Transmission of Socioeconomic Inequalities

1
ALSPAC User Group
Transmission of Socio-economic
Inequalities Paul Gregg, Carol Propper and Liz
Waskbrook
2
Transmission of Socio-economic Inequalities

• Growing evidence that children of poorer families
  suffer penalties not just in terms of schooling
  but also health and behaviour (e.g. Propper and
  Rigg CP105, CP 125).
• How does low income translate into these poorer
  outcomes?
• Do the mediating influences differ across
  outcomes?

3
Overview

• Aim to compare and contrast the importance of
  different risk factors including income in
  accounting for the gaps between low and higher
  income children
• Examine range of different middle childhood
  outcomes
• IQ, School performance, locus of control, self
  esteem, behavioral problems, risk of obesity (age
  9)
• Use ALSPAC cohort (c 9000 children born in 1991/2
  in Avon)

4
Research questions

• Which aspects of the environments of low income
  children matter for each outcome? Proximal
  factors
• Which types of low income family do worst in
  fostering each outcome? Distal factors
• Are the adverse environments that matter related
  to particular family characteristics?
• Estimate a model which decomposes the association
  of income with these factors on the outcomes
• Unified model across range of outcomes and large
  set of distal and proximal factors

5
Modelling framework
6
Proximal factors

• Factors that capture the environment, or lived
  experience, of the child and that vary with
  family income
• Parental psychological functioning Anxiety/
  depression, weighted life events, financial
  difficulties, parental relationship, frequency of
  smacking, social networks, locus of control
• Preschool childcare Type and intensity, between
  birth and age 3, between age 3 and school entry
• Health at birth and health behaviours Birth
  weight and gestation, parental smoking,
  breastfeeding, diet at age 3
• Home learning environment Books and toys,
  maternal teaching, educational outings, mothers
  and partners reading and singing with child
• Physical home environment Car ownership, garden,
  noise, crowding, damp/mould
• School peer quality Fixed effects

7
Family characteristics

• Factors associated with income that independently
  influence the proximate environment of the child,
  but that do not impact on children directly
  (distal factors)
• Family structure and life cycle Single
  parenthood, siblings, mothers age
• Parental labour market status Mothers and
  partners employment and occupational class
• Family education Mothers, partners and
  maternal grandparents qualifications
• Local environment Local deprivation, social
  (public) housing

8
Decomposition I
Proximal factors (P) (e.g. parental
psychological functioning, health behaviors,
home learning environment, school choice)
Family characteristics (C) (e.g. household
composition, parental education)
Child outcome at age 7, 8 or 9 (O)
(Ln) family income at age 3 4 (Y)
9
Decomposition II
10
Decomposition III
11
The income gradient
d
Oij cons dj Yi eij for the jth outcome of
the ith child
12
The income gradient

• Low income children are cognitively, emotionally
  and physically disadvantaged compared with their
  better off counterparts
• Gradients steeper for cognitive than other
  outcomes
• Childs Locos of Control has an intermediate
  gradient

13
p lt 0.01 for all gradients
Outcomes standardized to mean 100, SD 10.
Coefficients on adverse outcomes reversed, such
that higher scores more favourable outcomes.
14
Decomposition I
Proximal factors (P) (e.g. parental
psychological functioning, health behaviors,
home learning environment, school choice)
Family characteristics (C) (e.g. household
composition, parental education)
Child outcome at age 7, 8 or 9 (O)
(Ln) family income at age 3 4 (Y)
15
Table 1 Income, proximal factors and child
outcomes
Numbers are of total income gradient. Stars
relate to test of significance of underlying
coefficient.
16
Table 2 Income, health behaviors and child
outcomes
Numbers are of total income gradient. Stars
relate to test of significance of underlying
coefficient.
17
Table 3 Income, preschool childcare and child
outcomes
Numbers are of total income gradient. Stars
relate to test of significance of underlying
coefficient.
18
Table 4 Income, the physical home environment
and child outcomes
Numbers are of total income gradient. Stars
relate to test of significance of underlying
coefficient.
19
Decomposition II
20
Income, family education and child outcomes
21
Decomposition III
22
Findings I

• Multiple aspects of the environments in which low
  income children are raised are associated
  differentially with poorer outcomes no magic
  bullet
• Lack of income is only one of a number of
  disadvantages faced by poor children. The
  association of low education of parents with
  outcomes for low income children is particularly
  important
• Observed proximal factors are more strongly
  associated with the income gaps in
  socio-emotional and health outcomes than in
  cognitive outcomes

23
Findings II

• The role of non-home environments such as child
  care and schools in generating inequality is very
  minor compared with the family environment
• The psychological stresses associated with
  raising a child on a low income are important in
  generating greater behavioral problems among poor
  children, but are also associated with a higher
  risk of obesity and poorer scholastic outcomes
• Poorer health behaviors (smoking, diet fed to
  children) among low income parents are an
  important pathway through which poorer health,
  behaviour and scholastic outcomes are
  transmitted.
• Determinants of IQ and school performance are not
  the same IQ deficits are explained more by
  parental education (proxying inherited ability?),
  while local neighbourhood matters more for
  academic outcomes (peer effects?)

24
Findings III

• Not everything about higher income lifestyles is
  beneficial for children.
• Full time maternal employment/early child care
  are associated with poorer behavioural outcomes,
  car ownership and educationally-oriented home
  environments are associated with greater risk of
  obesity

25
Additional slides
26
Table 5 Income, family characteristics and child
outcomes
Numbers are of total income gradient. Stars
relate to test of significance of underlying
coefficient.
27
Table 6 Income, family structure and child
outcomes
Numbers are of total income gradient. Stars
relate to test of significance of underlying
coefficient.
28
Table 7 The residual income gradient, proximal
factors and child outcomes
Numbers are of total income gradient. Stars
relate to test of significance of underlying
coefficient.
29
Table 8 Income, family education, proximal
factors and child outcomes
Numbers are of total income gradient. Stars
relate to test of significance of underlying
coefficient.
30
Table 9 Income, the local environment, proximal
factors and child outcomes
Numbers are of total income gradient. Stars
relate to test of significance of underlying
coefficient.
31
Appendix
32
Income, maternal psychological functioning and
child outcomes
33
Income, the home learning environment and child
outcomes
34
Income, parental labour market status and child
outcomes
35
Income, family education and child outcomes
36
Income, local environment and child outcomes
37
Income, family structure, proximal factors and
child outcomes
38
Income, parental labour market status, proximal
factors and child outcomes
39
(No Transcript)
40
(No Transcript)