Parenting Practices and Socioeconomic Gaps in Childhood Outcomes
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
Parenting Practices and Socioeconomic Gaps in Childhood Outcomes
Parenting Practices and Socioeconomic
Gaps in Childhood Outcomes
Ariel Kalil and Rebecca Ryan
Summary
In this article, developmental psychologists Ariel Kalil and Rebecca Ryan examine the
relation between parenting practices and socioeconomic gaps in child outcomes. They
document substantial differences between richer and poorer families, including growing
gaps in parental engagement and time use. These gaps matter: the fact that children born to
lower-income, less-educated parents are less likely to spend quality time with their parents
only compounds their relative economic disadvantage.
Evidence suggests that disadvantaged parents want to do many of the same things
that higher-income parents do, such as reading to their children and engaging them in
educational experiences like trips to parks and museums. But they’re nonetheless less likely
to do those things. The authors consider a number of explanations for this discrepancy. One
important contributing factor, Kalil and Ryan write, appears to be financial strain and family
stress, both of which can impede parents’ emotional and cognitive functioning in ways that
make it harder for them to interact with young children in intellectually stimulating and
emotionally nurturing ways.
The authors conclude with a discussion of the types of policies and programs that might
narrow income-based parenting gaps. They find encouraging evidence that relatively low-
cost, light-touch behavioral interventions could help parents overcome the cognitive biases
that may prevent them from using certain beneficial parenting practices.
www.futureofchildren.org
Ariel Kalil is a professor in the Harris School of Public Policy at the University of Chicago, where she directs the Center for Human
Potential and Public Policy and co-directs the Behavioral Insights and Parenting Lab. Rebecca Ryan is a Provost’s Distinguished Associate
Professor in the Department of Psychology at Georgetown University.
Richard Reeves of the Brookings Institution reviewed and critiqued a draft of this article.
VOL. 30 / NO. 1 / S PR ING 2020 29Ariel Kalil and Rebecca Ryan
S
ocioeconomic status is correlated way children develop. But we also recognize
across generations. In the United that the vast majority of empirical evidence
States, 43 percent of adults who supporting these theoretical mechanisms is
were raised in the poorest fifth correlational.5 This correlational research
of the income distribution now consistently finds that average differences
have incomes in the poorest fifth, and 70 in parenting behavior predict the cognitive,
percent have incomes in the poorest half. academic, and behavioral outcomes that
Likewise, among adults raised in the richest presage adult success.6 Although it’s not
fifth of the income distribution, 40 percent our purpose here to describe the plausibly
have incomes in the richest fifth and 53 causal links between parenting practices and
percent have incomes in the richest half.1 child development outcomes, more recent
Many factors influence this intergenerational studies relying on experimental and quasi-
correlation, but evidence suggests that experimental methods do find evidence of
parenting practices play a crucial role. such links. For example, recent research
These include doing enriching activities finds that the amount of time parents spend
with children, getting involved in their with their children has a direct and plausibly
schoolwork, providing educational materials, causal effect on the children’s cognitive test
and exhibiting warmth and patience. Parental scores.7
behavior interpreted in this way probably
Here, we focus on specific parenting
accounts for around half of the variance in
practices that have been linked empirically
adult economic outcomes, and therefore
and theoretically to better child development,
contributes significantly to a country’s
and we explore how those practices vary
intergenerational mobility.2
by socioeconomic status (SES). We review
Across disciplines, dozens of studies studies that characterize SES in terms of
have found differences in these types of family income and also parental education.
behaviors across rich and poor parents Specifically, we provide an overview of
and demonstrated how these differences what scholars know about the differences in
matter to children’s success as adults. parenting behavior by SES that contribute
Among other things, richer parents—both to differences in children’s outcomes by
mothers and fathers—spend more time in SES. We also examine the theoretical
educational activities with their children, origins of these differences in parenting
produce more cognitively stimulating home behavior. The origins are interrelated and
learning environments, and are more likely wide-ranging: they include socioeconomic
to read and do math-related activities with and demographic factors, such as financial
their children.3 Parents also differ by family constraints and parental work schedules;
background in their discipline strategies— opportunities and constraints in the parents’
those with lower incomes and less education environment, such as access to information
are more likely to use harsh, physical and exposure to stress and violence; and
discipline with children than their richer and “cultural” factors, such as norms, beliefs and
more educated counterparts.4 expectations, habits, and values. We don’t
try to draw a bright line between so-called
In this article, we take as a given that the way cultural factors and others; rather, we believe
parents behave with children influences the that many factors that are often thought of as
30 T H E F U T UR E OF C HI L DRE NParenting Practices and Socioeconomic Gaps in Childhood Outcomes
cultural are actually the result of other, more children’s development. Developmental
readily quantifiable contextual factors, such psychology distinguishes these parenting
as stress, money, information, and parents’ behaviors along two key dimensions: the
reactions to those things. This article reviews level of cognitive stimulation and the quality
how contextual factors differ (or not) in of emotional support. Cognitive stimulation
meaningful ways between low- and high- includes enriching behaviors like reading
SES parents, and whether and how those and other literacy activities, doing arts and
differences relate to parenting behavior. crafts, and discussing math concepts. Positive
socioemotional interactions involve parental
warmth and consistency and the absence
of harsh discipline or physical punishment.
Dozens of studies across
On average, research shows, parents with
disciplines have demonstrated more education and income engage in
that richer and poorer more cognitive stimulation with their young
children, interact with greater warmth and
parents interact with their consistency, and use harsh discipline less
children in different ways, often than do parents with less education and
and that these differences income.
influence children’s Differences in Cognitive Stimulation
development. Among studies showing that higher-
SES parents engage in more cognitively
stimulating activities in terms of both
We conclude by discussing the efficacy of
quantity and quality than their lower-SES
programs and policies designed to narrow
peers do, some of strongest evidence comes
SES-based differences in parenting behavior,
from time diaries. The most replicated
and we suggest directions for promising
finding is that mothers and fathers with more
policy and programmatic interventions based
education and income spend more time in
on this review. Although parental behavior
educational activities with their children
matters far beyond the early childhood years,
than do lower-SES parents.9 The authors of
here we focus on early childhood, given the
this article, Ariel Kalil and Rebecca Ryan,
primacy of parental influence during this
along with colleague Michael Corey, have
developmental stage and the speed of early
also shown that highly educated mothers
childhood brain development, both of which
and fathers are more efficient in their
provide the foundation for cognitive and
parental time investments—they tailor
emotional skills over the life course.8
their activities to children’s developmental
Differences in Parenting Practices stages.10 With respect to total childcare time,
by Socioeconomic Status the educational gradient is most apparent
in households with the youngest children.11
Dozens of studies across disciplines have Together, these findings suggest that higher-
demonstrated that richer and poorer parents SES parents aren’t only investing more time
interact with their children in different in their children’s development, but they
ways, and that these differences influence may also have better assimilated the message
VOL. 30 / NO. 1 / S PR ING 2020 31Ariel Kalil and Rebecca Ryan
that parental investments in early childhood heard by children in higher- versus lower-
are key ingredients in children’s long-run SES families comes from words spoken
success.12 directly to the children, not words said when
children are present, and that the language
Studies that draw on stylized measures of used in higher-SES homes is more diverse
the frequency with which parents engage
and responsive to children’s speech than
in enriching activities tell a similar story.
that in lower-SES homes.17 This SES-based
When asked how often per week or month
difference in linguistic environments could
they engage in reading, math, or other
plausibly contribute to SES-based gaps in
enriching activities at home, higher-SES
children’s early language skills, especially
parents are more likely to report reading
given the robust evidence linking the
to and doing math-related activities with
quantity and quality of parents’ speech to
their children; they’re also more likely to
young children to children’s early language
provide the materials, such as books, puzzles,
development.18
and games, with which to engage in those
activities.13 Over the past 30 years, in fact, Differences in Emotional Support
high-SES parents have consistently engaged
in a wide range of enriching activities in As we’ve said, parents differ by SES not
and outside the home—such as reading to only in the quality and quantity of cognitive
children and taking them to the library or a stimulation they offer children, but also in
museum—far more often than their lower- the level of emotional support they provide.
SES counterparts.14 Parental sensitivity—defined as the ability
to perceive children’s signals, interpret these
One of the best-known SES-based signals correctly, and respond promptly and
differences in cognitive stimulation comes appropriately—has been theoretically and
from research on language stimulation empirically linked with children’s emotional
of young children. Higher-SES parents and behavioral outcomes, including self-
use greater language stimulation when regulation, social functioning, and early
interacting with children than do their cognitive skills.19 Mothers living in poverty
lower-SES counterparts.15 A famous example display less sensitivity during interactions
of this difference comes from a study by with their babies than do their higher-SES
Betty Hart and Todd Risley, who intensively counterparts, and in descriptive analyses
observed the language patterns of 42 families these differences explain gaps in children’s
with young children.16 They found that in early language outcomes and behavior
professional families, children heard an problems.20
average of 2,153 words per hour; in working-
class families, the number was 1,251 words More broadly, better-off parents tend to
per hour; and in welfare-recipient families, display more of what’s called an authoritative
it was only 616 words per hour. By age four, (versus authoritarian) parenting style
a child in a welfare-recipient family could than lower-SES parents do. Authoritative
have heard 32 million fewer words than a parenting describes a broad style of
classmate in a professional family. More interacting in which parents place high
recent studies have clarified that the bulk demands on children but also use high
of the difference in the number of words levels of warmth and responsiveness.
32 T H E F U T UR E OF C HI L DRE NParenting Practices and Socioeconomic Gaps in Childhood Outcomes
Authoritarian parenting, by contrast, is punishment, which includes spanking,
characterized by strict limits on children and hitting with objects, and other actions that
little warmth or dialogue, and punishment intentionally cause physical pain, is associated
tends to be harsh.21 Studies have found that with an authoritarian parenting style, whereas
parents—both mothers and fathers—with nonphysical discipline strategies such as
more education are more likely to use an time-outs and explanations for desirable
authoritative style than less-educated parents, behaviors are associated with an authoritative
who are likelier to use either an authoritarian style.25 Research shows that lower-SES
style or a permissive style (characterized parents spank and use other forms of physical
by “low demands coupled with high levels discipline more often than higher-SES
of warmth and responsiveness”), a pattern parents do, whereas higher-SES families
we see within racial and ethnic groups and are more likely to use discipline strategies
in cross-country comparisons.22 Supporting that include reasoning and promote child
these broad differences in style, studies have autonomy.26 Studies show links between
also shown that lower-income parents use
corporal punishment, such as spanking, and a
more directives and prohibitions in speech
host of adverse cognitive and socioemotional
with children than their middle-income
child outcomes.27 Perhaps it’s not surprising,
counterparts do.23 Finally, in a large national
then, that in descriptive analyses these
sample, researchers saw a significant negative
disciplinary differences explain a meaningful
correlation between punitive behavior (such
proportion of SES-based differences
as yelling and hitting) and income.24
in children’s outcomes, particularly
socioemotional ones.28
Given the well-documented Summary
links between … parenting Decades of research have demonstrated that
behaviors and children’s lower- and higher-SES parents differ not
just in the ways they raise their children, but
skills, it’s reasonable to
also in precisely the behaviors that predict
hypothesize that SES-based children’s cognitive and socioemotional
differences in parenting skills. Given the well-documented links
behaviors contribute to between these parenting behaviors and
children’s skills, it’s reasonable to hypothesize
the intergenerational that SES-based differences in parenting
transmission of economic behaviors contribute to the intergenerational
status. transmission of economic status. In the
next section, we review research on
some possible origins of these parenting
Discipline strategies are a central component differences, and assess the evidence in
of socioemotional interaction between support of each mechanism. Understanding
parents and children and a key facet of how these parenting gaps arise is essential to
the difference between authoritative determining an effective policy and program
and authoritarian parenting. Corporal response that could narrow them.
VOL. 30 / NO. 1 / S PR ING 2020 33Ariel Kalil and Rebecca Ryan
Mechanisms Underlying SES- The best evidence on differences in money
Based Gaps in Parenting Practices spent on children across the socioeconomic
distribution comes from two studies by
The wide-ranging scholarship on SES- Emory University sociologist Sabino
based differences in parenting practices Kornrich, using data from the Consumer
offers many potential origins for these Expenditure Survey. (This survey, conducted
differences. Different fields (such as by the Bureau of Labor Statistics, provides
economics, sociology, psychology, and data on the expenditures, income, and
neuroscience) stress different potential demographic characteristics of US
mechanisms. Below, we distinguish five of consumers.) Kornrich and his colleague
these mechanisms and present evidence that Frank Furstenberg found not only that
each one might plausibly help explain SES- parents at the top of the income distribution
based parenting gaps. In doing so, we aim to spend more on children’s enrichment than
illuminate promising targets for policy and lower-income parents do, but also that the
programmatic intervention to narrow SES- difference in real dollars has increased
based gaps in parenting. substantially since the 1970s.30 This spending
gap has grown despite the fact that parents at
Financial Constraints all income levels are devoting an increasing
share of their income to children, and that
The most obvious reason higher-SES
the lowest-income parents spend the largest
parents might use different parenting
share. Kornrich extended the analysis
practices than their lower-SES counterparts
by examining income-based inequality
is that they simply have more money to
in parental spending on young children
buy the materials and experiences that
specifically over the period from 1972 to
enhance child wellbeing. This mechanism
2010.31 He found increased spending among
may sound tautological—surely parents
parents at the top of the income distribution
who have more money to spend on their
but little change among those at the bottom.
children do so. Yet some parents may choose
Much of the increase derived from additional
to spend discretionary income on their own
spending on childcare. But spending on
leisure and consumption rather than on
enrichment goods (such as books, toys,
their children.29 With respect to cognitive
games, and fees for activities) also grew
stimulation, child-related expenditures
substantially among higher-income families
include materials to enhance time with
during this time, and grew not at all among
children—such as books, toys, and games—
lower-income families.
as well as costly experiences such as dance,
music, and sports lessons; tutoring; and These studies, combined with other research
museum visits and artistic performances. that finds differences in the presence
Differences in spending on these types of books, toys, and games in lower- and
of enrichment goods could directly affect higher-income families’ homes, suggest that
children’s development by enhancing the unequal spending on children undoubtedly
quantity and quality of their cognitive explains some of the SES-based differences
stimulation, but could also affect parents’ in parenting practices.32 Still, in a recent
ability to invest time in enhancing their study of parent-child reading time in low-
children’s development. income Chicago families, almost no parents
34 T H E F U T UR E OF C HI L DRE NParenting Practices and Socioeconomic Gaps in Childhood Outcomes
reported that they failed to read to their being accessible to their children but largely
children because they lacked the appropriate engaged in housework or leisure activities.37
books.33 Parents can also do many activities Of course, it’s challenging to separate time
with children that are enriching but not availability from family structure: low-income
necessarily costly—such as talking to parents are far likelier to be single parents,
them, telling stories, and playing games. with less economic and social support to
Thus, although differences in children’s lighten the competing demands of household
experiences by SES surely arise in part tasks than married mothers. (For more about
from differences in parents’ ability to pay single parents and other aspects of family
for enrichment, financial constraints don’t structure, see Melanie Wasserman’s article
entirely explain the gap. in this issue.38) Nonetheless, in a cross-
national comparison study, highly educated
Time Constraints mothers in many developed countries spent
Another possible reason that lower- more time than less-educated mothers in
SES parents engage in fewer cognitively primary child investment activities—even
stimulating activities with children, and in Norway, where universal family policies
spend less time with them in general, is are designed to equalize resources across
that these parents simply have less time parents.39 The authors interpreted their
to spare. Research on work hours and findings as suggesting that the differences
schedules shows that lower-SES parents are between more- and less-educated mothers in
likelier than higher-SES parents to work time spent with children more likely reflect
unpredictable and nonstandard hours.34 different beliefs about parenting rather than
All else being equal, it’s hard for parents time constraints.
to engage in developmentally stimulating
In sum, it isn’t clear how much of the SES-
activities with children when they’re
based difference in time investment in
working during prime “investment” time
children stems from differences in time
(that is, weekends and evenings). Several
available versus parents’ decisions to allocate
quantitative studies show that the SES-
available time to their children. These
based gaps in time investment remain large
decisions may be shaped by information,
even when accounting for other family
values, and preferences—topics we turn to
differences, such as employment hours,
next.
but few researchers have explored how the
timing or regularity of work hours might Information, Values, and Preferences
explain SES-based differences in parents’ about Parenting and Child Development
time investment.35 That said, high-SES
parents (especially mothers) tend to work Given that lower-SES parents may invest
more hours than lower-SES parents and less time in children not just because they
have less discretionary time—but still spend have less time to spend but rather because
more time with their children.36 This stems they spend the time they have differently, it’s
from fact that higher-SES parents (especially reasonable to hypothesize that SES-based
mothers) spend more of their childcare time differences in this area stem in part from
primarily engaged in activities, while lower- differences in information on, values about,
SES mothers tend to spend childcare time or preferences for spending time doing
VOL. 30 / NO. 1 / S PR ING 2020 35Ariel Kalil and Rebecca Ryan
enriching activities with children. We could important.41 Moreover, for each of the skills,
extend this hypothesis to cover emotionally the proportion of parents who said the skill
supportive behaviors as well: perhaps lower- was important was greater in the lowest fifth
SES parents have less information about how of SES than in the highest fifth. It’s unlikely,
warm, sensitive parent-child interactions then, that the large differences by SES in the
can benefit children’s socioemotional actual skills of children entering kindergarten
development—or perhaps they have weaker arise because disadvantaged parents lack
preferences for such interactions. To be information about the importance of those
sure, information, values, and preferences skills.
are different concepts: information
generally refers to parents’ knowledge of
child development and the activities that US parents at all income
promote it; values reflect parents’ goals for
their children and their ideal traits; and levels believe it’s important
preferences refer to taste factors that may for children to develop skills
influence parental behavior, such as level of
that will prepare them for
happiness, degree of satisfaction, or utility.40
success in school and life;
To understand how these factors drive
SES-based differences in parental behavior,
they also share similar ideas
we need strong evidence that information, about the values they wish to
values, and preferences differ by SES. instill in their children.
But most recent evidence suggests that
US parents at all income levels believe it’s
important for children to develop skills that Another key aspect of the parental belief
will prepare them for success in school and system is terminal values for children—the
life; they also share similar ideas about the characteristics parents believe they must
values they wish to instill in their children. instill in children to prepare them for life.42
For example, one group of researchers The concept of values is often invoked in
examined data from the 1998 and 2010 Early discussions of “cultural beliefs” as they
Childhood Longitudinal Study (ECLS—a relate to parenting: researchers have posited
national study by the National Center for for decades that the difference in terminal
Education Statistics that examines child values among parents at different points in
development, school readiness, and early the income or education distribution is one
school experiences). Their goal was to source of the intergenerational persistence of
estimate the share of parents who rated social class.43 Historically, high-SES parents
various early childhood kindergarten have valued “independent thinking” and
readiness skills—such as counting to “self-direction” more than low-SES parents
20, knowing the letters of the alphabet, do, whereas low-SES parents have put more
and sitting still—as “very important” or value on “obedience” and “conformity.”
“essential.” The researchers found an Theoretically, differences in parental values
increase between 1998 and 2010 in the help account for the reproduction of social
proportion of parents in the lowest fifth of class partly because of the myriad ways
the SES distribution who rated these skills as these differences influence how parents
36 T H E F U T UR E OF C HI L DRE NParenting Practices and Socioeconomic Gaps in Childhood Outcomes
prepare their children for their academic Income may also shape the extent to which
and professional futures. But our recent parents view the time they allocate to their
research with our colleagues Caitlin Hines children as direct utility versus investment
and Kathleen Ziol-Guest shows that rich and utility. Economists have long thought that
poor parents’ ideas about the characteristics highly educated parents, more so than less-
needed for children to succeed in life (such educated parents, view time with children
as working hard, being helpful, and thinking as an “investment behavior,” a means to
for oneself) have converged substantially in increase children’s future human capital.48
the past three decades. In fact, in 2016 we This framework may help explain why
found no significant differences in parents’ highly educated parents spend more time
espoused values by education or income.44 in childcare than less-educated parents
Using a nationally representative survey, who work the same hours and have as many
another study similarly found no differences children. But the same theories suggest
by parental education in contemporary that highly educated parents might spend
parenting standards: parents of all social relatively more time with their children
backgrounds strongly endorsed time- because they derive more enjoyment from
intensive, child-centered parenting as the the activity. Using data from the 2010–13
optimal parenting style (what sociologist American Time Use Survey Well-Being
Annette Lareau labeled “concerted Module (a national study conducted by
cultivation”), whereas parents of all social the Bureau of Labor Statistics that links
backgrounds showed little support for a less self-reported wellbeing information to
intensive, adult-centered parenting style individuals’ activities and time-use patterns),
(which Lareau labeled “natural growth”).45 Kalil and colleagues examined mothers’
reports of how they feel during childcare and
Even though all parents have similar in other activities, seeking empirical evidence
aspirations for their children’s development pertaining to economic theories of time
and readiness for school, lower-SES parents allocation.49 For all mothers, spending time in
might expect a lower return from their childcare was associated with higher positive
investments in their children. But researchers feelings than was spending time in other
have shown that low-income parents do activities. This finding offers no support for
expect a positive return from the time they the hypothesis that highly educated mothers
spend in educational activities with their enjoy childcare more than their less-educated
children; in one study done in Colombia, counterparts do.
among very low-income households, parents’
beliefs predicted investment in young In sum, research provides only mixed
children.46 Furthermore, a survey of parents evidence that information, values, or
of school-aged children in England found no preferences drive differences in parenting
SES-based difference in expected returns to behavior across the socioeconomic
time or money invested in children. But some distribution. Compared to higher-SES
research suggests that although all parents parents, lower-SES parents may have less
expect high returns on their investment in nuanced ideas about how to promote child
child development, lower-SES parents expect development and may underestimate the
relatively lower returns than their higher-SES benefits of time spent promoting child
peers do.47 development. But high- and low-SES parents
VOL. 30 / NO. 1 / S PR ING 2020 37Ariel Kalil and Rebecca Ryan
alike understand the importance and value probability of being diagnosed with clinical
of enriching behavior with children, such as depression.54
reading, and they appear to enjoy this time in
equal measure. According to the family stress model, this
psychological distress spills over into all
Family and Environmental Stress family relationships. As couples struggle to
make ends meet, and as their depression,
Sociologist Glen Elder developed the family anxiety, and parenting stress increase,
stress model to explain how economic loss their interactions with each other and with
influenced parent and child wellbeing their children become more hostile and
during the Great Depression.50 According conflicted.55 Evidence of these associations
to this perspective, low-income families face includes a study using data from the Panel
significant economic pressure as they struggle Study of Income Dynamics (a household
to pay bills and purchase important goods survey of family income, employment,
and services, and this economic pressure, health, and wellbeing that follows its
coupled with other stressful events more subjects over time). Kalil and her colleague
prevalent in the lives of low-income families, Patrick Wightman found that parental job
causes poor parents to suffer psychological loss, particularly that of the father, was
distress that can disrupt parent-child associated with increases in marital conflict
interactions.51 Although the model was and interpersonal violence; this finding is
developed to explain the impact of economic replicated in other studies.56 In turn, parents’
loss on family wellbeing, it has since been psychological distress and conflict with one
applied to the way chronic economic strain, another are linked with parenting practices
and poverty in particular, can undermine that are on average more punitive, harsh,
parenting quality.52 inconsistent, and detached, as well as less
nurturing, stimulating, and responsive to
Research has substantiated many of the
children’s needs.57 Associations that link
hypothetical links in the family stress
economic strain to psychological stress to
model—at least in observational studies. In
disrupted parenting have been documented
low-income families, parents and children
consistently in studies of early child
alike experience more daily stress than their
development.58
higher-income peers do, and low-income
parents report higher levels of parenting In recent years, the family stress model’s
stress and depression.53 Specifically, poor focus on environmental conditions and
mothers of infants are two and a half times parents’ mental health has broadened to
more likely to report being depressed include our understanding of how stress
than nonpoor mothers. These studies affects neurobiological and cognitive
only establish correlations among poverty, functioning. Specifically, studies show
stress, and parents’ wellbeing. But more that in the context of scarcity, including a
causal evidence comes from one study’s lack of money, parents are more likely to
finding that decreases in income among make decisions that emphasize short-term
parents, particularly those who are already rather than long-term gains.59 This greatly
at low income levels, predicted increases diminishes the possibilities for purposeful,
in mothers’ depressive symptoms and their goal-directed parenting. Taken together with
38 T H E F U T UR E OF C HI L DRE NParenting Practices and Socioeconomic Gaps in Childhood Outcomes
the scholarship on the family stress model, decisions, for a variety of reasons—such
these growing areas of research suggest that as differences in stress, in the composition
financial strain can alter parents’ emotional of their social networks, or in parents’ own
and cognitive functioning in ways that upbringing or experiences. Or they may
undermine their ability to be cognitively experience the same heuristic differently,
stimulating and emotionally sensitive with which might also result in different patterns
young children. of decision-making. Here we describe
two potentially important characteristics
Cognitive Biases and Decision-Making that make parenting especially susceptible
to cognitive biases and to differential
It seems that disadvantaged parents want to
adaptations to biases by parental SES.
do many of the same things that better-off
parents do, especially activities associated Present bias. For many parenting decisions,
with more positive child outcomes like the payoff doesn’t materialize until years into
reading aloud and going on educational the future. Deciding to spend money and
outings. However, they’re less likely to time on schooling, extracurricular activities,
actually do those things. That is, we see a health-promoting behaviors, and other
wider gap in disadvantaged families between activities meant to improve child outcomes is
what parents aspire to do and what they do in much like making financial investments with
practice. Researchers in behavioral science uncertain returns. Research suggests that
and behavioral economics have described a people systematically put too much weight
set of cognitive biases that may give rise to on present outcomes as opposed to future
this gap between knowing and doing. outcomes, which often leads to suboptional
choices.61 Present bias can mean that parents
prioritize spending their time on activities
that provide immediate gratification rather
People systematically put than investing that time in their children.
too much weight on present For example, even if parents believe in
outcomes as opposed to future the value of reading, have books at home,
and understand the connection between
outcomes, which often leads parents’ reading aloud and children’s skill
to suboptimal choices. development, they may be less likely to
read to their children routinely because
the temptation to do something else in the
Like many other decisions, parenting moment overcomes the commitment to
decisions are complex. This fact constrains invest time in an activity whose payoff lies
parents’ capacity to make optimal decisions, in a distant and uncertain future. Scholars
simply because human judgment can’t readily have reached no consensus on what causes
master the complexity of parenting. Thus differences in time preference. Many early
parents are prone to relying on heuristics sociology studies provide observational
(cognitive shortcuts) to simplify their evidence that time preference is culturally
decisions and make them “computationally acquired.62 Economists Gary Becker and
cheap.”60 Lower- and higher-SES parents Casey Mulligan proposed in 1997 that the
may use different heuristics in making more financial resources people have to
VOL. 30 / NO. 1 / S PR ING 2020 39Ariel Kalil and Rebecca Ryan
imagine the future, the less future value behaviors are primarily learned from one’s
they’re willing to give up for present value own parents, relatives, and friends.65
(that is, they are more patient, or future-
focused). Empirical evidence supports this Automaticity reduces cognitive demands,
hypothesis.63 More recently, Priyanka Joshi leads to rapid responses, and is useful for
and Nathanael Fast claimed that power many parenting situations. But it can also
makes people feel more connected to their create barriers to eliminating adverse parent
futures, which in turn results in less present behaviors (such as yelling at or hitting a child,
bias (that is, more patience). To the extent or forgoing toothbrushing). Higher- and
that income can be perceived as power, lower-SES parents may have the same goals
this could help explain why low-income for their children; they may even have the
individuals experience present bias.64 same information about how to achieve those
goals. But parenting behaviors are correlated
Automaticity bias. Parenting often requires across generations. Thus, higher- and lower-
quick, on-the-spot decisions. When a child SES parents may have different parenting
runs toward a busy street, a parent must habits because of the differences in their
react, not contemplate. When a child screams own upbringings in different socioeconomic
in the checkout lane because a parent has circumstances.66 In this way, automaticity bias
turned down a request for candy, the parent can help reinforce SES-based differences
seldom has time to reflect on what to do. The in the cognitive stimulation and emotional
need to act quickly results in automaticity, support provided by parents.
meaning a response with minimal cognitive
processing. Automaticity is a useful heuristic Summary
that reduces cognitive load. An automatic
The evidence reviewed above suggests that
response can be beneficial if it’s efficacious,
neither time constraints nor differences in
but costly when it’s not. Because automatic
parental preferences or beliefs likely explain
responses can be likened to habits, and habits
much of the variation in parenting behavior
are hard to break, ineffective automatic
by SES. Differences in how much money
responses can lead to ineffective parenting.
is available to high- and low-SES parents
Automaticity comes from learning, repetition, undoubtedly affect differences in parents’
and practice. The automatic behaviors material investments in their children, but
parents adopt are likely to depend on their money isn’t likely to explain the differences
own experiences. Behaviors repeatedly in how parents spend time with children. We
observed or experienced as a child can easily do see consistent evidence that lower- and
become default behaviors in adulthood. An higher-SES parents interact with and invest
adult whose parents always spanked him in children differently because low-SES
when he misbehaved as a child is more likely parents undergo more daily and often “toxic”
to “automatically” spank his own children in stress than higher-income parents do. That
response to bad behavior, giving little thought type of stress increases parents’ depression
to alternative kinds of discipline. We don’t and anxiety and can undermine their
have a lot of evidence about how people learn cognitive ability to focus on long-term goals
to be parents, but what we do have (usually rather than short-term ones. Recent research
from small surveys) suggests that parenting has also found that the economic context
40 T H E F U T UR E OF C HI L DRE NParenting Practices and Socioeconomic Gaps in Childhood Outcomes
of parenting itself, whatever its impact on recipients compared to nonrecipients find
mental health, is associated with cognitive that EITC recipients are likely spend their
biases in parents that may encourage them to check on durable goods like cars or home
focus on present versus future gains and to appliances, or to pay off debts, and not on
rely on habits rather than conscious problem- child-related expenditures per se.67 However,
solving when making parenting decisions. a recent study found that receiving the EITC
during the spring of a child’s senior year
Policies and Programs to Narrow in high school boosted the likelihood that
the Gap low-income students would enroll in college,
What types of policies and programs suggesting that the additional money may
would most effectively narrow SES- sometimes go to education.68 Taken together,
based parenting gaps? Below, we review this research suggests that providing more
research about programs that aim to money isn’t likely to alter the time or money
improve parenting behavior by targeting spent by parents on daily child enrichment
precisely the mechanisms discussed above. activities, but it might increase parental
Wherever possible, we review evidence investment in larger expenditures like college
from randomized controlled trials or from enrollment.
quasi-experimental studies (which compare
Another source of information on how
treatment groups and control groups formed
a sudden change in income might affect
by means other than random assignment,
families comes from a study on the effect of
such as a policy change). Otherwise, we
a windfall from casino earnings on members
review the correlational evidence about the
of an American Indian tribe.69 For children
differences in the mechanism by SES or the
who’d never been poor, an increase in
correlational links between each mechanism
parental income had no effect on high school
and parenting behavior.
graduation or educational attainment. But
Money to Spend on Children for children in poor families, the additional
parental income increased schooling by
If a main reason that low- and high-SES nearly one year and increased the chance of
parents raise children differently is that graduating from high school by 30 percent.
low-SES parents have less money, the policy More importantly, the windfall was associated
solution would be to provide conditional or with a 5 percent increase in mothers’ and
unconditional cash transfers to low-income fathers’ supervision of children and a 4
parents. It’s difficult to estimate the causal percent increase in positive mother-child
effect of this on parenting behavior because interactions, according to children. These
income increases are seldom random. But findings indicate that income itself can
research on how low-income parents spend enhance parenting behavior and, as a result,
their Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC) child outcomes. But note that the income
refunds offers some insight into behavior increase in the study was significant—as
changes caused by giving parents money. much as 100 percent for poor families, far
The EITC is a tax credit that serves to offset more than that likely to be implemented by
payroll taxes and supplement the wages of US public policies. So it’s unclear whether
low-income workers. Studies that compare lessons from the study could guide real-world
spending patterns across the year for EITC applications.
VOL. 30 / NO. 1 / S PR ING 2020 41Ariel Kalil and Rebecca Ryan
A new intervention might clarify the workers at large firms about scheduling
potential impact on parenting behavior practices and wellbeing, and thus providing
of smaller but still meaningful income much new evidence.72
increases. A group of prominent researchers
recently launched Baby’s First Years, an Information, Values, and Preferences
experimental program that randomly assigns
Another possible strategy involves designing
either an unconditional cash transfer of
interventions to affect parents’ information
$4,000 per year or a nominal $20 per month about, values around, or preferences for
to low-income families. Over the next few investments in children. Impacting these
years, the study will explore the effects mechanisms is one of the goals of home
of these income boosts not only on infant visiting programs, which are by far the most
development but also on parents’ mental common policy approach to narrowing
health, parenting stress, and parenting parenting gaps between higher- and lower-
practices. Baby’s First Years seeks to answer SES parents. These programs typically
two questions: Can extra money alone target the mother-infant relationship, aiming
enhance parenting practices? And if so, does to enhance child development by modeling
it do so by improving parents’ mental health or directly instructing parents about caring
and reducing parenting stress?70 for infants, toddlers, and preschool-aged
children. This approach assumes that
Time to Spend with Children
parents who know the importance of certain
Another policy approach that might alter parenting behaviors, and learn how to
parents’ behavior would be to increase the engage in them, will do so more often. The
amount or nature of the time available to number of families served by home visiting
low-income parents to spend with their programs proliferated with the passage of
children. But education-based differences in the Maternal, Infant, and Early Childhood
parental time investments persist even when Home Visiting Program (MIECHV), part of
policies provide generous family supports the Affordable Care Act in 2010; MIECHV
in attempts to equalize opportunity for has been authorized through fiscal year
child development.71 Still, given that stress 2022.73
disrupts parents’ mental health, focus, and Three of the most commonly adopted (and
attention, policies that improve the stability rigorously evaluated) home visiting models
and predictability of low-income parents’ are the Nurse-Family Partnership, the Early
work schedules could make a meaningful Head Start home visiting program, and
difference in parenting behavior and Healthy Families America.74 Although each
children’s development. Studies to assess of these programs has demonstrated positive
the impact of such approaches are still in effects on some parenting outcomes, the
their infancy, but one multicomponent effects vary across sites, even within the
investigation—the Shift Project, conducted programs. For example, multiple evaluations
jointly at the University of California, of Healthy Families America have
Berkeley, and the University of California, demonstrated modest effects on mothers’
San Francisco—holds promise. The project ability to interact in sensitive or stimulating
is using an innovative method of data ways with children, but only at some
collection to survey thousands of retail sites.75 Another home visiting program, the
42 T H E F U T UR E OF C HI L DRE NParenting Practices and Socioeconomic Gaps in Childhood Outcomes
Home Instruction Program for Preschool parents less likely to participate in home
Youngsters (HIPPY), which specifically visiting, it’s just too difficult to deliver the
targeted parents’ reading and educational programs as intended.80
activities with preschool-aged children,
showed robust effects on children’s school The second reason for home visiting’s
performance in the first cohort, but not in modest benefits may be that the chief
later ones.76 Even when programs (or sites of mechanism these programs use to enhance
programs) were found to enhance parenting parenting practices—providing information
practices, the effects were relatively modest and instruction—isn’t the mechanism that
differentiates the behavior of lower- and
and often faded over time.77
higher-income parents. Above, we reviewed
The most recent evidence on home visiting research that suggests low- and high-income
comes from a national evaluation of the four parents largely share the same parenting
most commonly used MIECHV-funded goals and values, and agree that it’s important
programs: the three described above, and to conduct enriching activities with their
the Parents as Teachers program. Like the children. The best evidence indicates that
evaluations of individual programs before low- and high-income parents differ primarily
it, the Mother and Infant Home Visiting in the level of stress each must negotiate
Program Evaluation, or MIHOPE, found while parenting, and in the impact of certain
that home visiting programs can increase cognitive biases on parenting decisions.
the quality of cognitive stimulation in the
Next we discuss two less time-consuming
home and reduce the frequency with which
approaches to parenting programs,
parents use harsh or aggressive disciplinary
sometimes called light touch interventions.
approaches. But as in the previous studies,
For this reason, they may hold particular
these effects were modest in size.78 In
promise.
fact, only about one-third of the parenting
outcomes that MIHOPE examined showed Family and Environmental Stress
effects that were statistically significant.
The home visiting programs we’ve described
Why does home visiting tend to yield so far all aim to alleviate parental stress and
only modest benefits? One reason may be improve parental mental health, among other
that such programs typically have trouble goals. Yet only Healthy Families America has
recruiting and retaining families.79 Programs demonstrated impacts on mothers’ mental
often recruit fewer than their target number health, and only at some sites.81 MIHOPE
of families and then provide far fewer home did find that home visiting, when averaged
visits than they expect to. On average, across model programs, was associated with
families in MIHOPE participated for only statistically significant reductions in mothers’
eight months, even though some programs depressive symptoms, but the effects were
were designed to last years, and 17 percent small.82 These small and inconsistent findings
of program mothers didn’t receive a single likely stem from the broad focus of these
home visit. Perhaps because of the hectic programs—they don’t exclusively target
schedules and nonstandard hours faced by mothers’ mental health or stress reduction—
many low-income families, and because the and their difficulty in recruiting and retaining
cognitive biases described above may make families.
VOL. 30 / NO. 1 / S PR ING 2020 43Ariel Kalil and Rebecca Ryan
largely sustained at three and six years after
Programs that focus on the program ended.84
improving parents’ mental The results from these programs suggest
health using clear clinical that some interventions can improve the
quality of parenting in low-SES families
approaches hold the most by reducing parents’ emotional and
promise for enhancing interpersonal stress and improving their
mental health. But long-term home visiting
parenting behavior. programs with diffuse goals aren’t likely
to produce those effects consistently or
But a number of smaller, more targeted at practically significant levels. Rather,
programs have found that improving programs that focus on improving parents’
parents’ mental health or reducing stress mental health using clear clinical approaches
results in improved parenting behavior. hold the most promise for enhancing
Mothers and Babies is one example. This parenting behavior.
six-week cognitive-behavioral intervention
Cognitive Biases and Decision-Making
has been shown to reduce depressive
symptoms and prevent depressive episodes In the past few years, a new approach to
among women before and after giving supporting parents has emerged that avoids
birth; as a result, it increases the mothers’ the difficulties of recruitment and retention
sensitivity with their infants.83 The program in home visiting programs. These light-
has been successfully embedded in touch, behavioral interventions, usually
traditional home visiting programs, offering designed with scale-up in mind, typically
a way to enhance home visiting’s effects on target specific, discrete parenting behaviors
parenting behavior. Family Foundations to get at the cognitive biases that may
is another well-developed and rigorously prevent mothers and fathers from using
evaluated intervention to improve parents’ certain parenting practices. One example is
mental health. This program aims to the Parents and Children Together (PACT)
minimize the strains of the transition to Study, a field experiment conducted at the
parenthood, and to help parents support Behavioral Insights and Parenting Lab at
and not undermine each other. At six the University of Chicago, which tested a
months and one year after a child’s birth, behavioral intervention to increase parent-
mothers and fathers in Family Foundations child reading time among low-income
reported significantly fewer depressive families.85
symptoms compared to a control group.
Mothers also reported less anxiety, and both The PACT study hypothesized that present
mothers and fathers reported more support bias might be the key to understanding why
from each other. In interactions with their low-SES parents read aloud to their children
children, parents showed more sensitivity less often than higher-SES parents do. The
and more support for child exploration, intervention aimed to overcome this bias
and had a more positive affect; intervention with a set of behavioral tools (goal-setting,
fathers showed less negativity. Unlike those feedback, timely reminders, and social
of most other programs, these effects were rewards) designed to “bring the future
44 T H E F U T UR E OF C HI L DRE NParenting Practices and Socioeconomic Gaps in Childhood Outcomes
to the present” and help parents form children’s preschool absences. Based
the habit of regular reading. These tools on outcome data from the preschools’
were all deployed using text messages, administrative records, the intervention
rather than in-person staff visits, which decreased chronic absenteeism by 20
made the program relatively easy for low- percent over 18 weeks. The study’s
income parents with hectic, unpredictable survey data showed that the parents who
schedules and high levels of daily stress. benefited most were those who, at the
start of the program, had reported lower
On average, PACT more than doubled preferences for attendance. In short,
the amount of time parents spent reading parents with weaker beliefs about the
to their children (the study measured usefulness of preschool benefited the
time use objectively, using digital tools).
most from messages and reminders that
But even more important was the finding
emphasized its importance.
that the intervention was substantially
more effective for parents who were more Finally, to address challenges arising from
present biased.86 In short, parents who cognitive scarcity, some promising new
suffered from present bias were the very approaches focus on parents’ executive
ones who benefited from an intervention function skills, key components of
designed to overcome it. which include impulse control, working
memory, and mental flexibility. These
The PACT study doesn’t just suggest
interventions seek to relieve the effects of
that difficulty making temporal tradeoffs
chronic toxic stress that can compromise
is partly responsible for parents’ failure
decision-making among low-income
to read to their children. It also offers
parents. Although experimental evidence
a blueprint for managing this cognitive
is currently lacking, some programs for
bias. Using a set of known behavioral
low-income parents are using coaching,
tools, parents are able to increase desired
multimedia, and specially designed
behaviors and improve their decision-
computer games to help adults improve
making. Moreover, PACT’s cost per family
memory, focus and attention, impulse
was relatively low—a fraction of the per
control, organization, problem-solving, and
capita costs of current policy interventions
multitasking.88 Mindfulness meditation
designed to improve preschool children’s
training, mind-body exercises (such as
educational outcomes. This suggests that
relaxation breathing), and “brain games”
behaviorally based interventions can
are other tools that may increase the
feasibly be adapted for policy purposes.
quality of parent-child interaction by
In another example of this new approach, improving parents’ executive function
Kalil and colleagues designed a behavioral skills—and likely improve mental health
field experiment, Show Up to Grow Up, to and health outcomes as well.89 Like the
increase attendance and diminish chronic other behavioral interventions described
absences at subsidized preschool programs above, these programs could be deployed
in Chicago.87 The program sent parents through technology in a way that could
personalized text messages targeting make home visits or meetings at children’s
behavioral bottlenecks that were driving preschools unnecessary.
VOL. 30 / NO. 1 / S PR ING 2020 45You can also read
