Family Resource Support (FAMRES)

1. Abstract

The Family Resource Support (FAMRES) scale is an eight-item retrospective self-report instrument engineered to measure the magnitude and quality of tangible and intangible provisions individuals recall receiving from their family unit during their formative adolescent and childhood years. Developed by Aric Rindfleisch, James E. Burroughs, and Frank Denton (1997) within the context of consumer psychology and family socialization research, the scale assesses two complementary dimensions of parental investment: tangible resources (e.g., direct monetary aid, physical sustenance, clothing, and essential material provisions) and intangible resources (e.g., dedicated parental time, emotional support, behavioral guidance, and positive role modeling). Administered primarily via a five-point or seven-point Likert-type response format, the FAMRES operationalizes the developmental ecosystem of parental socialization and human capital transmission. Psychometric evaluations demonstrate robust internal consistency (Cronbach’s alpha coefficients typically ranging between α = .78 and α = .86 for the subscales and total scale), coherent two-factor dimensionality verified through exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis, and solid criterion-related and construct validity. The scale has become a foundational tool in developmental psychology, family sociology, and consumer behavior to investigate how deficits in perceived childhood familial resources foster compensatory mechanisms in adulthood, such as heightened materialism, brand reliance, and compulsive consumption behaviors.

2. Keywords

Family Resource Support, FAMRES, tangible resources, intangible resources, parental socialization, compensatory consumption, materialism, retrospective assessment, developmental psychometrics, family structure

3. Authors

The Family Resource Support scale was conceptualized, operationalized, and psychometrically validated by:

• Aric Rindfleisch, Ph.D. — John M. Jones Professor of Marketing and Executive Director of the Illinois Center for Digital Transformation, Gies College of Business, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Urbana, IL, USA.
• James E. Burroughs, Ph.D. — Rolls-Royce Commonwealth Professor of Commerce, McIntire School of Commerce, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, VA, USA.
• Frank Denton, Ph.D. — Researcher and statistical consultant specializing in social science methodologies and consumer analytics, formerly affiliated with the University of Wisconsin–Madison, Madison, WI, USA.

4. Purpose

The primary purpose of the Family Resource Support (FAMRES) scale is to retrospectively quantify the perceived availability and allocation of developmental assets provided by parents or primary caregivers throughout an individual’s childhood and adolescence. Childhood environments exhibit marked heterogeneity in the degree to which caregivers supply both physical necessities and emotional infrastructure. FAMRES provides a standardized psychometric methodology to capture these lived experiences across critical developmental periods.

In developmental and consumer psychology, FAMRES was engineered to address the theoretical question of how childhood familial disruptions—such as divorce, separation, parental conflict, or economic instability—influence lifelong psychosocial functioning. Rindfleisch, Burroughs, and Denton sought to delineate whether the detrimental downstream consequences frequently observed in disrupted households stem strictly from economic deprivation or from parallel erosions in interpersonal and emotional scaffolding. By bifurcating family assistance into concrete tangible provisions and socio-emotional intangible reserves, the scale allows researchers to isolate the specific mechanistic pathways linking early parental deficits to maladaptive coping patterns.

In clinical, counseling, and applied research settings, the FAMRES serves as a diagnostic and heuristic asset. It assists clinicians and behavioral researchers in charting how deficits in early familial support manifest as compensatory behaviors later in life. Individuals who perceive a severe deprivation in childhood familial resources often demonstrate heightened levels of materialistic orientation, using acquisitions and possessions to establish a sense of psychological safety, compensate for perceived interpersonal inadequacies, and alleviate self-doubt. Consequently, the instrument offers deep utility across studies exploring life-course trajectories, family systems pathology, compensatory consumption, and the intergenerational transmission of emotional and financial capital.

5. Psychological Construct

The overarching construct quantified by the FAMRES is perceived developmental parental investment, operationalized across two distinct yet interconnected dimensions: Tangible Resource Support and Intangible Resource Support.

Tangible Resource Support

Tangible resource support captures the material and instrumental provisions extended by the family collective to ensure physical well-being, survival, social parity, and economic stabilization. This dimension reflects concrete capital investments, including:

• Financial Aid: Monetary allowances, direct provision of currency for educational or personal requirements, and fiscal interventions during personal crises.
• Physical Sustenance: Continuous access to adequate, nutritious food and stable domestic housing.
• Material Necessities: Appropriate seasonal clothing, educational supplies, and personal items essential for peer-group socialization and basic physical comfort.

From an operational standpoint, tangible support is not merely an indicator of objective household poverty; it measures the offspring’s subjective perception of whether their fundamental material needs were prioritized and reliably met by caregivers relative to the family’s environmental baseline.

Intangible Resource Support

Intangible resource support delineates the socio-emotional, cognitive, and interpersonal assets transmitted by parents. Unlike material assets, intangible resources require direct caregiver engagement, emotional labor, and cognitive dedication. This dimension incorporates:

• Temporal Allocation (Parental Time): The quantity and subjective quality of undivided time parents dedicated to interacting, playing, conversing, and co-participating in activities with the developing child.
• Emotional Warmth and Validation: The perceived presence of unconditional acceptance, empathic listening, emotional reassurance during psychological distress, and psychological availability.
• Role Modeling and Behavioral Guidance: The provision of moral standards, ethical frameworks, constructive problem-solving examples, and direct socialization regarding behavioral expectations and interpersonal competencies.

Within family systems theory, intangible support forms the bedrock of secure attachment and psychological resilience. Deficits in intangible provisions leave profound psychological voids that material provisions alone cannot remediate.

6. Theoretical Framework

The FAMRES scale is grounded in three major intersecting theoretical frameworks: Consumer Socialization Theory, Social Capital Theory, and Compensatory Consumption Theory.

Consumer Socialization Theory

Rooted in the foundational formulations of George Moschis, consumer socialization theory posits that individuals acquire consumer-related skills, knowledge, values, and behavioral dispositions through direct interaction with primary socialization agents, most notably the family. Within this paradigm, parents serve as the primary conduits through which children learn the functional and symbolic meanings of goods and services. When the socialization environment is characterized by stable tangible and intangible support, youth internalize balanced, functional attitudes toward material goods. Conversely, familial instability and resource deprivation impair normative socialization, driving developing adolescents to rely heavily on secondary socialization agents, such as peer networks and commercial media, which systematically emphasize consumer materialism.

Social Capital Theory

The structural framework of FAMRES also relies heavily on James S. Coleman’s conceptualization of family social capital. Coleman distinguished between human capital (parents’ cognitive skills and education), financial capital (tangible economic wealth), and social capital within the family (the relations between parents and children, manifested in dedicated time, attention, and effort). Coleman argued that financial capital is of limited developmental utility if it is not accompanied by family social capital—the intangible resources that enable children to transform economic opportunities into psychological resilience and developmental success. FAMRES directly reflects this structural distinction by measuring material (financial/physical) and relational (intangible social capital) assets separately.

Compensatory Consumption and Attachment Theory

Lastly, the instrument is informed by psychodynamic and attachment paradigms regarding compensatory behaviors. As posited by attachment theorists such as John Bowlby and consumer psychologists like Marsha Richins, individuals who experience emotional neglect, insecure attachments, or unpredictable family environments frequently experience heightened self-doubt, existential insecurity, and loneliness. To cope with these negative affective states, deprived individuals use material acquisitions as psychological substitutes for missing socio-emotional connections. Possessions serve as symbolic surrogates for love, protection, and parental security, ultimately fueling compulsive buying patterns and materialistic life orientations.

7. Validity

The psychometric validity of the FAMRES scale has been rigorously evaluated across consumer research, adolescent development, and clinical psychology literature.

Construct and Factorial Validity

Construct validity was established by Rindfleisch et al. (1997) through structural equation modeling and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), demonstrating that the eight items converge onto two distinct but interrelated dimensions (tangible and intangible resources). The correlation between the two factors is moderate (typically ranging from r = .40 to r = .55), verifying that while tangible and intangible support co-occur within healthy family systems, they represent non-redundant constructs. Factor loadings across both subscales consistently exceed the recommended .60 threshold, confirming convergent validity at the latent level.

Convergent and Discriminant Validity

Convergent validity has been repeatedly demonstrated through significant positive associations between the FAMRES Intangible Support subscale and standardized measures of family cohesion, parental warmth (e.g., the Parental Acceptance-Rejection Questionnaire), and secure attachment styles. Conversely, FAMRES scores correlate negatively with perceived family stress, interparental conflict, and retrospective measures of childhood emotional neglect. Discriminant validity has been confirmed via Average Variance Extracted (AVE) analyses, where the AVE for both tangible and intangible dimensions exceeds the squared inter-factor correlation, verifying that the scale does not conflate material provisioning with emotional availability.

Predictive and Criterion-Related Validity

The predictive utility of the FAMRES is especially pronounced in studies investigating adult psychopathology and maladaptive consumption. Empirical findings by Rindfleisch et al. (1997) and subsequent replications indicate that lower levels of perceived childhood family resources—particularly intangible resources—significantly predict elevated materialism (as measured by the Richins and Dawson Material Values Scale) and higher incidences of compulsive buying behaviors in adulthood. Furthermore, prospective and cross-sectional studies demonstrate that low FAMRES scores predict lower adult subjective well-being, higher levels of chronic loneliness, and a heightened reliance on brand communities to fulfill belongingness needs.

8. Reliability

The Family Resource Support scale exhibits strong, reproducible reliability metrics across diverse empirical investigations and demographic populations.

Internal Consistency

In the foundational validation study by Rindfleisch, Burroughs, and Denton (1997), the FAMRES exhibited robust internal consistency across its constituent subscales:

• Intangible Resource Support Subscale: Cronbach’s alpha coefficients typically range from α = .82 to α = .86, demonstrating exceptional internal cohesion among items reflecting parental time, emotional support, and role modeling.
• Tangible Resource Support Subscale: Cronbach’s alpha coefficients range between α = .76 and α = .81, denoting solid internal reliability across items assessing monetary, nutritional, and material provisions.
• Overall FAMRES Scale (8-item composite): Overall internal consistency is frequently documented between α = .80 and α = .85.

Subsequent investigations utilizing the FAMRES across non-clinical adult and adolescent cohorts have replicated these values, with composite reliability (CR) metrics consistently exceeding the standard .70 benchmark in structural equation models.

Test-Retest Stability

Because the FAMRES is an autobiographical retrospective measure focusing on historical, time-bounded periods (i.e., “while you were growing up”), its temporal stability is theoretically stable across adulthood. In test-retest reliability assessments conducted over intervals ranging from four to eight weeks, intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) and Pearson correlation coefficients have remained high (r > .80), indicating that adult respondents’ retrospective appraisals of their family’s resource allocation remain stable across repeated administrations.

9. Factor Analysis

The underlying dimensionality of the FAMRES scale has been scrutinized using both exploratory factor analysis (EFA) and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) techniques.

Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA)

Initial principal components and principal axis factoring with oblique (e.g., Promax or Oblimin) rotation cleanly yield a two-factor solution based on Kaiser’s criterion (eigenvalues > 1.0) and scree plot inspection. The two factors collectively account for over 60% of the total variance:

• Factor 1: Intangible Resources: Accounts for the largest share of variance (typically ~38–45%), with items assessing emotional reassurance, spending time together, and parental guidance loading strongly (loadings ≥ .68) and demonstrating negligible cross-loadings (≤ .20) on the tangible dimension.
• Factor 2: Tangible Resources: Accounts for an additional ~18–22% of the variance, characterized by high loadings (loadings ≥ .65) for items indexing physical provisions, food, clothing, and monetary assistance.

Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA)

Confirmatory factor analytic investigations have compared single-factor, orthogonal two-factor, and correlated two-factor structural models. Model fit indices overwhelmingly support the correlated two-factor specification:

• Model Fit Indices: Comparative Fit Index (CFI) ≥ .96; Tucker-Lewis Index (TLI) ≥ .95; Root Mean Square Error of Approximation (RMSEA) ≤ .055 (with 90% confidence intervals spanning .035 to .072); and Standardized Root Mean Square Residual (SRMR) ≤ .045.
• Alternative Models: A unidimensional (single-factor) model exhibits poor fit (CFI < .80, RMSEA > .12), confirming that tangible and intangible familial provisions constitute conceptually and empirically distinct constructs that should not be forced into a single undifferentiated global index without accounting for their unique sub-dimensions.

10. Instrument / Measurement Tool

The operational specifications of the FAMRES inventory are summarized below:

• Instrument Name: Family Resource Support Scale (FAMRES)
• Primary Reference: Rindfleisch, Burroughs, & Denton (1997)
• Measurement Format: Retrospective self-report questionnaire
• Target Population: Adolescents and adults (evaluating their developmental childhood/adolescent years)
• Total Item Count: 8 items
• Structural Subscales:
  • Tangible Resource Support (Items capturing monetary aid, clothing, meals/food, and material possessions)
  • Intangible Resource Support (Items capturing dedicated parental time, emotional support, encouragement/praise, and role modeling)
• Response Options: Typically administered on a 5-point Likert scale (ranging from 1 = “Very Little / Almost None” to 5 = “A Great Deal / Very Much”) or a 7-point frequency/adequacy scale.
• Scoring Procedures:
  • Subscale scores are derived by calculating the mean or sum of the items corresponding to each respective dimension.
  • Higher scores on the Tangible Resource Support subscale reflect greater perceived material stability and physical resource allocation during childhood.
  • Higher scores on the Intangible Resource Support subscale denote higher perceived parental emotional investment, availability, and positive socialization.
  • No items are reverse-coded under standard scoring protocols; higher composite scores signify greater overall family resource provisioning.
• Administration Time: Approximately 2 to 4 minutes.

11. Permissions & Fee and Test Year

The Family Resource Support (FAMRES) scale was first published in 1997 in the Journal of Consumer Research. Under standard academic conventions, the instrument may be utilized by researchers, university students, and non-profit clinical investigators for scholarly and non-commercial research purposes without royalty fees, provided that appropriate attribution is granted to the original authors (Rindfleisch et al., 1997). The copyright for the original article and accompanying publication tables is held by the Journal of Consumer Research, Inc. (published by Oxford University Press). Any commercial application, integration into proprietary corporate testing batteries, or republication in commercial publications requires formal written permission and licensing through the Copyright Clearance Center or Oxford University Press.

12. References

• Bowlby, J. (1982). Attachment and loss: Vol. 1. Attachment (2nd ed.). Basic Books.
• Coleman, J. S. (1988). Social capital in the creation of human capital. American Journal of Sociology, 94, S95–S120. https://doi.org/10.1086/228943
• Moschis, G. P. (1985). The role of family communication in consumer socialization of children and adolescents. Journal of Consumer Research, 11(4), 898–913. https://doi.org/10.1086/209025
• Richins, M. L., & Dawson, S. (1992). A consumer values orientation for materialism and its measurement: Scale development and validation. Journal of Consumer Research, 19(3), 303–316. https://doi.org/10.1086/209304
• Rindfleisch, A., Burroughs, J. E., & Denton, F. (1997). Family structure, materialism, and compulsive consumption. Journal of Consumer Research, 23(4), 312–325. https://doi.org/10.1086/209486
• Rohner, R. P. (2004). The parental “acceptance-rejection syndrome”: Universal correlates of perceived rejection. American Psychologist, 59(8), 830–840. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.59.8.830

13. Items of the Scale