The Experts below are selected from a list of 391911 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Sara Mclanahan - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Family Structure transitions and child development instability selection and population heterogeneity
American Sociological Review, 2015Co-Authors: Dohoon Lee, Sara MclanahanAbstract:A growing literature documents the importance of Family instability for child wellbeing. In this article, we use longitudinal data from the Fragile Families and Child Wellbeing Study to examine the impacts of Family instability on children's cognitive and socioemotional development in early and middle childhood. We extend existing research in several ways: (1) by distinguishing between the number and types of Family Structure changes; (2) by accounting for time-varying as well as time-constant confounding; and (3) by assessing racial/ethnic and gender differences in Family instability effects. Our results indicate that Family instability has a causal effect on children's development, but the effect depends on the type of change, the outcome assessed, and the population examined. Generally speaking, transitions out of a two-parent Family are more negative for children's development than transitions into a two-parent Family. The effect of Family instability is stronger for children's socioemotional development than for their cognitive achievement. For socioemotional development, transitions out of a two-parent Family are more negative for white children, whereas transitions into a two-parent Family are more negative for Hispanic children. These findings suggest that future research should pay more attention to the type of Family Structure transition and to population heterogeneity.
-
reflections on Family Structure and child well being economic resources vs parental socialization
Social Forces, 2012Co-Authors: Elizabeth Thomson, Sara MclanahanAbstract:Briefly, our findings showed that cohabiting parents were closer to single parent families than married parent families in terms of economic disadvantage. We also found that differences in economic resources accounted for much more of the disadvantage associated with non-traditional Family Structures than differences in parenting, especially differences between single parent families and married parent families. Parenting differences, as measured in our data, accounted for only a small part of the differences associated with Family Structure. Our article was part of an ongoing stream of research to understand and explain the wellestablished association between Family Structure and child well-being. The fact that much subsequent research confirmed many of our findings is due to the substantial body of theory and empirical research upon which our study was built. As members of the design team for the National Survey of Families and Households, we had worked to ensure that all of the elements for the study were in place and did our best to ensure that gaps in prior data were filled. We view this study, however, as one in a series of incremental steps toward a fuller understanding of Family transitions and child well-being. It simplified but clearly articulated what had been viewed as the two primary mechanisms that might account for differences among families – time and money. The simplification may be part of the article’s popularity as a referent point for subsequent research that has gone well beyond in both theory and methods. The distinctions we were able to make among cohabiting and married stepfamilies and between never-married and ever-married mothers also provided stepping stones to more extensive and nuanced research. Research on Family Structure has expanded dramatically during the past two decades, in part because of the proliferation of different Family forms and in part because of the availability of new longitudinal studies that follow families and children over time. The new body of research presents a much more detailed and more complicated picture of the types of families in which children grow up and the Family conditions and processes that are associated with healthy child development. In the discussion below, we describe some of the
-
Family Structure transitions and maternal parenting stress
Journal of Marriage and Family, 2009Co-Authors: Carey E Cooper, Sara Mclanahan, Sarah O Meadows, Jeanne BrooksgunnAbstract:Data from the Fragile Families and Child Wellbeing Study (N = 4,176) are used to examine Family Structure transitions and maternal parenting stress. Using multilevel modeling, we found that mothers who exit coresidential relationships with biological fathers or enter coresidential relationships with nonbiological fathers reported higher levels of parenting stress than mothers in stable coresidential relationships. Mothers who enter coresidential relationships with biological fathers reported lower levels of parenting stress than mothers who remain single. Mothers' resources, especially their relationships with biological fathers, accounted for most of the associations between transitions and parenting stress, with posttransition resources being more important than pretransition resources. Mothers with high levels of education were less affected by transitions than mothers with less education.
-
Family Structure and the reproduction of inequalities
Review of Sociology, 2008Co-Authors: Sara Mclanahan, Christine PercheskiAbstract:Over the past four decades, income inequality has increased and Family Structures have diversified. We argue that Family Structure has become an important mechanism for the reproduction of class, race, and gender inequalities. We review studies of income inequality and Family Structure changes and find a wide range of estimates of the correlation. We discuss how increases in income inequality may lead to increases in single motherhood, particularly among less educated women. Single motherhood in turn decreases intergenerational economic mobility by affecting children's material resources and the parenting they experience. Because of the unequal distribution of Family Structure by race and the negative effects of single motherhood, Family Structure changes exacerbate racial inequalities. Gender inequalities also increase as mothers incur more child-related costs and fewer fathers experience Family life with children.
-
Family Structure and child well being economic resources vs parental behaviors
Social Forces, 1994Co-Authors: Elizabeth Thomson, Thomas L Hanson, Sara MclanahanAbstract:We used data from the [U.S.] National Survey of Families and Households to investigate economic resources and parental behavior explanations for Family Structure effects on children. The economic explanation received considerable support in terms of single-mother disadvantage and accounted for a smaller proportion of disadvantage associated with mother-partner families. Parental behaviors particularly maternal and paternal support accounted for much smaller proportions of disadvantages found in mother-stepfather as well as mother-partner families. Parental behaviors did not appear to mediate any of the economic resource effects on children. (EXCERPT)
Frank Denton - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Family Structure materialism and compulsive consumption
Journal of Consumer Research, 1997Co-Authors: Aric Rindfleisch, James E Burroughs, Frank DentonAbstract:Despite the rapid and dramatic changes in the Structure of the American Family over the past thirty years (e.g., divorce, single parenting), consumer researchers have largely neglected the issue of how alternative Family forms influence consumer behavior. The authors' initial inquiry into this area finds that young adults reared in disrupted families are more materialistic and exhibit higher levels of compulsive consumption than young adults reared in intact families. Furthermore, they show that the relationship between Family Structure and compulsive consumption is partially mediated by both the amount of resources available within the Family and the degree of Family stress. The authors also find that the impact of Family disruption on Family stress is moderated by socioeconomic status. They conclude by proposing an agenda for future research that considers the antecedents, processes, and consequences of alternative Family Structures as they relate to consumer behavior. Copyright 1997 by the University of Chicago.
-
Family Structure materialism and compulsive consumption
Journal of Consumer Research, 1997Co-Authors: Aric Rindfleisch, James E Burroughs, Frank DentonAbstract:Despite the rapid and dramatic changes in the Structure of the American Family over the past 30 years (e.g., divorce, single parenting), consumer researchers have largely neglected the issue of how alternative Family forms influence consumer behavior. Our initial inquiry into this area finds that young adults reared in disrupted families are more materialistic and exhibit higher levels of compulsive consumption than young adults reared in intact families. Furthermore, we show that the relationship between Family Structure and compulsive consumption is partially mediated by both the amount of resources available within the Family and the degree of Family stress. We also find that the impact of Family disruption on Family stress is moderated by socioeconomic status. We conclude by proposing an agenda for future research that considers the antecedents, processes, and consequences of alternative Family Structures as they relate to consumer behavior.
Elizabeth Thomson - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
reflections on Family Structure and child well being economic resources vs parental socialization
Social Forces, 2012Co-Authors: Elizabeth Thomson, Sara MclanahanAbstract:Briefly, our findings showed that cohabiting parents were closer to single parent families than married parent families in terms of economic disadvantage. We also found that differences in economic resources accounted for much more of the disadvantage associated with non-traditional Family Structures than differences in parenting, especially differences between single parent families and married parent families. Parenting differences, as measured in our data, accounted for only a small part of the differences associated with Family Structure. Our article was part of an ongoing stream of research to understand and explain the wellestablished association between Family Structure and child well-being. The fact that much subsequent research confirmed many of our findings is due to the substantial body of theory and empirical research upon which our study was built. As members of the design team for the National Survey of Families and Households, we had worked to ensure that all of the elements for the study were in place and did our best to ensure that gaps in prior data were filled. We view this study, however, as one in a series of incremental steps toward a fuller understanding of Family transitions and child well-being. It simplified but clearly articulated what had been viewed as the two primary mechanisms that might account for differences among families – time and money. The simplification may be part of the article’s popularity as a referent point for subsequent research that has gone well beyond in both theory and methods. The distinctions we were able to make among cohabiting and married stepfamilies and between never-married and ever-married mothers also provided stepping stones to more extensive and nuanced research. Research on Family Structure has expanded dramatically during the past two decades, in part because of the proliferation of different Family forms and in part because of the availability of new longitudinal studies that follow families and children over time. The new body of research presents a much more detailed and more complicated picture of the types of families in which children grow up and the Family conditions and processes that are associated with healthy child development. In the discussion below, we describe some of the
-
race differences in Family experience and early sexual initiation dynamic models of Family Structure and Family change
Journal of Marriage and Family, 2001Co-Authors: Elizabeth ThomsonAbstract:We examine the effects of Family Structure on age at first sexual intercourse before marriage for a recent cohort of women. Previous research on the linkage between Family Structure and sexual initiation has employed relatively crude measures of Family Structure-typically a snapshot of the respondent's Family Structure at age 14. We use retrospective parent histories from the 1979-1987 National Longitudinal Survey of Youth to construct dynamic measures of Family Structure, using information on the number and types of parents in the respondent's household between birth and age 18. We use these measures in proportional hazard models to test the effects of prolonged exposure to a single-mother Family, prolonged absence of a biological father, parental presence during adolescence, and Family turbulence. For White women, age-specific rates of first sexual intercourse are significantly and positively associated with the number of Family transitions; for Black women, age-specific rates are significantly and positively associated with having resided in a mother-only or father-only Family during adolescence. Net of other effects of Family Structure, we find no significant effects for White or Black women of being born out of wedlock, prolonged exposure to a single-mother Family, or prolonged absence of a biological father. Our results for White women are consistent with a turbulence hypothesis, whereas for Black women our results suggest the importance of Family Structure during adolescence. For neither White nor Black women are our results consistent with hypotheses positing earlier initiation of sexual activity for women with prolonged exposure to a single-mother or fatherabsent Family. Key Words: Family Structure dynamics, father abuse, premarital sexual initiation, racial and ethnic differences, single mothers. Numerous studies have found that sexual activity occurs earlier for adolescents who experienced a parental divorce or who have an absent father relative to those who resided with both biological parents (Billy, Brewster, & Grady, 1994; Booth, Brinkerhoff, & White, 1984; Brewster, 1994; Flewelling & Bauman, 1990; Hogan & Kitagawa, 1985; Inazu & Fox, 1980; Newcomer & Udry, 1984; Thornton & Camburn, 1987; Trent & South, 1992; Weinstein & Thornton, 1989; Whitbeck, Simons, & Goldberg, 1996). This empirical association is important because of the increasing prevalence of single-parent families and because early sexual activity may increase the risk of contraceptive nonuse, sexually transmitted disease, teen pregnancy, teen motherhood, and out-of-wedlock childbearing. Despite substantial empirical research, the mechanisms linking Family Structure to the initiation of sexual activity are not well understood. One difficulty has been the reliance of much previous research on relatively crude measures of Family Structure-typically a child's Family Structure at age 14. Such snapshot measures say little about what aspect of Family Structure influences adolescent behavior, in part because they conflate differences in an adolescent's Family trajectory that are, we argue, important in explaining the timing of first intercourse. In addition, snapshot measures ignore the increasingly fluid nature of Family life accompanying increases in nonmarital childbearing, divorce, and remarriage. We use data from the National Longitudinal Survey of Youth (NLSY) to examine age-specific rates of first sexual intercourse before first marriage for a nationally representative sample of women who entered adolescence during the late 1970s and early 1980s. We exploit detailed Family histories available in the NLSY to estimate the effects of the number of Family transitions, exposure to specific types of families, and Family Structure during adolescence. These results help shed light on how parental socialization, parental supervision during adolescence, and Family turbulence may have affected the timing of sexual initiation for this cohort of women. …
-
Family Structure and child well being economic resources vs parental behaviors
Social Forces, 1994Co-Authors: Elizabeth Thomson, Thomas L Hanson, Sara MclanahanAbstract:We used data from the [U.S.] National Survey of Families and Households to investigate economic resources and parental behavior explanations for Family Structure effects on children. The economic explanation received considerable support in terms of single-mother disadvantage and accounted for a smaller proportion of disadvantage associated with mother-partner families. Parental behaviors particularly maternal and paternal support accounted for much smaller proportions of disadvantages found in mother-stepfather as well as mother-partner families. Parental behaviors did not appear to mediate any of the economic resource effects on children. (EXCERPT)
-
Family Structure gender and parental socialization
Journal of Marriage and Family, 1992Co-Authors: Elizabeth Thomson, Sara Mclanahan, Roberta Braun CurtinAbstract:Data from the National Survey of Families and Households demonstrate that parental behavior varies to a limited extent by Family Structure and to a much larger extent by gender. Mothers spend more time with children and are more responsive to childrens behaviors than fathers whether they are married single or remarried. Single parents spend more time with children than do married parents while being equally responsive to children. It is primarily stepparents both stepmothers and stepfathers who report significantly less frequent activities and fewer positive responses to children. We note however that single parents do not spend twice as much time with children as do married parents so that from the childs point of view there are significant differences between parental time in one- and two-parent families. We also observe important interactions between effects of Family Structure and parents sex such that male or female "primary parents" spend more time with children than "secondary parents." This means that the most egalitarian childrearing arrangements are likely to be found in father-stepmother families the least egalitarian in mother-stepfather families. We do not find significant effects of Family Structure on negative responses to children or on parental control or demands. (authors)
Sheppard G Kellam - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
household Family Structure and children s aggressive behavior a longitudinal study of urban elementary school children
Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 1995Co-Authors: Nancy Vadenkiernan, Jane L Pearson, Nicholas S Ialongo, Sheppard G KellamAbstract:The relationship between contemporary household Family Structures at fourth-grade and sixth-grade parent- and teacher-rated aggression was examined in an epidemiologically defined population of urban school children. The relationship between Family Structure and aggression varied by child gender and by parent and teacher ratings in the home and school, respectively. After taking into account Family income, urban area, and fourth-grade aggressive behavior, boys in both mother—father and mother—male partner families were significantly less likely than boys in mother-alone families to be rated as aggressive by teachers. No significant relations between Family Structure and teacher- or parent-rated aggression were found for girls.
-
Family Structure and aggressive behavior in a population of urban elementary school children
Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 1994Co-Authors: Jane L Pearson, Nicholas S Ialongo, Andrea G Hunter, Sheppard G KellamAbstract:ABSTRACT Objective This report examined associations between Family Structure and 393 fourth-grade children's aggressive behavior. Method In an epidemiologically defined urban community population, both teacher and parent ratings of child aggressive behavior were examined among Family Structures that reflected current demographics. Relative risks for teacher- and parent-rated child aggressive behavior in mother-alone households were compared with those in the next most prevalent Family Structures (mother-father, mother-grandmother, and mother-male partner families). Results With all income groups combined, teachers rated boys and girls in mother-alone families as more aggressive relative to mother-father families. Among low-income families, the protective effects for mother-father families were not apparent, and mother-male partner families were associated with an increased risk for teacher-rated aggression for boys. Conclusions Absence of and type of second adult present, child gender, home and school context, and income were important factors that moderated the associations between Family Structure and child aggressive behavior in this urban setting.
Anne E Winkler - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
welfare rules incentives and Family Structure
Journal of Human Resources, 2020Co-Authors: Robert A Moffitt, Brian J Phelan, Anne E WinklerAbstract:We reexamine the effects of welfare on Family Structure, emphasizing that AFDC and TANF rules are based more on the biological relationship of the mother’s children to any male in the household than on marriage or cohabitation. We find that many 1990s welfare reform policies did not affect Family Structure, but that several work-related reforms increased single parenthood and decreased marriage to biological fathers. These effects are most evident when work-related reforms are bundled and examined over a longer time period. We hypothesize that these effects stem from increased earnings of single mothers and factors specific to biological fathers.
-
welfare rules incentives and Family Structure
2015Co-Authors: Robert A Moffitt, Brian J Phelan, Anne E WinklerAbstract:In this study we provide a new examination of the incentive effects of welfare rules on Family Structure. Focusing on the AFDC and TANF programs, we first emphasize that the literature, by and large, has assumed that the rules of those programs make a key distinction between married women and cohabiting women, but this is not a correct interpretation. In fact, it is the biological relationship between the children and any male in the household that primarily determines how the Family is treated. In an empirical analysis conducted over the period 1996 to 2004 that correctly matches Family Structure outcomes to welfare rules, we find significant effects of several welfare policies on Family Structure, both work-related policies and Family-oriented policies, effects that are stronger than in most past work. Many of our significant effects show that these rules led to a decrease in single motherhood and an increase in biological partnering. For all of our results, our findings indicate that the impact of welfare rules crucially hinges on the biological relationship of the male partner to the children in the household.Institutional subscribers to the NBER working paper series, and residents of developing countries may download this paper without additional charge at www.nber.org.
-
welfare rules incentives and Family Structure
National Bureau of Economic Research, 2015Co-Authors: Robert A Moffitt, Brian J Phelan, Anne E WinklerAbstract:In this study we provide a new examination of the incentive effects of welfare rules on Family Structure. Focusing on the AFDC and TANF programs, we first emphasize that the literature, by and large, has assumed that the rules of those programs make a key distinction between married women and cohabiting women, but this is not a correct interpretation. In fact, it is the biological relationship between the children and any male in the household that primarily determines how the Family is treated. In an empirical analysis conducted over the period 1996 to 2004 that correctly matches Family Structure outcomes to welfare rules, we find significant effects of several welfare policies on Family Structure, both work-related policies and Family-oriented policies, effects that are stronger than in most past work. Many of our significant effects show that these rules led to a decrease in single motherhood and an increase in biological partnering. For all of our results, our findings indicate that the impact of welfare rules crucially hinges on the biological relationship of the male partner to the children in the household.
