Appendix A

Inheritance in Contemporary America: The Social Dimensions of Giving across Generations

Appendix A

Methodology

The research on which this book is based employed both survey and nonquantitative methods. Several factors call for a multimethod approach, including in-depth (semistructured) interviews of adult children and aging parents in addition to detailed quantitative analyses of large-scale nationwide surveys on intergenerational exchanges, bequests, and inheritance. An analytic literature review indicated that a complex set of mechanisms shapes family gift-giving patterns. By employing survey data from the University of Michigan’s Health and Retirement Study, sponsored by the National Institute on Aging, and from the Assets and Health Dynamics among the Oldest-Old dataset (AHEAD), an in-depth economic, social, and health database, I could determine the personal value older parents attach to all types of financial giving. At the same time, information about role expectations by the elderly parent could be assessed in some detail. Thus, I chose to develop a case method approach to explore the fabric of emotional relationships and psychic meanings that may be attached to giving. The following summarizes the justification for this analytic approach.

First, inspection of survey data indicates that a complex set of mechanisms shapes family gift-giving patterns. Probing questions, what Howard Schuman refers to as the “random probe,” can help to determine people’s attitude toward money.

Second, during an in-depth personal interview, the researcher can ask about monetary support received over several years, not simply a short span of time dictated by the survey. The evidence suggests little giving occurs during the course of one year. We asked adult children and parents about any type of financial support the adult child had received since leaving the parents’ household. This helped determine whether parent(s) tended to give money at certain times over the life course. For instance, do parents mainly give money to help purchase a new home, for college education, to help the adult child establish a household, or simply when the child is in need? Are inter vivos transfers a functional alternative to inheritance? If so, how do minority families differ from non-Hispanic whites in their definition of wealth transmission and subsequent decision to give substantial gifts?

Finally, a nonquantitative approach made it possible to explore the fabric of emotional relationships and psychic meanings that may be attached to giving. The interview guide was designed to get underneath the numbers revealed in survey research.

I hypothesized that one important factor that may determine giving is the quality of the relationship between the parent and child. Most surveys include questions that inquire about frequency with which the focal adult child speaks to or visits parents, or how good the parent-child relationship is on a scale of 1 to 10. These gauges may not uncover the nuances of the parent-child relationship compared with an in-depth personal interview protocol that queries both parent and child about past conflict over issues such as sibling rivalries, financial assets, and emotional blackmail. Another important variable is how close the adult child has stayed to the parent after leaving home. A child who lived with a step-parent for five years before leaving home may have a very different relationship with that parent than a young child who lived in the parental household for fifteen years or longer.

SAMPLE

To amplify the national (published) data on the role of gift exchanges in defining the new intergenerational contract, an embedded qualitative case study of a multiethnic sample of elderly parents and adult children was conducted on issues related to family gift giving and inheritance. My decision to use this method and to draw a sample of older parents and adult children from the southwestern United States was deliberate. Central Texas is a socioeconomically diverse region and contains one of the largest Mexican American populations in the nation.

To begin the process, a random sample of ninety-four churches located in the city of Austin was selected for potential inclusion in the study. The churches selected for possible inclusion in the study were listed on pages 426–444 of the December 2001 Greater Austin Yellow Pages Book. Fifteen percent of the churches responded to the original mail survey. Follow-up reminder cards were sent to those who had not responded to the first survey.

From this list, church leadership was contacted by letter. The letter described the project goals and invited the congregation to participate in the study. Next, the investigator arranged a meeting to distribute the survey and was available to answer any questions about the study.

Although I did not obtain active written consent, subjects were informed about the study only after permission was received from the church leadership. Participation in the study was strictly voluntary. Potential participants were provided a copy of the questionnaire and asked to complete it at their convenience and to return it in the stamped, self-addressed envelope. The initial survey instrument took approximately 15–20 minutes to complete. Respondents were also given the opportunity to contact the principal investigator with any additional questions about the study. The paper-and-pencil survey contains information about demographic background and attitudes toward inter vivos exchanges, loans, and inheritance practices.

In the second stage of the research, I conducted qualitative interviews with parents 55 years and over and adult children over 18 years old residing in central Texas. The interview guide included a set of questions about their attitudes and expectations toward giving and receiving money in childhood. In addition, personal feelings and information were elicited on perceptions of current exchange and bequest practices. Long-distance telephone interviews were also conducted for focal parents and children who resided outside the state. The final study group was based on a purposive quota sample, which included twenty-five respondent adult children and older parents representing several racial and ethnic groups of African American, European, and Latino/Hispanic ancestry.

With this multicultural matrix, I was able to identify differences based on social characteristics in exchange patterns, the feelings of commitment to performing roles and meeting filial obligations, and the extent to which economic factors constrain the decision to give gifts in later life. If the moral obligation outweighs the degree of reciprocity held by parents and children, then any prior giving or future bequest expectations may not be revealed in the interviews. Employing this methodology, then, allowed me to capture symbolic elements of gift giving and bequest motives (reciprocity and altruism) and constraints, if any, from both the parent’s and the child’s perspective.

The research posed no risks to the study subjects known at the time the study was conducted. All information was maintained in strict confidence and no damaging information was collected. Those individuals who wished not to participate in the entire interview were permitted to discontinue from it. The subjects benefited from the study insofar as some isolated individuals enjoyed the interaction with the interviewer. The social benefit is that this project will continue to provide information needed by elder care providers responsible for guardianship services, money management, and retirement planning.