The assimilation of in-laws: The impact of newcomers on the communication routines of families

Journal of Applied Communication Research

Volumn 36, Issue 1, 2008, Pages 74-97

  Prentice, Carolyn M ^a,b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MISSOURI   (United States)

^b W O Farber Center for Civic Leadership   (United States)

Author keywords

Assimilation; Family; In laws; Socialization; Structuration theory

Indexed keywords

EID: 38349099022     PISSN: 00909882     EISSN: 14795752     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/00909880701799311     Document Type: Article

References (32)

1. Anderson, C. M., Riddle, B. L., & Martin, M. M. (1999). Socialization processes in groups. In L. R. Frey, D. S. Gouran, & M. S. Poole (Eds.), The handbook of group communication theory and research (pp. 139-163). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
2. Barker, V. E., Abrams, J. R., Tiyaamornwong, V., Seibold, D. R., Duggan, A., Park, H. S., et al. (2000). New contexts for relational communication in groups. Small Group Research, 31, 470-503.
3. Bengston, V. (2001). Beyond the nuclear family: The increasing importance of multigenerational bonds. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 63, 1-16.
4. Burrell, B., & Morgan, G. (1979). Sociological paradigms and organisational analysis. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
5. Carter, B., & McGoldrick, M. (1988). Overview: The changing family life cycle - a framework for family therapy. In The changing family life cycle: A framework for family therapy (2nd ed., pp. 3-28). New York: Gardner Press.
6. Cotterill, P. (1989). Mothers and daughters-in-law: A study of intergenerational relationships between family women (Doctoral dissertation, Council for National Academic Awards, UK, 1989). Dissertation Abstracts International, 42(03), 1014A.
7. Creswell, J. W (1997). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five traditions. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
8. Duvall, E. (1954). In-laws: Pros and cons. New York: Association Press.
9. Fischer, L. R. (1983). Mothers and mothers-in-law. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 45, 187-192.
10. Fitzpatrick, M. A. (1988). Between husbands and wives: Communication in marriage. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
11. Frey, L. R. (1994a). Introduction: Revitalizing the study of small group communication. Communication Studies, 45, 1-6.
12. Frey, L. R. (1994b). The naturalistic paradigm: Studying small groups in the postmodern era. Small Group Research, 25, 551-577.
13. Giddens, A. (1984). The constitution of society. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press.
14. Holstein, J. A., & Gubrium, J. F. (1995). The active interview. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
15. Jackson, J. C., & Berg-Cross, L. (1988). Extending the extended family: The mother-in-law and daughter-in-law relationship of black women. Family Relations, 37, 293-297.
16. Jorgenson, J. (1994). Situated address and the social construction of "in-law" relationships. Southern Communication Journal 59, 196-204.
17. Keyton, J. (1999). Relational communication in groups. In L. R. Frey, D. S. Gouran, & M. S. Poole (Eds.), The handbook of group communication theory and research (pp. 192-222). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
18. Limary, B. H. (2002). The mother-in-law/daughter-in-law dyad: Narratives of relational development among in-laws (Doctoral dissertation, University of New Mexico, 2002). Dissertation Abstracts International, 63(02), 773A.
19. Lopata, H. Z. (1999). In-laws and the concept of family. Marriage and Family Review, 28, 161-172.
20. McGoldrick, M. (1988). The joining of families through marriage: The new couple. In B. Carter & M. McGoldrick (Eds.), The changing family life cycle: A framework for family therapy (2nd ed., pp. 212-234). Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.
21. Moreland, R. L., & Levine, J. M. (1982). Socialization in small groups: Temporal changes in individual-group relations. Advances in Experimental and Social Psychology, 15, 137-192.
22. Norris, J. E., Pratt, M. W., & Kuiack, S. L. (2003). Parent-child relations in adulthood: An intergenerational family systems perspective. In L. Kuczynski (Ed.), Handbook of dynamics in parent-child relations (pp. 325-344). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
23. Nydegger, C. N. (1986). Asymmetrical kin and the problematic son-in-law. In N. Datan, A. L. Greene, & H. W. Reese (Eds.), Life-span developmental psychology: Intergenerational relations (pp. 99-123). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
24. Pfeifer, S. K. (1989). Mothers-in-law's and daughters-in-law's perceptions of interpersonal interaction (Doctoral dissertation, University of Delaware, 1989). Dissertation Abstracts International, 51(05), 1783 A.
25. Servovich, J. M., & Price, S. J. (1994). In-law relationships: A role theory perspective. International Journal of Sociology of the Family, 24, 127-146.
26. Silverstein, J. L. (1990). The problem with in-laws. Journal of Family Therapy, 14, 399-412.
27. Socha, T. J. (1997). Group communication across the life span. In L. R. Frey & J. K. Barge (Eds.), Managing group life: Communicating in decision-making groups (pp. 3-28). Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.
28. Socha, T. J. (1999). Communication in family units. In L. R. Frey, D. S. Gouran, & M. S. Poole (Eds.), The handbook of group communication theory and research (pp. 475-492). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
29. Stafford, L., & Dainton, M. (1995). Parent-child communication within the family system. In T. J. Socha & G. H. Stamp (Eds.), Parents, children, and communication: Frontiers of theory and research (pp. 3-21). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
30. Stohl, C., & Putnam, L. L. (1994). Group communication in context: Implications for the study of bona fide groups. In L. R. Frey (Ed.), Group communication in context: Studies of natural groups (pp. 473-481). New York: Knopf.
31. Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1998). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory (2nd ed). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
32. van Manen, M. (1990). Researching lived experience: Human science for an action sensitive pedagogy. Albany: State University of New York Press.