Individual Submission Summary
Share...

Direct link:

Associations Among Neighborhood Disorder, Unmarried Fathers’ Parenting and Coparenting, and Young Children’s Development

Thu, March 21, 2:15 to 3:45pm, Baltimore Convention Center, Floor: Level 3, Room 341

Integrative Statement

Exposure to neighborhood disorder puts young children at risk for developing behavior problems, primarily by influencing proximal processes such as parenting behaviors (Bronfenbrenner & Morris, 2006; Kohen et al, 2008). However, this research rarely considers fathers’ parenting (Zhang & Fuller, 2012), especially in early childhood. Another potential yet understudied family pathway linking neighborhood disorder to child development is via coparenting (Barnett et al., 2016). Neighborhood disorder may undermine coparenting cooperation, or it may motivate parents to work together closely to protect their children.

Coparenting and parenting independently impact child development (Tuebert & Pinquart, 2010), and are influenced by different factors (Feinberg, 2003). This research rarely includes fathers’ observed parenting (Karreman et al., 2008), especially among low-income, primarily unmarried families, nor does it consider neighborhood disorder. Fathers’ parenting behaviors influence child development, above and beyond mothers’ parenting (e.g., Webster et al., 2013). Supportive coparenting relationships are associated with reduced behavior problems (Feinberg et al., 2009).

Research questions:
1. How is neighborhood disorder associated with fathers’ supportive and intrusive parenting behaviors and coparenting alliance?
2. Is neighborhood disorder indirectly associated with children’s behavior problems via fathers’ parenting behaviors and coparenting alliance?

Method:
Data are from the Building Strong Families intervention which provided relationship skills education to low-income, unmarried couples transitioning to parenthood (Wood et al., 2012). We include fathers who participated in the last wave of data collection when parenting was observed (approximate child age = 36 months) and who lived with their children because neighborhood ratings were based on the child’s home (N=1,050). Approximately 53% of fathers were African American, 24% Hispanic, and 23% White.

Neighborhood disorder was a sum of 8 interviewer-rated items (e.g., building conditions, safety). Parenting behaviors were observed during a 10-minute semi-structured play task (adapted from NICHD ECCRN, 1999). Supportive parenting was a composite of positive regard, sensitivity, stimulation of cognitive development and reverse-coded detachment. Harsh parenting was a composite of negative regard and intrusiveness. Coparenting alliance was based on fathers’ reports (=.95) on 10-items tapping how parents work together to raise the child (Abidin & Brunner, 1995). Mothers reported children’s externalizing and internalizing problems (Peterson & Zill, 1986). We controlled for intervention effects, several parent (e.g., depress) and child (e.g., sex) characteristics and mothers’ observed parenting and reported coparenting alliance.

Results & Conclusions:
See Table 1 for results from a path model (RMSEA = .03 (90% CI = .00-.05); CFI= .94). Exposure to greater neighborhood disorder was associated with less supportive parenting by fathers and lower coparenting alliance as reported by fathers. Neighborhood disorder was positively associated with children’s internalizing behaviors, controlling for mothers’ and fathers’ parenting and coparenting. Fathers’ harsh parenting was linked to increased behavior problems. There were no statistically significant indirect effects linking neighborhood disorder to behavior problems via fathers’ parenting or coparenting.

Understanding how neighborhood characteristics are associated with fathers’ parenting and coparenting and child development carries clear implications for targeted parenting interventions. This work helps unravel the complex correlates and influences of multiple aspects of father-child relationships in disadvantaged contexts.

Authors