Wednesday, Nov 25
	PSID Guide | Data and Documentation | Publications and Conferences | Child Development Supplement | Search CDS Guide | Time Diary | Bibliography | Contact Us

Chapter 1
Overview of the Study

Summary

Between February 1996 and June 1998, the University of Michigan, Survey Research Center conducted the 1997 Child Development Supplement to the Panel Study of Income Dynamics (PSID). The objective of the project was to gather data that would provide researchers with comprehensive and nationally representative information about children and their families to study how economic and social differences affect child development.

The Child Development Supplement to the PSID obtained the following: (i) reliable, age graded assessments of the cognitive, behavioral, and health status of 3,600 children (including about 250 immigrant children) obtained from the mother, a second parent or parent-figure, the teacher or child care provider, and the child; (ii) a comprehensive accounting of parental and caregiver time inputs to children as well as other aspects of the way children and adolescents spend their time; (iii) teacher-reported time use in elementary and preschool programs; and (iv) other-than-time use measures of other resources--for example, the learning environment in the home, teacher and administrator reports of school resources, and parent-reported measures of neighborhood resources. Data were collected from 2,394 PSID families with 3,586 children aged twelve and under.

Introduction

The PSID is the premier ongoing longitudinal survey of a representative sample of U.S. men, women, children, and the families in which they reside. Data on employment, income, wealth, housing, food expenditures, transfer income, and marital and fertility behavior have been collected annually since 1968. From 5,000 families in 1968, the study had grown to include over 8,700 families in 1996, since children and other sample members become respondents in their own right when they leave the original household. In 1997, the PSID reduced the core sample and added a refresher sample of immigrants to the United States (since 1968) so that the data are representative of the current U.S. population. As a result, in 1997 the core PSID sample consisted of 6,792 families. The study is conducted at the Survey Research Center, Institute for Social Research, University of Michigan. Core funding is provided by the Economics and Sociology programs of the National Science Foundation, with additional funding from the Department of Health and Human Services, the Department of Housing and Urban Affairs, and the National Institute on Aging.

One of the major uses of the Panel Study of Income Dynamics in recent years has been to examine the consequences of family events and circumstances such as family structure and income during the years children are living with their parents for children's educational and economic successes as young adults (Brooks-Gunn, Duncan, Klebanov & Sealand, 1993; Duncan, Brooks-Gunn & Klebanov, 1994; Duncan, Yeung, Brooks-Gunn, & Smith, 1998; Haveman & Wolfe, 1994; McLanahan & Sandefur, 1994). Until 1997, data on family circumstances were collected annually from interviews with one adult respondent so, for individuals in the sample under age 30, these family measures are available from birth for years they are in the study. Once children turn age 12, information about their marital, fertility is obtained; at age 16, labor force activities and income are obtained; and, once they form their own household, detailed information on their own circumstances as young adults is obtained. However, the only information on children as children had been limited to age, sex, and schooling. Therefore, we did not know the childhood mechanisms or process whereby early family, school, and neighborhood experiences facilitate or detract from leading a healthy, productive adult life. In 1995, funding from the Assistant Secretary of Planning and Evaluation, Department of Health and Human Services, enabled the PSID to include a set of questions asked of adults about their own and their young children's school successes, and failures. While this was an important first step, the supplement was limited. It contained no direct assessments or reports of children's development and experiences as children.

The Child Development Supplement to the PSID (PSID-CDS) rectified that situation. The additions to information collection in the main PSID include the following: (i) reliable, age graded assessments of the cognitive, behavioral, and health status of 3,600 children (including about 250 immigrant children), obtained from the mother, a second parent or parent-figure, the teacher or child care provider, and the child; (ii) a comprehensive accounting of parental and caregiver time inputs to children as well as other aspects of the way children and adolescents spend their time; (iii) teacher-reported time use in elementary and preschool programs; and (iv) other-than-time use measures of other resources--for example, the learning environment in the home, teacher and administrator reports of school resources, and parent-reported measures of neighborhood resources.

Theoretical Model

Selection of interview content was guided by theories of child development in which financial, time, and social-psychological resources are crucial to child development (Hofferth, 1995). Following Haveman and Wolfe (1994), we view "resources" very broadly, defining them as consisting of the purchased resources, time, interpersonal connections, and institutions that parents, schools, and communities may use to promote the development of children. Resources actually spent on promoting child and adolescent development are considered "investments" since, independent of whether they add to a child's well-being immediately, time and money are expended that may enhance the future health, cognitive ability, and productive social behavior of children.

Resources from which investments in children are made are derived from the various contexts in which the child develops (Bronfenbrenner, 1979). We classify these as family, school, neighborhood/community, and larger societal systems. "Societal systems" include government policies that provide resources for children in general or for particular subgroups of children.

Types of Family Resources
In this project we concentrate on three general kinds of resources: financial, time, and social-psychological, with measurement of most of these kinds of resources taken at the level of the family, neighborhood and school. In economic models, the financial and time resources that are made available to the children in a family (Hill & Stafford, 1985; Lazear & Michael, 1988) indicate the level of investment, while the human capital (e.g., schooling level) of the parent indicates the likely "quality" of that investment.

Recent work has found strong relationships between childhood income and child development. Duncan, Brooks-Gunn and Klebanov (Duncan, et al., 1994) related patterns of childhood poverty to age-5 IQ and behavior problems, using data from a longitudinal study of low-birthweight children observed from birth. The duration of economic deprivation is a highly significant predictor of both outcomes; differences in the economic resources of single- and two-parent families partly explain the effects of single-parent family structure on IQ. Miller & Korenman (Miller & Korenman, 1994) use data from the NLSY Mother-Child file to show that a multi-year measure of average family income is the most powerful SES-based predictor of age-normed stunting (low height-for-weight) and wasting (low weight-for-height). Recent research focusing on wealth shows that temporary economic difficulties can be weathered more easily by families with greater assets (Yeung & Hofferth, 1998); consequently, their children may not be adversely affected.

Much more is known about income than about time use, but we do know that bearing children leads to a restructuring of parental time. On the one hand children destabilize marriage by reducing the shared leisure time of their parents, but on the other hand they may stabilize marriage by providing a source of shared satisfaction (Hill, 1988). Time-use diaries have been extremely useful in describing the activities in which parents spent time in the 1970s and 1980s and how much time was spent in child-oriented activities (Timmer, Eccles & O'Brien, 1985). Despite this work, very little is known about how income and time are distributed across children within individual families; that is, how much is allocated to various household members. Gathering information from both partners or joint caregivers is important to understanding intrafamilial resource allocation (Lundberg & Pollak, 1994).

Social and psychological resources at the family level include characteristics of the parents such as their mental and physical health; the quality of the relationship between them; parental values such as education and work; and beliefs about the parental role in child rearing; and parenting style. Some of the most important parenting style indicators include provision of learning and stimulating experiences; communication and decision-making styles; warmth; disciplinary practices; monitoring and supervision; and engagement. All have been shown to be empirically associated with child well-being (Maccoby & Martin, 1983; Bornstein, 1995; Holmbeck, Paikoff & Brooks-Gunn, 1995).

Family members' choices have implications for the allocation of their limited resources. Residing in a single-parent household means less parental time available to children (Hill & Stafford, 1980; Nock & Kingston, 1988). Residence in a stepparent household also results in less time spent in parental interaction than in two-biological-parent families (McLanahan, Astone & Marks, 1991; Thomson, McLanahan & Curtin, 1992; Hetherington, 1993). Other adults in the household may provide the child with more parental-figure time. For example, in multigenerational households, the grandmother or grandmother figure often functions as a co-parent with regard to responsibilities and time spent with the child. Co-residence in multigenerational households presumably would offer children more resources (Furstenberg, Morgan, Moore & Peterson, 1987; Furstenberg & Crawford, 1978; Kellum, Adams & Brown, 1982) except in cases where the grandparents cannot help with childcare, and, if ill, might require care themselves. The changing pattern of extended family support in black families has been studied (Hofferth, 1984; Jackson & Woodford, 1990). Many of the measures used represent the sharing of economic resources, but time sharing across the extended family has been studied less routinely. From child diaries which include who was present, as we propose to do, researchers could quantify the time inputs from extended family, neighborhood groups, child care arrangements, and preschool/schools.

The quality of resources is also important. Mothers who find juggling work and parenthood stressful, unsatisfying, or too much of a time drain may put less effort into providing stimulating experiences for their children, or may exhibit less warmth toward their children (Wilson, Ellwood & Brooks-Gunn, 1995; Weinraub & Wolf, 1983; Lerner & Galambos, in press). Non-working fathers may not be able to use their extra time with their children in a productive manner because of the stress of being unemployed. Conflicts may arise among intergenerational household members over the roles of both generations in the care of the children, which may be translated into less warmth or less provision of learning experiences by either the mother or grandmother (Brooks-Gunn & Chase-Lansdale, 1995).

Types of Extra-Familial Resources
Social capital has recently been conceptualized as an important potential resource (Coleman, 1988). Social capital consists of the interpersonal connections that families establish with people outside their immediate families (kin, peers, childcare providers, neighbors, schools, community). Time (e.g., helping others, volunteer work) and money invested by the family in these connections built a stock of resources that the family can call upon when needed. A neighborhood rich in connectedness among families and individuals and with high expectancies for its children has a level of trust and stability that could prove extremely beneficial to children. Important time and money inputs also come from neighborhood institutions (e.g., schools, libraries, small businesses, youth centers) outside the family.

Though family factors typically account for more variance than school factors, school factors may make a difference (Rutter, 1987; Jencks & Mayer, 1988). There are three aspects of school resources that appear to make a difference to children's learning: time, materials, and classroom composition. In addition, aspects of school structure also appear to make a difference to child outcomes, including "time on task" or actual academic learning time in the classroom (Lee & Smith, 1995; Borg, 1980). The provision of before and after school programs and extracurricular activities, higher per pupil expenditure and low student/teacher ratios are important resource-related attributes, in that they cost money. A mix of race/ethnic backgrounds and ability levels constitute important resources. An appropriate mix that is helpful to the low achievers may not be harmful to high achievers (Valerie Lee, personal communication).

Coleman's social capital paradigm applies to schools as well as to neighborhoods. It includes parental involvement with the school and in the child's schooling. Another source of social capital is connectedness through knowing the parents of one's child or children. This may occur through residential proximity, close-knit neighborhoods, through school involvement and school activities or through church and other social-organization-related activities.

Figure 1-1 presents our model of how children's outcomes are related to parental resources and parenting practices. In the first stage, five parental behaviors--employment, marriage, childbearing, welfare receipt, and residential mobility--are a function of background variables such as education and key determinants of economic status. In the second stage, resources such as time, expenditures and parenting style are modeled as a function of demographic and economic status from earlier stages. Marital stress is included as a potential intervening factor in modeling parenting style. In the last stage, children's outcomes (physical health, socioemotional development, and academic achievement) are a function of resources and parenting behavior.

The Instruments

Child and Primary Caregiver. The child is assessed first, using a set of standardized tests and questions. Then, the primary caregiver (usually the mother) answers a set of interviewer-administered questions about each child, for up to two children. In order to obtain more information about the family and to assess parental functioning and parent-child and parent-parent relations, each primary caregiver fills out a self-administered questionnaire (SAQ).

Secondary Caregiver. The collection of information from a second caregiver is a unique aspect of this study. Each secondary caregiver fills out one SAQ about the child and a second SAQ about the household. While assessment of father involvement in the lives of their children is a key goal, we define the second caregiver quite broadly, since in many low-income households the second caregiver is a grandmother. Our study is designed so that parenting, conflict, attitudes, and division of household tasks will be obtained regardless of whether the second caregiver is a father, an unmarried male or female partner, or the child's grandmother. Additionally, information on father involvement was obtained from the primary caregiver, whether or not the father lives with the child.

Absent Fathers. Another key and unique aspect of this study is the collection of data from absent fathers. Mothers of children who had fathers living elsewhere were asked to provide contact information on the father and the interviewers attempted to contact and interview these men. The content of the absent father-child interview was similar to that of the other caregiver, focusing on the sample child. A household booklet was also administered.

Demographic and Economic Context. The core PSID survey collects information on the number of parents, number and ages of children, presence of other adults, income, employment, earnings, hours of work, and education of all family members. Measures of parental financial resources are excellent; all major components of wealth as well as income are collected. In 1997 a child support supplement was funded for the first time and included in the core to provide information on father financial contributions to children. Variables from the core can be merged with the Child Development Supplement to provide additional information on children's families.

Time Diary. Another unique aspect of the study is the collection of a time diary of children's activities. The last national data on children's time use was collected in 1981 by the University of Michigan on a small sample of several hundred middle class families. Many studies continue to utilize these numbers even though they are old (Task Force on Youth Development and Community Programs, 1992). Parental time with children is the one area on which data reported in stylized form are considered unreliable because of a strong social desirability bias. A recent study using U.S. data from the 1920s to the 1980s reports that parental time caring for children rose rather than declined over the period, in spite of increased maternal employment (Bryant & Zick, 1996). Until 1997 no data were available to document changes since 1981.

Preschools and Schools. Resources from schools and preschool programs are important to children's lives. The PSID-CDS collected information from the teacher and administrator of the child's school or childcare center/program, family day care home, or other day care provider. The teacher/caregiver provided information on the child, on activities in the classroom, and on his or her own characteristics. The administrator provided information on the characteristics and composition of the school and its student body. The teacher instrument for elementary school also obtained a diary of child and teacher activities during the school day, teaching style, the resources available in the classroom, and the characteristics of students and teacher. Teachers provided information on child behavior using many of the measures on which the mother reports.

Communities. The PSID Child Development Supplement includes a rich set of measures on the communities in which children grow up. Some of these data will be merged onto the data file from Census Data or administrative sources (particularly income and race-ethnic characteristics of the neighborhood) and others were asked directly of parents (such as the extent to which parents know their neighbors, participate in community activities, and view their neighborhood as "safe"). The information collected includes economic, social, and policy characteristics of the community in which the child lives.