suggested that men tend to place a heavier

home-to-work conflicts, compared to husbands.

emphasis on work, whereas women do so on

When husbands perform a larger proportion of

the family. In men, job satisfaction increases

housework and childcare, the home-to-workcommitment to work, such as “always thinking

conflicts of wives decrease (Matsuda, 2006).

about work even on holidays,” and an increase

Shimada, Shimazu, and Kawakami (2012)

in commitment to work predicts a deterioration

examined correlations between WLB andof mental health. On the other hand, homementalmarriedfactors such as role assignment between the

couples having pre-school children. The resultshusband and wife might have stronger effects

the

other

health

hand,

in

wives

have

double-income

workers’

mentalhealth,WLB,

“ Factors affecting workers’ mental health”

on the mental health of women. In the case of
women,

maritalcopingincreases

89

1. ParticipantstheA questionnaire was administered to marriedcommitment to home, such as “valuing time

workers aged 30-49 years (N=241) in a survey

with family on holidays,” and the increase in

conducted from December 2016 to Februarycommitment too home improves their mental

2017. The number of questionnaires distributed

health.

was 335, of which 241 were collected (response

Based on the above considerations, this study
considered

workplacesatisfactionasaworkplace factor and marital coping as a homerate of 72%). Among them, responses with
deficiencies (N=3) were excluded, and 238
datasets were analyzed.

factor and investigated correlations among
WLB, workplace satisfaction, marital coping

2. Procedures

and mental health based on gender, to identify

Questionnaires were distributed using thefactors that affect workers’ mental health.

snowball sampling technique. The authors

Figure 1 shows a model of the hypothesis ofrequested the participants to respond to thethis study.

questionnairethroughacquaintancesanddelivered it by hand or by post. The following
Commitment to
Workplace

explanation was given on the cover of thework

Mental healthsatisfaction（Higher scoresmean lower

Marital coping

mental health）

Commitment to
Solid line：menhome

Dotted line：women

Figure 1. Model of the Hypothesis

questionnaire; the data obtained through thesurvey would be anonymously processed
statistically, such that individuals would not be
identified. The privacy of the participants
would be carefully protected, and the would be
used only for fulfilling the objectives of thestudy. Participants can freely stop responding if

Hypothesis 1: Workplace satisfaction would

they feel any difficulties in responding or dohave a positive effect on mental health scores

not feel like responding. Responses have to beof men medicated by commitment to work.

made only if the participants agree with theMoreover, workplace satisfaction would have aobjectives of this study.

direct negative effect on mental health scores.
Hypothesis 2: Marital coping would have a

3. Measuresnegative effect on mental health scores of(1) Mental healthwomen mediated by commitment to the home.

The

JapaneseversionoftheKesslerMoreover, marital coping would have a direct

Psychological Distress Scale (K6) developed

negative effect on mental health scores.

by Kessler, Andrews, and Colpe et al. (2002)
and translated by Furukawa, Kawakami, andMethods

Saitoh et al. (2008) was used. In this scale, the90Itakura.

mental health level is considered to be low

items),” and “human relationships (e.g. “I havewhen the score of adding the six-item score isgood human relations at my workplace.” 10high, whereas mental health is considered to beitems).” Participants were requested to respondhigh when the score is low. Participants wereto all the 33 items using a four-point scale: 1

requested to respond to all the six items using a(Unsatisfied), 2 (Rather unsatisfied), 3 (Rather

five-point scale: 0 (None of the time), 2 (Somesatisfied), and 4 (Satisfied).

of the time), 3 (Most of the time), and 4 (All of
the time).

(4) Marital coping
The Japanese version of the Dyadic Coping(2) WLB

Inventory, developed by Bodenmann (2008)

The WLB scale for husbands and wives

and translated by Kawashima et al. (2014) was

developed by Ogata (2013) was used. This

used. This scale is composed of 10 factors;

scale consists of four factors; “utilization ofStress communication by the self (e.g. “let myleisure time (e.g.“I enjoy my hobbies when I

partner know that I appreciate his/her practicalhave time.” 5 items),” “commitment to home

support, advice, or help,” 4 items), Supportive(e.g. “I value the time I spend with my wife (ordyadic coping by the self (e.g. “I show empathy

husband) on vacation.” 7 items),” “commitment

and understanding to my partner,” 5 items),

to work (e.g.“Sometimes I cannot get my job

Delegated dyadic coping by the self (e.g.

out of my mind even on vacation.” 7 items),”“When my partner feels he/she has too much toand “local community exchanges (e.g.“I havedo, I help him/her out,” 2 items), Negative

quite a few interactions with people in the

dyadic coping by the self (e.g. “I blame mycommunity on my holidays.” 3 items).”

partner for not coping well enough with stress,”

Participants were requested to respond to all the

4 items), Stress communication of the partner

22 items using a four-point scale: 1( Not at all),(e.g. “My partner lets me know that he/she

2 (No), 3 (Neither no or yes), and 4 (Yes).

appreciates my practical supports, advice, or
help,” 4 items), Supportive dyadic coping of(3) Workplace satisfaction

the partner (e.g. “My partner shows empathy

The scale of satisfaction with the workplace

and understanding to me,” 5 items), Delegatedenvironment, job content, salary, and human

dyadic coping of the partner (e.g. “When I am

relationships (Adachi, 1998) was used. This

too busy, my partner helps me out,” 2 items),

scale consists of four factors; “job content (e.g.

Negative dyadic coping by the partner (e.g.

“ I am interested in my job.” 9 items),”“My partner blames me for not coping well

“workplace environment (e.g. “Opinions andenough with stress,” 4 items), Common dyadic

demands of the staff are accepted in mycoping (e.g. “We try to cope with the problem

company.” 8 items),” “salary (e.g. “My job

together and search for ascertained solutions,”

performance and salary are well-balanced.” 6

5 items), and Evaluation of dyadic coping (e.g.

“ Factors affecting workers’ mental health”

91“I am satisfied with the support I receive from

Participants were requested to respond to all the

my partner and the way we deal with stress37 items using a five-point scale: 1 (Verytogether,” 2 items). Negative dyadic coping by

rarely), 2 (Rarely), 3 (Sometimes), 4. (Often),the self and negative dyadic coping by theand 5 (Very often).

partner are invert items. This study focused on
the concrete behaviors of marital coping.

(5) Basic attributes

Therefore, two items for evaluating dyadic
coping were excluded from the analysis.

The

gender,age,

employment

status,occupations, positions, working hours, working

Table1. Demographics
Men

Women

Total

（N=140)（N＝98）（N＝238）30～39 years old

94 (67.14%)

48 (48.98%)

142 (59.66%)

40～49 years old

46 (32.86%)

50 (51.02%)

96 (40.34%)＜Employment status＞
Regular staff
Part-time workers

134 (95.71%)
1 (0.71%)

66 (67.35%)
31 (67.35%)

200 (84.03%)
32 (13.45%)

5 (3.57%)

1 (1.02%)6 (2.52%)＜Age＞

Self-employed＜Occupations＞
Sales work

32 (22.86%)

2 (2.04%)

34 (14.29%)

Clerical work

58 (41.43%)

59 (60.20%)

117 (49.16%)

Service business

2 (1.43%)

7 (7.14%)9 (3.78%)

Professional work

28 (20.00%)

22 (22.45%)

50 (21.01%)

Technical work

17 (12.14%)

2 (2.04%)

19 (7.98%)

Others1 (0.71%)

1 (1.02%)2 (0.84%)

Unknown

2 (1.43%)

5 (5.10%)7 (2.94%)＜Positions＞
Managerial positions

40 (28.57%)

7 (7.14%)47 (19.75)

Non-managerial positions

99 (70.71%)

89 (90.82%)

188 (78.99%)

Unknown

1 (0.71%)

2 (2.04%)

3 (1.26%)

Less than 40 hours per week

11 (7.86%)

45 (45.92%)

56 (23.53%)

More than 40 hours per week

129 (92.14%)

53 (54.08%)

182 (76.47%)

1-5 years

16 (11.43%)

30 (30.61%)

46 (19.33%)

6-10 years

51 (36.43%)

31 (31.63%)

82 (34.45%)

11-15 years

37 (26.43%)

19 (19.39%)

56 (23.53%)

16-20 years

15 (10.71%)

11 (11.22%)

26 (10.92%)

over 21 years

21 (15.00%)

7 (7.14%)28 (11.76%)

Have

64 (45.71%)

32 (32.65%)

96 (40.34%)

Do not have

76 (54.29%)

66 (67.35%)

142 (59.66%)

034 (24.29%)

31 (31.63%)

65 (27.31%)

1

39 (27.86%)

15 (15.31%)

54 (22.69%)

2

52 (37.14%)

37 (37.76%)

88 (36.97%)

3

16 (11.43%)

14 (14.29%)

30 (12.61%)＜Working hours＞＜The length of service＞＜Transfers＞＜The number of children living together＞

4
1 (1.02%)
1 (0.42%)Note) The numerical values on the left side indicate the number of respondents, and those in parentheseson the right side indicate the percentage.

92

Itakura.

days, the length of service, the presence ofprofessionals (N=50), technical staff (N=19),transfers, family members living together, andothers (N=2), and unknown (N=7). Their job

their age were inquired.

positions

included,managerial

positions(N=47), non-managerial positions (N=188),
Results

and unknown (N=3). The mean working hours

1. Demographics

per week of the participants was 43.83 hours

Table 1 shows the basic attributes of the(SD=12.88) and their length of service was asparticipants. There were 140 men and 98

follows; 1-5 years (N=46), 6-10 years (N=82),

women. Their mean age was 37.53 years

11-15 years (N=56), 16-20 years (N=26), and(SD=5.98). Their employment status was asover 21 years (N=28). The number of those that

follows; full time workers (N=200), part-time

had been transferred was 96, and those that had

workers (N=329), and self-employed people

not been transferred was 142. The number of(N=6). The occupations of the participants

children living together was below; 0 (N=65), 1

included the following, sales staff (N=34),(N=54), 2 (N=88), 3 (N=30) and 4 (N=1).

clerical staff (N=117), service business (N=9),
Table 2. Mean values and SDs of each sub-scale score
Mean

SD

3.90

3.83

Utilization of leisure time

14.03

3.19

Commitment to home

23.18

3.42

Commitment to work

15.39

3.29

Local community exchange

6.83

2.40

Job content

25.77

4.44

Workplace enviroment

21.04

3.9

Salary

16.09

3.58

Human relationships

29.06

4.44

Stress communication by the self (SCS)

13.16

4.31

Supportive dyadic coping by the self (SDCS)

16.71

3.68

Delegated dyadic coping by the self (DDCS)

6.47

1.68

Negative dyadic coping by the self (NDCS)

15.91

2.89

Stress communication of the partner (SCP)

13.18

3.60

Supportive dyadic coping by the partner (SDCP)

15.87

4.76

Delegated dyadic coping by the partner (DDCP)

5.29

1.84

Negative dyadic coping by the partner (NDCP)

15.70

3.35

Common dyadic coping (DDC)

15.14

4.73

Mental health
WLB

Workplace satisfaction

Marital coping“ Factors affecting workers’ mental health”

2. Calculation of sub-scale scores

93

Moreover, delegated dyadic coping by the self,

The mean values and SDs of each sub-scale

had a direct positive effect on the mental healthscore of mental health were calculated for WLB,

scores of men, whereas delegated dyadic

workplace satisfaction, and marital coping

coping of the partner had a direct positive effectscales (Table 2).

on mental health scores of women. The
goodness-of-fit indices of the model in men

3. Examination of the model

were χ² = 47.19, CFI = .999, RMSEA = .014,

Path analysis was conducted based on gender

SRMR = .035, GFI = .966, AGFI = .873, andusing covariance structure analysis to examine

those in women were χ² = 66.51, CFI = .990,

the validity of the hypotheses. The results

RMSEA = .035, SRMR = .057, GFI = .936,

indicated the goodness-of-fit of the hypothesis

AGFI = .815.

model was rather low (Hypothesis 1: χ² = 91.94,
CFI = .852, RMSEA = .119, SRMR = .068,

Discussion

GFI = .844, AGFI = .671, Hypothesis 2: χ² =

This

study

examinedcorrelations

73.05, CFI = .855, RMSEA = .146, SRMR

among

WLB,

workplacesatisfaction,= .146, GFI = .848, AGFI = .489). Therefore,

marital coping, and mental health, tothereexamined.

identify the factors that would affectConsequently, the model shown in Figure 2 wasworkers’ mental health based on gender.

adopted for men and themodel shown inResults indicated that the commitment toFigure 3 was adapted for women. The results

work had a positive effect on the mental

obtained by using the models are as follows:

health scores of men. Moreover, job

hypothesis

model

was

content, negative dyadic coping by the(1) Regarding WLB, workplace satisfaction

self, and supportive dyadic coping by theaffected commitment to work, and commitment

partner also had positive effects on theto work had a positive effect on mental healthcommitment

scores regardless of the gender. Moreover, inworkplace environment and negative

women,

dyadicmaritalcopingaffected

local

to

coping

work,
by

the

whereaspartnerthehadcommunity exchanges and local community

negative effects on the commitment toexchanges had a negative effect on mental

work. Furthermore, job content had ahealth scores.

direct negative effect on mental health(2) Regarding workplace satisfaction, jobscores of men. On the other hand, it wascontent had a direct negative effect on mental

indicated that negative dyadic coping byhealth scores, regardless of gender.

the partner might have a direct negative(3) Concerning marital coping, negative dyadic

effect on mental health scores, whereas

coping by the partner had a direct positivedelegated dyadic coping by the self might

effect on mental health scores in both genders.

have a positive effect on mental health

94

Itakura.

Workplaceenvironment-.29**

Salary-.17✝

Commitment to
work

.28

Job content

**

.15✝

.38**

SDCP

-.34**-.21*.25*

Mental-.21*

NDCP

health.17✝

Utilization of
NDCS

-.22

✝

leisure time
.16**

SCS
.35**

SDCS

.31✝

Commitment.25**

to home

.29**

CDC

DDCS

P<10✝, P<.05*, P<.01**
Note）Only significant paths are indicated.
Note）Negative dyadic coping by the partner is an inverted item.

Figure2. The results of path analysis for men
Note）When mental health scores are higher, mental health levels are lower. Whenmental health scores are lower, mental health levels are higher.

“ Factors affecting workers’ mental health”

95

Job content.16*

Utilizationof leisure

Human
relationships

time

.46**
-.34**-.31**

Work
environment

Commitment to
work

-.23*

Salary.23*

Mentalhealth

.22*
.30**

CDC

-.39**.38**

Commitment
NDCP

SDCP

to home-.47**.20*

Local community-.12✝

exchange

DDCP
.44*

P<10✝, P<.05*, P<.01**
Note）Only significant paths are indicated.
Note）Negative dyadic coping by the partner is an inverted item.

Figure3. The results of path analysis for womenNote）When mental health scores are higher, mental health levels are lower. Whenmental health scores are lower, mental health levels are higher.

96

Itakura.

scores. These findings partly supported

well-being.

Hypothesis 1.

suggested that employees with high work

In women, the commitment to work

Moreover,engagement

tend

to

it

has

be

been

proactively

had a positive effect and local community

involved in work, which has positive

exchanges had a negative effect on theeffects on their physical and mental

mental health scores. Moreover, job

health (Demerouti, Bakker, & Schaufeli

content and negative dyadic coping by the

et al., 2001). It could be possible thatpartner had positive effects on theworkers’ mental health improves whencommitment to work, whereas humantheir autonomy is valued, and workers

relationships had a negative effect on theare motivated to work.

commitment

to

work

in

women.

It has been suggested that a person’s

Regarding local community exchanges,

mental health could decline when the

supportive dyadic coping of the partner

marital

had a negative effect and negative dyadic

attitude to the person’s stress regardlesscoping by the partner had a positive effectof gender. This result supports theon it. Furthermore, negative dyadic

crossover hypothesis (Westman & Jone,coping by the partner had a direct2006), i.e. marital couples experiencing

negative effect on mental health scores

stress have many negative interactions

and delegated dyadic coping of theand conflicts, and stress responses are

partner had a direct positive effect on

propagated as a result. Moreover, marital

mental health scores. Job content had acoping has a stronger correlation with thedirect negative effect on mental healthqualityscores also in women. These findings

compared

partly supported Hypothesis 2.

(Ledermann, Bodenmann, & Gagliardi et

It has been indicated that job content

al.,partnerof2010).

the
to

shows

maritalmarital
Negativeanegative

relationship,communication
attitudes

anddirectly affects mental health in bothbehaviors between married couples tend

men and women. This result supports theto escalate symmetrically (Watzlawick,idea that workplace factors are more

Bavelas, & Jackson, 1967), which mightdifficult to manipulate than home factors

deteriorate workers’ mental health.

(Higgins Duxbury, & Irving, 1992). When

It has also been indicated that job

workers have complaints about their job

content lowers the mental health scorescontent, in many cases, it is difficult toof both men and women, mediated by thedeal with it, which might directly affectcommitment to work. This result might

their mental health. On the other hand,be discussed from the perspective of being

Thompson and Prottas (2006) indicatedworkaholic. Workaholic employees bringautonomy at work affected employees’

work into their homes and feel anxious

“ Factors affecting workers’ mental health”

97

about leaving work, which deteriorates

mother. Therefore, marital mental healththeir mental health (Schaufeli, Taris, &might improve through decreasing the

Van Rhenen, 2008). Workers feeling thatinconsistency

they must work excessively hard bringdelegate behaviors and wives’ needs.

their

their

Moreover, Shimizu (2017) advocated in a

psychological stress, and deteriorate the

keynote address that each person has an

quality of the marital relationships,

obligation called “Yozou” when they get

regardless of gender. On the other hand,married and start a family (Kozuka,

it was suggested that local community

Wakashima, and Hasegawa, 2018). Yozou

exchanges

is

work

home,

might

increase

improvewomen’sanbetweenhusbands’

active behavior that exceeds

mental health. Women tend to havegive-and-take relationships. “Delegatedinteractions with people in the local

dyadic coping by the self” by men in thiscommunity more often than men. Local

study is the Yozou to the home by men.

community exchanges might play an

However, further study on the issues

important role in improving the mental

below are required; Do women recognize

health of women. The above results

it as Yozou to the home when men play asuggesttraditional

that

excessively

high

role

playedbywomen?

commitment to work might have negative

Shimizu (2017) suggested that admitting

effects on mental health. Therefore,

the diversity of family members isstress buffering factors such as local

necessary for the home to (Kozuka,

community

Wakashima, & Hasegawa, 2018). At

exchanges

shouldbeconsidered.

home,

each

familymemberhasaFurthermore, it was suggested thatdifferent position. Each family member

delegated dyadic coping by oneself might

thinks about how to behave, relate to one

deteriorate the mental health of men,another, and the functions of the home,whereas delegated dyadic coping by theby maintaining these differences. In

partner might deteriorate the mental

other words, “delegated dyadic coping byhealth of women. Watanabe and Itakura

oneself,” i.e. men playing the traditional(2017)

wife

roles played by women implies that a

encourages a husband to take care of

married couple functions through copying

children,home-to-work“similarities instead of through admitting

conflicts increased. On the contrary, when“differences”. It is possible that womenafather’s

would become deprived of their discretion

involvement in childcare, her mental

at home because of this similarity.

burden might decrease because she felt

Therefore, women’s mental health might

she was playing an important role as adeteriorate as a result of “delegatedreported

mother

the

that

when

wife’ssuppressed

a

a

98

Itakura.

dyadic coping by the male partner”.

mental health could be improved by work

However, this study did not collect pairengagement. On the other hand, thedata on marital couples. Studies on WFC

work-life-balance might be lost when

have investigated marital couples usingcommitment to work increased throughpair analysis (Hammer, Allen, & Grigsby,

satisfaction with job content, which1997). In the future, data of marriedcauses problems such as a workaholism

couples should be analyzed for conducting

leading to the deterioration of mental

research with more elaborate designs.

health. Based on the above results, it isThis study indicated that workplacesatisfaction

did

not

affectsuggested that both work engagement

theand workaholic processes should becommitment to one’s home in men,

examined in the future. This study

whereas the workplace environment andcomprehensively

the salary affected the commitment toaffecting workers’ mental health, which

one’s home in women. The above results

might contribute to the achievement ofdiffer from the findings of Okubo et al.

workers’ WLB and improve their mental(2011), i.e., men tend to bring work into

health.

examinedfactors

their home more often than women.
Approximately

70%

of

the

femaleNoteparticipants in this study were regularThis article is a revised version of theworkers, which might have increased themaster’s thesis written by the second

degreeauthor and submitted to the Graduateofcommitment

to

work.

Workplace factors had a higher weight for

School of Education, Faculty of Education,

these

Gifu University, in 2017.

women,

which

might

have

increased its effect on the home. It issuggestedthat

futurestudiestakedifferences in employment status into
consideration.

Moreover,

this

study

Reference
Adachi, T. (1998). Job satisfaction of sales
people: A covariance structure analysis

suggested the possibility that satisfaction

of

the

motivationalwith the job might directly improvecovariance structure analysis of themental health and commitment to work.

motivational process The JapaneseOn the other hand, it was also indicated

Journal of Psychology, 69, 223-228.

that mental health deteriorated when

Bodenmann, G. (2008). Dyadic coping

satisfaction with the job content isinventory:

Test

mediated by commitment to work. The

Switzerland: Huber.

process.:Amanual.

Bern,

above results suggest that when a person

Bodenmann G., Meuwly N., Bradbury

is satisfied with the job content, his/herTN., Gmelch, S., & Ledermann, T. J.

“ Factors affecting workers’ mental health”(2010).

Stress,anger,

andverbalaggression in intimate relationships:

99

Behavior and Human Decision Process,51, 51-75.

Moderating effects of individual and

Ito,Y, Sagara, Y, & Ikeda, M, (2004).

dyadic coping Journal of Social andMarital relationship, occupational life,

Personal Relationships, 27, 408-424.

and subjective well-being of married

Faragher, E. B., Cass, M., & Cooper, C. L.
(2005). The Relationship between Job
Satisfaction

andMeta-Analysis

Health:A

Occupational

andpeopleThe

Japanese

Journalof

Psychology, 75, 435-441.
Kanai,

A.

(2002).

Examining

determinants of work-family conflict

Environmental Medicine, 62, 105-112

and their effects on the mental healthFujino, Y., Horie, S., Hoshuyama, T.,of male and female workers. Japanese

Tsutsui, T., & Tanaka, Y (2006). A

Association

Systemic Review of Working Hours andIndustrial/Organizational

Mental Health Burden Journal of

Journal, 15, 107-122.

occupational health 48, 87-97.

ofPsychology

Kato, J. (2009). Working environment

Furukawa, T. A., Kawakami, N., Saitoh,that achieves Work-Life Balance (apublishing

Tachmori, H., Iwata, N., Uda, H.,

Japanese journal of labour studies 583,

Nakane,47-56.

H,

Watanabe,M.,

Naganumara, Y, Hata, Y., Kobayashi,

company's

case)

The

M., Ono, Y., Nakane, Y., Nakamura, Y.,

Kato, Y., & Kanai, A. (2006). The effect ofM., Miyake, Y., Takeshima, T., &copingKikkawa, T. (2008). The performance of

conflict in dual-career couples The

the Japanese version of the K6 andJapanese Journal of Psychology, 76,

K10 in the World Mental Health511-518.

Survey Japan. International Journal of

behavior

withwork-family

Kawashima, A., Yoshitake, N., &Methods in Psychiatric Research, 17,

Matumoto, S. (2014). 夫婦コーピング

152-158.

の検討―子どもの夫婦間葛藤時の情緒

Hammer, L.B., & Allen, E., & Grigsby, T.

安定性に着目して― 日本子ども学会

D. (1997). Work-family conflict in the

学術集会 第 11 回会議, 9. (indual-earner couples: Within individual

Japanese)and crossover effects of work and

Kessker, R.C., Andrews, G., Colpe, L. J.,

family Journal of Vocational Behavior,

Hiripi, E., Mroczek, D. K., Normand,

50, 185-203.

S. -L., Walters, E. E., & Zaslavsky, A.

Higgins, C.A., Duxbury, L, E., & Irving,M. (2002). Short screening scales to

R.H. 1992 Work-family conflict in themonitor population prevalences andOrganizational

trends in non-specific psychologicaldual-cancer

family.

100

Itakura.

distress. Psychological Medicine, 32,(2011). Effects of socio-environmental

959-976.

factors on depression in workers from

Kozuka, T., Wakashima, K., & Hasegawa,the Tohoku and Hokkaido areas The

K. 2018. Reconsider systems theory.

Hirosaki

Annual Progress of Family

104-113.

Psychology, 36, 156-164.
Ledermann, J., Bodenmann, G.,

MedicalJournal,61,

Schaufeli, W. B., Taris, T. W., & Van
Rhenen,W.

(2008).

Workaholism,

Gagliardi, S., Charvoz, L., Verardi, S.,

Burnout, and Work Engagement: Three

Rossier, J., Bertoni, A. M. M., &of a Kind or Three Different Kinds ofIafrate, R.(2010). Psychometrics of

Employee

the Dyadic Coping Inventory in three

Psychology An International Review,

language groups SWISS JOURNAL

57, 173-203.

AppliedWell ‐ being?

OF PSYCHOLOGY, 69, 201-212.

Shimada, K., Shimazu, A., & Kawakami,

Matsuda, S. (2006). Work-Family Conflict

N. (2012). 未就学児を持つ共働き夫婦に

of Husbands and Wives withおける ワーク・ライフ・バランスと精神

Preschool Children－Rational View

的健康 ―1 年間の縦断データから― 厚

versus Gender Role Explanation－

生の指標, 59 (15), 10-18. (in Japanese)

Japanese journal of family sociology,

Shimazu, A. (2014). Work-life Balance

18, 7-16.
Naikakuhu (2015). 仕事と生活の調和 (ワーク・ライフ・バランス) レポート 2014
仕事は「時間」から「質」の社会へ ―and Mental Health among Dual-earner
Couples The Japanese journal of labour

studies, 56, 75-84.
Thompson, C. A., & Prottas, D. J. (2006)

もっと進めよう ワーク・ライフ・バラ

Relationships

ンス ! 国が, 地方が, 企業が, 私たち

familyが― (in Japanese)

perceived<http://wwwa.cao.go.jp/wlb/governm

well-being. Journal of Occupational

ent/top/hyouka/report-14/zentai.html

Health Psychology, 11, 100-118> (2017 年 12 月 14 日)
Ogata, K. (2013) A Study on the Pregnant

amongsupport,organizationaljob

autonomy,andemployeecontrol,

Watanabe, M., & Itakura, N. (2017). The
effectsofmother`s

coparental

Wife’s Marital Relationship andregulation on work-family conflict: In

Mental Stress —From the View Point

theof Husband’s Work-Life Balance andJournal

Wife’s Occupation— Bulletin of Aichi

Psychology, 35, 72-77.

University of Education, 62, 89-97.
Okubo Y., Matsuzaka,M., Takahashi, I.,
Danjo, K., Nakaji, S., & Umeda, T.

contextofofmaternal

Japaneseanxiety.

ClinicalWatzlawick, P., Beavin, J., & Jackson, D.
D.

(1967).

Pragmatics

Communication.

A

of

Human

study

of

“ Factors affecting workers’ mental health”

interactional patterns, pathologies, andparadoxes. New York: Norton101