The (Conditional) Resource Dilution Model: State- and Community-Level Modifications

Abstract

One of the most consistent patterns in the social sciences is the relationship between sibship size and educational outcomes: those with fewer siblings outperform those with many. The resource dilution (RD) model emphasizes the increasing division of parental resources within the nuclear family as the number of children grows, yet it fails to account for instances when the relationship between sibship size and education is often weak or even positive. To reconcile, we introduce a conditional resource dilution (CRD) model to acknowledge that nonparental investments might aid in children's development and condition the effect of siblings. We revisit the General Social Surveys (1972-2010) and find support for a CRD approach: the relationship between sibship size and educational attainment has declined during the first half of the twentieth century, and this relationship varies across religious groups. Findings suggest that state and community resources can offset the impact of resource dilution-a more sociological interpretation of sibship size patterns than that of the traditional RD model.

Sibship Size and Educational Attainment: Evidence of Cohort Trends from 26 Low-Fertility Countries

“…Both studies commonly found increasingly weaker negative associations between sibship size and education. For instance, the educational disadvantage associated with sibship size in the US nearly halved when comparing individuals born in the 1900s with those in the 1960s (Gibbs et al 2016). In line with this finding, Fahey (2017) also reported a steady decline in sibship size during the latter half of the twentieth century, particularly in the 1970s and 1980s, highlighting that the decline was most prominent among child with lower socioeconomic status, especially black children.…”

“…For example, using data from multiple US surveys, Blake (1989) assessed the relationship between sibship size and years of education and how it varies over time. Gibbs et al (2016) also addressed the same issue with more consistent and recent data, General Social Surveys from 1972 and 2010. Both studies commonly found increasingly weaker negative associations between sibship size and education.…”

“…Children from a large family suffer from resource dilution, but stronger public policies and supports in education and family are likely to compensate such disadvantages that stem from families. For example, Gibbs et al (2016) show that the negative effect of sibship size on educational attainment in the US was largest in states where per capita spending on higher education was lowest, which suggests that state resources and policies can offset the impact of the RD mechanism. They frame this as conditional resource dilution (CRD) and suggest that "the expanding size of state-sponsored investments in education and related programs that unlink family background from educational opportunities" explain "the decline in the relationship between sibship size and educational attainment over time" (Gibbs et al 2016:738).…”

“…(Lu and Treiman 2008:813). Indeed, some studies documented evidence of positive or non-negative associations (Lu and Treiman 2008;Maralani 2008;Parish and Willis 1993;Pong 1997) and others reported remarkable temporal variations within societies (Gibbs, Workman, and Downey 2016;Lu and Treiman 2008). These studies suggest that a negative relationship between sibship size and educational outcomes is not a universal phenomenon but a topic that should be examined through a comparative lens.…”

Fewer Siblings, more Wealth? Sibship Size and Wealth Attainment

“…The role of the sibship configuration, including aspects such as sibship size (i.e. the number of siblings) and birth order, for attainment processes throughout the life course has been studied since the 19 th century (Galton 1874) and remains a contentious issue today (Black et al 2010;Gibbs et al 2016;Härkönen 2014;Jacob 2011). Questions of whether and how sibship size and other aspects of the sibship configuration may shape individuals' life chances are important to address to understand the interplay between demographic processes and intra-and intergenerational processes of social stratification (Steelman et al 2002).…”