Analyses. Across all three time points, participants were missing 13% of data on the Acrimony Scale. Estimation Maximisation was used to impute missing data. Descriptive statistics were used to assess progression to joint FDR, agreement within FDR, and satisfaction with FDR. Two-way repeated-measures univariate analyses of variance (ANOVAs) were performed to evaluate the short-term and medium-term effects of FDR participation and of reaching agreement in FDR on acrimony. These were performed for all parents who remained in the sample at Time 3 (n = 704) and for the ambivalent subgroup (n = 126). A Greenhouse-Xxxxxxx correction was used to interpret the ANOVAs because Xxxxxxx'x Test of Sphericity indicated that the assumption of sphericity was not met. Results A majority of participants (n = 604, or 85.8%) stated they were hoping to achieve a parenting agreement, while 159 (22.6%) wanted a property settlement (many clients attend for both parenting and property matters). A fifth (n = 126 participants, 17.9%) showed ambivalence to FDR (i.e., stated that their objectives in attending FDR included obtaining a certificate to proceed to court). Time 1, 2 & 3 assessments (126 ambivalent) 450 parents (64%) proceeded to joint FDR (73 or 58% of ambivalent parents) 254 parents (36%) did not proceed to joint FDR (53 or 42% of ambivalent parents) 299 parents (66%) reached full/ partial agreement (42 or 58% of ambivalent parents) 151 parents (34%) did not reach agreement (31 or 43% of ambivalent parents) Figure 1. Rates of participation and agreement in joint FDR for all parents (n = 704) and for ambivalent subgroup (n = 126) Participation in joint FDR Of the 704 parents who remained in the sample at Time 3, 450 (63.9%) participated in joint FDR. Just over half of these (n = 237; 52.7%) attended two or more joint sessions, and just under half (n = 213; 47.3%) attended only one joint session (mean joint sessions attended = 1.31, SD = 1.52, range 1–11). In the ambivalent subgroup, 73 parents (57.9%) had participated in joint FDR. Of these, a higher proportion attended only one joint session (n = 40; 54.8%), while fewer than half (n = 33; 45.2%) attended two or more joint sessions (mean joint sessions attended = 1.96, SD = 1.69, range 1–11.
Appears in 2 contracts
Analyses. Across all three time points, participants were missing 13% of data on the Acrimony Scale. Estimation Maximisation was used to impute missing data. Descriptive statistics were used to assess progression to joint FDR, agreement within FDR, and satisfaction with FDR. Two-way repeated-measures univariate analyses of variance (ANOVAs) were performed to evaluate the short-term and medium-term effects of FDR participation and of reaching agreement in FDR on acrimony. These were performed for all parents who remained in the sample at Time 3 (n = 704) and for the ambivalent subgroup (n = 126). A Greenhouse-Xxxxxxx correction was used to interpret the ANOVAs because Xxxxxxx'x Test of Sphericity indicated that the assumption of sphericity was not met. Results A majority of participants (n = 604, or 85.8%) stated they were hoping to achieve a parenting agreement, while 159 (22.6%) wanted a property settlement (many clients attend for both parenting and property matters). A fifth (n = 126 participants, 17.9%) showed ambivalence to FDR (i.e., stated that their objectives in attending FDR included obtaining a certificate to proceed to court). Time 1, 2 & 3 assessments (126 ambivalent) 450 parents (64%) proceeded to joint FDR (73 or 58% of ambivalent parents) 254 parents (36%) did not proceed to joint FDR (53 or 42% of ambivalent parents) 299 parents (66%) reached full/ partial agreement (42 or 58% of ambivalent parents) 151 parents (34%) did not reach agreement (31 or 43% of ambivalent parents) Figure 1. Rates of participation and agreement in joint FDR for all parents (n = 704) and for ambivalent subgroup (n = 126) Participation in joint FDR Of the 704 parents who remained in the sample at Time 3, 450 (63.9%) participated in joint FDR. Just over half of these (n = 237; 52.7%) attended two or more joint sessions, and just under half (n = 213; 47.3%) attended only one joint session (mean joint sessions attended = 1.31, SD = 1.52, range 1–11). In the ambivalent subgroup, 73 parents (57.9%) had participated in joint FDR. Of these, a higher proportion attended only one joint session (n = 40; 54.8%), while fewer than half (n = 33; 45.2%) attended two or more joint sessions (mean joint sessions attended = 1.96, SD = 1.69, range 1–11.
Appears in 1 contract
Samples: Participation, Agreement
