SYNOPSIS

On

“JOINT FAMILY IS THAN BETTER THAN A NUCLEAR

FAMILY”

Submitted under the partial fulfilment for the award of the

degree of

BACHELOR OF BUSINESS

ADMINISTRATION 2019-2022

BY

AnshikaChauhan

(1910101048)

Semester - V

Under the guidance of

Mr. Tarun Gupta

(ASSISTANT

PROFESSOR)

Department of Management

INVERTIS UNIVERSITY, BAREILLY

(U.P.) SESSION 2019-2022

1
 TABLE OF CONTENT

S.NO TOPICS PAGE NO

1 Introduction 03 to 03
2 Review Of Literature 04 to 05
3 Need Of Study 06 to 06
4 Research Objective 06 to 06
5 Research Methodology and tools 07 to 09
6 Referance 10to 11

2
 INTRODUCTION

Family is where our roots take hold and from there we grow. A sense of belonging is derived from the strong
bond of family. Family bonds are a link to our beginning and a guide to our future. We are molded within a
unit, which prepares us for what we will experience in the world and how we react to those experiences. Values
are taught at an early age and are carried with us throughout our life. Family bonds help to instill trust and hope
in the world around us and belief in ourselves. Rituals of bedtime stories, hugs, holidays and daily meals shared
together, provide a sense of warmth, structure and safety. These rituals and traditions, not only create memories
and leave a family legacy, but create our first path in life.
A nuclear family can be defined as a household consisting of two married, heterosexual parents and their
legal children (siblings). So nuclear family consisting of a father and mother and their children, who
share living quarters. Nuclear families can have any number of children.
Joint family can be defined as members of a uni-lineal descent group live together with their spouses and
offspring in one homestead and under the authority of one of the members. Joint family is an extended
form of a nuclear family. It is composed of parents, their children, and the children’s spouses and
offspring in one household.
Children between 6 and 12 years of age will have widened social horizons beyond the confines of their own
home. Within the family, school children continue to learn those values and competencies they will bring into
the adult world. Their continued family achievement depends on a variety of family factors, including parental
expectation, stimulation and guidance.
The school age period is usually the first time that children are making truly independent judgment. Here family
play a vital role during development of each school age child, much of what the child know at this age has been
learnt through the family circle. Parents and family members have responsibility to teach and train every child.
The home and family is first training school for development especially cognitive and moral development.
Parent and family members are the first teachers.
In recent decades traditional form of the family has undergone major changes, with increasing rates of divorce
leading to single-parent families, remarriages, resulting in extended families and broken families. These trends
and the resulting consequences that may have effect on growth and development of children especially cognitive
and moral development
In this contest some family factors may have impact on development [cognitive and moral] of school age

3
 REVIEW OF LITERATURE

Charles Devas (1886) – expanded on Le Play's work, offering an in-depth comparative treatment of
joint families around the world. Devas maintained that joint families were common in China and India and
had formerly been found in Russia, the Balkans, and parts of Central Italy. But in places like “modern France
or England or North America,” Devas maintained, the diminished “power of the father over his children”
had led to “rapid dissolution” of the joint family.An extensive anthropological and demographic literature
has concurred with Devas's generalizations about the spatiotemporal distribution of joint families.

Silver 1982- wrote that there were three basic types of families in all parts of the world and all ages of
history. What he called the famille patriarcale—now termed the joint family—was one in which all sons
remained with or near their parents upon reaching adulthood, and worked together on the family farm.
Eventually, when the family got too large to support on a single farm it would split apart, with some sons
receiving movable property such as livestock. Le Play said that patriarchal families could be found among
“Eastern Nomads, Russian Peasants, and the Slavs of Central Europe.Le Play's second family type was the
famille souche or stem family. In stem families, according to Le Play's definition, the father selected one
child to remain near the parental homestead to work on the farm and eventually inherit it, thus continuing
the family line. All other children left the parental family to form their own nuclear households. Le Play
argued that the stem family was the dominant form of peasant household in most parts of Europe.

Shalini Bharat (1986), studied, “Single Parent Family in India-Issues and Implications”. She found that
females have to fact the emotional consequences, hysteria, insomnia, feeling of unworthiness, aggression, and
restlessness. There was considerable amount of guilt feelings due to suppression of sexual desires. The effect
on children was reflected in fear, loneliness, withdrawal, regression and fear of loss of the remaining parent.

K.J.S. (1986), studied on, “The Joint and Nuclear Family : A Personal Experience”, The author described her
experience of living in a joint family, the integration problem and the nature of relationship with respect to
one’s own parents. Other adults and children in a joint and nuclear family. Author described a personal
experience of family of the same person in a joint and a nuclear family.

Malik and Balda (2001) conducted a study on effect of family income on children’s intelligence. The sample
comprised of 60 children of the age range of 8-9 years from Hissar city self structured. Interview schedule and
Wechsler intelligence scale for children. Revised were used for data collection results showed that family size
was negatively correlated with IQ of children which in turn affect the child’s academic performance, while
family income had a positive correlation with the intelligence of children.

Maniuvani (2002), studied, “Adjustment problem of children in single parent and two parent families”. The
researcher found that boys in single parent families had more educational adjustment problems than that of boys
in low parent families. It was also found that they had more emotional and educational adjustment problems
compared to girls in single parent families. Girls in single parent families had less social adjustment problem
than girls in two parent families

Ginther and Pollak (2004), conducted a study on family structure and children’s educational outcomes in
joint families and nuclear families. The sample of 12,686 young individuals aged 14.21 years included in the
study Peabody individual achievement test was administered on the individuals to assess their reading
recognition, comprehension and math ability findings showed a crucial distinction between children reared in
nuclear families and children reared in joint families and also revealed that the relationship between family
structure and children’s educational outcomes weakens substantially and is often statistically insignificant
4
 Parkin (1971, 81) looks at the value conceptualization in a different spirit. He distinguishes between a dominant
value system and a subordinate value system which is accommodating to the dominant one and a radical value system
which promotes opposition to the existing inequalities

Parveen (2006) related home environment with the personality and academic achievements of the
students. She found a relation between home environment and academic achievements and concluded that
home environment affects the personality and academic achievements of the students.

Qaiser, Hassan, Shakir and Shagufta (2012) also examined the effects of family structure on the
academic performance of the students. But they took family structure in terms of family size and number
of siblings and recommended that small family size and small number of siblings coupled with
parents’ participation enhances student’s performance.

Aneesa, Najma and Noreen (2013) explored the impacts and implications of family dynamics on
the adolescents’ development. They were of the view that family communication supports good family
functioning. They correlated family communication and family system as the predictors that can gauge
family satisfaction among the adolescents. They found that the family satisfaction increases the chances of
academic achievements.

Etienne Breton .2021 A Tale of Two Villages: Development and Household Change in India,
Population and Development Review, 10.1111/padr.12401, 47, 2, (347-375)
Despite decades of sweeping socioeconomic and cultural transformations, extended households remain
widespread in many regions of the world. The mechanisms explaining this persistence are not well-
established. The research reported on here investigates these mechanisms in India, where the prevalence of
stem and joint households ranks among the highest in the world. Combining demographic and
ethnographic data, this study compares processes of household change in two villages in India's Deccan
Plateau. Results highlight key pathways by which development can contribute to both the decline and
persistence of joint households. In the first village, joint households have become virtually extinct in recent
years. Analyses suggest that frequent labor migrations, depopulation, and slow economic growth largely
explain this decline.

5
 NEED OF THE STUDY

A developing trend in the field of paediatrics is focus on the family unit as an element of optimum child health and
development. The American academy of paediatrics, task force on the family, examines the family, its components and its
influences on the child and wellbeing. For paediatric health care professionals it is important to recognize the influence of
family dynamic on the child health, therefore an examination or study of the family and its function must be incorporated into
assessment. The family size and composition directly influences the child development. Parenting practices differ between
small and large families. Growth and development of children occurs as a result of their cultural and hereditary backgrounds
of family.
A child behavioral pattern to a large extent is the product of the environment in which he or she lives. During this period the
family, school and community help in shaping his or her character, molding the personality and laying foundation for his or
her future. If the family, school and community do their work properly, his or her chances for a successful and happy life are
greatly increased.
There are many factors which influences the growth and development.
These factors are classified into two-
1. Forces of nature
2. External forces.
External forces are so many factors influencing directly on development of health. Among these, family is one of the most
important factors which directly have effect on the development of children

RESEARCH OBJECTIVES

The study has the following objectives.

1) To assess the level of cognitive development among school age children belongs to joint and
nuclear family as measured by structured questionnaire
2) To compare the level of cognitive development among school age children belongs to joint
and nuclear family.
3) To compare the level of moral development amongschool age children belongs to joint and
nuclear family.
4) To compare the level of moral development among school age children belongs to joint and
nuclear family.
5) To find out the association between cognitive and moral development of children belongs to joint
and nuclear family with selected demographic variables.

6
 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

To accomplish the objectives of the study, the following research methodology is proposed:

• Research Design: This research is very wide as it will consider theoretical aspects, qualitative
information and quantitative data So, the research design for this study will be Descriptive and
Analytical researches
• Research approach: Quantitative Research Approach
• Methods:
Study design and setting
We conducted a population based cross sectional study in all 52 Union Councils of District
Abbottabad, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa province, Pakistan from March 2015 to August 2015. We
recruited 2063 participants for our study. Abbottabad is the main district of Khyber Pakh- tunkhwa
province of Pakistan having more than 1.2 mil- lion population living in 52 union councils. The
primary language spoken here is Hindko (used by 94% of the rural population and 75% of urban
residents) followed by Urdu which is also spoken and understood in rural & urban areas.

• Sample Size and SelectionCriteria: We used the Statulator, an online statistical calculator
for sample size determination. Assuming a standard deviation of 12 units (derived from pilot
study) and a de- sign effect (DEFF) of 2, the study would require a sample size of 969 for
each group (i.e. a total sample size of 1938, assuming equal group sizes),to achieve a power of
90% at 5% significance level (two sided) for detecting a true difference of 2.5 points in
quality of life score be- tween joint and nuclear family systems.Participants were selected from
all union councils (UCs) of District Abbottabad. Multistage cluster sampling
tech- nique was employed in this study. Each union council was further divided into several
blocks called Mohallah. We did proportionate sampling according to the 1998 population
census of UCs for the selection of Mohallah & on the next stage households. In the first stage
we randomly selected these blocks (Mohallah) in each of the UC from a list by using simple
random

Following table will give the view of sample size:-

Table 1 Socio-demographic characteristic of the study participants (n = 2063)

Joint family system (n = 1053) Nuclear family system (n = 1010) All (n = 2063)
No. (%) No. (%) No. (%)
Age
18–30 412(39.2) 308(20.6) 720(34.9)
31–40 277(26.3) 359(35.4) 636(30.8)
41–50 149(14.2) 240(23.7) 389(18.8)

7
 > 50 215(20.4) 103(10.2) 318(15.4)
Gender

8
 Males 553 (52.5) 505 (50) 1078 (52.2)
Females 500 (47.5) 505 (50) 1005(48.7)
Marital status
Married 843 (80.0) 796 (78.8) 1639 (79.4)
Widowed/Widower 36 (3.4) 24 (2.37) 60 (2.9)
Divorced 4(0.3) 2 (0.1) 6 (2.0)
Separated 5(0.4) 4(0.3) 9 (0.4)
Never Married 165 (15.6) 184(18.2) 349(16.9)
Education

No education 163(15.4) 159(15.7) 322(15.6)

Informal education 17(1.6) 30(2.9) 47(2.2)
Can read / write 111(10.5) 100(9.9) 211(10.2)
Primary (up to grade 1) 344(32.6) 293(29) 637(30.8)
Secondary (up to grade 2) 321(30.4) 337(33.3) 658(31.8)
Tertiary (up to grade 3) 97(9.2) 91(9) 188(9.1)
Place of residence

Urban 297(28.3) 301(29.8) 598(29)

Rural 756 (71.7) 709(70.2) 1465(71)
Ownership of residence

Owner 849(80.5) 750(74.3) 1599(77.5)

Not owner 204(19.5) 259(25.7) 463(22.4)
Occupation

Not working 397 (37.7) 413(40.9) 810(39.3)

Working 595 (56.5) 567(56.1) 1162(56.3)
Retired 61 (5.8) 30(3) 91(4.4)
Socioeconomic status

High 391(37.1) 296(29.3) 687(33.3)

Intermediate 375(35.6) 315(31.2) 690(33.4)
Low 287(27.3) 399(39.5) 686(33.3)
Respondent disease
Physical disability 13(1.2) 15(1.5) 28(1.4)
Hypertension 79(7.5) 75 (7.4) 154(7.5)
Diabetes 34(3.2) 24(2.4) 58(2.8)
Other 492 (47) 488(48.3) 980(47.5)
None 435(41.3) 408(40.4) 843(41)
Respondent satisfaction

Satisfied 921(87.5) 817(81) 1738(84.2)

Unsatisfied 132(12.5) 193(19) 325(15.8)
Social Capital
Low 96(9.1) 118(11.7) 214(10.4)
Moderate 816(77.5) 755(74.7) 1571(76.1)
High 141(13.4) 137(13.6) 278(13.5)

9
• Statistical analysis:The data was analyzed using the Stata version 13.0 (Stata Corp, College Station, TX, USA).
First, we conducted descriptive analyses such as frequencies, proportions and means. Then, we carried out
univariate linear regression analyses with domain scores as dependent and other var- iables as independent
variables. Next, in the multivariate analysis, we included all independent variables and used stepwise backward
approach to eliminate variables with a p value > 0.05. Finally, multi-level analysis was per- formed with two –
level continuous random intercept model with individuals nested within clusters was ap- plied to explore the
variability explained by individuals and cluster level variables taking the correlated nature of data into account. P-
value of < 0.05 was considered as significant.

• Tools of data collection- .

1. Section-A: Demographic profile of samples
2. Section-B: A structured questionnaire and structured rating scales was developed by the
investigator for assessing the cognitive and moral development for school age children between
years of age group 8-10 years’
• Demographic data: Age, sex, educational status of child, type of family, no of family member, income
of family, no of siblings, educational status of father and mother, occupation of father and mother.
• Development of tool: The final structured questionnaires consisted of three parts.
• Part 1: Demographic variables which contained items for obtaining base line information about the school age
children.
• Part 2: Structured questionnaire consisted of 24 items covering all aspects of cognitive development such as
time, arithmetic, classification, Thinking and reasoning and memory. The items were of multiple choice types
with one correct response. The maximum score was 24 and minimum score was zero.
• Part 3: Structured rating scale (3 point scale) for moral development consisted of 30 items covering all aspects
of moral development such as Helping, Forgiveness, Respect, Charities, Sincere, Honesty, Rules and
Regulations, Loyalty, Ethical Sense, Fairness, and Responsibleness. The items were of structured rating scales
(three point scale). The maximum score was 60 and minimum score was zero.
• Statistical Tools: For the data analysis various statistical tools like Percentage, Comparative
Analysis, Correlation and Test of Significance i.e. t-test & chi-square test will be employed and
also the statistical software like MS Excel, Minitab, and MY SQL etc.

10
 REFERENCES
Kathy D. Family values: the importance of strong family bonds. From:
http://www.helium.com/items/629105-family-values-the-importance-of-strong-family-bonds.
Marlow DR, Redding BA. Pediatric Nursing. In: 6th edn. Elsevier Publication; 2010
Pillitteri. MCH nursing; Care of the child bearing and child bearing family. In: 2nd edn. J. P. Lippincott
publication; 1995.
Hockenberry MJ, Wilson D. Wong’s Nursing care of infant and children. In: 8th edn. Elsevier publication;
2007.
Polit DF, Hungler BP. Nursing research. In: 6th edn. New York: J. B.Lippincott company; 1999.
Basavanthappa BT. Nursing Research. In: and others, editor. 2nd edn. New Delhi: Jaypee publications;
2007.
Parikh B. Development of Moral Judgment and Its Relation to Family Environmental Factors in Indian and
American Families. Child Dev. 1980;51(4):1030–9. doi:10.2307/1129540.
Bahadur A, Dhawan N. Social values of parents and children in joint and nuclear family. J Indian Acad Appl
Psychol. 2008;34:74–80.
Amato PA. Family process and the competence of adolescents and primary school children. J Youth Adolesc.
1988;18(1):39–53.
Wood D. Impact of family relocation on children’s growth, development, school function, and
behavior. JAMA: J Am Med Assoc. 1993;270(11):1334–8. doi:10.1001/jama.270.11.1334.
Hughes C, Ensor R. Executive Function and Theory of Mind in 2 Year Olds: A Family Affair? Dev
Neuropsychol. 2005;28(2):645–68. doi:10.1207/s15326942dn2802_5.
Lee LS. he concomitant development of cognitive and moral modes of thoughts: A test of selected dedutions
from Piagets theory. . Genet Psychol Monogr. 1971;83:93–146.
Susanne AA, Darci NS, Ana CB, Márcia R. Family environment and child’s cognitive development: an
epidemiological approach. Rev Saude Public. 2005;39(4):606–11.
Kar BR, Rao SL, Chandramouli BA. Cognitive developmentin children with chronic protein energy
malnutrition. Bio Med Publication . 2008;4:31. doi:10.1186/1744-9081-4-3143.
Arora S, Bharti S, Sharma S. Comparative Study of Cognitive Development of ICDS and Non-ICDS Children
(3-6 Years). J Human Ecology. 2007;22(3):201–4. doi:10.1080/09709274.2007.11906021.
Hum JE. The role of family configuration in early childhood intellectual development in the context of an
extended family system in Pakistan. J Hum Ecol. 2007;22(3):201–4.
Böhm B, Katz-Salamon M, Institute K, Smedler AC, LagercrantzH. Forssberg H; Developmental risks and
protective factors for influencing cognitive outcome at 5 1/2 years of age in very-low-birth weight children.
Dev Med Child Neurol. 2002;44(8):508–16.
Rao RM, Brenner AR, Schisterman FE, Vik T, Mills L. Long term cognitive development in children with
prolonged Crying. Published by group.bmj.com. 2004;89:989–92.
Merel Braspenning: An Exploration of Religious Education and its Importance for Moral Development
in Children; 2010. Availablefrom: URN:NBN:NL:UI:10-1-100192URN:NBN:NL:UI:10-1- 100192.),
39-54.
Norberg S, Magdalena. The phase out of the nuclear family: empirical studies on the economics and
structure of modern Swedish families. Available from:
http://ideas.repec.org/p/hhs/umnees/0708.html.Craig MS..
Lena E, Aminur R. Household Structure and Child Outcomes: Nuclear vs.Extended Families –
Evidence from Bangladesh. ColumbiaUniversity; 2004
Availablefrom:http://economics.uchicago.edu/download/April122.pdf.
Kendall, Earline D. Effects of Changed Family Structures on Children:A Review of the Literature.
Education resourceinformation centre. Available from: http://www.eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/search/
detailmini.jsp?_nfpb=true&_&ERICExtSearch_SearchValue_0=ED205281&ERICExtSearch_SearchType_0=
no&accno=ED205281.
Suresh SK. Nursing Reasearch & Statistics. In: 2nd Edn.; 2011.
Mahajan BK. Methods in Biostatistics for medical students ch workers. In: 6thn. New Delhi: Jaypee
publications; 2005.
11
 Name of Student. Name of Guide
(Anshika Chauhan). (Tarun Gupta)

Name of HOD :-Rajeev Bhandari

Head of the department ( BBA department)

12