Factors That Influence the Parent Child Bond Among Low Income Families
Curr Opin Psychol. Author manuscript; bachelor in PMC 2018 Jun one.
Published in concluding edited course as:
PMCID: PMC5423399
NIHMSID: NIHMS862490
Parenting and SES: relative values or indelible principles?
Abstract
The quality of parenting is a complex and multiply adamant construct that is strongly influenced by the larger ecological context in which it evolves. A substantial body of literature has documented associations betwixt socioeconomic status (SES) and parenting merely has been express in its consideration of factors that may explain or moderate the nature of this relation. The socioeconomic atmospheric condition within which a family lives may powerfully influence parenting through its effects on parental mental wellness and via differential access to resources. Parents' childrearing knowledge and cultural values may also vary along a socioeconomic gradient, with downstream furnishings on parenting. Further, both socioeconomic factors and parenting can independently shape children's health and evolution. A more than comprehensive understanding of linkages between SES and parenting may inform preventive intervention efforts to support families from disadvantaged environments.
Keywords: Socioeconomic status, parenting, family, culture
Introduction
The parenting construct is often examined at the individual or dyadic levels (east.g., private traits that shape parenting practices, effects of parenting on child outcomes). However, parenting is strongly influenced past and situated within the larger social ecology in which information technology unfolds, including the socioeconomic context. Research on the clan between socioeconomic status (SES) and parenting has been substantial only narrow in its scope, with studies primarily, and at times mistakenly, examining parenting as a pathway through which socioeconomic status influences child development. For example, although deficient dental hygiene among poor children is often attributed to parental neglect of hygienic teaching, evidence suggests that earlier exposures to cariogenic bacteria, along with stress-related, structural compromise of the principal dentition are more likely the causes (Boyce et al., 2010).
Despite the variability in parenting across the SES slope, express research has examined the nature of the relation betwixt SES and parenting itself. This selective review aims to accost this gap in the literature. We begin with a summary of empirical support for the association between SES and parenting, followed by a consideration of factors that may mediate or moderate this relation. We conclude with suggestions for time to come research that recognize the complexity of socioeconomic furnishings and advance our understanding of the dynamic processes that influence parenting practices across the SES gradient.
Parenting in context: Examining associations with SES
Defining SES and parenting
The multifaceted nature of SES requires defining for the purposes of the nowadays review, especially since relations with parenting may differ depending on the specific aspects of SES being addressed (Callahan & Eyberg, 2010). Measures of SES may be comprised of "social" indicators that draw rank or class-based positioning (e.thou., occupational nomenclature systems, educational level), "economical" factors that are textile-and resources-related (e.g., income), or both (Hoff, Laursen, Tardif, & Bornstein, 2002). SES may besides be assessed objectively or subjectively — the latter using self-perceived social condition relative to one'south peers (Adler et al., 1994) — or conceptualized using person-or neighborhood-level indicators (Matthews & Gallo, 2011). Virtually widely used in the parenting literature that is summarized in the present commodity are SES indicators based on objective measures of parental income, education, and/or occupation. Of note, measures of SES must be contextualized, as what constitutes "depression" or "high" SES is relative and may differ beyond geographic locations.
The construct of parenting may include parental style (e.g., authoritative, authoritarian, permissive; Baumrind (1967)), parents' goals for their children, beliefs regarding parenting, or specific parenting practices (Hoff et al., 2002). Literature on the SES-parenting relation has predominantly explored the latter. Of great importance to this review is recognition that studies on parenting have largely been conducted past high-income, well-educated developmental clinicians and researchers. Thus, the judgments that take been made about "adept" and "bad" parenting are influenced by the backgrounds and rearing experiences of those in the position to draw such conclusions, a caution that also applies to the authors of this review. Although parenting quality must, to some degree, exist defined as context-specific (Cabeza de Baca & Ellis, in press, this issue) and "in the eye of the beholder", we also exercise not deny the reality of parenting practices that tin be deemed good or bad irrespective of circumstance (Mesman et al., 2015). Thus, we recognize the harmful nature of abusive, neglectful, or other clearly adverse parenting practices, besides as the supportive, attentive and nurturing behaviors that characterize good parenting. Extant parenting research often applies eye-class parenting standards across the socioeconomic gradient, rather than because the relative functionality of specific rearing practices. Existing literature must be reviewed with this caveat in mind – a qualification to which we will return in our give-and-take of hereafter research directions.
Relations between SES and parenting
Empirical studies have documented associations between SES and parenting practices. As compared to higher SES family environments, parenting inside low SES family unit environments has been observed to be harsher and more punitive (Hoffman, 2003) with greater levels of chaos (Evans, Gonnella, Marcynyszyn, Gentile, & Salpekar, 2005) and more instability in day-to-day family routines (Evans, 2004; Fiese, Rhodes, & Beardslee, 2013; Jensen, James, Boyce, & Hartnett, 1983). In their seminal review paper on the consequences of adverse early family relationships, Repetti, Taylor, and Seeman (2002) highlight the clan of low SES with "risky" family characteristics, including heightened family conflict, low levels of support, and exposures to family violence. Although economic disadvantage is often conceptualized equally stable and chronic, research has found acute declines in income lead often to greater family conflict and higher parental hostility (Conger, Ge, Elder, Lorenz, & Simons, 1994).
Studies investigating the chief effects of socioeconomic status on parenting have go less common in recent years, with increasing empirical focus on more circuitous models of environmental and contextual factors that shape family processes and child development. Pregnant support for relations between SES and parenting has been derived from statistical models in which parenting is identified as a mediator of the association between socioeconomic factors and child outcomes. For example, a meta-assay found negative parenting partially accounted for the relation between poverty and children'due south mental health symptoms, particularly among male offspring (Grant et al., 2003). Related research on adult populations has found that depression SES in childhood is associated with negative early family relationships that subsequently contribute to poorer health outcomes later in life (Lehman, Taylor, Kiefe, & Seeman, 2005, 2009).
Pathways to parenting: Mediators and moderators of the association between SES and parenting
Parenting is a complex, multiply determined construct and its variability across the SES gradient suggests the presence of mediating and moderating variables (Luthar & Latendresse, 2005). Although an exhaustive review is outside the telescopic of the electric current commodity, theoretical and empirical research suggest the following 4 factors may assistance explain or modulate the nature of the SES-parenting association (encounter Figure 1).
Conceptual model of mediating and moderating factors on the relation betwixt socioeconomic condition (SES) and parenting.
Parent distress and mental wellness bug
Low SES is consistently associated with elevated rates of mental health problems (Chen & Miller, 2013). Developed past Conger and colleagues, the Family Stress Model (FSM) model posits that socioeconomic disadvantage contributes to negative parenting practices through higher levels of parental psychological distress and marital conflict (Conger & Conger, 2002; Conger et al., 1992, 1993; Conger et al., 2002). Since its initial presentation nigh 15 years ago, the FSM has accrued an impressive body of empirical support among families diverse in ethnicity, structure, and age of offspring (Conger, Conger, & Martin, 2010). For case, parental low has been found to mediate the relation betwixt economical pressure and negative parenting in a rural sample of parents during infancy/toddlerhood (Newland, Crnic, Cox, Mills-Koonce, & Family Life Project Cardinal, 2013), a nationally representative sample of parents during early childhood (Yeung, Linver, & Brooks-Gunn, 2002), and an ethnically diverse sample of parents during the elementary school years (Mistry, Vandewater, Huston, & McLoyd, 2002)
Access to resources
The Family Investment Model (FIM) purports that parents of college SES have more capital letter to contribute to children's higher order developmental outcomes while by necessity, parents in more disadvantages households must attend more to the bones, pressing needs of the family (Conger & Donnellan, 2007). Investments may accept the form of cloth appurtenances purchased for children or parental interest in enrichment activities, both of which have been associated with family unit SES (Bradley, Corwyn, McAdoo, & Garcia Coll, 2001; Sohr-Preston et al., 2013; Yeung et al., 2002). Greater income and educational status may also confer higher "social uppercase" that indirectly influences childrearing strategies through the educational and occupational opportunities to which parents guide their children (Conger & Donnellan, 2007). Conversely, parents in economically disadvantaged households may have fewer financial resource to expend on children's material resource and exist employed in multiple jobs that brand information technology difficult to spend fourth dimension with their children (Chen & Miller, 2013).
Parental knowledge and expectations of childrearing and kid evolution
The "knowledge gap hypothesis" suggests parents with higher levels of educational activity and greater economic resources will exist exposed to, larn, and adopt information relevant to parenting practices more rapidly than lower SES individuals (Bornstein, Cote, Haynes, Hahn, & Park, 2010). Parental cognition, in plough, is purported to assume an of import part in the relation between SES and parenting behavior. Inquiry hither is limited, merely income and teaching have been shown to be positively associated with parental knowledge (Benasich & Brooks-Gunn, 1996; Morawska, Winter, & Sanders, 2009), and parental noesis of childrearing mediates the relation between SES and parent-kid communication (Rowe, 2008). Differences accept been observed in parental expectations of children's development across socioeconomic strata, with higher SES more often than not associated with expectations for greater educational attainment (Mello, 2009) and faster accomplishment of developmental milestones (Hoff et al., 2002). Contrasting expectations of children'due south cognitive and behavioral abilities may also influence parents' behavior and mode of interacting. For example, Davis-Keane (2005) plant that greater income and instruction was indirectly associated with increased parental warmth and engagement in play activities through parents' higher educational expectations for their children.
Cultural norms and values
Cultural contexts assume a pregnant role in ascribing value and pregnant to parenting practices (Bornstein, in press, this issue; Prevoo & Tamis-Lemonda, in press, this issue). Moreover, the qualitative and historical experience of economic adversity (e.g., antecedents, persistence, geographic concentration, opportunities for improving financial condition) may differ beyond racial and ethnic groups, influencing how SES is related to parenting practices (McLoyd, 1990). Parenting enquiry has predominantly been conducted amongst Caucasian families (Gershoff, Aber, Raver, & Lennon, 2007), and when available, studies using various samples often confound ethnicity with SES or do not accept adequate representation of ethnically diverse individuals across the range of SES (Hill, 2006). The influence of socioeconomic factors on parenting varies across different ethnic groups, but research has yielded mixed findings. For example, SES has been plant to relate positively to parental sensitivity (Mistry, Biesanz, Chien, Howes, & Benner, 2008) and to support for autonomy across ethnic groups (Richman & Mandara, 2013). Parke et al. (2004) found the FSM to exist similarly applicable across Caucasian and Mexican American families, including relations of economic disadvantage to parenting via parental psychological health. Conversely, other research has found significant differences in FSM and FIM validity equally a part of ethnicity (Mistry et al., 2008). Weis and Toolis (2010) observed a positive association between SES and maternal hostility among Latina, but not African American or European American women. The authors hypothesized that "upward mobility" and participation in the labor force may disharmonize with traditional gender roles and caregiving responsibilities within the Latino culture, creating a more than stressful home environment that contributes to college levels of maternal hostility.
Conclusions and future directions
In the current U.S. economic climate, xx% of children live in poverty, with most one-half of those residing in households that are 200% beneath the federal poverty threshold (DeNavas-Walt & Proctor, 2014). Children reared under conditions of socioeconomic arduousness are at increased chance for a multifariousness of acute and chronic physical wellness problems and poorer mental health, besides as greater impairment resulting from these weather condition (Chen & Brooks-Gunn, 2015; Duncan & Magnuson, 2013; Reiss, 2013; Spencer, Thanh, & Louise, 2013), with lasting consequences that may persist into machismo (Matthews & Gallo, 2011). Economic and wellness disparities are growing, engendering strong motivation to detect modifiable factors that may be incorporated into preventive and intervention efforts to benumb the relation between low SES and children's poor health outcomes. Although an extensive literature has identified parenting equally 1 pathway through which socioeconomic factors exert their influence, the clan between SES and parenting is more complex than simple, direct, and linear relations. The current review considered several variables that may explain or shape the SES-parenting clan. Building upon these mechanistic pathways, at that place are several of import directions that future research may consider to further analyze the nature of the relation between SES and parenting.
Outset, and possibly most significantly, are studies that consider the value, meaning, and functionality of parenting practices beyond unlike social and economic climates, rather than universal denotations of "good" and "bad" parenting. Research in this area is scarce, but certain patterns of parental socialization in lower SES households (e.g., interdependence, family unit orientation, obedience to authority) take been conceptualized as a better match to a social environment in which customs members rely on each other for assistance. Such parental strategies may be at odds with the promotion of autonomy, independence, and self-reliance in higher SES environments (Zilberstein, 2016). For example, familism values (normative beliefs in the Latino population that emphasize interdependence and attachment among members of the firsthand and extended family) may promote adaptive outcomes among low-income Mexican American youth for whom neighborhood and social support is especially important (Gonzales et al., 2011). Similarly, restrictive and decision-making parenting practices, while typically considered to be negative, may offer protective benefits in depression SES neighborhood environments where levels of criminal offence and violence are high (Chen & Miller, 2013).
Second, additional inquiry is also needed to explore a broader set of SES factors as they relate to parenting. Traditional indicators of parent income and teaching index a narrow component of the larger socioeconomic context that shapes parenting practices, and multilevel indicators of SES (e.g., neighborhood, schoolhouse, peer relations and social hierarchy factors) may exert strong, additional effects.
Third, existing inquiry on SES and parenting is disproportionately focused on mothering. Updated conceptualizations have moved beyond defining fathers solely as "breadwinners", though the provision of economical resources continues to be an important component of fathering (Waller, 2010), and SES may strongly influence the paternal role (Roy, 2014).
Finally, further inquiry is also needed to disentangle the complex relations betwixt ethnicity and SES. Although the electric current literature suggests that ethnicity and SES may exert interactive effects, studies are hampered by various samples that lack adequate variation across the SES slope in social club to statistically examine the full range of circuitous relations that shape parenting practices (Pinderhughes, Dodge, Bates, Pettit, & Zelli, 2000). It may be the example that presumed cultural differences in parenting are ameliorate accounted for past variations in SES (Mesman, van IJzendoorn, & Bakermans-Kranenburg, 2012).
As noted throughout this select review, the written report of the SES-parenting relation has often been pursued considering of the ensuing effects of low SES on children's physical and psychological wellness. Withal, agreement the complexities of parenting inside diverse economical climates is itself a worthy and valuable topic of enquiry. Economical hardship may pose significant challenges for positive parenting, and elucidating these processes within the family is essential for understanding how to provide parents with needed back up. The efficacy of parenting interventions inside low SES families may be improved by addressing factors of parental mental health, resource access, and childrearing knowledge within a culturally-sensitive framework. In sum, moving beyond examinations of simple linear associations betwixt SES and parenting to explore the specific qualities, contexts, and conditions under which these relations arise offers hope for supporting adaptive family unit processes and promoting resilience amid adults and children in disadvantaged environments.
Acknowledgments
Source of funding: Some of the research cited in this article was supported past grants awarded to Dr. W. Thomas Boyce from the National Found of Mental Health (R01 MH62320), the MacArthur Foundation Research Network on Psychopathology and Development, and the Canadian Institute for Advanced Research. Dr. Roubinov is supported by a grant from the Canadian Constitute for Advanced Research (CIFAR) awarded to Dr. Boyce.
Footnotes
Publisher's Disclaimer: This is a PDF file of an unedited manuscript that has been accepted for publication. As a service to our customers we are providing this early version of the manuscript. The manuscript will undergo copyediting, typesetting, and review of the resulting proof before it is published in its final citable class. Please notation that during the production process errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all legal disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain.
References
* of special interest
** of outstanding interest
Adler NE, Boyce T, Chesney MA, Cohen Southward, Folkman South, Kahn RL, Syme SL. Socioeconomic status and health. The challenge of the gradient. Am Psychol. 1994;49(one):15–24. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Baumrind D. Child care practices anteceding iii patterns of preschool behavior. Genetic psychology monographs. 1967;75(one):43–88. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Benasich AA, Brooks-Gunn J. Maternal attitudes and knowledge of child-rearing: Associations with family and child outcomes. Kid development. 1996;67(3):1186–1205. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Bornstein MH. Parenting in acculturation: Two contemporary research designs and what they tell us. Current Stance in Psychology in printing. [PMC costless commodity] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Bornstein MH, Cote LR, Haynes OM, Hahn CS, Park Y. Parenting knowledge: experiential and sociodemographic factors in European American mothers of young children. Dev Psychol. 2010;46(vi):1677–1693. doi: 10.1037/a0020677. [PMC free commodity] [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
Boyce WT, Den Besten PK, Stamperdahl J, Zhan Fifty, Jiang Y, Adler NE, Featherstone JD. Social inequalities in childhood dental caries: the convergent roles of stress, bacteria and disadvantage. Social science & medicine. 2010;71(ix):1644–1652. [PMC gratis commodity] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Bradley RH, Corwyn RF, McAdoo HP, García Coll C. The dwelling environments of children in the U.s.a. part I: Variations by age, ethnicity, and poverty status. Child development. 2001;72(vi):1844–1867. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Cabeza de Baca, Ellis Early on stress, parental motivation, and reproductive decision-making: Applications of life history theory to parental beliefs. Current Opinion in Psychology in press. [PMC costless article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Callahan CL, Eyberg SM. Relations between parenting behavior and SES in a clinical sample: Validity of SES measures. Child & Family Behavior Therapy. 2010;32(2):125–138. [Google Scholar]
Chen J, Brooks-Gunn J. Neighborhoods and Cerebral Evolution. Emerging Trends in the Social and Behavioral Sciences: An Interdisciplinary, Searchable, and Linkable Resources 2015 [Google Scholar]
* Chen East, Miller GE. Socioeconomic status and health: mediating and moderating factors. Annual Review of Clinical Psychology. 2013;9:723–749. • A review of how family factors, including parent behaviors, family conflict, and routines, are influenced by SES. Highlights variability among individuals reared in low SES environments, and family unit-level factors (east.g. maternal warmth) that have been shown to promote positive outcomes in the context of disadvantage. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Conger RD, Conger KJ. Resilience in Midwestern families: Selected findings from the first decade of a prospective, longitudinal report. Journal of Marriage and Family. 2002;64(two):361–373. [Google Scholar]
Conger RD, Conger KJ, Elder GH, Lorenz FO, Simons RL, Whitbeck LB. A family process model of economic hardship and adjustment of early adolescent boys. Kid development. 1992;63(three):526–541. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Conger RD, Conger KJ, Elder GH, Lorenz FO, Simons RL, Whitbeck LB. Family unit economic stress and adjustment of early adolescent girls. Developmental psychology. 1993;29(2):206. [Google Scholar]
** Conger RD, Conger KJ, Martin MJ. Socioeconomic Status, Family unit Processes, and Individual Evolution. J Marriage Fam. 2010;72(3):685–704. doi: 10.1111/j.1741-3737.2010.00725.x. • Comprehensive review of empirical support for the Family Stress Model and Family Investment Model. [PMC gratis article] [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
Conger RD, Donnellan MB. An interactionist perspective on the socioeconomic context of human evolution. Annu Rev Psychol. 2007;58:175–199. doi: 10.1146/annurev.psych.58.110405.085551. [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
Conger RD, Ge X, Elder GH, Lorenz FO, Simons RL. Economic stress, coercive family unit procedure, and developmental problems of adolescents. Child development. 1994;65(2):541–561. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Conger RD, Wallace LE, Sun Y, Simons RL, McLoyd VC, Brody GH. Economic force per unit area in African American families: a replication and extension of the family stress model. Developmental psychology. 2002;38(two):179. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Davis-Kean PE. The influence of parent pedagogy and family unit income on child achievement: the indirect role of parental expectations and the home surround. Journal of family unit psychology. 2005;19(2):294. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
DeNavas-Walt C, Proctor BD. Income and poverty in the United States: 2013 current population reports. US Department of Commerce, Economics and Statistics Assistants, United states of america Demography Agency 2014 [Google Scholar]
Duncan GJ, Magnuson K. Economic stress, human majuscule, and families in Asia. Springer; Netherlands: 2013. The long attain of early on childhood poverty; pp. 57–70. [Google Scholar]
Evans GW. The environment of childhood poverty. American psychologist. 2004;59(two):77. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Evans GW, Gonnella C, Marcynyszyn LA, Gentile L, Salpekar Due north. The office of chaos in poverty and children'due south socioemotional adjustment. Psychol Sci. 2005;xvi(7):560–565. doi: 10.1111/j.0956-7976.2005.01575.x. [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
Fiese BH, Rhodes HG, Beardslee WR. Rapid changes in American family life: Consequences for child health and pediatric practice. Pediatrics. 2013;132(3):552–559. [PMC gratuitous article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Gershoff ET, Aber JL, Raver CC, Lennon MC. Income is not enough: Incorporating material hardship into models of income associations with parenting and child development. Child development. 2007;78(1):70–95. [PMC gratuitous commodity] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
** Gonzales NA, Coxe Southward, Roosa MW, White R, Knight GP, Zeiders KH, Saenz D. Economic hardship, neighborhood context, and parenting: Prospective furnishings on Mexican-American adolescent's mental health. American journal of customs psychology. 2011;47(1–two):98–113. • Cultural-ecological approach to examining parenting in a diverse sample of low-income Mexican American mothers and fathers. Parenting behaviors were influenced by economic and cultural factors across private and neighborhood levels. [PMC free commodity] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Grant KE, Compas BE, Stuhlmacher AF, Thurm AE, McMahon SD, Halpert JA. Stressors and child and adolescent psychopathology: moving from markers to mechanisms of risk. Psychol Bull. 2003;129(iii):447–466. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
* Colina NE. Disentangling ethnicity, socioeconomic status and parenting: Interactions, influences and meaning. Vulnerable Children and Youth Studies. 2006;1(ane):114–124. • Review of theoretical and empirical literature that has attempted to clarify the unique and interactive influences of ethnicity and SES on parenting. [Google Scholar]
Hoff E, Laursen B, Tardif T, Bornstein K. Socioeconomic status and parenting. Handbook of parenting Volume 2: Biology and ecology of parenting. 2002;8(two):231–252. [Google Scholar]
Hoffman LW. Methodological problems in studies of SES, parenting, and kid evolution. Socioeconomic condition, parenting, and child evolution. 2003:125–143. [Google Scholar]
Jensen EW, James SA, Boyce WT, Hartnett SA. The family routines inventory: Development and validation. Social science & medicine. 1983;17(4):201–211. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Lehman BJ, Taylor SE, Kiefe CI, Seeman TE. Relation of childhood socioeconomic condition and family environment to adult metabolic functioning in the CARDIA study. Psychosom Med. 2005;67(6):846–854. doi: x.1097/01.psy.0000188443.48405.eb. [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
Lehman BJ, Taylor SE, Kiefe CI, Seeman TE. Human relationship of early life stress and psychological performance to blood pressure in the CARDIA study. Health Psychol. 2009;28(3):338–346. doi: 10.1037/a0013785. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
** Lugo-Gil J, Tamis-LeMonda CS. Family resources and parenting quality: links to children's cerebral development across the first 3 years. Kid Dev. 2008;79(four):1065–1085. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8624.2008.01176.ten. • Large-scale study of low-income families that examined the relation of SES to parenting using behavioral observation. Greater SES was associated with higher support, sensitivity, and positive regard during parent-child interactions. [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
** Luthar SS, Latendresse SJ. Comparable "risks" at the socioeconomic status extremes: Preadolescents' perceptions of parenting. Development and Psychopathology. 2005;17(01):207–230. • Unique written report of parenting within both low- and high-income communities that highlighted variability in parenting across the socioeconomic gradient. Challenged parenting stereotypes that are often applied to low (and high) SES family environments. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Matthews KA, Gallo LC. Psychological perspectives on pathways linking socioeconomic status and physical health. Annu Rev Psychol. 2011;62:501–530. doi: x.1146/annurev.psych.031809.130711. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
McLoyd VC. The impact of economical hardship on Black families and children: Psychological distress, parenting, and socioemotional development. Child evolution. 1990;61(2):311–346. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Mello ZR. Racial/ethnic group and socioeconomic status variation in educational and occupational expectations from adolescence to adulthood. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology. 2009;30(4):494–504. [Google Scholar]
Mesman J, van IJzendoorn MH, Bakermans-Kranenburg MJ. Diff in opportunity, equal in procedure: Parental sensitivity promotes positive child development in ethnic minority families. Child Development Perspectives. 2012;6(three):239–250. [Google Scholar]
Mesman J, van Ijzendoorn M, Behrens K, Carbonell OA, Càrcamo R, Cohen-Paraira I, Heidar J. Is the ideal female parent a sensitive mother? Beliefs most early childhood parenting in mothers across the globe. International Journal of Behavioral Development. 2015 0165025415594030. [Google Scholar]
Mistry RS, Biesanz JC, Chien Due north, Howes C, Benner Advertisement. Socioeconomic condition, parental investments, and the cognitive and behavioral outcomes of low-income children from immigrant and native households. Early Childhood Research Quarterly. 2008;23(2):193–212. [Google Scholar]
Mistry RS, Vandewater EA, Huston Air conditioning, McLoyd VC. Economic well-being and children'due south social adjustment: the part of family process in an ethnically various low-income sample. Child Dev. 2002;73(3):935–951. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Morawska A, Wintertime Fifty, Sanders MR. Parenting knowledge and its role in the prediction of dysfunctional parenting and disruptive child behaviour. Child Care Health Dev. 2009;35(2):217–226. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2214.2008.00929.x. [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
* Newland RP, Crnic KA, Cox MJ, Mills-Koonce WR, Family Life Project Central, I The family model stress and maternal psychological symptoms: mediated pathways from economic hardship to parenting. J Fam Psychol. 2013;27(1):96–105. doi: ten.1037/a0031112. • Longitudinal examination of the Family Stress Model to a large sample of families living in loftier rural poverty. Beyond maternal depressive symptoms, socioeconomic factors were related to parenting via somatization and anxiety symptoms. [PMC costless article] [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
Parke RD, Coltrane Due south, Duffy S, Buriel R, Dennis J, Powers J, Widaman KF. Economic stress, parenting, and child adjustment in Mexican American and European American families. Child Dev. 2004;75(6):1632–1656. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8624.2004.00807.x. [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
Pinderhughes EE, Dodge KA, Bates JE, Pettit GS, Zelli A. Bailiwick responses: influences of parents' socioeconomic condition, ethnicity, beliefs nearly parenting, stress, and cognitive-emotional processes. Journal of family psychology. 2000;14(3):380. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Prevoo MJL, Tamis-Lemonda Parenting and globalization in Western countries: Explaining differences in parent-child interaction. Electric current Opinion in Psychology in printing. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Reiss F. Socioeconomic inequalities and mental wellness issues in children and adolescents: a systematic review. Social scientific discipline & medicine. 2013;xc:24–31. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Repetti RL, Taylor SE, Seeman TE. Risky families: family unit social environments and the mental and concrete health of offspring. Psychol Bull. 2002;128(ii):330–366. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Richards MH, Miller BV, O'Donnell PC, Wasserman MS, Colder C. Parental monitoring mediates the effects of age and sex on problem behaviors amongst African American urban young adolescents. Periodical of Youth and Adolescence. 2004;33(3):221–233. [Google Scholar]
Richman SB, Mandara J. Do Socialization Goals Explain Differences in Parental Command Between Black and White Parents? Family Relations. 2013;62(4):625–636. [Google Scholar]
Rowe ML. Kid-directed speech: relation to socioeconomic status, knowledge of child development and child vocabulary skill. Journal of kid language. 2008;35(01):185–205. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Roy KM. Fathers and fatherhood. The Wiley Blackwell companion to the sociology of families. 2014:424–443. [Google Scholar]
Sohr-Preston SL, Scaramella LV, Martin MJ, Neppl TK, Ontai L, Conger R. Parental Socioeconomic Status, Communication, and Children'southward Vocabulary Development: A Third-Generation Test of the Family Investment Model. Child evolution. 2013;84(3):1046–1062. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Spencer N, Thanh TM, Louise Due south. Low income/socio-economic condition in early on babyhood and concrete wellness in later childhood/adolescence: a systematic review. Maternal and child health journal. 2013;17(iii):424–431. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
* Tamis-LeMonda CS, Shannon JD, Cabrera NJ, Lamb ME. Fathers and mothers at play with their 2- and 3-year-olds: contributions to language and cognitive development. Kid Dev. 2004;75(half-dozen):1806–1820. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8624.2004.00818.x. • Study of mothers' and fathers' parenting behaviors that suggests the importance of a family systems approach: mothering was predicted by maternal and paternal socioeconomic factors. [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
Waller MR. Viewing low-income fathers' ties to families through a cultural lens: Insights for research and policy. The Register of the American University of Political and Social Science. 2010;629(i):102–124. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Yeung WJ, Linver MR, Brooks-Gunn J. How money matters for young children'southward evolution: Parental investment and family processes. Kid development. 2002;73(vi):1861–1879. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
* Zilberstein K. Parenting in Families of Low Socioeconomic Status: A Review with Implications for Child Welfare Practice. Family Court Review. 2016;54(2):221–231. • Unique perspective on parenting strategies that may sally to promote adaptive functioning in depression-SES environments, and how this may be viewed within the kid welfare system. [Google Scholar]
Source: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5423399/
Post a Comment for "Factors That Influence the Parent Child Bond Among Low Income Families"