Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter.
Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.
OCR for page 43
II
CHld Carc and
Chad Dcvelopmcnt
OCR for page 44
OCR for page 45
3
The Effects of Child Care
Chapters 3 through 5 review what has been learned about the lives of
children in child care from research, clinical practice, and work with young
children. In Chapter 3 we trace successive phases of child care research,
which have moved to increasingly complex and fruitful questions about
child care. In Chapter 4 we highlight the particular dimensions of child
care quality (e.g., group size, ratio) that are most important to children's
development. And in Chapter 5 we review what is known about how child
care can support children's physical health and psychological development.
PROCESSES OF CHILD DEVELOPMENT
Before turning to these issues of child care and children's develop-
ment, however, it is useful to outline briefly several basic principles about
development that underlie the ensuing discussion. These principles emerge
from and reflect important areas of agreement in different scientific dis-
ciplines that shed light on children's development, notably developmental
psychology, clinical work with children, and research in early education.
First, children's development is multiply determined: by sources within
the child, such as temperament, neurological integrity, and impairment; by
factors in the child's immediate environment, such as quality of relationships
and interactions with parents and quality of out-of-home care; and by
factors in the child's larger social environment, including the immediate
neighborhood and the broader culture. These factors do not operate
separately but interact in a complex fashion to influence developmental
outcomes. Child care must therefore be viewed as one of many sources
of influence on children's development and one that interacts in complex
ways with numerous others.
45
OCR for page 46
46
WHO CARES FOR AMERICA)S CHILDREN?
Second, children are not only influenced by their immediate and
broader environments, but also shape these environments. Development
reflects the transactional processes-or mutual influences of child and
environment. In child care settings, for example, children are influenced
by caregiver and peer behaviors, and they also selectively relate to certain
teachers and peers.
Third, children's development involves the biological, cognitive, and
socioemotional domains. Although development in these domains is in-
terrelated, progress across domains does not occur uniformly. Rather,
children may advance or lag in one domain but not others. It is therefore
important to consider the development of children in child care in specific
domains, rather than to view patterns of influence as equally affecting all
domains.
Fourth, children's physiological, cognitive, and socioemotional needs
differ markedly by developmental level. Consideration of the age of a child
is fundamental to understanding the differing needs of children in child
care settings.)
Finally, the nature of environmental influences on children is best
thought of as probabilistic. Recent research and practice with children
posits risk factors, conditions or events that increase the probability of
negative or less than optimal developmental outcomes, and protective
factors, conditions or events that increase the probability of positive or
optimal developmental outcomes. Risk and protective factors are thought
to influence development most often by interacting with other sources
of influence on a child's development. Child care could function as a
protective factor, a risk factor, or a relatively neutral factor for particular
developmental domains.
In short, the relationship between child care and child development is
complex. In light of this complexity, it is not surprising that there are no
perfect studies and few that are conclusive about the relationship between
child care and child development. Nonetheless, the cumulative weight of
evidence from empirical studies, clinical work, and professional practice is
sufficient to draw some conclusions that can serve as provisional guides to
program and policy. The rest of this chapter and the next two review that
evidence.
~ In this chapter, and indeed throughout this volume, infants refers to children in the first year
of life, toddlers to those 13 to 36 months, preschool age to those 3 to 5 years old, and school age
to those 6 years or older. We note, however, that there is some variation across researchers and
legislators in the precise demarcations used for these developmental periods. Where a particular
study, author, standard, or regulation uses age demarcations that differ from ours, we note the
discrepancy and specify the intended age of the children.
OCR for page 47
THE EFFECTS OF CHILD CARE
EVOLUTION OF CHILD CARE RESEARCH
47
Marked social changes that impinge on the lives of families and chil-
dren have often sparked an initial wave of psychological research that asks,
"Is this harmful to children?" It has been the case repeatedly that this
initial wave of research, which might be called the "alarm phase," does
not address questions of sufficient subtlety or complexity to illuminate the
impact of the social change. Typically, in the evolution of the research,
the alarm phase gives way to a second research phase that examines the
demographic shift in a more differentiated manner.
The research on maternal employment (a "sister" literature to that
on child care that is not restricted to young children receiving a particu-
lar form of supplemental care) illustrates this evolution. Researchers and
practitioners responded decades ago to the striking increases in rates of
maternal employment by asking whether or not children were adversely
affected by daily separations and nonmaternal care. But the great complex-
ity in the research findings from those early studies indicated that it was
not enough to ask about potential harm. Some children clearly benefited
from their mothers' employment. Furthermore, it did not appear that ma-
ternal employment was a unitary phenomenon with uniform implications
(Bronfenbrenner and Crouter, 1982; Hoffman, 1979~. Rather, its impact on
children was related to a number of child characteristics (e.g., age and sex),
family characteristics (e.g., father involvement with children, mothers' role
satisfaction, and extended family support), and factors beyond the family
(e.g., culture) (Zaslow et al., in press). Research restricted to a status
strategy mother is or is not employed- gave way to research focusing on
mechanisms and processes, the factors associated with differing outcomes
of maternal employment for children.
The research on child care is following a similar pattern of evolution
(Belsky, 1984; Phillips, 1988~. A first wave of studies asked whether the
increasing rates of participation of young children in family day care and
center care was cause for alarm. Did the development of children in
supplemental child care differ from that of children cared for by parents?
The accumulating evidence, however, has forced a shift in the research
focus. Child care was not found to be inherently or inevitably harmful.
Rather, it was found to vary greatly as an environment for children, and
children's development was linked to the variation. A second wave of child
care research, still in progress, examines children's development in light of
variations in the environment of child care.
According to Phillips (1988), the major focus of a third wave of child
care research is beginning to emerge. This phase will view the home
and child care environments as linked and mutually influential. Children's
development is beginning to be understood in light of experiences across
the two care settings.
OCR for page 48
48
WHO CARES FOR AMERICA'S CHILDREN?
Each successive wave of child care research reflects progressively
greater conceptual complexity and methodological refinement. Yet the
question central to each wave remains important, even as the new ques-
tions emerge. That is, the waves of research overlap and complement one
another, rather than supplanting each other.
It is important to continue to ask how the development of children
reared at home and in child care settings differs (the question focal to the
first wave of research), even as questions are asked about the implications
of poor-quality care in comparison to care that is adequate or of high
quality (second wave) and about the joint impact of the child's home and
the child care settings (third wave). Although there are methodological
weaknesses as well as strengths in each research wave, we view each phase
as using research approaches appropriate to the central question being
addressed. We begin, however, not with the first wave, but one step further
back, in the research on maternal deprivation.
ROOTS OF CHILD CARE RESEARCH:
MATERNAL DEPRIVATION
The alarm phase of research in child care has its roots in the substantial
body of clinical and empirical studies of children experiencing maternal de-
privation and institutionalization (long or short stays in residential facilities
for children). It was not only initially considered possible that child care
might belong on a continuum with the institutionalization of children, but
actually explicitly stated that this was the case. The influential 1951 World
Health Organization Expert Committee on Mental Health concluded on
the basis of the work of John Bowlby (1951), that "day nurseries" consti-
tuted a form of maternal deprivation with permanent negative effects on
children (Rutter, 1981a).
Studies of short-term (hospitalization, short-stay residential nursery)
and long-term ~ong-stay residential nursery, institutionalization) parent-
child separations, many of them rooted in the psychoanalytic tradition, do
indicate problems in children's development (e.g., Freud and Burlingham,
1944, 1973; Goldfarb, 1943; Provence and Lipton, 1962; Ribble, 1965;
Robertson and Robertson, 1971; Spitz, 1945; Wolkind, 1974~. These prob-
lems range from acute distress syndrome, associated with short periods
in care, to conduct disorders, problems in forming relationships, and in-
tellectual deficits, associated with longer term care (Rutter, 1981a). In
particular, `'an institutional upbringing which involves multiple changing
caretakers has been shown to lead to important social deficits and prob-
lems in interpersonal relationships" (Rutter, 1981a:154~. But does the ac-
cumulated evidence regarding weeks or years completely away from parents
OCR for page 49
THE EFFECTS OF CHILD CARE
49
indicate that child care should be considered together with this grouping
of studies, as a form of maternal deprivation?
Rutter's (1979, 1981a) reassessments of the theory and research into
maternal deprivation are extremely helpful in extracting those elements
of early views of maternal deprivation (particularly those of Bowlby) that
the research evidence has sustained and those elements that have required
revision. According to Rutter, there have been two important and lasting
contributions of the early work on maternal deprivation. First, that work
identified deplorable conditions in short- and long-term residential settings
for children. In response, there have been widespread changes in those
conditions. Second, studies responding to that work have resulted in an
understanding of experiences that are necessary for young children's normal
development.
Above all, that research showed that young children need to develop
enduring relationships with a limited number of specific individuals, re-
lationships that are characterized by affection, reciprocal interaction, and
responsiveness to the particular and highly individualized cues of the infant
and young child, and that the child's environment has to provide sufficient
opportunity for stimulation (Rutter, 1981a, summarizes the evidence). It
is in the context of familiar relationships that children make their major
developmental advances in communication and understanding in the first
years. The growth of language and social understanding depends on the
child's social exchanges with familiar, responsive others (Bruner, 1983;
Dunn, 1988; Lock 1978; I3revarthen, 1977~.
In other respects, other early conclusions on maternal deprivation have
required revision in light of subsequent research (Rutter, 1979, 1981a). Per-
haps most central, the initial work emphasized the child's need to become
attached to the mother in particular, and to be cared for in his or her own
home, for healthy subsequent development. For example, Bowlby's early
statements viewed the mother-child bond as different from all other rela-
tionships (Bowlby, 1951~. Subsequent work has not confirmed this exclusive
emphasis on the mother-child relationship. Rather, the evidence indicates
a normal tendency for children to form multiple simultaneous attachments
(Chibucos and Kail, 1981; Dunn, 1983~. These attachments tend to be
hierarchical, with one attachment (often to the mother) most significant to
the child (Rutter, 1981b). However, mothers are not the only caregivers
who can provide the essential experiences for healthy early development.
Children can benefit from '`multiple mothering" if it provides affection,
warmth, responsiveness, and stimulation in the context of enduring rela-
tionships with a reasonably small number of caregivers (according to Rutter
[1981a], four or five caregivers), who have come to know and be able to
respond to the child's individual needs and style.
OCR for page 50
so
WHO CARES FOR AMERICA'S CHILDREN?
Accordingly, researchers no longer believe that the effects of institu-
tionalization on children are solely the result of disruption of the mother-
child relationship. In the more complex and differentiated view of insti-
tutionalization that has evolved, it is now understood that some of the
more serious developmental problems follow not from interruption of a
mother-child relationship, but from an initial lack of any such relationship.
Furthermore, the effects of residential care vary according to the setting's
provision of enduring relationships and stimulation; according to the child's
physical status (e.g., nutrition, pre- and postnatal complications); and to
the family circumstances surrounding the institutionalization, particularly
family discord. Thus, the nature and circumstances of the separation in
combination with the characteristics of the child determine its implications
rather than the single fact of mother-child separation (Rutter, 1979, 1981a;
Wolkind, 1974).
Of particular importance in the present context, Rutter's reassessment
of the maternal deprivation research concludes that child care does not fall
on a continuum with institutionalization (Rutter, 1981a:154~:
[where is a world of difference between institutional care without any
parental involvement and day care in which the mother remains a key
figure who continues to actively participate in looking after the child. For
these reasons, little weight can be attached to the results of residential
group care as a basis for assessing the probable sequelae of group day
care.
In sum, infants and young children tend to form several attachments
to a small number of selected individuals. A healthy environment for child
development does include at least one secure attachment, but does not
necessarily require care exclusively by a mother. Rather, environments
that provide stable, warm, responsive, and stimulating relationships with
several caregivers, if these relationships are limited in number, can encour-
age healthy psychological development. Child care differs fundamentally
from institutionalization and should not be considered part of the same
phenomenon simply on the grounds of mother-child separation. Yet when
child care environments fail to provide those elements found to be essential
to normal development-and instead involve a large number of caregivers,
frequent changes in caregivers, lack of responsiveness to the child as an in-
dividual, and lack of social and cognitive stimulation they can be expected
to have negative implications for development.
OCR for page 51
THE EFFECTS OF CHILD CARE
FIRST WAVE OF CHILD CARE RESEARCH:
DEVELOPMENT OF CHILDREN IN CHILD CARE AND
THOSE REARED AT HOME
51
The impetus for the first wave of empirical, systematic child care re-
search, then, was the concern that young children would be harmed by
daily separations from their mothers. As it became clear that mother-child
separations and daily participation in child care did not have the drastic
negative implications that the maternal deprivation construct predicted,
important questions nevertheless remained: Did the development of chil-
dren in supplemental child care differ from that of home-reared children in
meaningful if less marked ways? Were there subgroups of children whose
development was enhanced by the child care experience? Were there sub-
groups of children whose participation in child care was associated with any
degree of risk for development?
Several comprehensive reviews of the first wave of child care research
by Belsky and colleagues (Belsky, 1984; Belsky and Steinberg, 1978), Clarke-
Stewart and Fein (1983), and Rutter (1981b) have addressed these questions
and provide extensive documentation, summarized below. Consistent with
the assumptions about development presented in the preface to these
chapters, we assume that the impact of child care differs by domain of
development. As such, we present the major findings separately for the
areas of intellectual and social development. However, we cannot present
findings separately by developmental level because researchers have made
surprisingly little effort to differentiate the outcomes for children exposed
to child care according to child age. The evidence rests largely on a
mosaic of cross-sectional studies, rather than on longitudinal studies aimed
at documenting the changes and consistencies in children's needs in child
care as they get older. The major exception to this pattern is that the
infancy period has been singled out for particular focus. But the years
from toddlerhood through school age are rarely discussed in the child care
literature with an assumption of changing developmental needs.
A further limitation in this wave of child care research in the United
States that is important to note is its very heavy reliance on studies of
center care, rather than the demographically more prevalent family day
care. In this respect much can be learned from the European research,
which has more consistently encompassed family day care as well as center
care in its attempts to examine the impact of child care experience versus
parental care (e.g., Cochran, 1977; Lamb, Hwang, Bookstein, et al., 1988;
Lamb, Hwang, Broberg, and Bookstein, 1988~.
Intellectual Development
On measures of intellectual development, reviews of the evidence
conclude that "children in day care centers do as well as those at home
OCR for page 52
52
WHO CARES FOR AMERICA'S CHILDREN?
. . . or that they do better, at least for a time or on some measures"
(Clarke-Stewart and Fein, 1983:965~.
Social class is an important factor in understanding the findings for
cognitive development among children in child care (Belsky, 1984; Belsky
and Steinberg, 1978~. Studies of more economically advantaged children in
community-based child care find either no differences in cognitive devel-
opment related to child care participation or more advanced development
among these youngsters. Studies of economically disadvantaged children
in high-quality child care intervention programs, however, consistently find
more advanced cognitive development in day care children than in home-
reared children. These children do not show the declines found for their
home-reared counterparts from disadvantaged families on tests of intellec-
tual development.
Although Belsky's reviews (Belsky, 1984; Belsky and Steinberg, 1978)
conclude that, overall, middle-class child care and home-reared children do
not differ on indices of intellectual development, Clarke-Stewart and Fein
(1983) diverge in their assessment of the research, pointing to indications of
superior scores on cognitive indices in some studies of children attending
community-based child care programs (e.g., Doyle, 1975; Rubenstein et
al., 1981~. Thus, for more economically advantaged children in community-
based programs, the most consistent conclusion appears to be that child care
attendance does not have negative implications for cognitive development.
In children from disadvantaged families, measures of IQ (that are lan-
guage dependent) typically decline beginning in the second year of life (see
Slaughter [1983] for discussion of this pattern and the types of measures
on which it occurs). Reviews of the evidence on early intervention pro-
grams for children at risk for this decline indicate that such programs are
effective in preventing or slowing the decline. Bryant and Ramey (1987),
for example, in an excellent recent review of this evidence, restricted their
examination to methodologically adequate experimental studies of early
intervention programs and considered the role of child's age at entry, dura-
tion and intensity of intervention program, nature of educational activities,
and whether the child or parents were primary targets of the intervention.
They conclude that program effectiveness was most closely linked with the
child's (or family's or both) extent of contact with the intervention pro-
gram and that "the most improvement in intellectual development occurs
when children attend day care and families receive parent training or other
services" (Bryant and Ramey, 1987:71~. Interventions were found to be
effective irrespective of whether they were initiated during infancy, early
childhood, or the preschool years. And the type of educational emphasis
and the curriculum were not closely linked with outcomes.
Findings of the early intervention programs indicate that gains on
OCR for page 53
THE EFFECTS OF CHILD CARE
53
measures of intellectual development are temporary rather than permanent
(evidence summarized by Clarke-Stewart and Fein, 1983; Haskins, 1989~.
However, longitudinal evaluations of early intervention that include out-
come measures in addition to IQ show some persistent effects. For example,
in one longitudinal analysis of 10- to 17-year-olds who had attended early
intervention programs, although group differences on IQ did not persist,
differences on measures of school-related behavior did: children who had
participated in intervention programs were less likely to repeat a grade in
school and less likely to be referred for special education than those who
had not participated (Darlington et al., 1980; Lazar et al., 1982~.
Recent research also indicates that when an intervention program is
continued into the elementary school years, complementing the child's
regular school participation, differences can be sustained. Horacek and
colleagues (1987:762) found that "children who participated in both [a]
preschool program and [a] school-age support program performed better
in school than the group that had only preschool" intervention, even though
the intervention at school age was of limited intensity. Thus, children at
risk for school failure may benefit most from a combination of early and
sustained intervention.
Haskins (1989), in reviewing the findings on the impact of early inter-
vention programs, urges a distinction between model intervention programs
(e.g., those considered in the Bryant and Ramey [1987] review) and Head
Start. Haskins points out that both types of programs yield "significant
and meaningful gains" on measures of intellectual performance by the end
of the first year of intervention, but it is only for the model programs
that there is evidence of strong positive effects on the later school-related
behavior variables. He suggests several possible explanations for this differ-
ence in the findings for model early intervention programs and Head Start.
Since data collection has been far more extensive and systematic for the
model programs, the long-term effects of Head Start may be undetected by
the fewer and less rigorous Head Start outcome studies. However, there
are fundamental program differences that could underlie the difference in
longer term implications of the two kinds of programs: Head Start en-
compasses sites ranging substantially in quality; while model programs are
consistently high quality. Furthermore, Head Start selects for participation
the most disadvantaged children and families, but draws control groups
from those remaining on the waiting list and who are thus relatively less
disadvantaged. Work by Lee and colleagues (1988) suggests that particu-
larly because of Head Start selection practices the impact of Head Start
may be systematically underestimated in studies.
Haskins (1989), while apologizing for the tendency of social scientists
to call for more research, notes the particular need for methodologically
OCR for page 73
THE EFFECTS OF CHILD CARE
73
found to be significantly correlated with center quality: the value the family
placed on social skills (as measured by parental reports) was positively
related to the quality of the child care arrangement; the value the family
placed on conformity (again measured through parental reports) was neg-
atively correlated with quality (McCartney, 1984; Phillips et al., 1987~. A
partial replication within the United States for this result is reported by
Kontos and Fiene (1987~: center quality in the state of Pennsylvania was
positively associated with the value the family placed on prosocial behavior.
Howes (in press, by, in an excellent discussion of the issues, notes
that family variables and the quality of care may have mutual influences
over a period of time. A stressed family, for example, may not be able
to persevere in a search for higher quality care and may place a child in
a lower quality setting. Experiences in such a setting then influence the
child's development (perhaps, for example, with regard to compliance),
which in turn may increase stress levels in the home. Such patterns of
mutual influence between school and family have been identified in older
children, especially boys (Patterson, 1986~.
The Link Between Child Care Quality and Family Variables
Given the interrelated nature of family and child care quality measures,
recent research has asked whether the quality of care has an impact separate
from family economic and psychological variables. Evidence that family
variables and the quality of care, separately, contribute to development
is of two kinds: correlational studies in which care quality continues to
predict child development with family variables controlled, and research
designs involving random assignment to different child care situations.
Studies using correlational designs have consistently concluded that
family and quality of care variables are important contributors. Howes
and Stewart (1987), for example, examined the role of family character-
istics (factor scores describing families as "nurturing and supported" or
"restrictive and stressed") and quality of child care in predicting the level
of children's play with objects, peers, and adults. Each set of variables
significantly predicted level of play with the other set of variables con-
trolled. McCartney (1984) concluded that the quality of center care was as
predictive of children's language skills as family background variables.
As research using the strategy of controlling for correlated family
variables progresses, one can anticipate the assessment of a wider range
of family variables and the use of direct observation of family processes,
rather than reliance on self-report measures. An excellent recent example
of progress in both respects can be seen in the work of Owen and Henderson
(1989~. In this study, child care quality at age 4 was found to be related to
several measures of mother-child and father-child interaction as observed
OCR for page 74
74
WHO CARES FOR AMERICA'S CHILDREN?
at 12 months: children in higher quality care at age 4 had shown less
negative affect at 12 months and had parents who had been rated as
more sensitive and positive. However, even with these early observational
measures controlled, children in higher quality care at age 4 were observed
to show more advanced social skills.
A study by McCartney and colleagues (1985) goes beyond a correla-
tional design to ask what happens to children of lower socioeconomic status,
compared with more advantaged children, when they are in center care of
higher overall quality. In this study, the social and cognitive development
of children attending a government-run center for low-income children in
Bermuda was compared with the development of children attending eight
private child care centers on the island.
The children at the government centers had mothers not only with
lower occupational status, but also with lower verbal IQ scores than mothers
in the comparison group. At the same time, the overall quality of the
government center was the highest of the centers as measured by the Early
Childhood Environment Rating Scale. Analysis of the developmental status
of the children in the government center with children of the same age
attending all other child care programs indicated higher scores for those in
the government center on measures of language development, intelligence,
and task orientation, as well as on indices of sociability and considerateness.
The authors comment that the findings "are especially convincing because
the comparison group consists of children of higher SES . . . " (McCartney
et al., 1985:251~.
Studies involving random assignment of children to groups varying
as to quality of care provide the most rigorous examination of whether
quality has an impact independent of family factors. Experimental designs,
which randomly assign children to differing child care situations, are a
widely used strategy in studies of early intervention for children from
disadvantaged families. In a recent review of that evidence, Bryant and
Ramey (1987) identified assessments of 17 early intervention programs
that involved random assignment to intervention or no-intervention groups.
They restricted their attention to studies involving such designs in light
of concerns about the failure, in other studies, "to ensure adequately the
initial equivalence of educationally treated and untreated (control) groups"
(Bryant and Ramey, 1987:35~. The crucial finding from that review is that
the program benefits, as measured by IQ scores, were most closely related
to the intensity of contact (amount and breadth) a child had with the
intervention program. This pattern, identified by looking across studies,
has also been found within a study that systematically varied children's
extent of contact with an intervention program (Horacek et al., 1987~. This
dose-response relationship in experimentally oriented research permits us
OCR for page 75
THE EFFECTS OF CHILD CARE
75
to conclude with confidence that programs involving high-quality care have
positive implications for children, independent of family background factors.
Although designs involving randomization are widely used in early
intervention studies, they are as yet rarely used in studies of variation
in quality in community-based child care programs. A notable exception
illustrates the feasibility and usefulness of such a strategy in studying quality.
One substudy within the National Day Care Study (NDCS) (Ruopp et al.,
1979) was carried out in the Atlanta public school system and involved
random assignment of children, within child care centers, to classrooms
varying systematically on quality factors. This substudy confirmed the
findings of the overall NDCS that children's growth on cognitive measures
from fall to spring was linked most closely to the quality component of
group size in child care centers.
Studies of variation in child care quality in community-based care
appear to be at an early and descriptive phase, documenting naturally
occurring variation and its correlates. Such a descriptive phase appears both
important and necessary (e.g., it revealed the family-quality associations),
and it will be especially important in future work on dimensions of quality
to follow the path of the intervention studies and the NDCS in using
experimental designs.
The conclusion best supported by the existing research is that children
who are cared for in both child care and the family are influenced by both.
As the research in this new wave progresses, an increasingly clear picture
will emerge of how care in one environment can offset or complement
care in the other. One example of this more complex conceptualization
comes from recent research by Howes and colleagues (1988~. In that
study, toddlers with insecure attachments to both mother and caregiver
showed the least ability to engage in interactions with caregivers while in
child care. Children with insecure attachments to their mothers but secure
attachments to caregivers showed behaviors indicating that the relationship
with the caregiver was compensatory: "These children appeared more
socially competent than the children who failed to form compensatory
secure relationships with alternative caregivers (1988:415~." The social
behavior of toddlers in child care was thus a reflection of relationships both
at home and in the child care setting.
As research progresses, consideration of indirect as well as direct effects
can also be expected. That is, not only are children directly influenced by
both of their care settings, but child care can have implications for parents
that in turn influence children. Thus, for example, Parker and colleagues
(1987) found that mothers who participated in the supportive activities
offered by Head Start reported fewer psychological symptoms, more feel-
ings of mastery, and greater satisfaction with the current quality of life at the
OCR for page 76
76
WHO CARES FOR AMERICA'S CHILDREN?
end of a year. The researchers note that such changes in the mothers may
well have implications for children: "In addition to the direct effects on
children of Head Start, future research should also examine the potentially
positive indirect effects on children stemming from the enhanced parental
well-being that parents' involvement in Head Start programs produces"
(Parker et al., 1987:232~. Similarly, Edwards and colleagues (1987) found
participation in a high-quality infant day care program to be associated with
changes over time in parent-infant interaction. Parents of center children
diverged over time from other parents in such behaviors as playing with,
holding, and touching their babies. The authors relate the increases in
those behaviors among the parents to the child-centered orientation and
behavior of the center caregivers. Indeed, the changes in parental behavior
mirrored observed caregiver behaviors. It will be important, then, in future
work to examine further the implications for parents of their children's
participation in programs of varying quality and to complete the picture by
determining the indirect effects of these influences on children.
Summary
Work reveals that a child's experiences at home and in a child care
setting are not separate and unrelated experiences: they are very much
linked. Although family and care quality factors are not independent, both
sets of factors contribute to children's development: that is, children who
experience care both in child care settings and in the home show the
influence of both.
Thus far, the major focus of the third wave of research has been to
document that a child's placement in child care of higher or lower quality
in part reflects family psychological and socioeconomic factors. In the
absence of subsidies or interventions, families that are more stressed, both
psychologically and economically, are more likely to use lower quality care.
The United States thus has a group of children in double jeopardy: the
children in greatest need of high-quality care to offset stress at home often
receive low~ualibr care.
Increasingly thorough and rigorous research on the joint contributions
of home and child care factors to children's development can be expected.
For example, a few studies now identify and control for a wide range of
family factors in considering the impact of care quality, but future work
on this issue will have to incorporate views of the family-day care linkage
that go well beyond the finding that family factors influence choice of care
quality. For example, how care quality influences family stress levels and
parent-child interaction needs to be examined.
OCR for page 77
THE EFFECTS OF CHILD CARE
77
CONCLUSIONS
The research on child care is evolving, and our evaluation of the
evidence points to the continuing need to address issues of methodology.
Even as it stands, however, the existing evidence from each of the research
stages we have identified provides the basis for broad conclusions:
Child care participation is not a form of maternal deprivation.
Children can and do form attachment relationships to multiple
caregivers, if the number of caregivers is limited, the relationships
enduring, and the caregivers are responsive to the individual child.
· Child care is not inevitably or pervasively harmful to children's de-
velopment. Indeed, the evidence points to aspects of development
for which child care is beneficial.
The quality of child care in either family day care or center care-
is important to children's development, whatever their socioeco-
nomic levels and whether one looks at cognitive or socioemotional
development.
Children from families enduring greater psychological and eco-
nomic stress are more likely to be found in lower quality care
settings. Thus, there are children in the United States, especially
those from low-income families, in double jeopardy from stress
both at home and in their care environments.
There is no strong basis in our review for urging parents toward
or away from enrolling children in child care settings, although we do
find unresolved questions concerning full-time care in the first year of life.
Rather, our review strongly directs attention to the issue of child care quality
and its impact on children's development. Accordingly, the next chapter
addresses in greater detail two key questions: What are the components of
care quality? What are the thresholds demarcating high- and low-qualib,
care on these dimensions?
REFERENCES
Ainsworth, M.D.S., M. Blehar, E. Waters, and S. Wall
1978 Pattems of Attachment. Hillsdale, NJ.: Erlbaum.
Anderson, C.W., RJ. Nagle, W.N Roberts, and J.W. Smith
1981 Attachment to substitute caregivers as a function of center quality and caregiver
involvement. Child Development 52:53-61.
Barglow, P., B.E. Vaughn, and N. Molitor
1987 Effects of maternal absence due to employment on the quality of infant-mother
attachment in a low-risk sample. Child Development 58:945-954.
Belsly, J.
1984 INTO waves of day care research: Developmental effects and conditions of
OCR for page 78
78
WHO CARES FOR AMERICA'S CHILDREN?
quality. Pp. 1-34 in R.C. Ainslie, ea., The Child and the Day Care Setting;:
Qualitative Vanations and Development. New York: Praeger.
1988 The "effects" of infant daycare reconsidered. Early Childhood Research Quarterly
3:235-272.
Belsky, J., and M. Rovine
1988 Nonmaternal care in the first year of life and the security of infant-parent
attachment. Child Development 59:157-167.
Belsky, J., and L" Steinberg
1978 The erects of daycare. Child Development 49:929-949.
Benn, R.K.
1986 Factors promoting secure attachment relationships between employed mothem
and their sons. Child Development 57:1224-1231.
Bowlby, J.
1951 Matemal Care and Mental Health. Geneva: World Health Organization.
1969 Attachment and Loss, Vot 1, Attachment. New York: Basic Books.
1973 Attachment and Loss, VoL 2, Separation. New York: Basic Books.
1980 Attachment and Loss, VoL 3, Loss. New York: Basic Books.
Brazelton, T.B.
1986 Issues for working parents. American Joumal of Orthopsychiatry 56:14-25.
Bronfenbrenner, U., and A C. Crouter
1982 Work and family through time and space. Pp. 39-83 in S.B. Kamerman and
C.D. Hayes, eds., Families That Work: Children in a Changing World. Panel on
Work, Family, and Community, Committee on Child Development Research and
Public Policy, Commission on Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education,
National Research Council. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press.
Brown, G., and T. Harris
1978 Social Origins of Depression: A Study of Psychiatric DZsorders in Women. London:
Tavistock.
Bruner, J.
1983 Child's Talk. New York: Norton.
Bryant, D.M., and C.T. Ramey
1987 An analysis of the effectiveness of early intervention programs for high-risk
children. Pp. 33-78 in M. Guralnick and C. Bennett, eds., The Effectiveness of
Early Intervention for At-Risk and Handicapped Children. New York: Academic
Press.
Campos, J.J., K.C. Barrett, M.E. Lamb, H.H. Goldsmith, and C. Stenberg
1983 Socioemotional development. Pp. 783-915 in P.H. Mussen, ea., Handbook of
Child Psychology, VoL 2. New York: Wiley.
Carew, J.
1980 Experience and the development of intelligence in young children at home
and in day care. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development
45~6-73:Serial No. 187.
Chibucos, T., and P. Kail
1981 Longitudinal examination of father-infant interaction and infant-father interac-
tion. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly 27:81-96.
Clarke-Stewart, K.A.
1987 Predicting child development from child care forms and features: The Chicago
study. Pp. 21-42 in D.A Phillips, ea., Quality in Child Care: What Does Research
Tell Us? Washington, D.C.: National Association for the Education of Young
Children.
1989 Infant day care: Maligned or malignant? American Psychologist 44:266-274.
OCR for page 79
THE EFFECTS OF CHILD CARE
79
Clarke-Stewart, K.A. , and G. G. Fein
1983 Early childhood programs. Pp. 917-999 in PH. Mussen, ea., Handbook of Child
Psychology, HoL 2. New York: Wiley.
Cochran, M.
1977 A comparison of group and family child-rearing patterns in Sweden. Child
Development 48:702-707.
Crockenberg, S.
1981 Infant irritability, mother responsiveness, and social support influences on the
security of infant-mother attachment. Child Development 52:857-865.
Darlington, R.B., J.M. Royce, AS. Snipper, H.W. Murray, and I. Lazar
1980 Preschool programs and the later school competence of children from low
income families. Science 208:202-204.
Doyle, A.
1975 Infant development in day care. Developmental Psychology 11:655-666.
Dunn, J.
1983 Sibling relationships in early childhood. Child Development 54:787-811.
1988 The Beginnings of Social Understanding. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University
Press.
Dyer, E.D.
1963 Parenthood as crisis: A re-study. Marriage and Family Living 25:196-2~1.
Edwards, C.P., M.E. Logue, S.R. Loehr, and S.B. Roth
1987 The effects of day care participation on parent-infant interaction at home.
American Joumal of Orthopsychiatry 57:116-119.
Farber, E.A., and B. Egeland
1982 Developmental consequences of out-of-home care for infants in a low-income
population. Pp. 102-125 in E.F. Zigler and E.W. Gordon, eds., Day Care:
Scientific and Social Policy Issues. Boston: Auburn House.
Freud, A., and D.T. Burlingham
1944 Infants Without Families; The Case for and Against ResidentialNurseries. New
York: International Universities Press.
1973 Infants Without Families; Reports on the Hampstead Nurseries, 1939-1945. New
York: International Universities Press.
Goelman, H., and A R. Pence
1987a Effects of child care, family, and individual characteristics on children's lan-
guage development: The Victoria Day Care Research Project. Pp. 89-104
in D.A. Phillips, ea., Quality in Child Care: What Does Research Tell Us?
Washington, D.C.: National Association for the Education of Young Children.
1987b Some aspects of the relationship between family structure and child language in
three types of day care. Pp. 129-146 in D. Peters and S. Kontos, eds., Annual
Advances in Applied Developmental Psychology, VoL 2. Norwood, NJ.: Ablex
Publishing Corp.
Golden, M., L Rosenbluth, M. T. Grossi, H.J. Policare, H. Freeman, Jr. , an d E.M . Brownlee
1978 The New York Cay Infant Day Care Study. New York: Medical and Health
Research Association of New York City.
Goldfarb, W.
1943 The erects of early institutional care on adolescent personality. Joumal of
ExpeKanental Education 12:106-129.
Grossman, K.E., K Grossman, F. Huber, and U. Wartner
1981 German children's behavior towards their mothers at 12 months and their
fathers at 18 months in Ainsworth's Strange Situation. Ir~temational Joumal of
Behavioral Development 4:157-181.
OCR for page 80
80
WHO CARES FOR AMERICA'S CHILDREN?
Harms, T., and R.M. Clifford
1980 Early Childhood Environment Rating; Scale. New York: Teachers College Press.
Haskins, R.
1985 Public school aggression among children with varying day-eare experience. Child
Development 56:689-703.
1989 Beyond metaphor: lathe efficacy of early childhood education. American Psy-
cholog~st 44:274-282.
Hobbs, D.F., and S.P. Cole
1976 Transition to parenthood: A decade replication. Joumal of Marriage and the
Family 38:723-731.
Hoek, E., K Christman, and M. Hoek
1980 Factors associated with decisions about return to work in mothers of infants.
Developmental Psychology 16:535-536.
Hoek, E., M.T. Gnezda, and S.L. McBride
1984 Mothers of infants: Attitudes toward employment and motherhood following
birth of the first child. Joumal of Mamage and the Family 46:425-431.
Hoffman, L^W.
1979 Maternal employment: 1979. American Psychologist 34:859-865.
Holloway, S.D., and M. Reichhart-Erickson
1988 The relationship of day-eare quality to children's free play behavior and social
problem solving skills. Early Childhood Research Quarterly 3:39-54.
Horaeek, H.J., C.T. Ramey, F.A. Campbell, KP. Hoffmann, and R.H. Fletcher
1987 Predicting school failure and assessing early intervention with high-risk children.
Joumal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry 26:758-763.
Howes, C.
1983 Caregiver behavior and conditions of earegiving. Joumal of Applied Develop
mental Psychology 4:99-107.
1988 Relations between early child care and schooling. Developmental Psychology
24:53-57.
in press, a Can age of entry and the quality of infant child care predict behaviors in
kindergarten? Developmental Psychology.
in press, b Current research in early day care: A review. In S. Chehrazi, ea., Balancing
Working and Parenting Psychological and Developmental Implications of Day
Care. New York: American Psychiatric Press.
Howes, C., and M. Oleniek
1986 Family and child influences on toddlers' compliance. Child Development 57:202-
216.
Howes, C., and P. Stewart
1987 Child's play with adults, toys, and peers: An examination of family and child
care influences. Developmental Psychology 23:423~30.
Howes, C., C. Rodning, D.C. Galluzzo, and L. Myers
1988 Attachment and child care: Relationships with mother and earegiver. Early
Childhood Research Quarterly 3:403-416.
Kontos, S., and R. Gene
1987 Child care quality, compliance with regulations, and children's development:
The Pennsylvania study. Pp. 57-80 in D.A. Phillips, ea., Quality in Child Care:
What Does Research Tell Us? Washington, D.C.: National Association for the
Education of Young Children.
Lamb, M.E., C.-P. Hwang, F.L" Bookstein, ~ Broberg, G. Hull, and M. Frodi
1988 Determinants of social competence in Swedish preschoolers. Developmental
Psychology 24:58-70.
OCR for page 81
THE EFFECTS OF CHILD CARE
81
Lamb, M.E., C.-P. Hwang, A. Broberg, and F.L. Bookstein
1988 The erects of out-of-home care on the development of social competence in
Sweden: A longitudinal study. Early Childhood Research Quarterly 3:379-402.
Lazar, I., R.B. Darlington, H. Murray, J. Royce, and A. Snipper
1982 Lasting effects of early education: A report of the Consortium for Longitudinal
Studies. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development 47~2-
3~:Serial No. 195.
Lee, V.E., J. Brooks-Gunn, and E. Schnur
1988 Does Head Start work? A 1-year follow-up comparison of disadvantaged
children attending Head Start, no preschool, and other preschool programs.
Developmental Psychology 24:210-222.
LeMasters, E.E.
1957 Parenthood as crisis. Marriage and Family Irving 19:352-355.
Lock, A., ed.
1~78 Aciron, Gesture, and Symbol. New York: Academic Press.
Matas, L., R. Arend, and L.N Sroufe
1978 Continuity of adaptation in the second year. The relationship between quality
of attachment and later competence. Child Development 49:547-556.
McCartney, K.
1984 Effect of quality of day care environment on children's language development.
Developmental Psychology 20:244-260.
McCartney, K., S. Scarr, D. Phillips, and S. Grajek
1985 Day care as intervention: Comparisons of varying quality programs. Joumal of
Applied Developmental Psychology 6:247-260.
McCartney, K., S. Scarr, D. Phillips, S. Grajek, and J.C. Schwarz
1982 Environmental differences among day-care centers and their effects on children's
development. Pp. 126-151 in E.F. Zigler and E.W. Gordon, eds., Daycare:
Scientific and Social Policy Issues. Boston: Auburn House.
Moen, P.
1989 Working Parents: Transformations in Gender Roles and Public Policies in Sweden.
Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.
Owen, M., and M. Cox
1988 Maternal employment and the transition to parenthood. Pp. 85-119 in NE.
GottEried and AW Gottfried, eds., Matemal Employment and Ch~l~en's Devel-
opment: Longitudinal Research. New York: Plenum.
Owen, M.T., and V.K. Henderson
1989 Relations Between Child Care Qualities and Child Behavior at Age 4: Do
Parent/Child Interactions Play a Role? Paper presented at the meetings of the
Society for Research in Child Development, Kansas City, April.
Parker, F.L, CS. Piotrkowski, and L. Peay
1987 Head Start as social support for mothers: The psychological benefits of
involvement. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry 57:220-233.
Pastor, D.L.
1981 The quality of mother-infant attachment and its relationship to toddlers' initial
sociability with peers. Developmental Psychology 17:326-335.
Patterson, G.R.
1986 Performance models for antisocial boys. American Psychologist 41:432-444.
Phillips, D.
1988 Quality in Child Care: Definitions at the AL. Mailman Family Foundation,
Inc. Paper presented at symposium on dimensions of quality in programs for
children. White Plains, New York, June.
OCR for page 82
82
WHO CARES FOR AMERICA'S CH LDREN?
Phillips, D.A., and C. Howes
1987 Indicators of quality in child care: Review of research. Pp. 1-20 in D.A. Phillips,
ea., Quality in Child Care: What Does Research Tell Us? Washington, D.C.:
National Association for the Education of Young Children.
Phillips, D.A., S. Scarr, and K. McCartney
1987 Dimensions and ellects of child care quality: The Bermuda study. Pp. 43-56
in D.A. Phillips, ea., Quality in Child Care: What Does Research Tell Us?
Washington, D.C.: National Association for the Education of Young Children.
Provence, S., and R.C. Lipton
1962 Infants in Institutions: A Comparison of Their Development With Family-Reared
Infants During the First Year of Life. New York: International Universities Press.
Ribble, M.A.
1965 The Rifts of Infants: Early Psychological Needs and Weir Satisfaction (2nd end..
New York: Columbia University.
Richtem, J.E., and C. Zahn-Waxler
1988 The infant day care controversy: Current status and future directions. Early
Childhood Research Quarterly 3:319-336.
Robertson, J., and J. Robertson
1971 Young children in brief separations: A fresh look. Psychoanalytic Study of the
Child 26:264-315.
Roopnarine, J.L, and M.E. Lamb
1978 The effects of day care on attachment and exploratory behavior in a strange
situation. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly 24:85-95.
Rubenstein, J.L, and C. Howes
1983 Social-emotional development of toddlers in day care: The role of peers and
individual differences. In S. Kilmer, ea., Early Education and Day Care, Vol. 3.
Greenwich, Conn.: JAI Press.
Rubenstein, J.L, C. Howes, and P. Boyle
1981 A two-year follow-up of infants in community-based day care. Joumal of Child
Psychology and Psychiatry 22:209-218.
Ruopp, R., J. leavers, F. Glantz, and C. Coelen
1~79 Children at the Center: Final Results of the National Day Care Study. Boston:
Abt Associates.
Rutter, M.
1979
Maternal deprivation, 1972-1978: New findings, new concepts, new approaches.
Child Development 50:283-305.
1981a Matemal Deprivation Reassessed. Middlesex, England: Penguin Books.
1981b Social-emotional consequences of daycare for preschool children. American
Joumal of Orthopsychiatry 5:4-28.
Schwarz, J.C.
1983 Infant day care: Effects at 2, 4, and 8 years. Paper presented at the meeting
of the Society for Research in Child Development, Detroit.
SchwaIz, J.C., R. G. Strickland, and G. Krolick
1974 Infant day care: Behavioral effects at preschool age. Developmental Psychology
10:502-506.
Slaughter, D.T.
1983 Early intervention and its effects on maternal and child development. Mono-
g~aphs of the Society for Research in Child Development 48~4~:Serial No. 202.
Spitz, R.A
1945 Hospitalism: An inquiry into the genesis of psychiatric conditions in early
childhood. Psychoanalytic Study of the Child 1:53-74.
OCR for page 83
THE EFFECTS OF CHILD CARE
83
Thompson, R.A.
1988 The edects of infant day care through the prism of attachment theory: A critical
appraisal. Early Childhood Research Quarterly 3:273-282.
Thompson, R.A., M.E. Lamb, and D. Estes
1982 Stability of infant-mother attachment and its relationship to changing life
circumstances in an unselected middle class sample. Child Development 53:144-
148.
Itevarthen, C
1977 Descriptive analyses of infant communicative behaviour. In H.R. Schaffer, ea.,
Studies in Mother-Infant Interaction. London: Academic Press.
Vandell, D.L, and C.P. Powers
1983 Day care quality and children's free play activities. American Joumal of
Orthopsychiatry 53:493-500.
Vandell, D.L, V.K Henderson, and K.S. Wilson
1988 A longitudinal study of children with day-care experiences of varying quality.
Child Development 59:1286-1292.
Vaughn, B.E., K.E. Deane, and E. Waters
1985 The impact of out-of-home care on child-mother attachment quality: Another
look at some enduring questions. In I. Bretherton and E. Water, eds., Growing
Points of Attachment Theory and Research. Monographs of the Society for Research
in Chdd Development 50~1-2~:Serial No. 209.
Watem, E., J. Wippman, and L^A. Sroufe
1979 Attachment, positive affect, and competence in the peer group: livo studies in
construct validation. Child Development 50:821-829.
Wolkind, S.
1974 The components of "affectionless psychopathy" in institutional children. Journal
of Child Psychology and Psychiatry 15:215-220.
Zaslow, M.J.
1988 The Quality of Care. Paper prepared for the Panel on Child Care Policy,
Committee on Child Development Research and Public Policy, Commission
on Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education, National Research Council,
Washington, D.C.
Zaslow, M.J., F.N Pedersen, J.T.D. Suwalsky, and B.A. Rabinovich
1989 Maternal employment and parent-infant interaction at one year. Early Childhood
Quarterly 4:459-478.
Zaslow, M.J., B.A. Rabinovich, and J.T.D. Suwalsky
in press From maternal employment to child outcomes: Preexisting group differences and
moderating variables. In J. Lerner and N. Galambos, eds., Matemal Employment
in the Child~earing Years. New York: Garland Press.
Representative terms from entire chapter:
day care
