Psychological Bulletin 1999, Vol. 125, No. 2, 223-254 Copyright 1999 by the American Psychological Association, Inc. 0033-2909/99/$3.00 Enduring and Different: A Meta-Analysis of the Similarity in Parents' Child Rearing George W . Holden an d Pamela C . Miller University of Texas at Austin The assessment of child-rearing beliefs and behavior has predominantly focused on qualities and characteristics believed to reflect consistent, enduring qualities of parenting—the similarity in child rearing. This review evaluate s the e vidence for similarity and differences among 3 types of child-rearing data and includes comparisons across time, children, and situations. B oth relative stabili ty and mean level differences were found in all 3 domains. The most similarity was found in the across-time arid across-children domains, although it depended on the child-rearing construct an d methodology used. It is argued that attention to the variability an d change in child rearing must be incorporated into theoretical models of parenting to better un derstand the natu re of child rearing and, in turn, parental influence on children's deve lopment. Is a mother characterized as sensitive when her son is an infant, equally sensitive when he reaches preschool, elementary school, or high school? Does a father exhibit the same amount of attention, love, and firm discipline to his 5-year-old son as to his 8-year-old daughter? And is a parent's irritability in the supermarket diag- nostic of the quality of caregiving provided in the home? Each of these questions represents a different face of the issue concerning the similarity of parental behavior. This question is critical fo r applied reasons a s well as for discovering the role that parents play in their children's develop- ment. The rigidity with which individuals are tied to their child- rearing beliefs and practices is an important issue for clinical psychologists wh o work with children exhibiting behavior prob- lems. If parents are to be effective therapists fo r their children (Kazdin, 1987) or adolescen ts (Schmidt, Liddle, & Dakof, 1996), then they nee d to adopt and maintain new behavioral repertoires. Similarly, developme ntal, social, school, and comm un ity psychol- ogists working to prevent a range of social problems including child injury (child maltreatment, poisoning, accidents), youth mor- bidity (substance abuse, obesity), school failure (low performance, dropouts), teenage sexual promiscuity (STDs, pregnancy), an d antisocial behavior (aggression, gang membership) are concerned with th e issue o f modifying parental behavior. According to human behavioral geneticists, the similarity of parenting is an especially timely theoretical issue. Plomin (1990, 1994) and others (e.g., Hoffman, 1991) have argued that to under- George W. Holden and Pamela C. Miller, Departmen t of Psycho logy, University of Texas at Austin. Pamela C. Miller is now at the Department of Psychology, University of Houston. Preparation of this article was supported in part by a National Institute of Child Health an d Human Development Grant 1 RO1 HD26574-01A1. We thank Elizabeth Thompson, who served as a second coder, as well as Rebecca Bigler, Anne Cameron, Ted Dix, Judith Langlois, William Swann, Ross Thompson, and John Weisz for their helpful comments. Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to George W. Holden, Department of Psychology, University of Texas, Austin, Texas 78712. Electronic mail may be sent to [email protected]. stand phenotypic differences among siblings, parents' roles in creating shared and especially nonshared environments need to be explicated. The concept of nonshared child-rearing environment recognizes that parents may interact with or structure a child's physical and social world differen tly from that of his or her sibling. Although such differences may be derived from parental charac- teristics or elicited by the child's attributes or predispositions (Scarr & McCartney, 1983), siblings nevertheless encounter dis- tinct as well as similar child-rearing experiences (e.g., Anderson, Hetherington, Reiss, & Howe, 1994; Brody, Stoneman, & McCoy, 1994). This particular theoretical emphasis on child-rearing differen ces comes in stark contrast to the historically prominent view of parents. Theories and popular beliefs about child-rearing effects posit that parents influence their children in a variety of ways (Holden, 1997; Maccoby & Martin, 1983). One way is through habitual patterns of interaction. "In theories of child-rearing, pa- rental behavior is assumed to have effects o n children through a history of experiences. There is faith [italics added] that, overtime, parental influences lead to generalized behavior tendencies that have some durability" (Radke-Yarrow, Zahn-Waxier, & Chapman, 1983, p. 502). Social-learning approaches (e.g., Patterson, 1982) as well as family-systems theories (e.g., Minuchin, 1985) both as- sume that parental effects occur through recurrent interactions. "We can assume that the family system, like any system, has self-stabilizing properties. . .Families stabilize around habitu al pat- terns of interaction; thus there is contin uity over time in the familial forces that support th e distinctive personality patterns o f individual children" (Maccoby, 1984, p. 326). If children's devel- opmental outcomes are affected by recurrent interactions, then stable patterns of child rearing are assumed to be responsible for links between parenting practices and child outcomes. Invariant views of child rearing and families are appealing in that they provide a parsimonious model of parenting. Methodolog- ically, it is also far more convenient for researchers to embrace such a view. If parental behavior were variable or changing, then making assessments of parental behavior would be much more difficult, time consuming, an d costly. Even more fundamental is 22 3
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
1982). These and other potential sources of child-rearing variabil-
ity ar e listed in the lower half of Table 2.
The likelihood that parent-child relationships can be character-
ized by considerable difference should not be surpris ing; there is
ample evidence that adult in timate rela tionships undergo s ignifi-
can t changes over rela tively short periods of t ime, such as during
hon eymoon s or after the birth of a child (B elsky & Rovine , 1990;
Cowan & Cowan, 1992). Certain close observers of parental
behavior ar e keenly aware of variability in child-rearing practices:
Children are quick to protes t that parents act more favorably
toward their s iblings than to them (e.g., Dan ie ls , Du n n , Fu rs ten -
berg, & Plomin, 1985).
Summary
The above examples of sources of child-rearing similarities and
differences illus tra te the competing evidence for both continuity
an d change in parenting. How the determinants interrelate—and
impact child-rearing similarity—is likely to be abstruse. Certain
determinants may compete between each other (e .g. , current be-
liefs vs. experience in family of origin), others may be additive
(e.g., difficult temperament and poverty), and s till others may
interact (e.g., personality and stress). Some variables mediate
child-rearing behavior and its stability (e.g., attributions); others
serve as moderators (e.g., poverty). However the variables relate,they represent a mu lt i tu d e of potential influences that contribute to
both similarities and differences across the three child-rearing
domains of consideration.
Through this discussion of in f lu en ces on paren t in g , it becomes
apparent that which variables or influences are held constant and
which variables are manipulated will impact the outcome. It is
likely that an investigator could design a s t u d y to maximize either
child-rearing similarities or differences. To some degree, we sus-
pect that this has occurred in the li terature. Longitudinal s tudies of
parent-child relations are in ten d ed to reveal stability, in contras t to
cross-situational s tudies that are more likely to emphasize the
situational specificity of child rearing. Research examining par-
enting across children falls somewhere in the middle, whereby
each child's temperament and behavior are the variables allowed
to f lu c tu a te .
Questions Addressed in the Meta-Analysis
Theoretical orientations and empirical reports have presented
credible reasons concerning why parenting behavior might be
characterized by either similarity or difference. This meta-analysis
is designed to systematically evaluate the available evidence. On
the basis of the exis ting li terature, we generated several hypothe-
ses. For several reasons, we expected the greates t amount of
similarity to be f o u n d in the across-time s tudies ra ther than th e
across-children or across-situations s tudies. Foremost, given that
the same dyadic rela tionships were assessed, those rela tionships
are based on a common his tory of in teractions and that longitudi-
nal s tudies were in tended to maximize the likelihood of finding
s tability, we expected to f ind th e mos t evid en ce of con t in u i t y in
tha t domain. Another reason why we expected the most s imilarity
across time was that su ch s tu d ies were u n l ik e ly to con t ras t theparen t in g of an i n fan t with th e paren t in g of an adolescent; ra ther,
it was expected that most s tudies would utilize rela tively short
longitudinal t ime frames by making comparisons across months
rather than across years .
G iv en the potential power of proximate contextual influences on
both the child 's and the parent 's behavior, we expected the across-
situations s tudies would show the leas t amount of parenting s im-
ilarity for several reasons. Firs t , we recognized that parental be-
havior can be highly s ituation specific , as much of the child-
rearing literature reviewed above has shown. Second, in line with
theoris ts such as Mischel (1984), we expected the person-situation
in te rac t ion wou ld res u l t in differences across contexts . In addition,
we reasoned that s tudies examining behavior across s ituations
w o u l d be d es ign ed to max imize the ways in which the con tex t
elicited different behavior. We anticipated that s tudies comparing
parenting across children to fall in be tween the o the r two d omain s
in terms of the e x t e n t of similarities or d if fe ren ces fou n d .
Several specific variables were hy pothesized to modify the level
of similarity for the across-time domain. We expected s tudies
containing longer samples of child-rearing behavior ( thereby cap-
t u r ing more representative samples of behavior) to show more
similarity than s tudies with briefer observations. Also, s tudies with
shorter t ime in tervals between assessments were predicted to show
more s imilarity, as has been fou n d with children 's in te lligence tes t
scores (e .g. , McCall, Appelbau m, & Hogarty, 1973). We reasoned
tha t investigations across t ime were more likely to use global and
molar-type variables, which in turn should show greater in terindi-v idual s tability than behavioral variables commonly assessed in
s tudies across children or across s ituations. Similarly, long itudin al
s tudies also are likely to rely on child-rearing at t i tudes, which are
likely to be more s table than child-rearing behavior (Holden,
1995). Finally, we anticipated t ha t similarity would be more ap-
parent in s tudies that began with older children, where parent-
child behavioral re la tionships would be more es tablished and
would u n d ergo fewer dramatic ontogenetic changes t han in s tu d ies
commen c in g in i n fan cy .
Method
Identification of the StudiesThree strategies were used to identify potential studies for i n c lu s io n . Th e
primary search method involved conducting a computer search of the
Psychological Abstracts database (PsyclNFO, 1888-1997). In addition, to
identify unpublished conference presentations, a computer search of the
Educational Resources Information Center (ERIC, 1901-1997) database
was also conducted. Both searches involved the use of the descriptors
parents) and child-rearing, cross-referenced with stability, instability,
consistency, variation, longitudinal, context, situation, an d siblings. Sec-
ond, a manual search was conducted of art icles published in Child Devel-
opment an d Developmental Psychology from the years 1980 th rough 1997.
The ancest ry method was a lso use d, whereby references l is t ed in review
or empirical studies provided a source for other articles. Those searches le d
to a total of 132 studies that were examined for possible inclusion.
To be included in the data set, th e study had to meet five criteria. First,
th e s tudy had to include a direct assessment of parents, rather than thechildren's perception of their parents' child-rearing behaviors or attitudes.
The assessment me thod could involve the use of questionn aires, inter-
views, observations, or some combination. Second, because we wanted to
investigate th e similarity of no rmal parental behavior, research in to clinical
samples of parents or children (e.g., depressed parents, noncompliant
children), family transitions (e.g., modifications in family composition
such as divorce, change in parents' work status, or adjus tments to na tura l
disasters or trau ma), or studies invo lving parents of disabled children were
omitted.
Although these criteria reduced the sample size, it was done in o rder that
the results be generalizable to normal child-rearing practices. Fo r example,
it has been shown that certain clinical populations of mothers (e.g., de-
pressed, schizophrenic) not only exhibit different rearing practices than
comparison mothers (Goodman & B ru m l ey , 1990; Kochanska, Kuczynski,
& Maguire , 1989), but they show diminished ability to adapt and modulatetheir behavior (Dix, 1992). Inclusion of such groups could have inflated
measures of the similarity of child rearing. However, wherever possible,data from comparison groups used in those clinical studies were included
(e.g., Kochanska, 1990; McHale & Pawletko, 1992).
Th e third criterion fo r inclus ion wa s tha t th e s tudy needed to contain
sufficient statistical information (correlations, F or t values, means, and
standard devia t ions , or at a min imu m, some in formation regarding s ignif-
icance) to allow the use of meta-analytic techniques . Fourth, we limited our
focus to mothers ' child rearing becau se of an insufficient number of studies
focusing on fathers. (We did identify a total of 21 studies that sampled
fathers; all but four also included mothers.) Finally, because we wanted to
examine actual child-rearing behaviors or beliefs, studies that focused on
parental behavioral intentions were excluded. Most of these studies used
vignettes asking parents to predict how they think they would behave in
response to a particular scenario.
A total of 87empirical studies met those criteria. The investigations fell
into three categories: (a) 56 studies examined parental behavior or attitudesover time; (b) 13 studies investigated parental behavior across different
children within a family; and (c) 20 studies assessed parental behavior
across situations.1
Those studies included 66 published articles (69% from
Child Development or Developmental Psychology), nine conference pre-
sentations, six chapters, three monographs, tw o dissertations, and onemanual.
A summary of the characteristics of the studies is found in Table 3.
Sixty-three percent of the studies contributed to the across-time domain,
15% to the across-children domain, and 22% to the across-situations
domain. Most (84%) of the studies that used a single assessment method
relied on systematic observations, followed by questionnaires (11%), an d
interviews (5%). Although th e data se t spans almost 35 years, more than
three fourths of the studies (78%) appeared in the past 15 years. With
regard to the age of the children, infants or toddlers were th e focus in 71%
of the studies; only 18% of the studies include d children older than age 10.A final characteristic of the studies that varied across child-rearing domain
was the sample size. The mean number of mother-child dyads in the
across-time studies was 75. The across-children studies had the largest
number of mothers per study (n = 139), whereas the across-situations
studies had, on average, th e fewest number of mother-chi ld dyads(n = 41).
Another characteristic of the three sets of studies was the presence of
confounds. Studies in each of the three domains ha d confounds. Of the 56
1Tw o studies contained data for two domains (Conger & Conger, 1994;
across- t ime s tudies , n ine in t roduced a confound by changing the se t t ing
(k = 6) or swi tch ing the assessmen t m ethod f rom observat ion to se l f -repor t
(k = 3). All of the across-children studies had one of two types of
l imi ta tions: The observat ions inevi tably confoun d e i ther the age of a ch i ld
or the age of the paren t . Invest iga t ions mu st either have had paren t s in t erac t
wi th thei r own chi ldren , who were a t differen t ages, or the researchers mu st
have waited u n t i l the younger ch i ld reached the same age tha t the o lder
chi ld was before conduct ing the second parent-child observat ion . Out of
the thirteen across-children s tudies inc luded in the meta-analysis , seven
co n f o u n d e d age of ch i ld, and s ix confounded t ime (a long wi th the age of
the paren t ) . Another confou nd wi th the da ta concerns the across-situa t ions
s tudies . The design of the s tudies involved changes in loca t ion , t asks, or
bo th . Three of these s tudies compared paren ta l behavior in the home wi th
behavior in the laboratory or another location (e.g., park). The other 17
studies occurred only in one set t ing (10 in the laboratory and 7 in the
home). Each of these single-set t ing studies created two or three differen t
si tua t ions by modify ing ac t iv i ti es (k = 13), in t roducin g o ther individuals
in to th e in terac t ions (k = 2) , swi tch ing rooms (k = 1), or modify ing
act iv i t i es and in t roducing ano ther individual (k = 1).
Selection of Child-Rearing Variables
Each s tudy measured an average of 6.1 child-rearing variables, result ing
in a total of 533 variables of interest . Two coders then independently
grouped those variables into child-rearing const ruc t s . Considerable a t t en-
t ion wa s devoted to determining th e appropriate construct categories.
Col lapsing variables into too few categories might have obscured any
systemat ic pa t t erns. Al terna t ively , i f too many categories were crea ted,
there might no t have been enough data for analyses. The coders arrived
at 11 independen t ch i ld-rear ing const ruc t s , ranging f rom caregive to ver-
balization. Four of the con st ruc t s ref lec ted different aspects of the qual i ty
of in terac t ions. Caregive included observational variables that reflected
daily custodial act iv i t ies wi th youn g ch i ldren , su ch as f eeding , ho lding , and
sooth ing . Behavioral or att i tudinal measures that reflected support, praise,
help , rewards, or use of posi t ive re inforcement were coded in to the con-
struct encouragement. Interaction was a behavioral construct that indicated
the degree of posi t ive involvement between mother and ch i ld, inc luding
engagement , p lay , and proximi ty . .Behaviors tha t involved demonst ra t ing
to the chi ld, t eaching , or providing some type of cognit ive or social
s t imula t ion were coded as stimulation. Maternal vocal iza t ions directed to
th e chi ld tha t may have been qual i f i ed as rate of speech, syntactic com-
plexity, or richness of vocabulary were classified as verbalization. A
const ruc t tha t cap tured the qual i ty of in t erac tion was responsiveness. Th e
behavioral var iables subsumed by th is const ruc t inc luded assessments of
sensi t iv ity or respon sivi ty . At t i tudinal or observat ional assessments of
child management or disciplinary practices or orientations that may have
appeared as restrictiveness, power assertion, or punishment were co l lapsed
in to the const ruc t control. Another behavioral const ruc t was monitor,
which consisted of paren ta l supervision (watchin g) or main ta in ing an
awareness of the ch i ld 's ac t iv i t i es . Two af fec t -based const ruc t s were in-
c luded. Negative a f f e c t consis t ed of the observed or self-reported at t i tudes
of host i l i ty , re jec t ion , cr i t ic i sm, or negat ive emot ional i ty . Positive a f f e c tencompassed behavioral or a t t i t udinal measures of maternal p leasure or
e n j o y m e n t with th e child, operationalized as laugh, smi le , warmth, an d
affect ion. Final ly , the const ruc t noninvolvement inc luded those behaviors
that reflected a lack of interest or involve me nt with the child, such as
i g n o ri n g o r n o n e n g a g e m e n t .
To assess the reliabili ty of the coding of the variables, two coders
independe n t ly ca tegorized the variables in to the 11 const ruc t s . They agreed
on ca tegory p lacement in 82% of the cases. Al l discrepancies were dis-
cussed and resolved by the coders. A total of 35 of the 533 variables (6.6%)
could no t be c lassi fied in to one of the const ruc t s and thus were no t inc luded
in th e analyses (e.g., achievement pressure , chores , f ee l ings of competence,
i n d e p e n d e n c e , an d over-protection or foster ing dependency) .
In severa l ins tances, two or more var iables used in a s tudy were co l-
lapsed and c lassi fied in to the same con st ruc t . For example, in a s tu dy by
Clarke-Stewart (1973), appropriateness and responsiveness were both in-
c luded under the const ruc t responsiveness. In such cases, the effect sizes
from the two (or more) var iables were averaged to form one measure per
s tudy as recommended by Rosen thal (1991) to m a i n t a i n i n d e p e n d e n t
samples in the meta-analysis .
Tables 4, 5, and 6 l is t the s tu dies analyzed in each of the three domain s
an d provide a summary of the key characterist ics of the studies, including
the sample size, presence of moderator variables, and the particular con-
s tructs examined.
The Meta-Analytic Method Used
Meta-analyses typ ical ly examine th e effects of an independen t var iable
on a dependen t var iable . In the case of parent-child relat ionships, this
t echnique has been used to address such quest ions as whether paren t s
differentially socialize their sons and daughters (Lytton & Romney, 1991),
whether ch i ldren 's wel l being i s adversely affected by being raised in
divorced, single-parent families compared with two-paren t famil ies
(Amato & Keith, 1991), and whether parental caregiving is related to child
dent variable is manipulated at two or more levels, and the relat ion betweenthe two variables i s then expressed as an effect size (ei ther with an r or d).
The cen t ra l analyses in th is ar t ic le , however , do no t examine the effect
of an independen t var iable on a dependen t var iable . Rather , we examine
whether paren t s are re la t ively s imi lar over t ime, differen t chi ldren , or
con texts . Thus, a par t icu lar var iable was assessed a t two poin t s in t ime,
with two ch i ldren , or in two or more s i tua t ions. Because the i ssue of the
degree o f similari ty is d e t e r m i n e d from correlational analyses, th e effect
size (ES) est imates were based on Pearson product-moment correla t ions
(e.g., Rose nthal, 1984). For studie s examin ing two (or more) variables
classified in to the same const ruc t , the ES was the average correla t ion . For
the com puta t ion of the average correla t ion , Fischer's r-to-z transformation
was use d. I f the resu l t s indica ted on ly tha t the correla t ion was non sign i f -
ican t , th e variable wa s given an effect size of 0.
A n um ber of s tudies , ra ther than assessing degree of similari ty, exam-
ined the i ssue of whether child rearing differed sign ifican tly in one of thedomains. A n a l y s e s from these s tudies were most of ten /-tests or A N OV A s
an d were t ransla t ed in to effect sizes with d (Hedges & Olkin, 1985). Effect
sizes were a lso computed in s tudies tha t provided means an d standard
devia t ions bu t did no t report any stat ist ical test . Studies reporting only
sign i ficance l evels were a lso inc luded in the an alyses. For un speci f ied
s ignif icant resu l t s , p value s along wi th sample s izes were used to determine
effect sizes (Johnson, 1993). As wi th th e correla tional da ta , non sign i f ican t
results were assigned an effec t size of 0. Across both type s of data, the o n ly
information provided for 29 (5.4%) of the 498 variables wa s tha t th e
analyses were nonsign i f ican t .2
Correla t ional da ta as wel l as da ta concern ing the di f ference in mean
levels of scores both yield information about similari ty and change. How-
ever, for convenience, correlations are referred to as an index of similari ty,
whereas tests of mean levels of scores are ascribed to as an index of
difference or c h a n g e . B e c a u se th e effect sizes obta ined from t or F valuesdeno t ing differences across t ime, ch i ldren , or s i tua t ions could no t be
combined with the correlations expressing similari t ies, separate a n a l y s e s
were conducted for s imi lari ty and di f ferenc e t es t s. I t should be poin ted ou t
that the similari ty and difference tests are not conceptually opposite. For
example, th e f r e q u e n c y of h u g g i n g or kissing children will l ikely show a
2The meta-analyses were recomputed wi thou t these non sign i f ican t var i-
ables. Removing those variables resulted, for the most part , in minimal
changes in the overa l l effect sizes. This set of meta-analyses is available
*o e ft *tt m Q > E 5 o ' 3 £ - S - § *« "^^ • - ^ '— OC
^ S *\u
'-C t/5 G /-^ Q ^Z , "3 ° W ) *^^ td ^ . 2 Q 2 t/J
1|Qg° 1iJl S If111
'~
N
§ G Pi ^ -T^ ^ • •- '•" 'i t '" ^ Q *3 1) t> C O D . .. cdQ Q, o ». Q . £3 '— • y ^" J2 v5 ^ ^ G ^ ^ '"" '* P '-" ^£ fl - ^ . C ^ i— Q 2 ^ .2 <S ^"^ '" C /5 .S . •• *tt • •• cfl , „ Q ^G
c / 5 " H £ 0 ^ *H -^ " Hu
« - w"w
Q" ^"^ ^ 5 5 " S" *^ r "^
IslI1 | |ll° i I s - f s s 1si g |>|s | i&1&^ '°B.^^ « i ||g ^ 1 is^ss'is
a l s S - s ^ |5a|l§§sl° -1l-igs" °-S §M"°1M"Is
fflsl i i ii Jiji1ilj||||J1ilUiif |» Ifllill
U U co O <3 U S Z (2 6 S U U UW W U U U
•a -oi|
3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 § « 3 < 3O U C J U U U G O c n U «C"^ CJ 0 0 O
1 111 1 - 3 11 l a1^ , ^ ^ 111S "S D D "S 5 P H 3 "S D D D DE H D (2 D
V3 C A d d CA C A C A V ] X VI
t) f] t/ V JV J ,f JQ J2 J y JJ J2W 3 VJ J J
•£ H ' S ' S f i ' S f i t s • t s ' S e S ' S G G ' S c "S ScB O C C O C O O g g O C O O C O C O Oo S o o p o 5 p — 2 r t 2 P o p p o p o ppp B B S e e _ S - . E
CB
e aE E c c
C N O O O O - ^ f 1 I C M C M C M C M C ^ O O
.S c c£ — e P § ia 2 S
.S .S .S .S .S o . p '3 'I -c
•- < n "e - S oE ES E £
f r^ r ^ ' 3 P E ^ "^c l ^ 'p £ ^ ?
9 l ^ s - i s S P § l § s s ^ p 1 § ^
(A SA WJ W5 CA J2J S w c « c « 2 ^ G O
M« £ J 3 J 3 JH C A S E 2
•S S' S' S£- | p| S5 S § S S ^ S 6 g. •§P O P P p S O S ( t ) P ^ . p P O O H O P ^ooS
!slll3Saa
f ll||2 sa!a! S ^
8 >G
^ ^>
§ 1 g g 1 § § § 1g1g g § § § § § gi g"*3 S T3 '-3 S "S "-3 '-3 ' C O S '.C '& '5 'i* *5 'S " O '£3w = < d « j r « c a e f l e d ^ S c o e d c d c d c d W ed e d ' ^ J e d> . ; ; >>.55 > r * r * > « d . s > > > • > > > > > c o >I-H j _ i i _ U > 4 - t U U U i_ 3 *j i_ U U U i U i U i U t- qj E -4i c A { U 4 i c n 4 J U U O f c J C A Q J U < 1 > U D ( U ( U 4 )31 )E H . 3 . 3 § , 3 ^^ ^ ' « g j ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ J ^ o1^o a o o cx o o o o o1
«c - a c e.2 c .2 -2^ S a s ?5e - S e ttl> co qj U05 41 co coJD 3 X) 43
o cx o o
vo r-- CM ONTf in rooo
<u
2 ~& Si ~ — •x^TS %_ r co o ri
IllsS c .S ON g
- u H- J r"
£•~&a*
< J O ~c
•S <$j " £ oo"7-1 pri ^v>
Q
On
p
vae
moSD
;smuaoD
&§
g§ g
111§| §uSu
•o
0oB
- a S P
§-ll> > £.0 E
o CM <n
c
is•g < =IOVO
«§ « "f
^ s s^&en \O ro
Inevew
Ovao
Ovao
oo r-OO C O ^*<N
Xs
oo
in" O --rON OO^O\ ON a
= J 13 Q«Mo"" O =<)
s >-. c
CO
CJ
<£ s<U
cd •— 3
D t\ '«> a> O• g4_< CL
1Jg
Q '» S
g f
§111o fa o ..g ca u,->
IK u E Q,
« '§ S " o•a S1 S S
1c
§8.» ,- U
D "
a g g ^ a1 l i'||§ § °§ 1 "aU U U U
3 j.
^11J 3 "23 MS M 3cj 5 o 5 uI'S H "g Stc .<u to ("U to
D P ID
|g Js | s , § §4 jq o ^
c
Ec c o
• § E 7o o -3<iG\ ON C ^O
- £ 2 _ g
1 & Z S c <> <T3 ti c9 O^ID -rt- 54 COgT)P ^ - S > > — c c oSJS^ j ^ o o s ; - -
•-^ (N --^ r-
*1C! C CS '3GO C O 2 O•n o -a S -s« *i3 c a g «(c S £ '+ 3 £O 34) «Daa ET-
M<U crt
Xi ^^43 3 43
0 0 OO
O CN VO Ocs rs o > cs
*&
3
_|
O Na\
2 J-SC- **C-ONp
jf£5ON
1g3S£
11«&
8 8sI1
^ x s2
xQ
^c^OD o c:
r is - s•S S 21 1 1 — " •--
CS0^
—_„&Q
III
I•— C3 3
U OOV)^g gQ
glg?11ll'1
U U U
T) -a
3 3
H 2
C 3 cd C
D S ^
• sm u g
r— oo cs
^^ M J3C C 00
•S 1-cc 2 2 w ci§ ^oB >, oo £
cJ r- —
4 0
1 § 1> S .0
J-§ «5 UCO tA•-' 3 ^
o a o
( CM O
*S" 5£OO Ho\ J3
C 33
g -*)S bb
aJ
> i *°
g 38^
1 1^1
+ - . . . . ^
co ^r^ < u Q .c
O W5 jj «3 '— ^
g lg I|g§Js I 1| 1 | i s~! 3r/C tS '"S S
CCflgfcS2,| -
5 2 - -3 A;> 2 ^ " S - ^ ^ - E_ g Q -3 & Q S c j S u t i t S5 c "c o ^ 2
s- > < £ - .
•| SM| ^ 2^g'|« g
S "* — ? - • - - t - * n'-3c C a>'-C *-• S ? s c co 4) >c 'S? t3
" « S,Q
c --S SSM
^^ g 'w | ^ M « C ^ «
S°2 § g g1
- s t s l -Sgs5£ .|g||gg_ Isal-^agK
1
is .2 w Q > co o G ^ — • •• > is • * • • < u co 2
||Su g'i|g s|° flaggl 'l s ^ ^ s § al -a -a^lls'lal§ , g c S > S o S c & = '5 e a 5 2 , c ' g e g S S
O U O ^ i O D O co ct f O o ±oz u £u a: u u u u u 5
1 SO &0 00 DO
I - S .S .3 &•
Cg M Mg uM M « M ^
D u H - s a c u D - ^ - a - a H a c u
« »
cH M"S«
fiC "S en g "S
S £ § g ^ E £ g § 2§o o o - - ^ ^ ^ V O - H ^ > % C | ) r y c— • C M CM r-CN CO (N OO ON — ON OO
+
t_ c; a c^ ' s ^ -^ "s "iTo -S - ^ m -§ -5 -5 ^^ orovo c ro m — c c c C c —
i/> ^ (/) t« c/i w - t»
OS § §^0o § 0 § § §|1E_ > > E ^ ^ E E E >, x E > > Ev o - r o v o - v o c o ^ - c o o l - ^
#
2 o = 3 bb
.S |'1 .1.2 1 > 'a |u |u |
lg o S f o o 1 ' f e f ' f cSC C 'O C C C e '> '.3 C a > C a ) CflJW t/3 UU 4> S d ^ W ± S l > ^ i 4 >W 3 W 5 U W l c c in ? qj U « C ( « C v iX> 3 .C_O 4^ i - 3 ,o.a.c
oo a oo o a £ a o o o
r— i in CM oo ON " in co in o\ •— o
0 3~
" " "c "O
T~ M"O ON *•" " ^^ r «
o M C o o f l i « = o g «
J g - s? ^^ | 2& £S . 2 |
l"i || « 1 ||2 « 5|S^ ^ jr ^ u § B S - • d ' ^ ^ ^ s
s f > ; = 3 B| •§ sS
£ J 3 ym
^"-uMJ2 S C O O Q S <% i >-W S ^ 'C •S
IHi 11 illjs i 1 !PIa- ou 0.0. o- a, £ ci oo on on
compared with th e crit ical value of the standard normal distribution a t a se t
significance level (1.96 for one contrast and 2.24 for three contrasts). If the
con t ras t v a lu e exceeded the critical value, the difference b e t w e e n t h e t w o
effect sizes was considered sign ifican t. B ecau se of the risk of Type 1 errors
result ing from multiple comparisons for each construct, we used a s imul-
taneous t es t procedure (Bonfer roni inequal i t i es) and se t the s ign i f icance
level as well as cri t ical values according to the number of contrasts
conducted (Hedges & Olkin , 1985). An inspec t ion for s tudies tha t mayhave cont r ibu ted ou t l i ers was conducted for the major analyses; no clear
outliers were found.
The final set of analyses involved t es t ing the moderator variables. These
analyses were computed a t the s tudy level . When avai lable , a to ta l of s ix
moderator variables were teste d for. Two types of moderator variables
were present in two domains: (a) age of child ( infant , toddler, school age)
an d (b) l e n g t h of observation (less than 30 min, 30-59 min, 60 or more
min). In addi t ion , four other moderators could be assessed in on ly one of
the domains. Across- t ime data was used to t es t whether the method of
assessment (observation, self-report from quest ionnai re or in t erview) af -
fected the levels of similari ty. In addit ion, the impact of the t ime interval
between assessments (6 months or l ess , more than 6 bu t l ess than or equal
to 12 mon ths, over 12 mon ths) was examine d in this domain. For the
across-children studies, the age difference betwee n the ch i ldren a t the t ime
of the assessment (same age vs. differen t ages) was tested. Type ofs i tuat ion (different set t ings vs. different tasks) was assessed in the across-
s i t u a t i o n s analyses. Analyses resu l t ed in a Qb, which fo l lows a ch i -square
distribution and has p—l degrees of f reedom where p i s the number of
leve ls . I f there was a s ign i f ican t Qb, the means of the two or more l evels
of th e modera tor var iable were s ign i f ican t ly different from each o ther
(Hedges & Olkin, 1985). Follow-up linear contrasts were conducted among
th e m e a n w e i g h t e d effect sizes in the case of a s ignif icant Qh when there
were more than two levels of the moderator variable.
Results
Similarities in Child Rearing
Test-Retest Reliability
Interpreta tion of the results from individual s tudies is dependent
on th e reliability of the assessment in s t ru men ts ; th e similarity
observed cannot exceed the reliability of the method (Alder &
Scher, 1994; Nunnally, 1978). Test-retest reliability of measures
of child rearing has been examined with two methods—behavioral
observations and atti tude questionnaires . Correlations of maternal
behavior based on repeated observations of the same mother-child
dyad in the same activity a t the same location (generally free play
in the home or laboratory) over a short period of t ime (from 3 days
to 1 month apart) were reported in 11 studies.5 The med ian
correlation was .59, ranging from a low of .35 to a high of .78.
These results indicate that repeated observations of matern a l be-
havior over a short period of time do provide a moderate degree of
reliability.
The test-retest reliability of global a t t i tude questionnaires is
typically higher than the re tes t re liability of observational data.
Althou gh retes t data were not included in the present articles with
enough frequency to be summarized, a review of a t t i tude ques-
tionnaires f o u n d tha t the mean test-retest reliability for 12 ins tru-
ments that used samples of parents was .74 (range = .61 to .89;
Holden & Edwards, 1989). These reliability limits should be kept
in mind when in terpreting the following f indings.
Results at the Study Level
R es u l ts from th e study level revealed that high levels of child-
rearing s imilarity were f o u n d in the across-children (r = .50, p <
.001, CI = .487.53, k = 10,n = 1,670; Q = 95.35, p < .001) and
th e across-time (r = .45, p < .001, CI = .437.46, k = 47,
n = 3,786; Q = 497.40, p < .001) studies. The mean effect size
from the across-situations s tudies was s ignificant as well butshowed less similarity than the other domains (r = .26, p < .001,
CI = .207.32, k=l2,n = 509, Q = 47.14, p < .001). Con tras t
tes ts revealed that the effect size for the across-children similarity
was s ignificantly s tronger than the across-time and the across-
s i tu a t ion s effect sizes (Z CT = 2.47, p < .05, zcs = 5.93, p < .05,
respectively). The across-time effect size was also significantly
higher than the across-situations effect size (ZTS = 4.80, p < .05).
However, the results a t the s tudy level were qualif ied by the
finding of heterogeneity for all three domains. Nevertheless , the
fail-safe Ns for the three domains ar e substantial. It wou ld
take 64,553 s tudies with null results to make the across-time
res u l t s n on s ign if ican t . Th e comparable n u mber of s tudies for the
across-children data is 6,441 and for the across-situations data
is 976.
Results at the Individual C onstruct Level
Meta-analyses a t the individual construct level provide the most
precise information about s imilarity of child rearing. However,
tha t set of analyses was limited by sample size; in several cases,
there were an insufficient number of s tudies to provide a u sefu l
es timate. Nevertheless , meta-analyses could be computed to assess
th e child-rearing s imilarity of seven or more of the 11 con s t ru c ts in
each of the three domains.
Similarity across time. A total of 47 longitudinal s tudies con-
tributed to these analyses; s tability could be assessed in all 11child-rearing constructs . The results, listed in Table 7, indicated
that significant levels of s tability were found on all the constructs ,
with a median effect size of .38 (range = .20 to .55). Except for the
con s t ru c ts n on in volvemen t an d monitor that were assessed in only
three and five s tudies , respectively, the effect sizes for the remain-
in g constructs were based on an average of 14.7 studies.
Heterogeneous results were present with all 11 constructs . How-
ever, the heterogeneity was a result of the variation in the magni-
tude of the positive effect sizes. For example, the construct that
showed the most varia tion across s tudies was control. The heter-
ogeneous result was due to correlations that ranged from .20 to .82,
with an overall effect size of .53.
Similarity across children. Seven of the 11 child-rearing con-
s tructs could be tes ted in this domain, with information from a totalof 10 studies. All effect sizes were s ignificant and in the moderate
range, with a median r of .38 (range = .33 to .59). Of the 7
constructs , 5 manifes ted heterogeneous results (see Table 8). The 2
constructs with homogeneous results , indicating s imilar results ,
were positive affect (r = .44) and responsiveness (r = .38).
5These s tudies were Bates et al . (1982); Belsky (1980); D u n n et al .
(1985); Frankel et al. (1980); Green et al. (1980); Holden (1983); L e y e n -
decker, Lamb, Scholmerich, and Fricke (1997); Lyt ton and Zwirner (1975);
Merrill (1946); Tamis-LeMonda et al. (1998); and Wachs (1987).
A more complete and balanced analysis of child-rearing simi-
lari t ies requires n ot j u s t a greater n u m b e r of studies bu t inv es t iga-
t ions tha t inc lude da ta from fa thers ; paren t s from different c u l t u r a l ,
e t h n i c , an d racia l b ackgrounds; an d s tudies tha t more sys t emat i -
cally test the moderator variables. For instance, in two studies that
inc luded b oth mothers an d fathers, both f o u n d lower levels of
similari ty in fathers ' than mothers' behavior (Belsky, Taylor, &
Rov ine , 1984; Lytton & Zwirn er , 1975). Socioeconomic status ca nalso affect similari ty in parenting. Thompson (1998) fou n d in his
rev iew tha t a t t achment r e la t ionships in middle-c lass mother - infan t
were more stable than in lower socioecon omic statu s families.
More broadly, th e data ar e parochial: Only 3% of the s tudies
inc luded da ta from a n o n w e s t e r n c o u n t r y .
T he da tab ase con ta in s o ther l imi ta t ions . A full analysis of child-
rearing similarities an d differences requires examination of both
correlational data and difference tests. However, both types of
analyses were r epor ted in less than one- third of the studies (n =
27). Conseque n t ly , in the cross- domain analyses , we were left with
compar ing rs an d ds derived from mostly different sets of studies.
Those two sets of studies differed on v ar ious d imensions , and
particular variables may have been confounded (e.g., age of child,
assessment l ength) . Another l imi ta t ion was tha t v ery few s tudies
compute d s imi lar i ty or difference scores separately for boys versus
girls, al though such a div is ion could be rev eal ing. Fo r example,
Kagan and Moss (1962) fou n d a median across-t ime cor re la tion of
.77 for maternal control of girls, but for boys, the comparable
correlat ion was .24.
It i s wor th cons ider ing whether th is meta-analysis provides an
ov eres t imat ion or underes t imat ion of parental similari ty. Overes-
t imat ion may resu l t from the bias to report at conferences or
publish studies that find stat ist ically significant levels of similarity.
U n su ccess fu l invest igat ions are far less l ikely to be reported in the
li terature (Roggman, Langlois, Hubbs-Tait , & Rieser-Danner,
1994). Howev er , b ecause s ign if ican t resu l t s cou ld be derived from
difference scores as well as similarity scores, we d o n o t t h i n k th emeta-analytic results overest imate child-rearing similari ty.
Al terna t iv e ly , i t can be argued that parental similari ty ha s been
underest imated for at least two methodological reasons. Most
(82%) of the studies included used observational procedures. How-
ever, on e problem with all of the observational studies reported
here is the failure to heed E ps te in 's (1 9 79 ) warning : At t empts to
characterize typical or s tab le b ehav ior cannot be effect ively ac -
complished with only on e ob serv at ion . Assessments of the short-
term similari ty of child-rearing behavior ar e genera l ly low; th e
median test-retest reliabili ty of observations was o n l y r = .58. A
more re l iab le index of typica l b ehav ior can be achiev ed through
aggregat ion , as Wachs (1987) an d L e y e n d e c k e r e t al. (1997) have
demons t ra t ed wi th ob serv at ions of mother- infan t in t erac t ions .
Howev er , if data are to be aggregated, it should only be d o n e
within the same situation and child so as not to lose v aluab le
information ab out how paren t s adjus t the i r b ehav ior across s i tua-
t ions an d children.
Another r e l iab i l i ty i ssue concerns th e i ssue of interobserver
reliabilities. Lo w re l iabi l ity a t t enua te s r esu l t s . If researchers cor-
rected for the reliability of the measurement instruments, then the
effect sizes may have increased (Alder & Scher, 1994). Observa-
t ional s tudies may also have underest imated parental similari ty
because of the lack of behavioral rat ings (used in only about 10%
of the across- t ime studies). Molecular variables that are typically
coded in observations capture on ly a m o d e s t a m o u n t of stable
indiv idual- difference v ar iance b ecause they are i n f lu en ced by in-
teract ional and contextual factors (Cairns & Green, 1979). A fuller
pic ture of the ex ten t of s imi lar i ty in paren t ing should cons is t of a
comprehens iv e mul t imethod approach us ing ob serv er ra t ings , ob-
servation codings, and self-reports.
A final l imitat ion of the data set l ies in the type of analyses
reported. This meta -ana lysis was l imited to studies that reportedcorrelat ional or difference tests. That is not to say t ha t there are no
other approaches to addressing the quest ion of similari ty in child
rearing. As Alder an d Scher (1994) argued, growth-curve analyses
prov ide an a l t e rna t iv e method for captur ing b oth cons is t ency in
ab solu te v alues as wel l as indiv idual d i fferences . T o da te , this
approach ha s rare ly b een used in the s tudy of parent-child rela-
t ions (cf . v an den B oom & Hoeksma, 1 9 94). Anoth er analy t ic
approach to assessing cont inu i ty and change that occurred too
i n f r eq u en t ly to b e summar ized was t r end an alyses , a procedure tha t
allows for a more complex analyses of change us ing three or more
assessment t imes . Fo r example , McNal ly , E isenb erg, an d Harris
(1991) f o u n d a quadra t ic t r end in a t t i t udes toward con t rol , whereb y
after relative stability, there was an increase in views ab out control
dur ing midadolescence. Complex pa t t erns of n o n l i n e a r c h a n g e
have also been observed with Egyptian an d Kenyan caregiv ers .
Sigman an d Wachs (1 9 9 1 ) fou n d l inear, cubic, an d quadra t ic
t r ends in chi ld- rear ing b ehav iors when they ob served in t erac t ions
between toddlers aged 18 to 29 months and their caregivers.
Despit e these l imi ta t ions wi th the da ta se t , the fail-safe n com-
puta t ions g iv e us conf idence in the f i ndi ngs . T hose resu l t s hold
sev era l impor tan t theore t ica l and empir ica l ramif ica t ions for s tudy-
in g an d u n d e r s t a n d i n g th e s ignif icance of child rearing.
The Implications of Variability and Change
in Child Rearing
If researchers into socializat ion are to achieve a comprehens iv eunders tanding of chi ld rearing—its origins, nature, and effects—
then paren t s mus t be s tudied more in t ens iv e ly . Th e fu n d am en t a l
implicat ion from th is s tudy is the need to recognize both similari ty
and difference s wi th in paren t s . Recog ni t ion of th is idea has impl i-
cat ions fo r theory, th e u n d e r s t a n d i n g of how child rearing impacts
o n t o g e n y , a n d f u ture empirical work.
Theoretical Implications
Much l ike th e re la t ions b e tween heredi ty an d e n v i r o n m e n t or
assimilat ion an d accommodat ion , a t t empts to dichotomize child
rearing as b eing e i ther s imi lar or different ar e clear ly misguided.
Given th at child rearing is an interpersonal act ivity that reflects the
c o n s t a n t interplay an d coordina t ion of goals between at least tw oindividuals (Maccoby, 1992), s u c h d y n a m i c s c a n n o t be reduced
into on e category or another . On the basis of this review, we would
refine the def in i t ion of paren t ing to b e an individual's adaptat ion to
three sets of variables: (a) his or her own contemporaneous in t ernal
cognit ive and affective factors, (b) a part icular child, and (c) the
context. Such an adaptat ion may rely on o ld solu t ions or elici t
nov el responses. These dynamics hav e n o t ye t b een adequate ly
recognized or explicated in the theoret ical conceptualizat ions
ab out paren t ing.
Perhaps th e most unequiv ocal theoretical implication of this
recently reported tha t children who perceived their parents ' differ-
en t ia l sibling treatment to be fair had more positive appraisals of
their s ibling rela tionships t h a n other children.
Variability in parenting across situations. This review raises
q u es t ion s abou t the u n d er ly in g reasons for and constraints on
variations in child-rearing across s ituations. This is most conspic-
u o u s wit h the limited unders tanding or parental sensit ivity (or
responsivity). Sen s i t iv i ty is a com plex con s t ru c t bu t is common lydefined as "con t in gen t , appropriate [italics added], and consistent
responses to an i n f a n t ' s signals or needs" (Lamb & Easterbrooks,
1981, p. 127). Surpris ingly , the co ntext-specific n ature of "appro-
priate" has not been carefully examined. Lit t le is known about why
some parents are able to navigate through successive and some-
t imes challenging contexts (such as the supermarket, Holden,
1983) with deftness and proprie ty, whereas other parents may lose
tempers or control. Furthermore, as De Wolff and van I jzendoorn
(1997) pointed out, a more contextualized view of sensit ivity is
n eed ed to a c c o u n t fo r paren t- in fan t a t tachmen t pa t te rn s in home
en viron men ts characterized by stress an d instability in a t tachmen t
rela tionships.
A conce pt closely rela ted to se nsit ivity is f lexibility. Variabilityin parental behavior, an expression of flexibility, is t h o u g h t by
some inve stigators to be central for effective parenting. As Mischel
(1984) recognized some time ago, greater consis tency in behavior
is displayed by individuals who are func t ion ing poorly. Along
those l in es , when d is cu s s in g d ys fu n c t ion a l mothers , Wahler an d
D u m a s (1989) observed "Mothers who attend to the complex
patterns of child-care s timuli will a lso perform a se t of highly
relevant parenting behaviors . . . mothers who are deficient in ob-
servational processes are prone to develop response-response link-
ages that permit s t imuli in one se t t ing to influence her [s ic]
behavior in o the r s e t t in gs . This is tan tamou n t to s ay in g tha t
a t t en t ion- def ic i t mothers a re marked by trait-like behavior pat-
terns [italics added].. ." (p. 123). Similarly, Grusec and Good-now (1994) proposed tha t flexibility in discipline may be more
impor tan t in terms of teaching the child than the particular method
u s ed : "... parents [must] be flexible in their disciplinary reac-
t ions , match in g them to the child's perceptions of and reactions to
th e con f l ic t s i tu a t ion : Effect ive paren t in g in volves s en s i t iv i ty to
th e child 's emotional s ta te and cognitions" (p. 17). Several other
researchers have also called for the s tu d y of flexibility in parents
(H of f m an, 1970) or have recog nized how effect ive paren ts mu s t be
flexible to balance child-like and adult perceptions (Maccoby,
1992), competing needs (Dix, 1992), or the dialectical process of
resolving confl ic t ing considerations (Holden & Ritchie, 1988).
Thus, i t appears tha t a key parenting characteris tic that has gone
ignored empirically is the ability to exhibit f lexibility.
Parental flexibility is not s yn on ymou s with in con s is ten t d is c i-
pl ine (e .g., Patte rson, 1982). Rather, like se nsit ivity, effective u se
of the principle of consis tency may necessita te taking in to account
th e immediate s ituational and child factors , such as in tentionality
an d recent in teractional his tory. The implication of Grusec and
Good n ow's (1994) analysis is that the child 's perception of paren-
ta l equity and jus tif ication rather than consis tency per se is what is
most important. P resumab ly, children of f lexible parents feel more
respected as individu als , develop better re la tionships with their
paren t s , and acquire a greater sense of self-efficacy than children
of parents who are u n j u s t ly rigid or easily manipulated.
Empirical Investigations Into Parental Variationan d Change
This new emphasis on parental varia tion and change must be
supported with empirical evidence into the types, sources, and
consequences of parental varia tion and change. Some of this work
has begu n , a s was in d ica ted in the in t rod u c t ion . However , a n ew
conceptualization invites many other novel research questions. Inaddition to the research suggestions mentioned above, we ident ify
three areas as most pressing: inquiries in to the nature of parental
variation, systematic research in to multiple levels of parental vari-
ables , and investigations in to the psychological processes associ-
ated with variation and change.
The nature of parental variation. Systematic analyses in to
parental varia tion and change across t ime, children, and s ituations
are needed to begin to reveal the nature of the shift ing landscape.
J us t as substantial differences in the quality of marital re la tions are
n ow widely recognized to occur over rela tively short periods of
t ime (e .g. , Belsky & Rovine, 1990; Cowan & Cowan, 1992),
variation and change in parenting also warrant examin ation . As
this review has revealed, there is substantially more informationabout how child rearing changes over t ime than across children or
situations. Consequently, there is a greater need for investigations
in to the la t ter two domains. For example, research is needed to
address why parents in teract different ly with different children.
Similarly, much of parents ' s ituationally induced behavioral vari-
ation is not random; rather we believe that it is lawful and that
lawfulness deserves s tudy.
Empirical work should s trive to reveal th e ways in which
parents modify their behavior in response to the characteristics of
situations. For example, Valsiner (1984) took a Vygotskian ap-
proach when he proposed that within particular contexts , parents
hav e three different zones of child behavior: those that are encour-
aged, discouraged, and tolerated. In an approach in tended to ac-
count for the parent-situation in te rac t ion be tween paren ts an dsetting, Miller, Shim, an d Holden (1999) adopted a Gibsonian
perspective of the environment. They used observational data from
th e home, park, and laboratory to show how sett ings provided
different afford an ces an d d eman d s on parent-child in teractions.
Multilevel investigations. Empirical work is also needed to
explicate th e in terplay of con t in u i ty , var iabi l ity , an d chan ge at
each of the f ive levels of variables dis tinguished above (trait ,
value, a t t i tude, behavioral in tention, and behavior). To what extent
are paren t in g t ra i t s main ta in ed over t ime , different offspring, an d
situations? Are child-rearing values maintained over t ime, or do
m a n y parents experience "value s tre tching" as the sociologis t
Rodman suggested (cited in Goodnow, 1997). Despite th e popu -
larity of s tudying child-rearing at t i tudes, scant a t tention has been
devoted to parental attitude change (Holden, 1995). At the level of
behavioral in tentions, several s tudies have shown that parents
believe they do indeed modify their actions because of the specif-
ics of the situations (e .g. , Catron & Masters, 1993; Dix & R e i n -
hold, 1991; Grusec & Kuczynski , 1980). Finally, as this review has
shown, there is ample evidence that observed child-rearing behav-
ior can be modified. However, what is less clear is the systematic
determinants of those modifications.
The psychological processes. Far more important than s imply
categorizing whether variation and change occur is the need to
u n d ers tan d the psychological processes at work. To date there is
parenting , and 3-year inhibition : Exploring stabi lity and lawful discon-
t inu i ty in a male sample. Developmental Psychology, 33 , 218-227.
Parpal, M., & Maccoby, E. E. (1985). Maternal responsiveness an d sub-
sequent child compliance. Child D evelopment, 56 , 1326-1334.
Patterson, G. R. (1982). Coercive family process. Eugene, OR : Castalia.
*Pease, D., & Melby, J. N. (1988, March). Stability of maternal and
paternal perceptions of parent behaviors. Paper presented at the biennial
meeting of the Southwestern Society for Research in Human Develop-
m en t , New Orleans, LA.
*Pettit, G. S., & Bates , J. E. (1984). Co nt inu i t y of individual differences in
the mother-infant relationship from six to thirteen months. Child Devel-
opment, 55 , 729-739.
*Pettit, G., & Bates , J. (1989). Family interaction patterns an d children's
behavior problems from infancy to 4 years. Developmental Psychol-
o g y , 25 , 413-420.
*Pianta, R. C., Sroufe, L. A., & Egeland, B. (1989). Continuity and
discont inui ty in maternal sensitivity at 6, 24, and 42 months in a
high-risk sample. Child D evelopment, 60 , 481-487.
Plomin, R. (1990). Nature and nurture: An introduction to human behav-
ioral genetics. Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole.
Plomin, R. (1994). Nature, nurture, and social development. Social Devel-
opment, 3, 37-53.
*Poresky, R. H., & Hendrix, C. (1989, March). Parenting priorities:Stability, change, and impact on young children. Paper presented at the
biennial meeting of the Society for Research in Child Development,
Kansas City, MO .
*Pratt, M. N., Kerig, P. , Cowan, P. A., & Cowan, C. P. (1988). Mothers
an d fathers teaching 3-year-olds: Au thoritative parenting and adult scaf-
folding o f y o ung children 's learning. Developmental Psychology, 24,
832-839.
*Pridham, K., Van Riper, M., Schroeder, M., & Thoyre, S. (1997, April).
Mothers' working models o f feeding: Ho w stable are they through the
first year? Poster presented at the biennial meeting of the Society for
Research in Child Development, Washington, DC.
Pulkkinen, L. (1982). Self control and continuity from childhood to ado-
lescence. P. B. Baltes & O. B. Brim (Eds.), L i f e span development and
behavior (Vol. 4, pp. 63-105). Ne w York: Academic Press.Radke-Yarrow, M. (1989). Development and contextual analysis of con-
t inu i ty . Human Development, 32 , 204-209.
Radke-Yarrow, M., Zahn-Waxler, C. Z., & Chapman, M. (1983). Chil-
dren's prosocial dispositions and behavior. In P. H. Mussen (Series Ed.),
& E. M. Hether ing ton (Ed.), Handbook of child psychology: Vol. 4.
Socialization, personality, and social development (pp. 469-545). Ne w
York: Wiley & Sons.
Ragozin, A. S., Basham, R. B., Crnic, K. A., Greenberg, M. T., &
Robinson, N. M. (1982). Effects of maternal age on parenting role.
Developmental P sychology, 18, 627-634.
Raphael-Leff, L. (1986). Facilitators and regulators: Conscious and uncon-
scious processes in pregnancy an d early motherhood. British Journal of
Medical Psychology, 59, 43-55.
*Roberts, G. C., Block, J. H., & Block, J. (1984). Continui ty an d change
in parents ' child-rearing practices. Child Development, 55, 586-597.Roggman, L. A., Langlois, J. H., Hubbs-Tait, L., & Rieser-Danner, L. A.
(1994). Infant day-care, attachment, and the "file drawer problem."
Child Development, 65 , 1429-1443.
Rohner , R. P. (1986). The warmth dimension: Foundations of parental
acceptance-rejection theory. Beverly Hills, CA : Sage.
Rollins, B . C., & Thomas, D. L. (1979). Parental support, power, an d
control techniques in the socialization of children. In W. R. Burr, R. Hill,
F. I. Nye, & I. L. Reiss (Eds.), Contemporary theories about the family:
V o l . 1. Research-based theories (pp. 317-364). New York: Free Press.
Rosenthal, R. (1984). Meta-analytic procedures for social research. New-
bury Park, CA: Sage.
Rosenthal, R. (1991). Meta-analytic procedures for social research (Rev.
ed.). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
*Rothbart, M. (1971). Birth order an d mother-child interaction in an
achievement s i tua t ion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychol-
o g y , 17 , 113-120.
*Rothbaum, F. (1988). Maternal acceptance an d child functioning. Merrill-
Palmer Quarterly, 34 , 163-184.
Rothbaum, F., & Weisz, J. R. (1994). Parental caregiving and child
external iz ing behavior in nonclinical samples: A meta-analysis. Psycho-
logical Bulletin, 116, 55-74.
Rutter, M. (1984). Continuities an d discont inui t ies in socioeconomic de -
velopment. In R. N. Emde & R. J. Harmon (Eds.), Continuities and
discontinuities in development (pp. 41-68). Ne w York: Plenu m.
Sameroff, A. J., & Feil, L. A. (1985). Parental con cepts of deve lopmen t. In
I. Sigel (Ed.), Parental belief systems: The psychological consequences
for children (pp. 83-105). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Scarr, S., & McCartney, K. (1983). How people m ake their own en viron -
ments: A theory of g e no t y p e — » e nv i r o nme nt effects. Child Develop-
ment, 54 , 424-435.
*Scarr, S., & McCartney, K. (1988). Fa r from home: An exper imenta l
evaluation of the mother-child home program in Bermuda. Child Devel-opment, 59, 531-543.
Schaefer, E. S. (1959). A circumplex model fo r maternal behavior. Journalo f Abnormal and Social Psychology, 59, 226-235.
*Schaefer, E. S., & Bayley, N. (1960). Consistency of maternal behavior
from infancy to preadolescence. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psy-
chology, 61 , 1-6.
Schaffer, H. R., & Liddell, C. (1984). Adult-child interaction u nde r dyadic
an d polyadic conditions. British Journal of Developmental Psychol-
o g y , 2, 33-42.
Schmidt, S. E., Liddle, H. A., & Dakof, G. A. (1996). Changes in parenting
practices an d adolescent drug abuse dur ing mult idimensional family
therapy. Journal of Family Psychology, 10 , 12-27.
*Scholmerich, A., Lamb, M., Leyendecker, B ., & Fracasso, M. P. (1997).
Mother-infant teaching interactions an d at tachment secur i ty in Euro-
American an d Central-American immigrant families. Infant Behavior &
Development, 20 , 165-174.
Sears, R. R., Maccoby, E. E., & Levin, H. (1957). Patterns of childrearing.Evanston, IL: Row, Peterson.
*Sigel, I. E. (1982). The relation ship between parental distancin g strategies
an d the child's cognitive behavior. In L. M. Laosa & I. E. Sigel (Eds.),
Families as learning environments for children (pp. 47-86). New York:
Ple num.
Sigel, I. E., McGillicuddy-DeLisi, A. V., & Goodnow, J. J. (Eds.). (1992).
Parental belief systems: The psychological consequences for children
( 2 n d ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbau m.
*Sigman, M., N e u m a n n , C., Carter, E., & Cattle, D. (1988). Home inter-
actions and the development of Embu toddlers in Ke ny a . Child Devel-
opment, 59, 1251-1261.
Sigman, M., & Wachs, T. D. (1991). Struc ture , con t inui ty , and nu t r i t ional
correlates of caregiver behavior patterns in Ke ny a an d Egypt. In M. H.
Bornstein (Ed.), Cultural approaches to parenting (pp. 123-137). Hill-
sdale, NJ : Erlbaum.
Smetana, J. G. (1989). Toddlers' social interactions in the context of moral
an d conven t ional t ransgressions in the home context . Developmental
Psychology, 25 , 499-508.
Smetana, J. G. (1997). Parenting reconceptualized: A social domain anal-
ysis. In J. E. Grusec & L. Kuczynski (Eds.), Parenting and children's
intemalization of values: A handbook of contemporary theory (pp.
162-192). Ne w York: Wiley.
Spitz, R. A. (1965). The first year of l i f e : A psychoanalytic study of normaland deviant patterns of object relations. Ne w York: International Uni-
versities.Sroufe, L. A. , & Jacobvitz, D. (1989). Diverging path ways, developme ntal
transformations, multiple etiologies and the problem of cont inui ty in
development . Human Development, 32 , 196-203.
Sroufe, L. A., Jacobvitz, D., Mangelsdorf, S., DeAngelo, E., & Ward, M. J.
(1985). Generational boundary dissolution between mothers an d the ir
preschool children: A relationship systems approach. Child Develop-
ment, 56 , 317-325.
*Stattin, H., & Klackenberg, G. (1992). Discordant family relations in
intact families: Developmen tal te nden cies over 18 years. Journal ofMarriage and the Family, 53, 940-956.
Steinberg, L. D. (1981). Transformations in family relations at puberty.
Developmental Psychology, 17, 833-840.
Steinberg, L., Lamborn, S. D., Dornbusch, S. M., & Darling, N. (1992).
Impact of parenting practices on adolescent achievement: Authoritative
parenting, school involvement, and encouragement to succeed. Child
Development, 63 , 1266-1281.
Stolz, L. M. (1967). Influences on parent behavior. Stanford: Stanford
University Press.
Symonds, P. (1938). A study of parental acceptance an d rejection. Amer-
ican Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 8, 679-688.
*Tamis-LeMonda, C. S., & Bornstein, M. H. (1989). Habituation an d
maternal encouragement of attention in infancy as predictors of toddler
language, play, and representational competence. Child Develop-
ment, 60 , 738-751.*Tamis-LeMonda, C. S., & Bornstein, M. H. (1991). Individual variation,
correspondence, stability, and change in mother and toddler play. Infant
Behavior and Development, 14, 143-162.
*Tamis-LeMonda, C. S., Chen, L. A., & Bornste in, M. H. (1998). Mothers'
knowledge about children's play and language development: Short-term
stability an d interrelations. Developmental Psychology, 34 , 115-124.
Taylor, M., & Kogan, K. L. (1973). Effects of birth of a sibling on
mother-child interac t ions . Child Psychiatry & Human Development, 4,
53-58.
*Teti, D. M., Sakin, J. W ., Kucera, E., Corns, K. M., & Eiden, R. D.
(1996). And baby makes four: Predictors of attachment security among
preschool-age firstborns du ring the tran sition to siblinghood. Child De-
velopment, 67 , 579-596.
Thomas, A., & Chess, S. (1977). Temperament and development. Ne w
York: Brunner-Mazel.Thompson, E., & Miller, P. C. (1997, April). Parental beliefs and use ofparental discipline: The role of religious affiliation. Poster presented at
the biennial meeting of the Society for Research in Child Development,
Washing ton, DC .
Thompson, R. A. (1998). Early sociopersonality development. In W.
Damon (Series Ed.) & N. Eisenberg (Vol. Ed.), Handbook of child
psychology: Vol. 3. Social, emotional, and personality development (5th
ed., pp . 25-104). Ne w York: Wiley.
Thompson, R. A., Lamb, M. E., & Estes, D. (1982). Stability in infant-
mother attachment and its relationship to changing life circumstances in
an unselected middle-class sample. Child Development, 53, 144-148.
Trickett, P. K. , & Kuczynski , L. (1986). Children's misbehavior and
parental discipline in abusive and non-abusive families. DevelopmentalPsychology, 22, 166-176.
Valsiner, J. (1984). Construction of the zone or proximal development inadult-child jo int ac t ion: Th e socialization of meals. In B , Rogoff & J.
Wertsch (Eds.), Children's learning in the zone of proximal development(pp. 65-76). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Valsiner, J. (1989). Human development and culture: The social nature of
personality and its study. Lexington, MA: Heath.
van de n Boom, D. C., & Hoeksma, J. B. (1994). Th e effect of infant
irritability on mother-infant interaction: A growth-curve analysis. De-
velopmental Psychology, 30 , 581-590.
Vaughn, B. , Egeland, B., Sroufe, L. A., & Waters, E. (1979). Individual
differences in infant-mother attachment at twelve and eighteen months:
Stability and change in families under stress. Child Development, 50,971-975.
*Vuchinich, S., Angelelli, J., & Gatherum, A. (1996). Context an d devel-
opment in family problem solving with preadolescent children. Child
Development, 67 , 1276-1288.
*Vuchinich, S., Bank, L., & Patterson, G. (1992). Parenting, peers, and the
stability of antisocial behavior in preadolescent boys. Developmental
Psychology, 28 , 510-521.
*Wachs, T. D. (1987). Short-term stability of aggregated an d nonaggre-
gated measures of parental behavior. Child Development, 58 , 796-797.
Wahler, R. G., & Dumas, J. E. (1989). Attentional problems in dysfunc-
tional mother-child interactions: An interbehavioral model. Psycholog-
ical Bulletin, 105, 116-130.
*Ward, M. J., Vaughn, B . E., & Robb, M. D. (1988). Social-emotional
adaptation an d infant-mother attachment in siblings: Role of the motherin cross-sibling consistency. Child Development, 59, 643-651.
Waters, E. (1978). The reliability and stability of individual differences in