Family economic pressure and early adolescents' prosocial behavior: The importance of considering the types of prosocial behavior

Abstract

Background Prior research findings are mixed regarding whether prosocial behavior is positively or negatively related to socioeconomic status and its correlates, such as economic pressure. This may be due to the lack of considerations for the type of prosocial behavior. Aims In this study, we aimed to examine how six types of prosocial behavior (i.e., public, anonymous, compliant, emotional, dire, and altruistic) are related to economic pressure among early adolescents. We hypothesized that family economic pressure would be associated with each type of prosocial behavior in differing ways. Materials & Methods Participants were 11–14 years old (N = 143, Mage = 12.2 years, SDage = 0.87, 63 boys, 1 trans‐identified boy, 55 girls), early adolescents and their parents. Among them, 54.6% were non‐Hispanic/Latinx (NH/L) White, 23.8% were NH/L Black, 11.2% were NH/L Asian, 2.1% were NH/L Multiracial, and 8.4% were Hispanic/Latinx. Parents reported family economic pressure and adolescents' six types of prosocial behavior. Results Path analysis revealed that economic pressure was negatively associated with emotional and dire prosocial behavior over and above age, gender, and race/ethnicity. Family economic pressure was unrelated to public, anonymous, compliant, and altruistic prosocial behavior. Discussion These findings show some support for the Family Stress Model, such that economic stress might hinder youth's prosocial development. At the same time, youth may have similar levels of certain types of prosocial behavior regardless of their family's economic pressure. Conclusion This research provided insight into the complex relation between economic pressure and youth's prosocial behavior which varies depending on the type of behavior.

Examination of promotive and protective effects on early adolescent prosocial behavior through a bioecological lens

“…One suggested mechanism is that economic strain decreases capacity for empathy as an adaptive response to scarcity, which leads to decreased prosocial behavior (Jiang et al, 2020). Another study, grounded in the Family Stress Model, illustrates how family economic stress can negatively impact youth prosocial behavior (Xiao et al, 2023). Specifically, in a cross-sectional study with youth ages 11-14, Xiao et al (2023) found that economic pressure, also referred to as financial stress or strain, was negatively associated with two types of prosocial behavior (dire and emotional types).…”

“…Another study, grounded in the Family Stress Model, illustrates how family economic stress can negatively impact youth prosocial behavior (Xiao et al, 2023). Specifically, in a cross-sectional study with youth ages 11-14, Xiao et al (2023) found that economic pressure, also referred to as financial stress or strain, was negatively associated with two types of prosocial behavior (dire and emotional types). We apply this logic to examine financial security by hypothesizing that individuals in families with greater financial security are better positioned to give more social and emotional support to those around them given their lower strain and competition for resources.…”

Socio-demographic Differences in Prosocial Tendencies Aimed at the LGBTQIA+ Community from a Sample of Slovak Heterosexual Adults

“…Public prosocial behaviors are performed in the presence of others, which can create social pressure and the need to maintain a positive image [9]. In contrast, digital prosocial behaviors can be performed anonymously or with reduced social pressure, allowing individuals to engage in prosocial acts without the fear of judgment or scrutiny [13,14]. Another difference lies in the nature of the interactions.…”