Realizations of Filial Responsibility (RFR)

Abstract

The Realizations of Filial Responsibility (RFR) is a psychological instrument designed to assess the actual support and aid provided by adult children to their aging parents. Developed primarily by W. C. Seelbach and W. J. Sauer, this scale is often used in conjunction with the Filial Responsibility Expectations (FRE) scale to measure the discrepancy between what aged parents expect from their children and what they actually receive. This realization gap is a critical variable in studies concerning the psychological well-being and morale of older adults. The RFR focuses on instrumental support, financial assistance, physical proximity, and frequency of contact, providing a quantitative measure of the practical aspects of intergenerational caregiving.

Keywords

Filial Responsibility, Intergenerational Support, Aged Parents, Caregiving Realizations, Parental Morale, Gerontology, Family Dynamics, Psychological Scale

Authors

W. C. Seelbach, W. J. Sauer

Purpose

The primary purpose of the RFR scale is to quantify the extent to which adult children fulfill perceived and explicit obligations toward their elderly parents. The instrument is divided into sections that measure both the general sense of responsibility perceived by the parent and the specific instrumental and financial aid actually received. By focusing on the realization of duties, the RFR provides researchers with data necessary to correlate actual support behaviors with outcome variables such as life satisfaction, morale, and adjustment among the elderly population.

A secondary, but crucial, application of the RFR is its comparative use alongside measures of expectations. Understanding the gap between expected and realized filial responsibility allows researchers to identify sources of strain or satisfaction within the parent-child relationship, particularly in cultural contexts where strong norms of filial piety exist.

Construct

The Realizations of Filial Responsibility (RFR) measures the behavioral component of filial responsibility. The construct posits that this realization comprises several dimensions, including affective closeness (feeling of responsibility), proximity and contact (living arrangements and visiting frequency), and instrumental support (direct aid with daily tasks and financial needs). Unlike measures focusing purely on attitudes or expectations, the RFR captures concrete, observable actions of the adult child as reported by the parent.

The scale is structured to capture two key areas: normative expectations realized (e.g., feeling responsible, living close) and specific activities of daily living (ADLs) or instrumental activities of daily living (IADLs) provided by the child. The resulting scores reflect the degree of practical support received, which is a significant predictor of an aged parent’s psychological and physical security.

Validity

Specific data regarding internal validity (e.g., criterion or construct validation studies cited directly in the source material) is limited, but the scale’s utility is established through its consistent use in correlational studies within gerontology and family studies. The RFR demonstrates face validity by directly addressing common behaviors associated with filial caregiving. Early research using the RFR, such as Seelbach’s foundational work, demonstrated that realizations of responsibility were significantly correlated with the morale of aged parents, suggesting strong predictive validity in relationship to psychological outcomes.

Reliability

Detailed psychometric reliability coefficients (e.g., Cronbach’s alpha, test-retest reliability) are not provided in the source description. However, the instrument has been widely adopted and cited in academic literature, suggesting acceptable reliability for research purposes in measuring stable behavioral constructs related to family support. Researchers utilizing the RFR often rely on the established reliability of the related Filial Responsibility Expectations scale when discussing the overall psychometric soundness of this measurement approach.

Factor Analysis

The source documentation does not explicitly detail a formal factor analysis of the RFR scale. Given the two distinct sections of the instrument—general expectations/contact (6 items) and specific instrumental aid (11 items)—it is likely that the RFR measures at least two primary, correlated factors reflecting different modalities of support realization: 1) Normative and Affective Support Realization, and 2) Instrumental and Financial Support Realization. Future research should confirm the underlying dimensional structure using exploratory or confirmatory factor analysis methods to ensure the scale maintains construct purity across diverse populations.

Instrument

Test Type: Behavioral/Attitudinal Psychological Scale

Format: Self-report questionnaire administered to the aged parent.

Language Available: English (Original), potentially translated in subsequent research studies (e.g., studies in India cited in the references).

Population Group: Aged parents/Elderly individuals.

Age Group: Typically 65 years and older.

Population Details: Originally validated on samples of aged parents, designed to assess the relationship dynamics with their adult children.

Test Methodology: The scale uses multiple scoring methods depending on the item cluster. The first six items utilize a 6-point Likert scale (1=Strongly Disagree to 6=Strongly Agree) to measure agreement with normative statements. The following eleven items use a categorical system (-1, 0, +1) to indicate whether aid was provided by the child, not needed, or provided by someone else. Additional ratings are required for child proximity and visiting frequency.

Keywords

RFR Scale, Filial Piety, Aging Research, Intergenerational Relationships, Caregiver Burden, Psychometrics, Social Support

Authors

Author ORCID Identifier: N/A (Information not available in source content)

Affiliation Email addresses: N/A (Information not available in source content)

Correspondence Address: N/A (Information not available in source content)

Permissions & Fee and Test Year

The scale was developed and published in the late 1970s, with foundational work appearing in 1977 and 1978. The instrument is generally considered to be in the public domain for academic research due to its inclusion in widely used sourcebooks like Fischer and Corcoran’s compilation. The primary test year is 1978 (Seelbach).

The instrument is documented in: Fischer, Joel, & Corcoran, Kevin J. (2007). Measures for Clinical Practice and research: A sourcebook. (4th ed.). NY. Oxford University Pr. Vol. 1, Page(s): 407-409.

The original instrument text can be found online at the following academic repository: http://digitalcommons.conncoll.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1061&context=psychhp

Reference’s

• Seelbach, W. C., and Sauer, W. J. (1977). Filial responsibility expectations and morale among aged parents. Gerontologist 17: 492–499.

• Seelbach, Wayne C. (1978). Correlates of Aged Parents’ Filial Responsibility Expectations and Realizations. The Family Coordinator, 27(4), 341-350.

• Seelbach, W. C. (1978). Realizations of Filial Responsibility (RFR). In Fischer, Joel., Corcoran, Kevin J. (2007). Measures for Clinical Practice and research: A sourcebook. (4th ed.). NY. Oxford University Pr. Vol. 1, Page(s): 407-409.

• Chandra, Aleksandr. (2016). “Mending Maya: An Analysis of Aging and Intergenerational Connection in Delhi, India” (2016). Connecticut College, New London, Bachelor of Arts thesis. http://digitalcommons.conncoll.edu/psychhp/63

Items of the Realizations of Filial Responsibility (RFR)

IMPORTANT: The following scale items must be preserved in their original language and must not be changed in any way.

1. Married children should live close to parents.

2. Children should take care of their parents‚ in whatever way necessary‚ when they are sick.

3. Children should give their parents financial help.

4. If children live nearby after they grow up‚ they should visit their parents at least once a week.

5. Children who live at a distance should write to their parents at least once a week.

6. The children should feel responsible for their parents.

******

1. Shopping for groceries

2. Preparing hot meals

3. Cleaning house

4. Doing laundry

5. Accompanying old parent when paying bills

6. Accompanying old parent when cashing check

7. Paying rent

8. Paying mortgage

9. Heavy work around the house

10. Going to movie‚ church‚ meetings‚ visiting friends

11. Walking up and down stairs

For each child circle “-1” if the child lives distant from you‚ “0” if the child lives not too far‚ and “+1” if the child lives close.

Child #:  -1 Distant‚ 0 Not too far‚  +1Close

For the last item‚ for each child‚ circle “-1” if the child visits less than once a month‚ “0” if the child visits at least monthly‚ and “+1” if visits are at least weekly.

Child #: -1 Visits less than once a month‚ 0 Visits are at least Monthly but not Weekly‚ +1 Visits are at least Weekly

For the items 1-6: 1= Strongly Agree‚ 2= Disagree‚ 3= Somewhat disagree‚ 4= Somewhat agree‚ 5= Agree‚ 6= Strongly agree

For the next 11 items‚ please record “-1” if someone other than your child provided aid‚ “0” if there is no need for aid in that area‚ and “+1” if one of your children provided aid.