Linear Regression Analysis

The third phase of the statistical analysis entailed the exploration of the co-joint influence of several independent variables on the dependent variable (FACI8). Regression was used to predict one variable from another and understand which among the independent variables are related to the dependent variable and also explore the forms of those relationships.

Regression model summaries of attachment and changeability with stepwise method are shown below.

Table 5. Stepwise regression model summary of Attachment.

Model 4 R .735 R square .540 Adjusted R square .522 Std. error of the estimate 10.670 Variables Standardised Coeff. β Sig. p-level FPSC Incendiary communication -.275 .002

FCOPES Passive appraisal .312 .000

FHI Control .284 .001

FCOPES Seeking spiritual support

.176 .012

The four independent variables in the regression model accounted for 54% of the total variation of the family adaptation (Attachment). The higher the R square statistic, the better

84

the model fitted our data. The adjusted R square took into account how many variables were included in the model. In this instance, of the eleven independent subscales used, only four variables had the potential for a significant relationship with attachment. These variables included subscales, incendiary communication, passive appraisal, control and seeking spiritual support.

Table 6. Stepwise regression model summary of Changeability.

Model 3 R .634 R square .401 Adjusted R square .384 Std. error of the estimate 11.876 Variables Standardised Coeff. β Sig. p-level Social Support .458 .000 FPSC Affirming communication .178 .041 Mobilising Family to Acquire and Accept Help

.222 .005

Table 6 shows that only three variables had the potential for a significant relationship with changeability. The three independent variable subscales: social support, affirming communication, and mobilising family to acquire and accept help in the regression model account for 40% of the total variation of the family adaptation (changeability subscale).

The β-values in Table 5 and in Table 6 show relationships between the family adaptation variables and the independent variables. The variable incendiary communication showed a negative β-value (β =-.275, p=.002) which represented a negative relationship. The less inflammatory communication between family members accrued the more the attachment variable of family adaptation increased. Of all the independent variables that were analysed for relationships with attachment and changeability variables, four variables did not suffice a relevant degree of measurement to show a positive relationship. These were commitment (FHI), challenge (FHI), acquiring social support (FCOPES) and reframing (FCOPES).

85 5.5. CONCLUSION

In all eleven independent variables that were correlated with family adaptation there were nine variables that showed significant correlation. The variables that showed significant relationships with Changeability included, commitment, affirming communication, incendiary communication, mobilising the family to acquire and accept help, and social support. Also, on the other variable Attachment, resiliency variables, commitment, challenge, control, affirming communication, incendiary communication, seeking spiritual support, passive appraisal, and social support showed a significant relationship.

However, after conducting a linear regression analysis (which was the third phase of statistical analysis in the study to discover whether a combination of independent variables can predict scores on the dependent variable) it was discovered that resiliency variables that produced the best predictors for family adaptation when measured with changeability were social support and mobilisation of family to acquire and accept help. On the other hand, the best predictors for attachment were incendiary communication, passive appraisal, control, and seeking spiritual support.

86

CHAPTER SIX

DISCUSSION

6.1 INTRODUCTION

The discussion and conclusion of this study are presented in this chapter. The study aimed to explore family resiliency factors that enable families to adjust and adapt as a result of facing non-normative challenges. This chapter provides the discussion of the findings presented in Chapter Five. The following structured questionnaires were used in this study: the Family Attachment and Changeability Index (FACI8), the Family Hardiness Index (FHI), the Family Problem Solving Communication (FPSC), the Family Crisis Oriented Personal Evaluation Scale (FCOPES) and the Social Support Index (SSI). The FACI8 was used as the dependent variable that measured family adaptation and the other measures were independent variables that were determined as the factors that contributed to family adaptation.

6.2 BIOGRAPHY

6.2.1 Family composition

Families in this study were fairly distributed except for the group that was composed of parents, children and relatives with a total of forty three participants. The study showed interest in the traditional family that included biological parents and their children. The composition of the participants included: parents with one child, parents with two children, parents with three children, and parents with children and relatives. This gave a total of 101 participants belonging to such kind of families. The remainder of five participants from the total of 106 participants belonged to the other category.

It can be suggested that a larger family may have access to more social support, more adults to contribute to finances and child nurturing. Families may also have access to a greater sense of unity during times of crises. The demographics of the participants were stated in Section 5.2 where it was seen that the 106 families that participated were from the lower average townships of the capital city of Harare. Interesting demographics were shown, such as the education level, literacy level and the employment rate of the families. These

87

families were Christian and Shona speaking. This particular cultural statement is important in the consideration of the cultural variation in resilience (McCubbin et al., 1996). The Resiliency model indicated to be suitable for research across cultures and that resilience research would benefit from such study (McCubbin et al., 1996).

6.2.2 Family income

The Resiliency model of McCubbin et al., (1996) shows family resources as one of the domains supporting family resilience. Family resources such as finances are sufficient for a family to contribute to family hardiness. This is the family’s ability to offer steeling resistance when confronted by adversity. McCubbin et al. (1996) are of the opinion that family income and employment are not resilience factors but rather are incorporated in the family hardiness factor.

In the quantitative section the family hardiness subscale of control was strongly correlated with the family adaptation subscale, attachment. Family members found themselves to be in control of the situations facing them and being employed with potential finances made it possible for the families to manage crises. Despite the whole economy of Zimbabwe being threatened, individual families still have the will power to provide basic needs for their families. In Section 5.2, the results show that there were 2 participants belonging to a family earning less than $150; 35 participants earning between $150-$500; 41 participants earning between $600-$1000; 15 participants belonging to families earning more than a $1000 and there were 13 participants who did not know the family’s total income. These ratings suggest that these families had one bread winner where the income was low and two or more bread winners where the income was higher.

Various studies indicate the importance of financial wellbeing as a resilience enhancing factor (Kaplan, Marks & Mertens, 1997; Strauss, 2011). In a South African study, Greeff & Van der Merwe (2004), indicate that economic resources act as sources of buffering agents and is similar with the term psychosocial inoculation (Walsh, 1996). It is very important for families to have tangible support, like the availability of financial, material and other forms of support programmes for Zimbabwean families in crisis.

88 6.2.3 Level of education

Education opens doors to success where there is potential need for employment. But in an economy that has been compromised employment opportunities become very scarce leading to a high rate of unemployment. The study showed that 58% of the participants had been through tertiary education and 38% had been either through high school or still in high school. Only 5% of the participants reported to be in the other category.

In times of crisis and lack of rightful job opportunities, members of families have no choice but to accept jobs that are available even though it might be jobs that they are overqualified for or jobs that are not within their field of expertise. The need for basic needs and nurturing for children in a family gives the families strength to accept their situation and compromise in order to keep the family together.

In the design of the present study, it was considered that education would be meaningful in supporting the strength and level of resilience among families. This reason for the inclusion of education in the biographic questionnaire is based on the theory of the Resiliency model (McCubbin et al., 1996), where emphasis is on family resources and education was considered a potential resource. Resilience factors highlighted by the model include factors that perform better in families with higher education, such as, equality and problem-solving communication.

Currently in Zimbabwe, the right to education is encouraged for both the girl and boy child. Women as well, are trying for the betterment of their educational level as the economic situation is constantly giving strain to families and demanding more than one breadwinner in the family to meet the basic needs. In studies conducted in South Africa (Smith, 2006; Strauss, 2011), education and financial levels appeared to be accepted by families as a form of caring and nurturing for the children. Higher education levels meant a positive future for the family and available finances also meant provision of basic needs for the family.