Assessing Parenting Behaviors Across Racial Groups Lawrence M. Berger Christina Paxson Center for Health and Wellbeing

1. Assessing Parenting Behaviors Across Racial Groups Lawrence M. Berger Christina Paxson Center for Health and Wellbeing Princeton University prepared for Fragile Families workshop Columbia University July 2004

2. In-home addition to Fragile Families • Added an in-home assessment to the Fragile Families Study. • In-home assessments added at 36 and 60 months. Information includes: • Child health and behaviors • Parenting (through interviews and direct observation) • Children’s cognitive development (PPVT, Woodcock-Johnson) • Parental physical and mental health and cognitive ability (stress; anthropometrics; PPVT) • At 60 months: ask families about involvement with the child welfare system.

3. Questions to be addressed: • How do factors such as economic status, family structure, and parental health affect the environments in which children live? (“Environments” include aspects of the physical environment as well as parenting.) • What are the determinants of very poor parenting behavior? • How does the care that children receive (across a variety of domains) affect their cognitive and developmental outcomes? • Do policy changes that alter the economic status of parents affect children’s environments and outcomes?

4. This paper (in progress!): Racial Differences in Parenting Why is this topic of interest? • A large literature documents racial and ethnic differences in parenting of young children, along a variety of domains. • It is possible that these parenting differences may account for differences in early achievement/school readiness. • Question: how much (and which) socioeconomic and parental characteristics can account for racial and ethnic differences in parenting?

5. Another motivation: Child Maltreatment and Race • The issue of “racial bias” in the assessment of parenting is an important topic in the child maltreatment literature. • Based on official statistics, blacks represent 15 percent of the U.S. children and 25 percent of child maltreatment victims. Whites represent 65 percent of children and 51 percent of maltreatment victims.

6. Statistics from “Child Abuse and Neglect” 2002 (NCCAN) (cases/1000)

7. Problems of Interpretation • Validity of official statistics as accurate measures of maltreatment rates can be questioned. • Poor children—especially those on welfare—may be more likely to come to the attention of mandated reporters, especially at young ages. • Some evidence of racial bias in reports of maltreatment (Lane et al, JAMA).

8. What might explain racial differences in • maltreatment rates? There is an active debate over the source of the disparity in official maltreatment rates. Potential explanations include: • Differences in parenting behaviors that are correlated with race. • “Racial bias” in the child protective services (CPS) system. Racial bias refers to a racial double standard, such that otherwise identical families of different races are assessed differently by reporters of maltreatment or by the social workers, judges, etc. who verify the validity of reports of maltreatment.

9. What might drive racial bias? There are several reasons in theory why racial bias in reporting and substantiation might be observed: • Stereotyping: Individuals expect to see “worse” parenting among some groups, and observe what they expect to see. (Could be driven by genuine differences in average behaviors in the population.) • Miscommunication: Individuals do not know how to interpret information from members of some groups. Assessments may not be systematically biased, but may be more error-ridden (so more chance that an extreme value is “observed.”

10. Implications, for maltreatment rates and for surveys: • Maltreatment: Greater error in the system, possibly for both blacks and whites. • Surveys: The same kinds of factors that result in biased assessments by reporters and social workers could result in biased assessments by interviewers.

11. Research Objectives • To investigate whether there are differences in parenting across racial groups (blacks versus whites). • To assess whether these differences can be accounted for by household and maternal characteristics other than race. • To study whether parents’ reports of their own behaviors and interviewers’ assessments of parental behaviors are related to the race of the interviewer.

12. Data Our data are drawn from an in-home module of the Fragile Families and Child Wellbeing Study (FFCW). This contains self-reported and interviewer-observed parenting measures. Data are available for 20 cities from the 36-month interview. Our sample consists of 1,149 blacks and 367 whites. All completed the full in-home module, and had interviewers for whom race was known.

13. Parenting Measures • Based on maternal reports: (1) absence of nonviolent discipline; • (2) use of psychological aggression; • (3) use of physical assault; • Based on interview observations: • (1) harshness • (2) lack of warmth;

14. Measures of Maternal and Child Characteristics • Based on interviewer observations: • Maternal verbal/social skills • Maternal understanding/attention • Maternal hostility/suspicion • Problems with child’s appearance • Problems with child’s behavior

15. Sociodemographic Characteristics • and Maternal Behaviors (core survey) • natural logarithm of needs-adjusted family income • the number of children and adults in the household • indicators for maternal education • indicators for presence and employment of father/other man in household • an indicator for whether the mother worked in the week before the core survey • maternal depression score • Indicator variables for whether the mother smoked cigarettes, drank alcohol, or used drugs during her pregnancy

16. Question 1: • Are there racial/ethnic differences in parenting? • Cross-tabulations of parenting measures indicate there are significant differences in the distributions across whites and blacks.

17. Examples: Frequency mother uses time-outs, explains why something is wrong, gave something else to do, etc.

18. Examples: Called child lazy or dumb; shouted, yelled or screamed at child; threatened to hit; threatened to kick out of house

19. Examples: Spanked, slapped, hit on bottom with object; pinched; shook.

20. Items: Parent did not shout at child Parent did not express annoyance with or hostility toward child. Parent neither slapped nor spanked child during the visit. Parent did not scold or criticize child during visit. Parent did not interfere or restrict child more than 3 times.

21. Items: Parent spontaneously vocalized to child twice. Parent responded verbally to child’s vocalizations. Parent told child the name of an object or person during visit Parent spontaneously praised child at least twice. Parent's voice conveys positive feelings toward child. Parent caressed or kissed child at least once.

22. Items: Parent's speech was distinct and audible. Parent initiated verbal exchanges with visitor. Parent conversed freely and easily.

23. Items: Respondent’s attention to interview (coded 0-3) Respondent’s understanding of questions (coded 0-3) Respondent’s ability to articulate answers (coded 0-3) Respondent’s level of cooperation (coded 0-3)

24. Items: Did respondent appear to be: Suspicious? Uncommunicative? Anxious/nervous? Hostile? To be on drugs? (Each on 3 point scale)

25. Examples: Child’s clothes dirty, ill-fitting, or inappropriate for season Child appears to be recently bathed Child’s hair is combed and clean

26. distributions not significantly different across races Items (each scored 0-3) Displays of negative emotions during interview Displays of positive emotions during interview Cooperation during PPVT Cooperation during height and weight measurement Persistence during PPVT

27. Sociodemographic characteristics

28. Sociodemographic characteristics

29. Maternal depression and risky behaviors

30. Question 2: Do Sociodemographic and Maternal Characteristics Account for Racial Differences? • Estimate regressions that control for city of residence; then add sociodemographics; then add maternal depression and risky behaviors. • Dependent variables are indicators being above the 75th and 90th percentiles for each of the scales. • I show OLS results, because I move to fixed effects models later (although conditional logits show similar results.)

31. Parenting Measures at 75th Percentile Cut Points

32. Parenting Measures at 90th Percentile Cut Points

33. Parenting Measures at 75th Percentile Cut Points

34. Question 3: Does the Race of the Interviewer Matter? • Estimate regressions that control for the race of the interviewer (including all other controls used so far). • Estimate models with interactions between the race of the mother and the interviewer. • Estimate models with race interactions and interviewer fixed effects.

35. Descriptive information on interviewers: • Interviewer characteristics

37. Descriptive information on interviewers: • Interviewer characteristics • Assignment of interviewers to respondents

39. Descriptive information on interviewers: • Interviewer characteristics • Assignment of interviewers to respondents • Is assignment random?

40. Dependent variable: indicator that interviewer is black Note: All sociodemographic and maternal controls included.

41. RESULTS

42. Note: All models include all sociodemographic and maternal controls and city dummies

43. Interpretation of these results: • The fact that there are systematic differences in assessments by the race of the interviewer, although interesting, does NOT provide evidence of bias. • We need to examine whether the assessments of black relative to white respondents vary across black and white interviewers. • Next set of regressions include a complete set of interactions between the race of the interviewer and the respondent (omitted category: white respondent and non-black interviewer.)

45. Harshness (90th percentile cut point) Test for bias: (MB/IW – MW/IW) = (MB/IB - MW/IB) Or: ( 0.066 – 0 ) – (-0.007 – 0.023) = 0 Or: 0.096 = 0 (p-value for test is 0.013).

46. Physical assault (90th percentile cut point) Test for bias: p-value=0.550 (hypothesis of no racial bias cannot be rejected.)

47. Lack of Warmth (90th percentile cut point) Test for bias: p-value is 0.002

48. With Interviewer Fixed Effects

49. Summary so far: • Self-reports of parenting behavior are not affected by the race of the interviewer relative to the respondent. • The race of the interviewer is systematically related to the assessments of harshness and lack of warmth– black interviewers are consistently less likely to give all parents, black and white, more negative ratings. • We find evidence of racial bias in assessments of harshness (at 75th and 90th p’tile cut point) and lack of warmth (at 90th p’tile cut point). • Could these findings be due to more negative interactions of the interviewer with the mother in mixed-race interviews, or “worse” child behavior?

50. Note: All models include all sociodemographic and maternal controls and city dummies