Instruments Measuring Father Involvement: A Scoping Review

Background and Purpose: The father's role and the extent of involvement with children shifted over the past several decades. Fathers went from being identified as sole breadwinners to active participants. Operationalization of father involvement has since broadened to include multiple dimensions of meaningful contributions by fathers to their children's development outside of residing with them and contributing financially. As researchers continue to study this phenomenon, scales are needed to measure father involvement. To provide a comprehensive overview of instruments that measure father involvement, the following questions were addressed: 1) what instruments have been developed to measure father involvement, and 2) what dimensions are captured in the scales?

Methods: The basis for this paper is a scoping review of the current instruments that measure father involvement. Consultation with the University of Kentucky's librarian assisted in locating electronic databases that included a comprehensive range of behavioral and social science publications. These included: APA PsychInfo, Health and Psychological Instruments, Psychology and Behavioral Sciences Collection, Social Work Abstracts, MEDLINE, and Sociological Collection. The earliest year of publication was restricted to 1970 to account for advances in this construct, with the following terms: (father OR dad OR male parent* OR male caregiv*) AND (invol* OR engag* OR involvement OR engagement OR active participant) AND (instrument OR scale OR tool OR index OR questionnaire OR measure OR measurement) AND (validit* OR development OR validation). Articles were excluded if (1) they were not in English and (2) the scale was not used to assess the concept of father involvement.

Results: The database search identified 1,207 records. After removing duplicates, 1035 studies were screened by their title and abstracts, and 817 were excluded based on the inclusion/exclusion criteria. A total of 25 studies were included in this review, which included 18 different instruments. Fourteen scales examined dimensions elucidated in previous models used to describe father involvement (i.e., the extent fathers are engaged, accessible, and responsible). Except for one scale, all incorporated moderating factors, inclusive of how accessible father-focused programs are and the nature of the clinician-father helping relationship, while seven identified cultural factors (stressors, diversity). Although several articles did not report the demographic characteristics of their sample, the majority of those who reported included Caucasian fathers. Lastly, most instruments measured father involvement in general; however, some scales were created for involvement with specific child populations, such as infant care during the first year postpartum, pediatric chronic disease, preschool-age children, children with developmental challenges, and health during preschool.

Conclusions and Implications: This study describes eighteen instruments and core features, with which father involvement can be measured from different perspectives and target populations (low-income, single-fathers, fathers with young children, etc.). This study offers providers and researchers a collection of instruments to utilize when working with families and investigating the phenomenon of father involvement. Additional research is needed to develop a holistic measurement for fatherhood and to psychometrically test scales for racially/ethnically diverse fathers and for interactions with older youth and teens.