This paper and the accompanying materials, all handed in at the last moment, without any prior advice from me, do not follow the guidelines for the term paper: the tables are scanned from other publications, and not done with Spss.
function in SPSS to valid//again// the use
of my study was the interchange with the correlation function, where dozens
of variables from each topic narrowed into selective groups where the variables
of each topic were paired in order to reveal usable guidelines. Despite
the numerous combinations provided by my topics, only three sets were enough
to establish a thesis for a paper. The first and most important set included
V 693—the frequency of intercommunity—and V 979—husbands’ reasons for grounds
of divorce. Other sets also referred to for my research included V 782—acceptability
of violence—crossed with 1153—divorce causes—and V 773—internal violence—with
The collective ideas of all the variables present useful guidelines in which to search for incidents to prove the relation of violence and divorce within the selected cultures. Comparing the variables as one group, I found that they all measured single concept—the bond between divorce and violence. My goal was to get the concepts in my hypothesis in line with the measures used in the variables; successful in this case, evidence for replication prevailed within the comparison of variables to the many societies. In the case of V1153, it measures up with three variables relating to divorce, exhibiting the reliability of the variables. Exercises and measurements in verifying a link between variables and my hypothesis allowed me to continue on with the direction of this paper.
The decision to choose the relevant variables to incorporate into a paper depended on an indicator called Pearson’s correlation. This measurement coordinated the accuracy of the values, whereby a lower number in this column meant a more accurate calculation. A standard was set for this Pearson correlation, valid at the point less than 0.05. For the sake of discussion, the numbers resulting from my findings were as follows: 0.410 with 0.037 Pearson correlation for V693 & V 979, 0.276 with 0.024 Pearson correlation for V 782 & V 1153, and 0.257 with 0.024 Pearson correlation for V 773 & V 1153.
Readily the values mentioned in the previous paragraph also accounted for compatibility of the topic in other cultures. Having the trend only valid in a few cultures would mean that the trend is limited and conclusively should not be expected on a multicultural scale. In recognizing the tendency of each result we see that the relations show enough significance to be able to apply to other cultures. Manipulating the Pearson correlation we measured the connections of the variables systematically; lower correlations address a combination not common in many societies, while significantly high correlations mean the set variables are dependable in the sponsoring societies.
also used in consolidating this report was the crosstabulation. Cross tabs
compiled the attitudes and the actions of people and categorized them geographically—with
the aid of V 200. In addition to crosstabulation’s regional information,
a table from this function provided the number of valid cases as compared
to the total number of entries was coordinated by a processing summary.
While evaluating the data, a majority of the trend existed in South America and Africa. The focus in these two continents was not the result of preference in these areas nor was it biased towards other cultures; instead the recurrence of my results navigated me in these areas in order to explain the occurrence. The validation of these areas came from the data sheet holding the responses from 186 different cultures, using the variables under the topics of internal violence & divorce—more specifically, the variables mention above. The limited number of cultures involved here denied the distinction of the trend of violence and divorce in specific parts, of the world, but it helps in understanding how things are run in cultures augmenting violence and divorce.
As far as research goes, the functions provided leads on where to begin the trial and error process on how to interpret violence and divorce in the applicable societies. Diffusing the primary confusion on the topics required an ardent search through cultures unlisted in the spreadsheet as well as the many of the appointed cultures; I eagerly searched for many cultures displaying a strait forward link between internal violence & divorce. Expectedly, no such luck existed in the many instances, thereby leading to a multiple step process: an in depth understanding of the culture, the incorporation of variables into each culture, and a search to see if the hypothesis exists. Assuming a simple link for something would appears for a intricate problem like the one being address would demonstrate the shallowness of my views. More appropriately this requires detailing of each culture so as to show a clear approach to verifying my thesis.
The interaction among these people follows the rules of survival. Since the actions inducing pain does not continuously happen, the arguments are sought to be products of tension among individuals, not entire societies. As stated in the Encyclopedia of Societies, hostility rarely involved hordes of people with tragedies of death, or spanned any big defeats in battle. However mild disputes may be, divorce nonetheless upholds tension within any married couple, bringing havoc to parents of the feuding couple as well. In some instances marriages that end in broken vows potentially result from the wife’s failure to produce children and the low productivity in her duties. Even the laziness in a woman is greatly despised and gives legitimate grounds for scolding and beating by a husband, the violent course of action. It is hard to say if a man will ultimately divorce a wife for her laziness, yet this scenario displays how violence interconnects with divorce.
An approach to understanding the relationship between violence and divorce is possible by tracing remnants of conflict and marriage, comparing some history of each culture, and finding for clues showing definite connections or deviance. Consolidating the divorce rates and any war habits & ritual between citizen within any society followed by critical analysis of the people would be viable in answering my problem. By enduring the discrepancies of each culture and understanding the reappearing patterns and adjustments, we can then deduce an explanation that is relevant in foreign societies as well as our own.
of the Cotopaxi Quichu provided more evidence of a society where violence
is minimal, and divorce happens infrequently as well. The geographical
area inhabited by this group stretches from the town of Pujili to the east,
Sigchos to the north, and Angamarca to the south. Their homelands exist
on an elevation at the 3400 to 4000 meter range, with ethnic boundaries
tied in with the limits of maize cultivation.
The economics of these people are based on subsistence agriculture and a limited commercial activity. Men and women of the area tend lands for producing barley, lava beans, and potatoes, primarily for the consumption of the family. In Zumbagua, families more contraband cane alcohol produced in the western lowlands to the White towns for sales in order to raise capital. With these small scale methods of income, the trading of the inhabitants occurred with the other ecological zones, on the basis of a cash economy. Considering the increasing poverty, less and less surplus is available, leading households to maintain ties with other households who have access to resources of higher or lower elevation. The relative tranquillity of their economy provides little to no reason for feuding, thus on the basis of economics friendly trading served to inhibit quarrels.
As for the social structure of the people, the family is closely tied together with much affection shared among the family members. Parents refrain from disciplining young children, although older children may be chastised for failing to do their responsibilities. You children are treated and dressed as anhydrogynous beings, whereby the only distinction between gender is the boy’s haircuts and the girls ear piercing. Productively, the Cotopaxi Quichu raise their children in a passive but affectionate manner, and thereby constituting a standard of people and of unity within the family and among other people.
There exists no formal means of social control; no police station, no jail, and no judicial system. A convict intended on being brought to justice was sanctioned either by an execution ordered by the victim’s family or by transferring the perpetrator to a provincial capital located several hours away. At times outsiders will intervene when violence erupts within the family. In this case, negative gossip would be the only censure. Like many face-to-face societies, gossip is a strong force in controlling behavior and is, in fact, the most frequently applied sanction to all cases.
Although the teachings of values bound families together, equally strong are the deep enmities that develop between families. Hostility began with gossip, accumulating force that spread to families and neighbors. The problem then either diffused into nothingness or progressed to public gatherings on the street. If the latter persisted, then the most severe cases integrated masses of people fighting in defense of their beliefs; severe cases pertained to national politics or religion.
More noticeable in people’s lives are conflicts within the family. These fights between two family members occur from problems driven by the hardships of society. Drunken husbands, depressed for various reasons, have the tendency to diffuse the problem b beating on the wife. From incidents of battery and threats from a husband, women retaliate with physical force as well as by banding together with other women in the family to beat up the abusive husband—usually in cases where the residence is matrilocal. Analyzing this society, it is evident that they have some history of violence with divorce being absent. In the two cases presented so far, violence is a factor in the town where divorce may occur, but the reverse is not true. Alluding to my theory, violence is a good indicator of divorce, while the opposite is not true.
Conditions for divorce: Economic Aspect
case of divorce, evident in a majority of African societies, relates to
the socioeconomic status of the male. In establishing reasonable grounds,
the economic groups needed to be separated into high, middle, and low income
groups. To test this factor, the informant recovered the records of the
duration of a marriage involving men from each category along with the
frequencies of divorce in each group. Sure enough the middle and high status
males had 76% and 71% marriages 1 ending in divorce. Contrary to the ability
of a husband to support a women, men who can provide more financial support
for a partner, thus establishing stronger bonds with a wife, actually expressed
less tolerance for women, explaining accounts of higher divorce rates of
middle to high status husbands to low status husbands. An explanation for
the low status husband was that the dependence on the wife for financial
stability exceeds that of the well to do husbands; where in fact the husband
created stronger bonds with the wife due to a sharing of responsibility
to produce family income. Being able to support a wife solely on the husband’s
income may make her more attached to and dependent on the husband, yet
with the male owning all the power financial gain, he acquire other women
more easily, resulting in short bonds within the marriage and in easily
inspired divorces. Divorce thereby, in this case, succumbs to the potential
earning capacity of a husband.
Observing each culture, we attempt to find arguable similarities as opposed to blatant coincidences. With each of the selected cultures, we found substantial evidence of violence and divorce in an array of societies. Judging all the information of each society as valid, I neglected to consider similarities among the different cultures as coincidental because of the many factors explaining the purpose of violence and divorce in the particular culture. By reviewing the many aspects of a culture—whether common or distinct—and instating the selected variables into the reviews of the culture, one can see develop test the reliability of the variables through their application in each society.
Living in an American society of rampant violence and divorce, I sometimes feel that other societies go through the same general course of action apparent under standards. On the other hand, an over-generalization of the trends existing in our culture comparable with others is also a naive assumption. I believe that the explanations for divorce and violence can not be so easily linked together; for that reason, the bridging of the two topics are still open to interpretation. Correspondence to the ideas presented here curtails more accurate descriptions of other cultures on an individual basis; however, these ideas propose general ideas which deem applicable to many societies, to a point where the ideas serve as good references in anticipating problems leading to divorce to a majority of other cultures around the world.