Transcript Slide 1

Contexts of Development:
Parents and poverty
Questions











What impact does poverty have on children?
What do within-child designs contribute to understanding the effects of poverty?
Are the effects of poverty (and the estimated effects of a reduction in poverty) greater or
less if the child's caregiver has a partner? if the child's caregiver is employed? What
accounts for these effects?
What are the effects of familial instability on children's adjustment problems?
How does parental work stress impact the parent-child relationship?
How is the quantity and quality of child care associated with peer competence?
Specifically, how does experience in child-care settings impact observed skill in peer
play? And, what impact does quality of child care have on socioemotional and peer
outcomes?
NEW: What are risk factors for high SES high schoolers Are they the same or different
than those of low SES high-schoolers?
What are two dimensions of parenting and how do they combine to form three-four
styles of parenting?
What are the characteristics of the three main styles of parenting?
What are the characteristics of children raised with those styles?
How would you characterize your own parents' parenting style and what style of
parenting would you favor as a parent?
The Big Picture: Psychosocial
ecology of human development

Physical and social circumstances are likely
to be the among the strongest predictors of
socioemotional development
–

divorce/remarriage, beginning and changing
schools, economic upturns/downturns -
Are these direct or indirect effects?
–
The emotional impact of the divorce or the
downturn in standard of living?
Policy Implications
Researchers can’t hide in the lab, but they
should not be overly prescriptive
 They should understand that policy can
have unintended repercussions for diverse
parties

–
–
–
attachment and daycare
adoption
maternal drug use
•
Thompson
Some poverty statistics in U.S.

In 2011, 16.1 million (22.0 percent) children under
the age of 18 were in poverty.
http://feedingamerica.org/hunger-in-america/hunger-facts/hunger-and-poverty-statistics.aspx
–

Children living in poverty more likely to have problems in school, earn less as adults, more likely to be teenage parents
16.7 million children under 18 in the United States
live in households where they are unable to
consistently access enough nutritious food
necessary for a healthy life—food
insecure
68% of children live in married-couple families
http://feedingamerica.org/hunger-in-america/hunger-facts/hunger-and-poverty-statistics.aspx

–
–

Single and unmarried couple families likely to be poorer
Only 8% of kids living in married-couple families lived in poverty
14% (10 million kids) have no health insurance
•
medialab.scu.edu/psychology/faculty/turdan/developmental%20ppts/contexts%20of%20development.ppt
Poverty Rates by Age
Poverty Rates highest for
children
http://www.statehealthfact
s.org/comparemapdetail.js
p?ind=10&cat=1&sub=2&
yr=274&typ=2
Poverty Rate for children
(2011)
http://www.statehealthfact
s.org/comparemapdetail.js
p?ind=10&cat=1&sub=2&
yr=274&typ=2
Consequences of poverty

Worse health, lower cognitive functioning
–

Most consistent finding is for lower academic
achievement
Depends on persistence, depth, and age
–
Longer, deeper poverty at early age is the worst
How poverty affects
development






Lack of warmth in parent-child relationship; fewer
educational opportunities at home
Lower quality childcare outside of home
Economic pressure creates conflict in the home
Lower parental physical, mental health; worse
relations with child
Bad neighborhoods, schools
Genetics? Mentally unstable, low IQ leads to
poverty, passed to kids?
–
–
Duncan, G. J., & Brooks-Gunn, J. (2000). Family poverty, welfare reform, and child development. Child
Development, 71(1), 188-196. doi: 10.1111/1467-8624.00133
Duncan, G. J., Yeung, W. J., Brooks-Gunn, J., & Smith, J. R. (1998). How much does childhood poverty affect
the life chances of children? American Sociological Review, 63(3), 406-423. doi: 10.2307/2657556
Dynamic associations between family income
and child
 “Children
had fewer externalizing
problems during times when their
families' incomes were relatively high
than during times when their families'
incomes were relatively low
–
the estimated benefits of increased
income were greatest for children who
were chronically poor.
•
N = 1,132
•
Dearing, E., K. McCartney, et al. (2006). "Within-child associations between
family income and externalizing and internalizing problems." Developmental
Psychology 42(2): 237-252.
Income strongly associated with problems
when chronically poor children's mothers
were partnered and employed
Why?
Familial Instability

“There are associations between the degree of
environmental instability and difficulties in
adjustment, such that children exposed to higher
levels of family instability (e.g., more frequent
separations from parent figures and more frequent
residential moves) show worse adjustment across
a variety of developmental domains. greater
attention in future research on child and
adolescent adjustment.”
•
Adam, E. K. (2004). Beyond Quality:. Parental and Residential Stability and
Children's Adjustment. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 13(5),
210-213.
Parental work stress…




Indirect effects of parental work stress on
children’s and adolescents’ adjustment
“Work stress is linked to parents’ feelings of
overload and strain, which in turn predict lower
parent-child acceptance and higher conflict…
Processes that in turn are related to less positive
adjustment of children and adolescents.
In the face of high work stress, withdrawing from
family involvement may be adaptive in the short
run but ultimately problematic.”
–
Crouter, A. C., & Bumpus, M. F. (2001). Linking Parents' Work Stress to Children's and Adolescents' Psychological
Adjustment. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 10(5), 156-159.
Rich and poor

‘614 sixth graders from two communities, one low and the
other high
–



Outcomes: subjective well-being and school competence.
Very affluent children can perceive their parents as
emotionally and physically unavailable to the same degree
as youth in serious poverty.
Closeness to parents was beneficial for all, just as criticism
was deleterious.
Parents' physical absence (e.g., at dinner) connoted
vulnerability for distress and for poor school performance
in both groups.
–
Even after considering the quality of parent-child
relationships
•
Luthar, S. S. and S. J. Latendresse (2005). "Comparable "risks" at the socioeconomic status extremes: Preadolescents' perceptions of
parenting." Development and Psychopathology 17(1): 207-230.
Problems of the rich





‘302 6th & 7th-graders in an affluent, suburban
community showed:
high rates of clinically significant depressive
symptoms among older girls,
links between various internalizing symptoms and
substance use among both boys and girls,
peer approval of substance use among older boys.
Associations between achievement pressures
(particularly excessive perfectionistic strivings),
and isolation from parents (particularly low
perceived closeness to mothers).
•
Luthar, S. S. and B. E. Becker (2002). "Privileged but pressured?:
A study of affluent youth." Child Development 73(5): 1593-1610.
Substance Use Among Affluent,
Suburban High School Students

Clusters reporting escalating, declining, and
persistently high use consistently demonstrated
relatively poorer psychosocial adjustment -- when
compared with a cluster of students reporting
minimal use.
–
Other dimensions of psychosocial adjustment remained
relatively stable despite changes in substance
use…social safety net?
•
McMahon, T. J. and S. S. Luthar (2006). "Patterns and
Correlates of Substance Use Among Affluent, Suburban
High School Students." Journal of Clinical Child and
Adolescent Psychology 35(1): 72-89.
Its parental criticism and absence –
not child overscheduling
•



.
Negligible evidence for deleterious effects of high
extracurricular involvement per se.
Far more strongly implicated was perceived parent
criticism for both girls and boys as well as the absence of
after-school supervision.
Low parent expectations connoted significant vulnerability
especially for boys.
–
At least among early adolescents, converging scientific and media
reports may have scapegoated extracurricular involvements, to
some degree, as an index of ubiquitous achievement pressures in
affluent communities.
•
Luthar, S. S., K. A. Shoum, et al. (2006). "Extracurricular
Involvement Among Affluent Youth: A Scapegoat for "Ubiquitous
Achievement Pressures"?" Developmental Psychology 42(3): 583597
Related to disabilities
Is emotion relevant to these kids?
‘Parents of children with developmental
delays reported lower prioritisation of
emotion & focused less on emotion during
discourse than parents of controls.
 Pathway from developmental status through
prioritisation to emotion focus.
 Emotion focus predicted children’s social
skills as reported on by multiple informants.

Direct & emotion-mediated paths
www.fhi.se/upload/BestPractice/FR5101_BHagekull.ppt
Two dimensions of parenting

Parental responsiveness (parental warmth or
supportiveness)
–
"the extent to which parents intentionally foster individuality,
self-regulation, and self-assertion by being attuned,
supportive, and acquiescent to children’s special needs and
demands.

Parental demandingness (behavioral control)

"the claims parents make on children to become integrated
into the family whole, by their maturity demands,
supervision, disciplinary efforts and willingness to confront
the child who disobeys“
faculty.augie.edu/~pchanavan/family/chapter3.ppt
–
Parent Styles

Indulgent parents (also referred to as "permissive" or
"nondirective") "are more responsive than they are
demanding. They are nontraditional and lenient, do not
require mature behavior, allow considerable self-regulation,
and avoid confrontation". Two types:
–

democratic parents, who, though lenient, are more conscientious,
engaged, and committed to the child, and nondirective parents.
Children and adolescents from indulgent homes (high in
responsiveness, low in demandingness)
–
more likely to be involved in problem behavior and perform less
well in school, but they have higher self-esteem, better social
skills, and lower levels of depression.
Parenting Styles

Authoritarian parents are highly demanding and directive, but
not responsive. "They are obedience- and status-oriented, and
expect their orders to be obeyed without explanation".
–

Provide well-ordered and structured environments with clearly stated
rules. Two types: nonauthoritarian-directive, who are directive, but not
intrusive or autocratic in their use of power, and authoritarian-directive,
who are highly intrusive.
Children and adolescents from authoritarian families (high in
demandingness, but low in responsiveness) tend to perform
moderately well in school and be uninvolved in problem
behavior, but they have poorer social skills, lower selfesteem, and higher levels of depression.
Parenting Styles


Uninvolved parents are low in both responsiveness
and demandingness. In extreme cases, this
parenting style might encompass both rejecting–
neglecting and neglectful parents, although most
parents of this type fall within the normal range.
Children and adolescents whose parents are
uninvolved perform most poorly in all domains.
Parenting styles--Baumrind

Authoritarian
–
–
–

Authoritative
–
–
–

“Because I said so!”
Punitive, controlling parenting strategies
Obedience oriented
Structure and rules with an emphasis on reasoning
Less likely to use physical punishment
Involve children in decision, rule making
Permissive
–
–
Loose structure
Children given much leeway in deciding activities, rules, and schedules
Which parenting style is best?

Outcomes associated with different styles
–
Authoritarian




–
Authoritative


–
Greater self-reliance and confidence
More sociable, willing to explore
Permissive


Lack of social competence
Increased aggression among boys
Withdrawal from social contact
Heteronomous morality
Immature, impulsive
Limitations of the research
–
–
Culturally biased? (research based primarily on white, middle class)
Confusion of causality? Kids may elicit different parenting styles
Parenting: Current view

What particular features of a parenting style
- including affective behavior - produces
outcomes in particular circumstances.
–
–
More flexibility for older adolescents
Group differences
 More
restrictive caregiving is seen as more loving
and has more positive outcomes among AfricanAmerican teens (Mason’s work)
Which parenting style were you
raised with?
Which do you think produces the
best kind of kids?
If you become a parent will you
raise your kids the same way
your parents raised you?
What will you do differently?
What will you do similarly?
Self-determination theory model
of internalization

Conditional negative regard predicts feelings of
resentment toward parents, then predicts dysregulation
of negative emotions and academic disengagement;


Conditional positive regard predicts internal
compulsion, which then predict suppressive
regulation of negative emotions and grade-focused
academic engagement;
Autonomy support predicts sense of choice, which
then predicts integrated regulation of negative
emotions and interest-focused academic
engagement.
Overview
Paths
Parenting and emotion

Try to achieve goals with/for offspring is
very emotional!
–
–

Discipline strategies are modified by perception
of child’s temperament.
The actual process is bidirectional
Mutual expectations impact next
interactions so that relationships impact
relationships
Covariance of genotype
&environment




Heritable characteristics of children evoke strong and
specific responses from their parents…
Moreover, heritable traits that influence parenting are
transmitted to children and influence children’s adjustment.
Thus, genetically influenced evocative processes from
children and parental-transmission mechanisms influence
the covariances between measures of family relationships
and child development.
Intervention: alter parental responses to heritable
characteristics of children and influence the genetically
influenced ontogeny of parenting.
Fathers’ Influence on Children’s Development: The
Evidence from Two-Parent Families
Lewis & Lamb, 2003
“Forgotten Contributors to Child Development”
1. Is fathering equivalent to mothering?
2. Why do mothers have an edge?
3. Parent-infant attachments – mothers might have an
edge
4. Longitudinal research - emerging trend favoring
fathers

Consider two trends:
–
–
Mothers are more sensitive
Cultural variations
FARHAT
Childhood and Adolescence
Patterns in infancy continue on..
 Both equally involved in scholastic
activities
 Mothers spend more time with children than
fathers do
 In adolescence: fathers have more contact
with sons
 Adolescents report being closer to mothers

FARHAT
What Makes Fathers Different?



Paternal sensitivity – interaction between biology and
culture
Family system
– Marital dissatisfaction has a negative effect on parental
synchrony and infant-father attachment
– Fathers and mothers affect each other differently
Linking the family to wider culture – Dual-earner homes
– Both reported feeling anxious about leaving infant with
someone else
– Men were less sensitive to four-month olds
– Strong traditional cultures – e.g. in New Delhi
FARHAT
Longitudinal Research
Father’s hostility predicted:
 Degree of hostility and ego-resiliency at age 25
Father’s involvement predicted:
 Adult children’s satisfaction in
–
–



Spousal relationships
Self-reported parenting skills
Performance in national exams at age 16
Absence/presence of criminal record at 21
Positive correlations with later indices (age 33) of
psychosocial adjustment
FARHAT