Family Obligation Test

The Family Obligation Test is a research-informed self-report profile based on psychometric methodology and relevant psychological research. The sections below summarize the academic background and explain how each result pattern should be read.

Academic Background

Based on the research of Alon Goldberg at Tel Hai Academic College, this profile summarizes the tested patterns as self-report facets rather than a diagnosis or formal assessment.

Duty First

Duty First is a family-obligation style that puts relatives' needs ahead of personal convenience when help feels morally required. High scorers tend to rearrange schedules, money, or life choices to support family in crises, even when the cost is real. Low scorers are more likely to treat family requests as one commitment among others and protect personal autonomy when the need is less urgent.

Boundary Line

Boundary Line is the tendency to protect personal plans, money, privacy, home life, and major choices when family requests press against autonomy. High scorers can still care about relatives, but they are more willing to say no, set conditions, or keep a decision intact when a request would take over their life. Low scorers are more likely to let family pressure reshape private decisions, even when doing so creates strain.

Resentful Giving

Resentful Giving is the pattern of helping family while feeling pressured, trapped, or underappreciated. High scorers tend to keep giving because refusal would create guilt or conflict, but the help leaves a residue of anger or unfairness. Low scorers are more likely to experience family support as chosen, manageable, or emotionally clean rather than as a debt that keeps growing.

Chosen Care

Chosen Care is the experience of finding meaning, pride, or identity in supporting family. High scorers tend to see dependable care as part of who they are and may value being trusted during crisis, routine need, or unpraised work. Low scorers are more likely to see family help as a task to manage, not a central source of purpose or self-respect.

Limitations

The Family Obligation Test is designed for self-understanding and comparison between result patterns. It should not be treated as a clinical, educational, or employment assessment.

References

• Fuligni, A. J., Tseng, V., & Lam, M. (1999). Attitudes toward Family Obligations among American Adolescents with Asian, Latin American, and European Backgrounds. Child Development, 70(4), 1030-1044.
• Marcoen, A. (1995). Filial maturity of middle-aged adult children in the context of parent care: Model and measures. Journal of Adult Development, 2(2), 125-136.
• Telzer, E. H., Gonzales, N., & Fuligni, A. J. (2013). Family Obligation Values and Family Assistance Behaviors: Protective and Risk Factors for Mexican-American Adolescents’ Substance Use. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 43(2), 270-283.
• Goldberg, A. (2022). Filial Maturity, Resolution of a Parent’s Disease, and Well-Being in Offspring of Parents Diagnosed with Alzheimer’s Disease. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 20(1), 761.
• Wakui, T. & Cheng, S. (2016). Filial Responsibility. In Encyclopedia of Geropsychology. Springer Singapore.