EVALUATION OF PREMARITAL EDUCATION The review presented here is the result of a comprehensive search of the literature using two computer bibliographic search systems: PsychInfo (1887-2001) and the Family Studies Database (1970- 2001). This search indicated that four previous attempts have been made to comprehensively review the empirical literature pertaining to the effectiveness of premarital education (Bagarozzi & Rauen, 1981; Gurman & Kniskern, 1977; Schumm & Denton, 1979; Silliman & Schumm, 2000), however, three of these reviews were done nearly two decades ago. The fourth, more recent review (Silliman & Schumm, 2000), primarily consists of a descriptive, program-level review of the marriage preparation literature that focuses on the format and theory of the interventions themselves. The aim of the review presented here is to provide a critical, meta-level review of the various components (e.g., design, sample, program format, measurement, analysis, and outcomes) and types of studies (e.g., experimental, nonexperimental, ex-post-facto) that have been done to evaluate the effectiveness of premarital education. We believe that this type of review complements the richly descriptive review done by Silliman and Schumm (2000) and is useful in that it both updates and expands upon earlier reviews in this area. To facilitate the process of developing an up-to-date review of the literature, the selection of studies included in this review was guided by the same two minimal inclusion criteria that were used by Bagarozzi & Rauen (1981) in their review of the premarital education literature nearly 20 yeas ago. These criteria specify that in order to be included a study needed to demonstrate that:
1. Standardized procedures and intervention techniques were employed and followed systematically during the premarital education process, and that
2. Some type of outcome measure was employed by the investigator to assess the treatment’s effectiveness. The review of research evaluating specific premarital education programs in this paper is limited to the 22 studies with published data which were located that fulfilled these minimum requirements. However, this review also expands upon past reviews in that it also includes an evaluation of the
3 ex-post-facto studies of premarital education that have been completed in the last twenty years.
As noted in Table 1, this evaluative review has been organized into three primary sub-sections based on the research design of the studies reviewed: (1) Experimental and Quasi-Experimental studies, (2) Non-experimental studies, and (3) Ex-post-facto studies.
For the purpose of this review, studies categorized as experimental were defined as those studies “in which at least one variable was manipulated and units [were] randomly assigned to the different levels or categories of the manipulated variable(s)” (Pedhazur & Schmelkin, 1991, p. 251).
Quasi-experimental studies were defined as those that have all the elements of an experimentally-designed study, except that subjects [were] not randomly assigned to groups (Pedhazur & Schmelkin, 1991).
Due to the similarities in design and procedure, experimental and quasi-experimental studies are reviewed together in the text of this paper, but to emphasize the importance of randomization in clinical intervention they have been listed separately in Table 1.
Non-experimental studies were defined as those in which a premarital education program was evaluated, but there was no pre-intervention evaluation of an independent variable and/or no control or comparison group was utilized. Those studies defined as “ex-post-facto” in design were those in which married couples were asked retrospectively if they had participated in premarital education and then were compared to those who had not participated in such preventive interventions. These studies are markedly different from the other studies reviewed here in that they typically attempt to assess the general effectiveness of having had some sort of premarital education, rather than assessing the effectiveness of a particular program or educational approach. A number of other studies have been completed during the last decade that retrospectively surveyed married couples about their experiences with premarital education, but did not utilize a comparison group (See Silliman & Schumm, 1999 for a review). Although these studies provide valuable insights into improving the general practice of premarital education, they do not directly assess the effectiveness of premarital education and are consequentially not review here.
Each of the following sections corresponds with the design distinction made in Table 1 and, where applicable, is organized according to four sub-sections: (1) Sample Characteristics, (2) Program Characteristics, (3) Methodological Analysis, and (4) Effectiveness Outcomes.
đang được dịch, vui lòng đợi..