Risk and Protective Factors Among Diverse Families: Does High-Quality Parenting Protect Children’s EF from Household Chaos or Low SES?

• In Event: Socioeconomically Diverse Families Contain Multitudes: Strengths-Based Approaches to Cognitive Development

Abstract

Introduction: Childhood socioeconomic status (SES) is, on average, associated with cognitive development, including executive functioning (EF). Household chaos (i.e., instability, disorganization) is a proposed mechanism by which SES influences children’s cognitive development (Andrews, Atkinson, et al., 2021; Little, 2017). Chaos is believed to interact with parenting behaviors such that it disrupts caregiving relationships in a manner thought to be reciprocal (Andrews, Dunn, et al., 2021). An implication, then, is that sensitive, high-quality caregiving relationships (i.e., attachment and involvement) may protect against the negative effects of household chaos and low SES on cognitive development. This pre-registered study uses both task-based and parent-reported measures of children’s EF to address three hypotheses:
1) Household chaos will negatively predict children’s EF.
2) Family SES will positively predict children’s EF.
3) Parenting will moderate these relationships, such that high-quality parenting will partially protect EF development from environmental risk.

Methods: Participants were from a study of 83 families recruited to maximize SES diversity. Children (ages 4-7 years) were identified as 36% Hispanic, 33% non-Hispanic White, 28% Black, and 4% Asian. Parents answered questions about total family income, number of adults and children dependent on family income, education level for up to two primary caregivers, household chaos (Matheny et al., 1995), their parenting relationship (PRQ; Kamphaus & Frick, 2005), and children’s EF (BRIEF-2; Gioia et al., 2015). Children completed two direct assessments of EF: Hearts and Flowers (H&F; Davidson et al., 2006) on a tablet and Head Toes Knees Shoulders (HTKS; McClelland et al., 2014). SES was indexed by averaging z-scores of family income-to-needs ratio and parent education. An EF composite, representing working memory, inhibition, and shifting, was indexed by averaging z-scores on the BRIEF, accuracy on H&F mixed trials, and HTKS total scores.

Results: Notably, SES and chaos were significantly correlated (r=-.25, p<.05; Figure 1) as were chaos and parenting (r=-.47, p<.001), but SES and parenting quality were not (p=.27). Multiple linear regression controlling for child age and typical developmental status showed that household chaos was negatively associated with EF development (βChaos=-.02, p=.01) and SES was positively associated with EF development (βSES=.22, p<.01). Although parenting did not significantly moderate relationships between chaos and SES with EF (interaction terms p>.2), effects were in the expected direction (Figure 2). Additionally, the main effects of parenting on EF (βPRQ=.02, p=.05) were stronger than those of chaos (βChaos=-.01, p=.18), suggesting that caregiving is more predictive of EF development. Exploratory analyses revealed that SES was solely associated with task-based EF measures (rH&F=.33, p<.01; rHTKS=.22, p<.1), while chaos was only associated with parent-reported, real-world EF (rBRIEF=-.26, p<.05).

Conclusions: Results suggest measures of children’s EF must be interpreted within the context of both risk factors and real-world relevance. Critically, this study contributes to intersectional resilience research with a sample of socioeconomically and ethnically/racially diverse families (Crenshaw, 1991).

Authors

• S. Alexa McDorman, University of Maryland - College Park
  Presenting Author

• Morgan Alayna Gilmer, Pennsylvania State University, University Park

• Ellie Kathleen Taylor, University of Maryland - College Park

• Victoria Alexander, University of Maryland - College Park

• Julia Anne Leonard, Yale University

• John D.E. Gabrieli, Massachusetts Institute of Technology

• Rachel R. Romeo, University of Maryland - College Park