Young Children’s Prosocial Behavior Protects Against Academic Risk in Neighborhoods With Low Socioeconomic Status

Abstract

Children raised in neighborhoods with low socioeconomic status (SES) are at risk for low academic achievement. Identifying factors that help children from disadvantaged neighborhoods thrive is critical for reducing inequalities. We investigated whether children’s prosocial behavior buffers concurrent and subsequent academic risk in disadvantaged neighborhoods in Bradford, UK. Diverse children (N = 1,175) were followed until age seven, with measurements taken at four times. We used governmental indices of neighborhood‐level SES, teacher observations of prosocial behaviors, and direct assessments of academic achievement. Neighborhood SES was positively associated with academic achievement among children with low levels of prosocial behavior, but not among children with high levels of prosocial behavior. Prosocial behavior may mitigate academic risk across early childhood.

Bored of the rings: Methodological and analytic approaches to operationalizing Bronfenbrenner's PPCT model in research practice

“…Their approach demonstrates how the synergy between person, context, process, and time can be implemented elegantly and effectively. Armstrong-Carter et al (2021) Armstrong-Carter et al ( 2021) utilized a longitudinal design to examine how neighborhood environment impacted children's prosocial behavior and later academic outcomes. Drawn from the Born in Bradford Study, completed in the United Kingdom, their sample included 1175 children (50% South Asian and 50% White or other) and, in this paper, data were utilized from three time points.…”

“…In Armstrong-Carter et al (2021), from a bioecological perspective, the proximal processes could be operationalized as the child's prosocial behaviors at time 1, when they were 4-5 years of age. Prosocial behavior was measured through a teacher-reported survey, the prosocial subscale of the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ).…”

“…At time 2, study staff completed an observational measure in the home, and two subscales (harsh parenting and maternal emotional support) were used in the analyses. Although this measure of proximal processes could be improved in similar ways as those discussed below for the Armstrong‐Carter et al (2021) study (i.e., assessment of the duration and frequency of parenting practices, growing complexity, and reciprocal interactions between child and parent), this study provides an illustrative example of a recommendation delineated by Bronfenbrenner and Morris: “From a theoretical perspective, the power of a PPCT design is most effectively enhanced by including more than one proximal process in the model” (2006, p. 808). In measuring two proximal processes, one inverse (i.e., harsh parenting) and one positive (i.e., maternal emotional support), the authors were able to gain insight into the complex and differential mechanisms at work.…”

“…Armstrong‐Carter et al (2021) utilized demographic information as control variables. Both gender and self‐identified ethnic identity were significant in the overall model related to early learning goals, suggesting that at least one of these two variables would be an excellent choice as an antecedent person characteristic.…”

A German Adaptation of the Prosociality Scale

“…Numerous studies have shown that acting prosocially does not only benefit the target of the action (e.g., the person who is cared for), but also the actor. For example, higher prosociality is related to higher academic achievements and fewer problem behaviors among children and adolescents (Armstrong-Carter et al, 2021; Bandura et al, 1996; Caprara et al, 2000; Kokko et al, 2006; Miles & Stipek, 2006; Xinyn et al., 2002) and with higher self-esteem, greater civic engagement, better self-regulation, and higher life satisfaction among adolescents and adults (Caprara & Steca, 2005; Luengo Kanacri et al., 2017; Zuffianò et al, 2014).…”