Parent-Child Cultivation and Children’s Cognitive and Attitudinal Outcomes from a Longitudinal Perspective

Abstract

This work adopts the concept of "concerted cultivation" (Lareau A. American Sociological Review 67 (5), 747-776, 2002, 2003) to interpret how socioeconomic differentials in child rearing practices generate unequal children's outcomes, distinguishing between children's participation in organized leisure activities and children's engagement in cognitively stimulating activities. Results show that it is the engagement in cognitively stimulating activities and not the participation in organized activities more generally that enhances children's reading ability and the locus of control. Path analyses confirm that the selected dimensions of parent-child cultivation-parental expectations, direct stimulation, parental interactions with the school and children's engagement in cognitively stimulating activities-mediate more than half of the socioeconomic gradient in children's reading ability and the locus of control, even after controlling for the previous level of abilities. In addiction, the effect of parent-child cultivation is largely independent from and stronger than parental socioeconomic characteristics. The model is assessed on a large cohort sample (British Cohort Study 1970).

Development of socio-economic gaps in children’s language skills in Germany

“…He concluded: 'While concerted cultivation plays a role in explaining socio-economic advantage, it is only a modest part of the story' (Cheadle, 2008: 23). In addition, Pensiero (2011) showed that the effects of concerted cultivation on children's reading skills can be traced back to stimulating processes and reading activities and not to participation in organised leisure activities.…”

The Three Generations of Cultural Capital Research: A Narrative Review

“…Fourth, the Lareau branch has become increasingly international. Both qualitative and quantitative studies have emerged from France (Barg, 2013), South Korea (Byun, Schofer, & Kim, 2012), the United Kingdom (Crozier, Reay, & James, 2011; Gracia, 2015; Henderson, 2013; Maxwell & Aggleton, 2013; Pensiero, 2011; Stirrup et al, 2015; Vincent & Ball, 2007), the Netherlands (Kloosterman et al, 2011), China (Sheng, 2012, 2014), Taiwan (Shih & Yi, 2014), Denmark (Jaeger, 2009), Canada (Davies & Aurini, 2008; Milne, 2011; Milne & Aurini, 2015), Australia (Naidoo, 2015), Cyprus (Symeou, 2007), and Ireland (McCoy et al, 2012).…”

Public Investments and Class Gaps in Parents’ Developmental Expenditures

“…High-income and highly educated parents are better able to allocate resources for children in ways that are highly valued in educational and labor market institutions (Becker and Tomes 1979; Corak 2013; Hao and Yeung 2015). There are pronounced socioeconomic differences in parents’ involvement with children’s educational activities (Altintas 2016; Bassok et al 2016; Cheadle 2009; Kalil et al 2016; Lareau 2002; Pensiero 2011; Ramey and Ramey 2010; Roksa and Potter 2011) and in parents’ investments of money on items for children (Kornrich 2016; Kornrich and Furstenberg 2013; Schneider, Hastings, and LaBriola 2018), and these gaps appear to be widening over recent decades. Class gaps in private spending on children are manifest in developmental goods (e.g., books, toys, and games) (Hao and Yeung 2015), as well as in education itself and the “shadow” educational system of classes and tutors (Bray 1999; Park et al 2016).…”

“…Recent research also identifies significant class gaps in parental investments that contribute to high levels of inequality in family environments by income and education. Parents with more income and education invest more resources and developmentally targeted time toward their children (Hao and Yeung 2015; Hernández-Alava and Popli 2017; Kalil, Ryan, and Corey 2012; Pensiero 2011).…”