Career and Curricular Choices among Filipino College Students as a
Function of Personality, Family, Gender, and Cultural Dynamics

 

Frederick David Abraham, Michele Joan Valbuena, & Psychardas
Silliman University, Dumaguete City, Philippines

 

 

Abstract

 

Filipino culture and personality are undergoing changes that are both rapid and profound. These changes pose both threats and opportunities for cultural and personal diversity and development. They also require longitudinal studies to understand their dynamics. Classroom discussions about the high level of shiftees and choice of a major and careers led to observing the need for research to get beyond personal and stereotyped concepts of family and education. Our study tried to evaluate how some attributes of Filipino familial, religious and barkadan life-styles are related to ego-strength, critical thinking, and self-actualization and how these attributes might be involved in students’ choice of educational and career paths. The methodology was to use questionnaires administered in the classroom with undergraduate psychology majors at Silliman as respondents. Four areas were included: (1) Demographics, Career Objectives and Choice of Major, Parental Attitudes, (2) Attribution Theory, (3) Family Dynamics and Demographics, and (4) Gender Issues. Tabulation, cross-tabulation, and χ2 tests both of goodness of fit and of relation between selected pairs of items constituted the principal method of analysis.

 

Our study revealed that (a) the classic (stereotyped) concept of the Filipino family was not universal, but rather much more diverse than often acknowledged, especially with many familial and career roles quite balanced and egalitarian among both parents, (b) there was considerable conflict between student's actual career choices and what they really desired, which related to conflict and aspects of self-assertiveness, ego-strength, and attribution, (c) passivity or anxiety is greater for women, and (d) female students do not perceive gender issues in the workplace to be a serious issue facing them. These issues could be important in possibly providing guidance to students in the future and for preventative guidance in family styles, and for other aspects of primary preventive mental health practices, and for understanding rapid change in Filipino culture.

 

Notes

1. Psycharda is a slightly corrupt combination of the words psychology and barkada. It emphasizes the use in many of our courses of the cooperative spirit of Philippine students as a vehicle of learning. The term stands for the groups formed in the psychology classroom. Here it is broadened to include several classes involved in the study: undergraduate classes in personality theory and special topics, and a graduate seminar in special topics. Some of those students are Rogen Alcantara, Luel de Jsus, Deborah Salem, Forence Tejada, Regina Villaluz (graduate students), and June Honculada, Anna Lourd Villaneuva, & Rea Abade (undergraduate research assistants), and the other undergraduate students.

2. Internet discussions with Dr. Huitt’s students at Valdosta State University (Georgia, USA) were also valuable.

3. The editorial efforts of Dr. Margaret Alvarez are greatly appreciated.

4. These preliminary results were presented via poster which included a laptop-PowerPoint show at PAPJA, Manila, January 1999 by several of the students.

Introduction

 

This study began toward the end of a course on personality theory. During the course we were constantly trying to relate theories to Philippine culture. When we got to humanistic and existential psychology (Maslow, Rollo May) and concepts of self-actualization, we confronted the issue whether students, raised in a culture of cooperation (family, church, barkada, and school) developed the individuality and ego-strength (characteristic of the American/European cultures from which most contemporary textbooks spring; e.g., our textbook by Engler, 1995) that would empower them with self-determination in their choices of careers and studies.

 

Postmodern psychosocial theorists (Adorno, Frankel-Brunswick, & Levinson, 1969; Baudrillard, 1995; Estrada-Claudio, 2002; Kintanar, 2002; Kristeva, 1981; Lacan, 1977; Lyotard, 1984; McCluhan, 1995; Poster, 1989; Sarup, 1993) have raised issues about ego strength and culture. Poster conducted a study among affluent southern Californian families on the influences of TV and modern “modes of communication” on ego-strength (Poster, 1989). He was investigating Lasch’s psychoanalytically oriented theory (1979, 1984) that loss of ego-strength and increase of narcissism afflicted the youth of a mass media culture. Poster raised the additional issue of the difference between the contemporary democratic family style, and the patriarchal-Oedipal style of the family of Freud’s time (early 20th century), which fostered a competitive, individualistic personality. Poster found that the modern affluent southern Californian family was characterized by a democratic, experimental, and lasses-faire attitude, but that ego-strength was not eroded.

 

Discussions in three sections of undergraduate personality theory yielded surprisingly different pictures of Philippine family influences on choice of careers and majors, from stereotypic conformity to great individuality. It was clear that the objectivity of research was needed to get beyond personal opinions. Several factors seemed important in the dynamics of students’ decisions about majors and careers. Some are: A rapidly changing Filipino culture, a rapidly changing academic context, the psychodynamics of Filipino family and culture, independence of individual choice, attribution of success and failure,

and gender attitudes—cultural and individual.

In this project, we wanted to investigate how these factors were involved in the following basic issues of personality factors for university students facing choices in careers and courses of study. Are these factors influenced by (a) the stereotyped view of the middle-class Filipino family as a large, cooperative, patriarchal, and religious, (b) Oedipal independence and competitiveness of the American-European cultural style, and (c) narcissism that might result from the over-dependence for personal decisions being made for the students by others (family, church, school, barkada). The importance placed on children’s contribution to their families in Filipino and other cultures has been shown to result in altruism (Whiting & Whiting, 1975). Could this tendency lead to overcome some of the dependence on the patriarchal family, church, and barkada in decision-making?

Methodology

 

Questionnaires were developed and employed. Three courses of students were involved in the study. A first semester (1997), upper level course (three section of about 100 students) on Psychological Theories of Personality, constituted focus groups discussing the issues. Then, second semester (1998), two sections of a course on Special Topics in Psychology provided the respondents to the questionnaire. A graduate seminar developed the questionnaire. The questionnaire contained four parts:

 

1)    Demographics, Career Objectives and Choice of Major, Parental Attitudes.
This part was designed to get at some of the usual demographics and some information about choice of studies and careers and any familial conflicts over those choices.

2)    Attribution Theory: Coping with Success and Failure.
This part was developed with our own questions rather than use expensive existing instruments written in other cultures (e.g., 16PF).

3)    Family Dynamics and Demographics.
This part was mainly designed to get at features of family and religious psychodynamics that might relate to psychoanalytic issues, such as how patriarchal, autocratic, or democratic a family might be.

4)    Gender Issues.
This part dealt with such issues as perceived inequality in the job market and workplace. This part was especially relevant since most of the students in these courses are female.

 

The 75-item questionnaire was administered to 86 students in the two sections of the course. As the results were keyed into a spreadsheet for data analysis, some questions proved to need follow up (preferences on attribution theory when more than one response could be chosen on a given item; some parental job classifications needed clarification). Some answers may have been defensive or in line with expected norms rather than sincere as revealed in occasional inconsistencies.

 

Results

 

 

 

Table 1. Shiftees

   Item 1 C

Switched Majors?

 

no

once

more

3 categories

28

26

14

collapse once/more

28

40

 

Ho: 10% switch

61

7

 

Chi-square

116

df=1

p<.001

 

Table 1 shows “Shiftees”, those students who have changed their majors one or more times. There were 40 shiftees, 14 of them shifted more than once. The Chi-square test of independence against a null hypothesis of 10% shifting was highly significant.

 

 

 

 

Table 2. Satisfaction of Student and Parents with a Different Career

 

   Items Ii, Ij

 

Ij:  Would You Prefer a Different Career?

 

 

Yes

No

Not Sure

Totals

 

Ii:

Would Your Parents
Be Happy
if You Were to Choose
a Different Career?

 

 

 

Yes

8               7.3 (.07)

2                      5.2 (2.0)

6             3.5 (1.6)

16

No

6        

3.6 (1.6)

1           2.6 (1.0)

1        

 1.8 (0.4)

8

Not Sure

17         20.1 (.5)

19        14.2 (1.6)

8         

9.7 (0.3)

44

Totals

31

22

15

68

     χ2=9.07 df=4 p~.06

    Key: Observed Expected (Chi)

 

 

 

Table 2 shows if students want careers other than the ones they are currently preparing for or expecting to go into, and if they think their parents would be satisfied if they were in fact to change their choice of career. More than half the students did not like their career choices or were not sure of them. Less than half thought their parents would object or were not sure if their parents would be unhappy if they chose a new career. The interaction (test of relationship using Chi-square) just missed being significant at the .05 level.

 

 

 

  Table 3. Conflict with Parents about Choice of Career

    Items IK, IM

 I M:If there was conflict do you wish you

 

 

 

  could change to your choice?

 

 

 

 

 yes

no

not sure

   no conflict

totals

I K:

parents

0

0

0

1

1

Chose career and

you

3

7

7

13

30

educational path

both

0

9

4

22

35

to satisfy:

not sure

2

0

0

0

2

 

totals

5

16

11

36

68

 

 Chi-Square was not significant (on shaded cells only)

 

Table 3 shows little conflict between students and parents over career choices (see marginals).

 

 

      Table 4. Locus of Generalized Success and Failure

Iems II l

 

III: Locus of Failure

 

 

& H K

 

Self

Family

Other

Totals

HK:

Self

19

1

26

46

Locus of

Family

2

1

4

7

Success

Other

2

1

4

7

 

 

23

3

34

60

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

       Collapsing for 2x2 Chi-Square

 

 

 

Self

F&O

Totals

 

 

Self

19

27

46

 

 

F&O

4

10

14

 

 

Totals

23

37

60

 

 

χ2=0.57 df=1 not significant

 

 

 

Table 4 on generalized attribution shows a tendency to take credit for success (77%) but to take less blame for failure (38%), and no interaction effect between generalized attribution for success and failure. But when asked about specific attribution in the case of doing poorly in course work, a majority of the respondents tended to accept blame (not shown).

 

  

     Table 5. Family Style

 

 

 

 Item (from section III)

yes

no

not sure

 H. Freedom of choice at elementary school age

48

17

3

 M: Attend church regularly

50

5

12

 U: Mother has white collar job

45

10

2

 S: Father has white collar job

39

26

3

 DD: Makes rules (father, mother, both)

17

6

42

 EE: Filipinos got married too young

18

33

17

 

Table 5 shows the results of several items. Children have freedom, the family is egalitarian with both parents making rules, and mothers outnumber fathers (barely) in having white-collar jobs. The families are religious (and more or less about the same as national figures at 85% Catholic, but liberal in family style. Both parents have jobs and participated in family and decision-making and chores with some traditional division of labor, despite having domestic helpers and a significant divorce rate.

 

Table 6. Relation of Expected Gender bias & attribution

Items IV B & IIL

IV B: men and women equal pay

 

 

 

yes

n + no

total

 

IIL:

self

7

12

19

 

failure

other

33

11

44

 

general

total

40

40

23

 

  χ2 = 8.3, df = 1, p<.01 significant

 

 

 

Table 6 shows that there is little expectation of gender bias in salaries. There was a significant interaction between generalized attribution and expectation of gender bias salary. The attribution question was one of the ones requiring re-scoring as multiple responding was allowed; if a student blamed themselves and others for failure, it was scored as blaming other for this table.

 

 

Table 7. Relation of Expected Gender bias & attribution

Items IV E & IIL

IV E: equal job availability

 

 

 

yes

no

no opinion

total

IIL:

self

13

7

7

27

failure

other

24

11

3

38

general

total

37

18

10

65

  Not significant

 

 

 

 

 

 

Table 7 showed no expectation of gender bias in job availability, and no interaction with the rescored generalized attribution question. There was also no expectation of achieving top-level positions (not shown). Only two students felt women should stay in the home instead of the workplace (there were only 5 males in the sample; not shown).

Discussion

 

1)     Shiftees (Tables 1-3)

 

a)     A 59% shiftee rate is surprisingly high. This result would appear to indicate a fairly strong degree of independence of choice of major, but further information would be required to discover if parental consent was in fact obtained for shifting.

b)    To conclude that the high proportion of shiftees may be indicative of strong ego-strength and self-actualization may be a bit premature. More information would be required to better answer that issue, especially since a lot of shifting is done without a real change in career goals. Shifting may be more a function of campus dynamics: readiness to move to a more difficult major or to escape one; going where your friends go, or following intellectual interests rather than career interests, and so forth. It could be noted that the conjecture of possible ego-srength is consistent with an old finding of Gribbons & Hohnes (1968) that individuals who change career directions are more vocationally mature.

c)     It may also be noted that these students are in the second, or exploratory stage of career development (Super, 1957) and that in this stage, career choice is often haphazard (Janis & Wheeler, 1978). Of the many factors, such as demographic ones, that influence such choice, the student’s aspirations are the most important (Kaplan & Stein, 1984), which is again consistent with the conjecture that shiftees show an evolving, albeit still unstable, maturity.

d)    That career choice is yet unstable is testified by the fact that 46% of the students indicate they would prefer a career other than the one they are currently preparing for, and another 22% are unsure. Apparently though, the range of careers they are considering are not seen as invoking conflict with their families (Tables 2&3). This finding may relate to the homogeneity of the families and careers and role models of the predominately middle class values of the Silliman students, the realities of the job situation in the Philippines, and the white-collar orientation of their vocational markets (Kaplan & Stein, 1984). More ethnographic investigation of these issues is needed, as well as improvements in the questionnaire and interviewing methods.

 

2)     Locus of Control (Table 4)

 

a)     The questions were so general in nature and obvious that they might have provoked defensive answers, but the answers appeared to be sincere and candid. The questions have a face validity which seems supported by the candor of the locus of failure admissions. This would seem to indicate a significant level of ego-strength.

b)    The attribution of an internal locus of success and an external locus of failure is similar to that of many studies, e.g., Abregana’s (1988) study of upland farmers in Nergros Oriental. The respondents displayed this tendency for global or general attribution (Table 4), but, for specific attributions, they were more willing to accept blame for poor performances (results not shown in the tables). While multiple responses were rescored as a single response for this tabulation, the fact that the respondents could pick several of the options, including internal and external sources of success and failure indicate that attribution in a sense is neither exclusively external or internal, but there can be a blending of both.

 

3)     Family Dynamics (Table 5)

 

Power relationships in the Filipino family, as elsewhere, are highly complex. Studying them involves many methodological problems. For example, an American wife can underestimate the amount of power she holds (Reiss, 1976). If a wife can underestimate her own power, certainly it could be that children would have difficulty reporting parental power relationships. It is clear that for our cohort, that pre-Spanish egalitarian familial power, is at least partly restored (Castillo & Guerrero, 1969; Lapuz, 1977), and formalized by the New Family Code (The Family Code of the Philippines, 1987; Bautista, 1989). It may be that this equalization was not always explicitly recognized within the family, it is rapidly undergoing such recognition. Some of the ego-strength of Silliman students may come from a tendency, noted by Poster in his study (1989), of working mothers to spend a great deal of time bonding with their families despite their jobs, which was verified in the focus discussions by the students in the psychardas in this study. It was clear that the questionnaire did not address all the nuances about parental authority that such focus discussions were able to address. Non-working mothers who are principally housewives seem to have less ego-strength and be more narcissistic than working mothers, an American result (Poster, 1989) that is, nonetheless, reflected in the Monobo folk tale, Dumpaw, in which a mother rat sacrifices her life while obsessively trying to satisfy her children (collected and performed by Priscilla Magdamo, personal communication).

 

4)     Gender Dynamics

 

a)     The highly significant Chi-square (Table 6, interaction of attribution and gender) showed, surprisingly, that perceived salaries for women was seen a fair despite the tendency to attribute blame to others by these mostly female students. In other word, if women were to view bias not on the basis of a realistic appraisal of social gender bias, but on the basis of a tendency to attribute failure to themselves. This would seem paradoxical. One might expect that a tendency to blame others for failure would result in the perception of job discrimination. More information is needed to explore this paradox. It is also a bit surprising that expectation of gender bias in the job market is so low considering the extent to which studies of gender issues has become so prominent. Perhaps those programs are raising the hopes of women students. Or perhaps the nature of the families of Silliman students also contributes to women having expectations of good job opportunities and important roles in society. To the extent that some gender issues are seen, it seems to be on the basis of a real appraisal of social institutions, revealing strong ego-strength and little rationalization or external attribution.

b)    The finding that students anticipate an unbiased job market is obviously related to their privileged middle-class status, egalitarian family dynamics, and having professional mothers as role models. While Liwag, De la Cruz, and  Macapagal (1998) conclude that “the family continues to be a major site of gender socialization of children”, there are many studies which show that the gender socialization may be attenuated in contemporary Filipino families (Bulatao, 1975; Estrada, 1983; Illo & Veneracion, 1988; Jocano, 1988; Licuanan, 1979; Sobritchea, 1990). De la Cruz (1986) showed children perceive progessional jobs as gender independent, but they see blue collar jobs such as kargador (cargo carrier) and labandera (laundry woman) as gender specific, an attitude that could be true of our cohort. Bantug (1996) found strong evidence of adolescents expecting jobs without gender limitations and that 70% saw gender roles in a state of change.

 

Conclusions

 

1)     Many interesting features of students’ psychodynamics are revealed which deviate from stereotyped views of Filipino middle-class family styles despite some defensive conformity in responding to perceived cultural norms, and despite some naivety in our test construction.

 

2)     The responses revealed the difficulty of getting at psychodynamics via questionnaires, and showed the need for ethnographic, interviewing, discussion, and text analytic supplements for such an experimental program. More work is needed to clarify the issues of this study.

 

3)     The interaction of gender and attribution is especially noteworthy, as it indicates that when bias is perceived, respondents are apparently not motivated by a generalized attribution of external blame, but by a sincere appraisal of the perceived specific cultural issue.

 

4)     This study is but a tiny contribution to Sikolohiyang Pilipino and the psychology of career and educational choices, but highlights the importance of doing cultural psychology and of using cultural approaches to understand the diversity of cultures within the Philippines. The Philippines is especially ripe for using cultural psychological approaches in rapidly changing cultures (Cole, 1996; Whiting & Edwards, 1988; Whiting & Whiting, 1975).

 

 

References

 

Abregana, B.C. (1988). Causal attributions for success and failure in farming among upland farmers in Balinsasayo region, Negros Oriental. Philippine Journal of Psychology, 21, 1-10.

 

Adorno, T., Frenkel-Brunswick, E., & Levinson, D.J. (1969). The Authoritarian Personality. New York: Norton.

 

Buadrillard, J. (1995). Simulacra and Simulation. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan.

 

Bautista, R.M.J. (1989) Ang Kodigong Pampamilya ng Pilipinas, Salin at Anotasyon. Lundod Quezon: Division of Research and Law Reform, University of the Philippines Law Center.

 

Bantug, C. (1996). A survey on gender relations: she said; he said. Women in Action, 52-57.

 

Bulatao, R.A. (1978). The value of a Filipino child: Pleasure and profit against cost and concern. (East-west Population Institute Reprint No. 113). Honolulu: East-West Pupulation Institute, East-West Center.

 

Castillo, G., & Guerrero, S.H. (1969, January). The Filipino women in rice farming systems: Some empirical evidence. Journal of Asian and African Studies, 4(1), 18-19.

 

Cole, M. (1996). Cultural Psychology. Cambridge: Belknap/Harvard.

 

De la Cruz, A.S. (1986) The impact of maternal employment on family members’ perceptions and attitudes towards the maternal role. Philippine Journal of Psychology, 19, 29-40.

 

Engler, B. (1995). Theories of Personality (4th ed.). New York: Houghton Mifflin.

 

Estrada, A. (1983). Maternal and Child Care in Macalampa, Camiling, Tarlac. Manila: Unpublished masteral thesis, Centro Escolar University.

 

Estrada-Claudio, S. (2002). Discourse analysis. In S. Guerrero (ed.), Gender Sensitive and Feminist Methodologies. Quezon City: University of the Philippines Press.

 

Gribbons, W.D., & Lohnes, P.R. (1968). Emerging Careers. New York: Columbia.

 

Guerrero, S. (2002). Gender Sensitive and Feminist Methodologies. Quezon City: University of the Philippines Press.

 

Heider, F. (1958). The Psychology of Interpersonal Relations. New York: Wiley.

 

Illo, J., & Veneracion, C.C. (1988). Women and Men in Rainfed Farming Systems: Case Studies of Households in the Bicol region. Quezon City: Institute of Philippine Culture, Ateneo de Manila University.

 

Jacano, F.L. (1988). Social Organization in 3 Philippine Villages: An Exploration in Rural Anthropology. Manila: Centro Escolor University Research and Development Center.

 

Janis, I.L., & Wheeler, D. (1978). Thinking clearly about career choices. Psychology Today, 11, 66-78.

 

Kaplan, P.S., & Stein, J. (1984) Psychology of Adjustment. Belmont: Wadsworth.

 

Kintanar,T.B. (2002). Textual analysis. In S. Guerrero (ed.), Gender Sensitive and Feminist Methodologies. Quezon City: University of the Philippines Press.

 

Kohut, H. (1972/1985). Thoughts on narcissism and narcissistic rage. In C. Strozier (ed.), Self Psychology and the Humanities: Reflection on a New Psychoanalytic Approach. New York: Norton.

 

Kristeva, J. (1980). Desire in Language. (L.S. Roudiez, ed.; T. Gora, A. Jardine, & L.S. Roudiez (trans.) New York:Columbia.

 

Lacan, J. (1977). Écrit/A Selection. New York: Norton; London: Tavistok.

 

Lasch, C. (1979). The Culture of Narcissism: American Life in an Age of Diminishing Expectations. New York: Norton.

 

Lasch, C. (1984). The Minimal Self: Survival in Troubled Times. New York: Norton.

 

Lapuz, L.V. (1977). Filipino Marriages in Crisis. Quezon City: New Day.

 

Licuanan, P.B. (1979) Some aspects of child-rearing in an urban low-income community. Philippine Studies, 27, 453-468.

 

Liwag, M.E.D., De la Cruz, A.S., & Macapagal, M.E.J. (1997). Child-rearing and Gender Socialization in the Philippines: A Comprehensive Review of the Literature. Makati: UNICEF.

 

Liwag, M.E.D., De la Cruz, A.S., & Macapagal, M.E.J. (1998). How we raise our daughters and sons: Child-rearing and gender socialization in the Philippines. Philippine Journal of Psychology, 31, 1-46.

 

Lyotard, J.-F. (1984). The Postmodern Condition: A Report on Knowledge. Manchester: Manchester University Press.

 

Maslow, A. (1970). Motivation and Personality (2nd ed.). New York: Harper & Row.

 

McLuhan, M. (1965). Understanding Media: The Extensions of Man. New York: McGraw Hill.

 

Medina, B.T.G. (1991) The Filipino Family. Quezon City: Univrsity of Philippines Press.

 

Murphy, P.L., & Abraham, F.D. (1995). Feminist psychology: Prototype of the Dynamical Revolution in Psychology. In F.D. Abraham and A.R. Gilgen (eds.), Chaos Theory in Psychology. Westport: Greenwood/Praeger.

 

Patelson, L.E. (1973) Girl’s careers—expressions of identity. Vocational Guidance Quarterly, 21, 269-275.

 

Poster, M. (1989). Critical Theory & Poststructuralism: In Search of a Context. Ithica: Cornell.

 

Reiss, I.L. (1976). Family Systems in America, 2nd ed. Hinsdale: Dryden.

 

Rotter, J. (1966). Generalized expectancies for internal versus external contol of reinforcement. Psychological Monographs, 80 (whole no. 609).

 

Sarup, M. (1993) An Introductory Guide to Post-structuralism & Postmodernism, 2nd ed. Ahens: Georgia.

 

Sobritchea, C.I. (1990). Gender inequality and its supporting ideologies in Philippine society. In L. Bautista & E. Rifareal (eds.), And She Said No! Human Rights, Women’s Identities and Struggles (pp. 8-17). Caloocan  City: National Council of Churches in the Philippines.

 

Super, D.E. (1957). The Psychology of Careers: an Introduction to Vocational Development. New York: Harper.

 

Whiting, B.B., & Edwards, C.P. (1988). Children of Different Worlds: The Formation of Social Behavior. Cambridge: Harvard.

 

Whiting, B., & Whiting, J. (1975). Children of Six Cultures. Cambridge: Harvard.

 

Appendix

Items from questionnaire used in this report.

 

I C. If you have ever switched major, how many times?

 

I I. If you chose another career, would your parents be more happy or less happy?

          1. More    2. Less    3. Not sure

 

I J. Do you prefer a career other than the one for which you are now preparing?

          1. More    2. Less    3. Not sure

 

I M. If there is conflict between them and you, do you think you are beginning to wish that you could change to your preference rather than following theirs?

          1. More    2. Less    3. Not sure    4. There was no conflict

 

II K. When things go well, do you tend to feel that the most important factor for success is:

(1)  Due to your own abilities?

(2)  Due to your family?

(3)  Due to your school?

(4)  Due to the society you live in?

(5)  Due to some other factors?

 

II L.   When things go wrong, do you tend to feel that the most important factor for the problems are?

(1) Due to your own abilities?

(2) Due to your family?

(3)  Due to your school?

(4)  Due to the society you live in?

(5)  Due to some other factors?

 

III H. When you were in elementary school did your parents give you a lot of freedom in choosing your activities and friends?

          1. Yes     2. No    3. Not sure

 

III M. Do you attend church regularly?

          1. Yes     2. No    3. Occasionally

 

III U. Mother’s occupation

(1)  Self-employed a) yes  b) no  c) Don’t know (housewife clarified later)

(2)  Type of job: a) White collar (professional). b) Blue collar (labor)

                  c) Don’t know

III DD. Who makes the rules in your parent’s family?

          1. Father   2. Mother   3. Both   4. Other

 

III EE. Do you believe that most Philippine young adults get married too young to be stable parents.

          1. Yes   2. No   3. Have no opinion

 

IV B. Do you believe women and men are paid equally for the same jobs?

          1. Yes   2. No   3. Have no opinion

 

IV E. Do you believe some jobs available to men and women are easier for men to get?

          1. Yes   2. No   3. Have no opinion