Illuminating associations between parenting and deleterious neighborhood characteristics via exhaustive modeling

Abstract

Objective Our goal was to illuminate associations between specific characteristics of under‐resourced neighborhoods (i.e., socioeconomic deprivation, danger) and specific aspects of parenting (e.g., parental praise, parental nurturance, harsh parenting, and parental control). Background Prior work has highlighted associations between level of neighborhood disadvantage and the parenting of its residents. However, this work has yet to clarify the specific characteristics of the neighborhood or the types of parenting involved. Method Exhaustive modeling analyses were conducted in a sample of 1030 families of twins (average age 8 years; 51% male, 49% female; the racial composition was 82% White, 10% Black, 1% Asian, 1% Indigenous, 6% multiracial) from the Twin Study of Behavioral and Emotional Development in Children. Neighborhood and parenting were assessed using multiple informants and assessment strategies (neighborhood informants, family informants, administrative data, and videotaped parent–child interactions). Results Neighborhood socioeconomic deprivation (i.e., limited institutional and economic structural resources) demonstrated small but consistent negative associations with positive parenting behaviors and maternal control, but not with negative parenting behaviors. Neighborhood danger (i.e., recorded crime, fear of crime, exposure to community violence), by contrast, demonstrated weaker associations with parenting that dissipated once we controlled for overlap with socioeconomic deprivation. Conclusion Danger and socioeconomic deprivation do not function as interchangeable characteristics of under‐resourced neighborhoods, at least in terms of their association with positive parenting. Future studies should identify the specific mechanisms through which neighborhood socioeconomic deprivation is associated with less nurturing parenting.

Child effects on positive parenting vary with neighborhood opportunity.

“…As already demonstrated in Burt et al (2023), neighborhood opportunity evidenced small but significant associations with maternal support (rs were .07 for neighbor informant reports, .12 for the full COI, and .11 for the opportunity composite; all p , .05). Although these associations are quite small, it is important to note that the magnitude of the phenotypic correlation between a moderator and an outcome has no bearing on the presence or magnitude of etiologic moderation (Purcell, 2002), as moderation is modeled only on that variance that does not overlap across the outcome and the moderator.…”

“…Fit indices are reported in Table 2, and model fit results are presented in Table 3 and plotted in Figure 2 in the online supplemental materials. This was an important within study replication, both in terms of gauging the specificity of the above findings to a particular aspect of positive mothering but also because this particular variable also demonstrated consistent associations with neighborhood deprivation in Burt et al (2023). As above, the A only moderation model emerged as the best-fitting model according to all four fit indices.…”

“…Building on this possibility, we found that mothers in impoverished neighborhood contexts were more responsive to their children’s genetically-influenced characteristics than were mothers in wealthier areas with more opportunity. Such findings push against common stereotypes of mothers in impoverished areas, and indicate that, although they may be slightly less supportive on average (Burt et al, 2023; Cuellar et al, 2015), their support is far more likely to be elicited or evoked by their child’s genetically-influenced characteristics. This may reflect targeted efforts on the part of those mothers to bolster their children in the face of limited opportunities available in their neighborhood context.…”

“…We suggest that the association between positive mothering and neighborhood characteristics can be understood as a specific manifestation of the way in which basic environmental cues shape behavior. We have previously proposed that, like all animals, humans detect and process cues in their surrounding environments related to the abundance of food, habitation, and other resources (Burt et al, 2023). These cues then influence the organism's behavior, sympathetic and parasympathetic nervous activity, and ultimately, stress or recovery from stress (e.g., South et al, 2015).…”

Integrating behavioural, biomedical, and social processes in resilience and health research over the human lifecourse

“…The investigators also have begun to identify the neural alterations predicted by disadvantage that remain intact in resilient youth as well as community and family factors that buffer the challenges of neighbourhood disadvantages and promote healthier resilient outcomes including positive mental wellbeing, social engagement, and scholastic success (Burt et al., 2021; Suarez et al., 2022). The longitudinal nature of this study and its comprehensive measures allowed for an extensive modelling of over 1000 twin‐families, which indicated that socioeconomic deprivation and imminent‐or‐experienced violence function as discrete challenges for children, and that positive parenting behaviours moderate both such challenges, with positive resilience effects on children over time (Burt et al., 2023).…”