Search Type Title Author/Investigator Search Advanced Search

Table of Contents | Previous | Next

CHANGE IN PARENT-CHILD INTERACTION IN LOW-INCOME FAMILIES: LINKS TO FATHER STATUS

Laurie A. Van Egeren, Lorraine McKelvey, Hiram E. Fitzgerald, Rachel F. Schiffman,
Mary Cunningham-DeLuca and Shelley M. Hawver
Michigan State University

Contingent responsiveness is considered a foundation of child socioemotional and cognitive adjustment (Bornstein, Tamis-LeMonda & Haynes, 1999; Watson, 1985). Whereas studies of parent-child contingency have focused on mothers, the contributions of fathers to children’s development are of equal interest. Moreover, because fathers’ access to the child is often regulated to some degree by mothers (Hochshild & Machung, 1989), fathers’ interaction styles should be considered in conjunction with mothers’ interaction styles. Among low-income families, for whom economic instability and chaotic social circumstances contribute to high rates of single motherhood, inconsistent father involvement, and transitory male figures in children’s lives (Halpern, 1993), patterns and processes of the mutual development of mothers’ and fathers’ interactions with their children warrant particular attention. This study examines changes in low-income parent-child dyads’ contingent responsiveness over a 2 ½ year period while taking into account the dependence of individuals within couples.

In addition, fathers who reside with the child or non-residential fathers who are actively involved might be expected to demonstrate better parenting interactions with the child because they would have more familiarity with and motivation to respond to the child. Thus, two father status variables, whether the father resided in the home and whether he was the biological parent of the child, were examined as predictors of individual differences in parent-child interactions.

Sample. The sample for this study consists of 71 families, which included mothers, children, and men identified by the mother as the child’s father or father figure. These families are participating in an ongoing longitudinal study of children eligible for Early Head Start in Jackson, Michigan. Thirty-five of the families were not part of the EHS intervention, and 36 families were EHS participants. Mothers averaged 22.2 years of age (SD = 4.8) and mean income was $10,120 (SD = $6,316). The majority (81 percent) of the sample is Caucasian, 8 percent reported being African American, 5 percent report being of Mexican decent, and the remaining 7 percent of the sample reports being of other ethnicities. Forty-seven percent of the sample reported not having completed a high school diploma at enrollment, 35 percent report having completed high school or a GED, and the remaining 28 percent report having attended some college (with one person having completed at least a two-year program).

Procedure and measures. At enrollment (child age M = 4.8 months, SD = 3.61), 24, and 36 months, each parent individually participated in a teaching task with the child. Live observations were rated by researchers (trained to a minimum reliability of 90 percent agreement) using the Nursing Child Assessment Teaching Scale (NCAST; Sumner & Spietz, 1994). Contingent parent-child interaction was assessed using three parental contingency scales (Sensitivity to Cues, Social-Emotional Growth Fostering, and Cognitive Growth Fostering) and two child scales (Clarity of Cues and Contingent Responsiveness to Caregiver). Paternal residency (0 = nonresident, 1 = resident) and biological father status (0 = social father, 1 = biological father) were determined by mother report. Men who lived in the home during at least one assessment were classified as residents.

Results. Hierarchical linear modeling (HLM; Bryk & Raudenbush, 1992) was used to derive an overall trajectory, consisting of a mean level on the interaction scale at 36 months and an estimate of linear change in interaction over time, for each parent and child while accounting for interdependencies between parents. The paternal status variables were then used to predict individual differences in the estimates for mean level and change. Level means, change parameters (significant estimates represent significant change), and tests for differences between mothers’ and fathers’ estimates for the overall trajectories are presented in Table 1.

Mean level. At enrollment, mothers were more sensitive to infant cues, but less likely to foster social-emotional or cognitive growth than were fathers. By 36 months, the pattern had reversed: fathers tended to be more sensitive to cues than mothers, but were less likely to foster social-emotional or cognitive growth. Children gave clearer cues to fathers at enrollment, but showed no differences in behavior toward parents by 36 months.

Linear change. Both parents increased significantly over time in their sensitivity to the child’s cues and cognitive growth fostering, but whereas mothers increased in social-growth fostering, fathers showed substantial decreases. Mothers increased more than fathers in sensitivity to cues and cognitive growth fostering. Children increased significantly in the clarity of cues and responsiveness toward both parents, but more so toward mothers.

Father status. Paternal residency, status as biological or social father, and the interaction between the two father status variables were examined to determine whether these characteristics accounted for variability in parent-child interaction trajectories. The results for the effects at enrollment are presented in Table 2.

Father status was not associated with maternal sensitivity to cues, but was consistently related to father sensitivity to cues. At enrollment, residential fathers were less sensitive than nonresidential fathers, and biological fathers were less sensitive than non-biological fathers. However, by 36 months, both residential and biological fathers had increased in sensitivity to cues; in fact, residential fathers were more sensitive than nonresidential fathers at 36 months (effect size r = .26, p < .05). Similar findings were evident among residential fathers (but not biological fathers) for cognitive growth fostering. At enrollment, residential fathers tended to be lower in cognitive growth fostering, but increased significantly over time.

TABLE1
TRAJECTORIES AND DIFFERENCES FOR PARENT-CHILD CONTINGENT RESPONSIVENESS

	Parent interactions						Child interactions
	Sensitivity to cues		Social-emotional growth fostering		Cognitive growth fostering		Clarity of cues		Responsiveness to caregiver
Parameters	Enroll	36 mo.	Enroll	36 mo.	Enroll	36 mo.	Enroll	36 mo.	Enroll	36mo.
Mother levela	3.75	4.51	1.82	2.2	2.82	4.79	7.18	8.67	6.3	8.09
Father levela	2.78	4.77	3.19	1.94	4.5	4.63	8.02	8.71	6.99	8.15
Level differences	26.44***	3.59t	50.40***	4.86*	5.29*	0.51	7.79**	0.04	2.39	0.04
Mother linear changeb	.33**		.27*		.68***		.59***		.50***
Father linear changeb	.24*		-.58***		.46***		.27*		.29*
Linear change diff.	21.88***		43.07***		4.14*		4.19*		0.94

a Mean. b Effect size r. t p < .07. *p < .05. **p < .01. ***p < .001.

TABLE 2
EFFECT SIZES FOR FATHER STATUS PREDICTING PARENT-CHILD INTERACTION TRAJECTORIES

								Child interactions
	Sensitivity to cues		Social-emotional growth fostering			Cognitive growth fostering		Clarityof cues		Responsiveness to caregiver
Parameters	Res.	Bio.	Res.	Bio.	Res. x Bio.	Res.	Bio.	Res.	Bio.	Res.	Bio.	Res. x Bio.
Mother level	-0.06	-0.09	0.06	-.24*		-0.16	-0.18	-.28*	-.23t	-.35**	-.39**	.29*
Mother change	0.06	0.06	0.18	.40***	-.28*	0.14	0.1	.23t	.22t	.26*	.29*	-.26*
Father level	-.63***	-.25*	0.08	0.16		-.22t	0.06	-0.08	0.02	-0.01	-0.16
Father linear change	.60***	.27*	-0.12	-0.18		.23*	-0.13	0.07	-0.06	0.08	0.16

Note. Effect sizes cannot be negative; directional signs are included to facilitate interpretation, where negative effect sizes in LEVEL represent lower levels at enrollment than at 36 months, and in LINEAR CHANGE represent decreases over time. a Mean. b Effect size r. t p < .07. *p < .05. **p < .01. ***p < .001. X2 (1,70)

Mothers’ social-emotional growth fostering, but not the other two interaction variables, was the only contingency measure predicted by father status; fathers’ own social-emotional growth fostering was not associated with their status as residential or biological. When mothers identified a social father figure rather than a biological father to be the child’s father at enrollment, they showed higher levels of social-emotional growth fostering. There was also a residential x biological status interaction for change. This indicated that when there was a biological or social father in residence, mothers increased in social-emotional growth fostering, when there was a biological father living outside of the home, mothers did not change in social-emotional growth fostering, and when there was a social father living out of the home, mothers decreased in social-emotional growth fostering.

Father status was associated with child contingent responsiveness to mothers, but not fathers. At enrollment, children provided clearer cues to mothers when fathers were not in residence; there was no significant change over time. An interaction effect between residential and biological status indicated that when the father was a nonresidential social father, children were more contingently responsive to mothers at enrollment, but decreased in contingent responsiveness to mothers overtime.

The overall picture suggests that fathers and mothers were more similar in their contingent responsiveness toward the child by 36 months than they had been when the child was a young infant. Children’s contingent responsiveness, which had tended toward favoring fathers, also became similar in interactions toward both parents. However, father status worked in distinct and complicated ways for mothers and fathers that were specific to different types of responsiveness.

References

Bornstein, M. H., Tamis-LeMonda, C. S., & Haynes, O. M. (1999). First words in the second year: Continuity, stability, and models of concurrent and predictive correspondence in vocabulary and verbal responsiveness across age and context. Infant Behavior and Development, 22, 65-85.

Bryk, A. S., & Raudenbush, S. W. (1992). Hierarchical linear models. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

Halpern, R. (1993). Poverty and infant development. In C. H. Zeanah (Ed.), Handbook of infant mental health (pp. 73-86). New York: Guilford Press.

Hochshild, A. R. (1989). The second shift. Avon Books.

Sumner, G., & Spietz, A. (1994). Caregiver/parent-child interaction teaching manual. Seattle, WA: NCAST Publications.

Watson, J. S. (1985). Contingency perception in early social development. In T. Field & N. Fox (Eds.), Social perception in infants (pp. 157-176). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.

 

 

Table of Contents | Previous | Next