Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Family structure and child outcomes: an illusive relationship Don Kerr King’s University College University of Western Ontario 2004 Canadian Population.

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "Family structure and child outcomes: an illusive relationship Don Kerr King’s University College University of Western Ontario 2004 Canadian Population."— Presentation transcript:

1 Family structure and child outcomes: an illusive relationship Don Kerr King’s University College University of Western Ontario 2004 Canadian Population Society Meetings Winnipeg, Manitoba

2 To what extent is "family structure” To what extent is "family structure” important in predicting child outcomes? important in predicting child outcomes? 2 issues: 2 issues: Why should “family structure matter”? Why should “family structure matter”? What empirical evidence is currently available on this issue with the NLSCY? What empirical evidence is currently available on this issue with the NLSCY?

3 Behavioral Scales for Children 4-11, NLSCY (first cycle) by Family Type

4 Why should “family structure matter”? Why should “family structure matter”? In both step and lone parent families In both step and lone parent families child loses out from the lack of co-residence with one biological parent -> less parental supervision -> less parental supervision -> lower transfer of social & human capital -> lower transfer of social & human capital (Amato & Booth, 1997) (Amato & Booth, 1997) There is no consensus on this issue!!! There is no consensus on this issue!!!

5 In working with the first wave of the NLSCY In working with the first wave of the NLSCY Multivariate analyses: Multivariate analyses: -> family type is found to be a useful predictor of childhood difficulties -> family type is found to be a useful predictor of childhood difficulties -> association persists with controls for low income, age, educ, etc. -> association persists with controls for low income, age, educ, etc. What does this cross sectional association represent??? What does this cross sectional association represent??? > the impact of being raised in a lone parent/step family > the impact of being raised in a lone parent/step family OR OR > the impact of “antecedent” factors > the impact of “antecedent” factors i.e. what lead to the formation of the lone parent/step family in the first place? (conflict, abuse?) i.e. what lead to the formation of the lone parent/step family in the first place? (conflict, abuse?)

6 In Longitudinal analysis: In Longitudinal analysis: -> most common approach: -> most common approach: “autoregressive or residual change analysis” “autoregressive or residual change analysis” -> An alternative is now possible (4 cycles of the NLSCY) -> An alternative is now possible (4 cycles of the NLSCY) Latent Growth Curve Models (LGM) Latent Growth Curve Models (LGM)

7 Autoregressive or Residual change approach Child outcome 1994 Child outcome 2000 Family structure, income, etc. Many critiques of this approach Rogosa et al. 1982; Rogosa and Willett (1985)

8 As an alternative: As an alternative: Latent Growth Curve Models (LGM) Latent Growth Curve Models (LGM) Duncan et al (1999) Duncan et al (1999) -> does not model variance at a specific point in time -> does not model variance at a specific point in time -> attempts to model individual trajectories on dependent variable over time -> attempts to model individual trajectories on dependent variable over time

9 Example: with consistent measures of hyperactivity: over 4 cycles (1994, 1996, 1998, 2000) Score on hyperactivity scale

10 Latent Growth Models Scale on externalizing problems Intercept Slope E1 E2E3E4

11 Latent Growth Models Scale on externalizing problems Intercept Slope E1 E2E3E4 Mean 4.9 Var 6.7 Mean -.565* Var.466

12 Latent Growth Models Scale on externalizing problems Intercept Slope E1 E2E3E4 Mean 4.9 Var 6.7 Mean Var.466 Lone parent * -.05ns

13 Latent Growth Models Scale on externalizing problems Intercept Slope E1 E2E3E4 Mean 4.9 Var 6.7 Mean Var.466 Lone parent Low income * -.05ns -.033ns.099*

14 Latent Growth Models Scale on externalizing problems Intercept Slope E1 E2E3E4 Mean 4.9 Var 6.7 Mean Var.466 Lone parent Step Family Low income * -.05ns.107*.132* -.033ns.099* GFI=.970 CFI=.971 χ2 =355.6 df = 13

15 Conclusion: Conclusion: Results are preliminary Results are preliminary Results are very mixed as to the importance of family structure Results are very mixed as to the importance of family structure Future research -> additional controls/behavioral scales Future research -> additional controls/behavioral scales LGM looks particularly promising in the analysis of change LGM looks particularly promising in the analysis of change


Download ppt "Family structure and child outcomes: an illusive relationship Don Kerr King’s University College University of Western Ontario 2004 Canadian Population."

Similar presentations


Ads by Google