Journal of Family Issues

Introduction Volume 27 Number 3

Journal
10.1177/0192513X05283508
Shek / Chinese
of Family
Family
IssuesResearch

March 2006 275-284

© 2006 Sage Publications

Chinese Family Research 10.1177/0192513X05283508

http://jfi.sagepub.com
hosted at
Puzzles, Progress, Paradigms, and http://online.sagepub.com

Policy Implications
Daniel T. L. Shek
The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Shatin

The adoption of the open-door policy and economic reforms in China since the
late 1970s have placed Chinese families, which have deep roots in traditional
Chinese cultural values and Chinese socialist thoughts, under the strong influ-
ences of Western cultural values, market economy, and globalization. This arti-
cle examines the puzzles intrinsic to Chinese family research and the related
progress as highlighted by the articles in this special issue. Several issues
regarding research paradigms in Chinese family research are identified,
including quantitative versus qualitative approach, cross-sectional versus lon-
gitudinal study, simple versus complex statistical analyses, local versus com-
parative research, intuitive versus validated assessment tools, assessment
based on single perspective versus multiple perspectives, and indigenous ver-
sus imported family concepts and theories. Finally, the question of how
Chinese family research may inform public policies is discussed.

Keywords: Chinese; families; Chinese family research; research issues

F amilies are the basic building blocks of societies in different cultures.

With rising adolescent, marital, and family problems in the global
context, family research in different disciplines has increased substantially
in the past few decades. Computer searches up to June 2005 based on the
search term family showed that there were 160,467 citations in PsycINFO,
199,110 citations in Sociological Abstracts, 15,830 citations in Social Work
Abstracts, and 64,896 citations in ERIC. Unfortunately, the existing research

Author’s Note: This work was financially supported by the Research Grants Council of the Gov-
ernment of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, Hong Kong (Grant CUHK4293/03H)
and Wofoo Foundation. I wish to thank Britta Lee and Joyce Chow for their assistance in prepar-
ing this paper. Please address all correspondence to Daniel T. L. Shek, Social Welfare Prac-
tice and Research Centre, Department of Social Work, The Chinese University of Hong Kong,
Shatin, Hong Kong; e-mail address: [email protected]

275
276 Journal of Family Issues

studies were predominantly conducted in the West. Using the search terms of
family and Chinese, an identical search showed that there were 1,864, 3,113,
104, and 505 citations in PsycINFO, Sociological Abstracts, Social Work
Abstracts, and ERIC, respectively. These figures clearly suggest that there is
a strong need to exert additional effort to conduct Chinese family research.
There are several reasons why more attention should be placed on re-
search based on Chinese families. First, the size of Chinese population war-
rants research attention. The World Population Clock (2005) showed that the
population of China was 1,298,847,624 in 2004, which was roughly one fifth
of the world’s population in 2004. The implication of these figures is that if
any theory is claimed to be universally applicable, relevant data from Chi-
nese people must be collected. Second, China has a history of more than
5,000 years, and family has been strongly emphasized in the Chinese culture.
This emphasis is clearly reflected in the popular Chinese saying of “xiu shen,
qi jia, zhi guo, ping tian xia” (if there is light in the soul, there will be beauty
in the person; if there is beauty in the person, there will be harmony in the
house; if there is harmony in the house, there will be order in the nation; if
there is order in the nation, there will be peace in the world). Obviously, Chi-
nese family values and beliefs provide food for thoughts for family research-
ers and practitioners in non-Western cultures. Finally, with the establishment
of a socialist political system in 1949, development of the Cultural Revolu-
tion in the mid-1960s to mid-1970s, and adoption of the open-door policy
and economic reforms in China since the late 1970s, it is important to exam-
ine how Chinese family as a social institution has been transformed in the
past decades.
From a historical perspective, several sources of influences have shaped
the development of Chinese families and related family processes in the con-
temporary era. With a history of more than 5,000 years, traditional Chinese
cultural values closely related to Confucian, Buddhist, and Taoist thoughts
constitute the fundamental influence of Chinese families. A survey of the lit-
erature shows that there are several interesting features intrinsic to traditional
Chinese families (e.g., Shek, 2001; Shek & Lai, 2000). First, under the Con-
fucian concept of “wu lun” (five cardinal relations), there was strong empha-
sis on filial piety, as shown in the saying of “bai xing xiao wei xian” (filial
piety ranks the top in all behavior). For examples, children were expected to
take care of their aging parents, and there was a strong cultural expectation in
the traditional Chinese culture that family members in different generations
should live together (i.e., patrilocal emphasis). In addition, sons were ex-
pected to bring honor to the family and continue the family name (and even
the country’s name), as exemplified by the saying of “bu xiao you san, wu
hou wei da” (among the three nonfilial acts, childlessness is the most serious
 Shek / Chinese Family Research 277

one). In fact, according to “qi chu zhi tiao” (seven conditions under which a
man could divorce his wife), a husband should divorce his wife if the wife
bore no son.
Second, with reference to the five cardinal relations (wu lun), children
were socialized to obey their parents unconditionally, as exemplified by the
saying of “fu yao zi si, zi bu neng bu si” (if a father wants the child to die, the
child cannot have the option of not dying). Besides, traditional Chinese par-
ents emphasized the supremacy and overriding role of the parents (Yang,
1981), as revealed in the saying of “tian xia wu bu shi zhi fu mu” (there is no
faulty parent in this world). Basically, children had little personal space such
as having their views and privacy rights in their upbringing.
Third, gender role differentiation was great in the traditional Chinese cul-
ture, and children were socialized to identify with traditional gender roles.
This emphasis can be reflected in the popular saying of “nan zhu wai, nu zhu
nei” (men take care of things outside the family whereas women take care of
things inside the family). In addition, husbands were regarded as “yi jia zhi
zhu” (master of the family) and wives were taught to be “chu jia cong fu” (a
married woman should obey her husband) in the traditional Chinese culture.
The second source of influence of contemporary Chinese families is the
political system in China. With the establishment of socialist and Maoist
regime since 1949, the role of the family has changed in a drastic manner.
Basically, there were two major changes since the establishment of the
socialist political and economic systems. First, driven by the force of “class
struggle” and the sacred mission to liberate the oppressed, the traditional
family system that was closely related to the feudal and landlord systems was
severely challenged. For examples, the rights of children and women after
1949 were given greater attention as compared to the pre-1949 era. Second,
Chinese socialists have emphasized the overriding importance of the State,
and the interest of the State always takes precedence over the interest of the
family. This emphasis can be clearly reflected in the saying of “die qin niang
qin bu ji mao zhu xi de en qing shen” (the closeness of the father and mother is
not as deep as the grace and love of Chairman Mao) in the era of Cultural
Revolution. Another striking example is that faced with the pressure arising
from the growing population, the “one-child policy” has shaped the ecology
of Chinese families in the past decades.
The influences of Maoist and socialist thoughts on Chinese families might
perpetuate if China adopted a closed-door policy. However, with the gradual
opening up of the country, increased contacts with foreign countries, and
implementation of economic reforms, there are three new emerging influ-
ences that have shaped Chinese families. First, there are research findings
showing that traditional Chinese family values have gradually been replaced
278 Journal of Family Issues

by Western family values. Shek (1996) reported that Chinese parents low-
ered their expectation that children should take care of their parents when
they grow old. In addition, socialization practices have changed to be more
child centered, with parents showing lenient, relaxed, and even loose parent-
ing behavior (Shek, 1995b, 2000, in press). Furthermore, more egalitarian
gender roles have replaced the traditional gender roles in Chinese marital
relationships.
Second, with the intensification of economic reforms, Chinese families
have been more susceptible to the influences of economic changes. Although
economic reforms have brought forth a higher level of quality of living, fam-
ily, marital, and parenting problems (such as intergenerational conflict, lack
of care for old people, marital disruption, and parent-child relational con-
flicts) have also increased as a result of economic reforms. Furthermore,
issues of unemployment and economic disadvantage, which should be theo-
retically nonexistent in socialist systems, have become more prevalent in
contemporary China.
Finally, the increasing pace of globalization has created two effects on
Chinese families. First, more Chinese families have migrated to Western
countries. As migration represents “culture shock” within the family, there is
a need for Chinese families to adapt to non-Chinese contexts. One relevant
issue that should be addressed is how the family members would preserve
their ethnic identities. Another impact of globalization is that work and fam-
ily are not separable, and that work can be an around-the-clock activity. In
other words, to do business in a more efficient manner, Chinese families
might have to sacrifice in this fast-changing world.
In short, the preceding discussion outlines the two backbone elements of
Chinese families: traditional Chinese cultural influence of more than 5,000
years and the socialist and Maoist influences of more than half a century.
With the adoption of the open-door policy and economic reform policy for
roughly a quarter of a century, there have been gradual changes in Chinese
families from emphases on traditional Chinese thoughts, collectivism, ex-
tended families, preference for many children (especially sons), and parent
centeredness in the socialization process to emphases on Western thoughts,
individualism, nuclear families, nonpreference for many children, and child
centeredness in the socialization process.
Against this background of change, there are several puzzles concerning
Chinese families that demand answers from social scientists. The fundamen-
tal puzzle is—what is the nature of contemporary Chinese families and the
related family processes in such fast-changing societal and international con-
ditions? Under this puzzle and with reference to the above-mentioned influ-
ences of and changes in Chinese families, some specific questions should be
 Shek / Chinese Family Research 279

asked. These questions include the following: How has the one-child policy
affected Chinese families? How do Chinese married couples look at infertil-
ity and adoption? How has the parent-child relationship been transformed
under the changing macro societal conditions? How do Chinese married cou-
ples look at gender roles in the family? How do children of migrated Chinese
families preserve their ethnic identity? How has globalization affected Chi-
nese family life? In view of the paucity of research studies on Chinese fami-
lies, we must admit that we have few answers to the specific questions sub-
sumed under this broad puzzle.
The second puzzle concerns the factors that determine Chinese family
processes and related phenomena. Adopting an ecological perspective, it is
exciting to examine how factors in different systems, including personal,
familial, social, community, societal, national, and international contexts
might influence individual, dyadic, and systemic behavior in the family sys-
tem. For example, it is important to ask whether Chinese family processes
(such as views on adoption) are different in urban and rural areas and in fami-
lies in different social classes. Under the influence of globalization, we
should also examine how work affects Chinese families.
The final puzzle concerns the question of whether Western theories and
research findings can be applied to Chinese people (i.e., universal applica-
tion of Western concepts and theories). The basic question is how Western
theories and research findings that are primarily based on individualistic val-
ues are applicable to Chinese families that are primarily guided by collec-
tivistic ideology. Furthermore, one should explore how indigenous Chinese
concepts about family, marriage, and parenting may contribute to our under-
standing of Chinese families and construction of related models. While there
are some studies supporting applicability of Western theories to Chinese
people (e.g., Shek, 2002a), there are still many remaining puzzles.
Against this background, the articles in this special issue on Chinese fam-
ily research represent an excellent effort to provide some answers to the
above puzzles. In the article by Francine M. Deutsch, filial piety and patri-
lineality are examined with reference to China’s one-child policy. This arti-
cle suggests that patrilineal norms are weak in contemporary Chinese fami-
lies and that the one-child policy has undermined patrilineal norms. The
issue of child adoption in contemporary rural China was examined in the arti-
cle by Weiguo Zhang. The study showed that gender preference for males
(i.e., adopted son) still persisted, and relative to state policies, individual de-
sires exerted a stronger influence on adoption decisions.
Based on the perceptions of parents and adolescent children, Shengming
Tang and Xiaoping Dong examined privacy rights in Shanghai, China. In
their study, they found that perceptions of privacy differed between genera-
280 Journal of Family Issues

tions, educational level, and gender. In the next article, Ellen Efron Pimentel
examined gender ideology, household behavior, and backlash in urban Chi-
nese couples. It is interesting to note, their findings showed that while
women held egalitarian values across cohorts, men’s identification with egal-
itarian gender attitudes appeared to decline across cohorts.
The last two articles in the special issue are concerned with the issue of
globalization. The role of families in ethnic identity formation during adoles-
cence was examined by Adriana J. Umaña-Taylor, Ruchi Bhanot, and Nana
Shin. Utilizing an ecological framework, the authors examined ethnic iden-
tity in adolescents of Asian Indian, Chinese, Filipino, Vietnamese, and Sal-
vadoran descent. Using sophisticated statistical analyses, the authors con-
cluded that ethnic socialization within the family played a significant role in
shaping ethnic identity formation for all adolescents, regardless of ethnic
background. Finally, Amy Wharton and Mary Blair-Loy conducted a cross-
national study of employees’ concerns on long work hours and family life
based on participants from the United States, London, and Hong Kong. They
found that compared with men, women experienced higher levels of work
conflict and that Hong Kong–based respondents were more likely than those
in the United States and England to worry about work-family conflict.
Theoretically, the articles included in this special issue provide some sup-
port to the Western theories and research findings. For example, the differ-
ences between parents and adolescents on their perceptions of privacy rights
(article by Tang and Dong) are generally consistent with the Western re-
search findings on parent-adolescent differences in their perceptions of par-
enting issues. In the study by Umaña-Taylor et al., the finding that familial
socialization is intimately linked to ethnic identity formation also provides
support for the generalizability of the ecological approach. The finding by
Wharton and Blair-Loy that women experienced higher levels of role con-
flict in their work and family than did men is also consistent with the finding
that women are “losers” in the marital relationship (Shek, 1995a) and the
notion of “gendered society” (Shehan & Kammeyer, 1997). Nevertheless,
the phenomenon of men’s “regression” in their identification with egalitar-
ian values in the study by Pimentel cannot be adequately accommodated
with the existing Western theoretical frameworks and the weakening of
patrilineal norms shown in the study by Deutsch requires further theoretical
examination.
There are several methodological features of these studies, and the related
research issues should be carefully considered by researchers on Chinese
family research. First, quantitative and mixed research approaches within the
spirit of critical realism were primarily adopted by the authors of the articles.
While postpositivistic approach represents the dominant research paradigm
 Shek / Chinese Family Research 281

in social science research, its limitations should be duly acknowledged.

Methodologically, it would be illuminating if qualitative research adopting
constructionist orientation could be strengthened in future. The use of quali-
tative research can be regarded as particularly useful to look at the “insider”
rather than the “outsider” accounts of Chinese family behavior and related
phenomena. However, a thorny issue that qualitative family researchers
should pay attention to is how the quality of qualitative family studies can
possibly be enhanced (Shek, Tang, & Han, 2005).
Second, the studies in this special issue represent cross-sectional studies
of Chinese families. Although the sample by Pimentel was randomly drawn
and there were several cohorts involved, the findings were not longitudinal in
nature. With reference to Shek’s (2002a) comment that there are very few
longitudinal family studies in the Chinese culture, it is obvious that more lon-
gitudinal studies should be carried out. There are at least two reasons why
longitudinal family studies should be conducted. First, longitudinal studies
can help researchers to understand changes in Chinese family phenomena.
This is particularly important in view of the fast-changing societal and eco-
nomic conditions in China. Second, longitudinal studies can enable re-
searchers to assess the predictors of family processes in Chinese families.
For example, without longitudinal studies, it would be quite impossible to
examine how economic disadvantage might transform family and parenting
processes in poor Chinese families.
The third feature of the studies is that with the exception of the article by
Umaña-Taylor et al., conventional statistical analyses including frequency
analyses, t test, ANOVAs, and OLS regression analyses were carried out.
Although it is perfectly legitimate to use such conventional statistics to
answer the related questions, their limitations should be realized. In the first
place, researchers cannot rely on conventional statistical analyses to look at
multiple indicators and latent variables that are important variables to be
considered in social science research. In addition, goodness-of-fit assess-
ment of the statistical models is not commonly available in conventional sta-
tistical analyses. Finally, conventional statistical analyses usually can only
give some “exploratory” rather than “confirmatory” answers to the research
questions.
Fourth, four studies in this special issue were conducted in mainland
China, and two studies (one on ethnic identity and another one on long work
hours) included participants from different places and/or with different eth-
nicities. Conceptually speaking, if a research study is claimed to be univer-
sally valid, it must be generalizable to different participants at different times
in different places (Walsh, 1993). As such, studies comparing participants
with different backgrounds are indispensable. Basically, there are two levels
282 Journal of Family Issues

at which comparative family studies should be carried out. First, findings

based on Chinese people are compared to findings obtained from non-
Chinese people, as shown in the study on ethnic identity formation in adoles-
cents in different ethnic groups (study by Umaña-Taylor et al.) and Wharton
and Blair-Loy’s study of long work hours in different places. Second,
because China is a big country and there are regional differences involving
different ethnic groups, studies involving participants from different parts
of China are also important (i.e., comparative studies within the Chinese
contexts).
Fifth, with reference to the studies that adopted a quantitative approach,
it is obvious that few validated tools have been used. According to Shek
(2002b), there were few validated Chinese assessment measures and effort to
validate the developed measures was inadequate. Phillips, West, Shen, &
Zheng (1998) observed that the lack of family assessment tools has severely
hindered the development of family service but that “unfortunately, few cli-
nicians or researchers go to the trouble of rigorously assessing the psycho-
metric properties of the translated instruments in the target culture” (p. 105).
Hence, another important area for development in Chinese family research is
on the development of validated Chinese family measures.
Another related methodological feature of the studies included in this spe-
cial issue is that Western measures and concepts were used to examine Chi-
nese family phenomena. For example, family privacy was operationalized in
terms of Western conceptions of privacy rights in the study by Tang and
Dong. Similarly, concepts derived from the Western literature were used to
examine long work hours and family life in the study by Wharton and Blair-
Loy. While it is common for social scientists to use “imported” Western con-
cepts to study Chinese behavior and phenomena, it is important to reflect on
whether such imported concepts really can capture Chinese family phenom-
ena. Essentially, the issue that should be addressed is whether an “emic” or
“etic” approach should be used to examine Chinese family phenomena.
Finally, the studies by Pimentel and by Tang and Dong clearly indicate the
importance of involving different members in Chinese family studies. In the
former study, differences between parents and adolescents on perceptions of
privacy rights were found. In the latter study, differences between husbands
and wives on egalitarian attitudes were revealed. In the rest of the studies in
this special issue, researchers only assessed their research topics from a sin-
gle perspective, such as the assessment of children’s view of patrilineal
norms in Deutsch’s study and adolescents’ views of ethnic identity in the
study by Umaña-Taylor et al. Because family matters might be viewed differ-
ently by different members in the family, there is a need to gauge the views of
different family members.
 Shek / Chinese Family Research 283

To what extent is the value of conducting Chinese family research? For

skeptics about social research, they may argue that research is basically
window dressing and politically laden. However, for those who believe in
evidence-based social policy and service implications, there are three rea-
sons why Chinese family research should be conducted, and these justifica-
tions can be seen in the current research studies. First, Chinese family
research can demystify myths about Chinese families and enhance our
understanding of the related phenomena. For example, the study by Deutsch
showed that compared with those with siblings, only children were equally
likely to plan on helping their parents, a finding that does not support the “lit-
tle emperors” syndrome of only children. Second, Chinese family research
can enable policy makers to understand the needs of Chinese families. For
example, because there is no comprehensive family policy in Hong Kong, the
study by Wharton and Blair-Loy clearly suggests that Hong Kong people and
the government should pay more attention to the issue of working hours and
the development of family-friendly policies. Besides, the studies by Zhang
and by Pimentel also point out the issue of gender inequality in adoption
preference and household behavior that suggest that more public education
should be done. Finally, Chinese family research in the context of social ser-
vices can give policy makers, service providers, and the public information
about the effectiveness of Chinese family services. Unfortunately, as com-
mented by Shek, Lam, and Tsoi (2004), the development of research evaluat-
ing Chinese family policies and services was very slow and evidence-based
social service in Hong Kong was still underdeveloped.
With reference to the articles in this special issue, this article gives a rough
contour of different parameters of Chinese family research. This brief article
outlines the importance of Chinese family research and the sources of influ-
ences that have shaped the development of Chinese family research. Against
this background and with reference to the articles included in this special
issue, the puzzles, progress, methodological issues, and public policy impli-
cations related to Chinese family research are highlighted. In view of the
paucity of Chinese family research in the social science literature, the articles
included in this special issue can be regarded as constructive responses and
pioneering additions to the literature on Chinese family research.

References
Phillips, M. R., West, C. L., Shen, Q., & Zheng, Y. P. (1998). Comparison of schizophrenic
patients’ families and normal families in China, using Chinese version of FACES-II and the
Family Environment Scales. Family Process, 37, 95-106.
284 Journal of Family Issues

Shehan, C. L., & Kammeyer, K. C. W. (1997). Marriages and the families: Reflections of a
gendered society. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
Shek, D. T. L. (1995a). Gender differences in marital adjustment and marital satisfaction in Chi-
nese married adults. Sex Roles, 32(11/12), 699-715.
Shek, D. T. L. (1995b). Perceptions of parental treatment of Chinese adolescents: Are Chinese
fathers stricter and less kind than the mothers? Journal of Genetic Psychology, 156(2), 175-
190.
Shek, D. T. L. (1996). Perceptions of the value of children in Chinese parents in Hong Kong.
Journal of Psychology, 130(5), 561-569.
Shek, D. T. L. (2000). Chinese adolescents’perceptions of parental differences in parenting char-
acteristics, parent-adolescent communication and parent-adolescent relationship. Adoles-
cence, 35, 135-146.
Shek, D. T. L. (2001). Chinese adolescents and their parents’ views on a happy family: Implica-
tions for family therapy. Family Therapy, 28, 73-103.
Shek, D. T. L. (2002a). Parenting characteristics and parent-adolescent conflict: A longitudinal
study in the Chinese culture. Journal of Family Issues, 23, 189-208.
Shek, D. T. L. (Ed.). (2002b). Research on social work practice in Chinese communities [Special
issue]. Research on Social Work Practice, 12.
Shek, D. T. L. (in press). Perceived parental behavioral control and psychological control in Chi-
nese adolescents in Hong Kong. American Journal of Family Therapy.
Shek, D. T. L., & Lai, M. F. (2000). Conceptions of an ideal family in Confucian thoughts: Impli-
cations for individual and family counseling. Asian Journal of Counseling, 7(2), 85-104.
Shek, D. T. L., Lam, M. C., & Tsoi, K. W. (2004). Evidence-based practice in Hong Kong. In
B. Thyer & M. A. F. Kazi (Eds.), International perspectives on evidence-based practice in
social work (pp. 167-181). London: Venture Press.
Shek, D. T. L., Tang, V., & Han, X. Y. (2005). Evaluation of evaluation studies using qualitative
research methods in the social work literature (1990-2003): Evidence that constitutes a
wake-up call. Research on Social Work Practice, 15, 180-194.
Walsh, F. (1993). Normal family processes. New York: Guilford.
World Population Clock. (2005). The world population clock. Retrieved June 30, 2005, from
http://princeton.edu/clock
Yang, K. S. (1981). The formation and change of Chinese personality: A cultural-ecological per-
spective. Acta Psychologica Taiwanica, 23, 39-55.