Parenting styles, such as authoritative (warm but firm) and authoritarian (strict with little warmth), can significantly impact children’s language skills and reading comprehension.
Authoritative parenting often promotes better academic outcomes, while authoritarian parenting may hinder development. Understanding these relationships is crucial for developing effective educational strategies and family interventions.
Yu, L., Huang, J., Liu, P. D., Yeung, S. S. S., Lin, D., Cheung, H., & Tong, X. (2024). How parenting styles affect the development of language skills and reading comprehension in primary school students. British Journal of Educational Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjep.12718
Key Points
- Parenting styles indirectly affect children’s language skills and reading comprehension through family investment and family process pathways.
- Authoritative parenting is positively related to the number of children’s books at home, which in turn is associated with children’s reading motivation, language skills, and reading comprehension.
- Authoritarian parenting is negatively related to family cohesion, which is associated with children’s reading motivation and consequently their language skills and reading comprehension.
- The indirect pathways linking parenting styles to children’s language and reading outcomes differ slightly between non-parental-migration (NPM) and parental-migration (PM) children.
- For PM children, authoritarian parenting has a significant negative effect on family cohesion, while for NPM children, this relationship is not significant.
- The study emphasizes the importance of considering cultural context and family background (e.g., migration status) when examining the effects of parenting styles on children’s academic outcomes.
- Reading motivation plays a crucial mediating role between family environment factors and children’s language and reading skills.
- The research highlights the complex interplay between parenting styles, family environment, children’s motivation, and academic outcomes in rural Chinese contexts.
- Limitations include the focus on rural Chinese children, potential bias in self-reported parenting measures, and the use of single measurements for family investment and process components.
- The study has implications for educational interventions, suggesting a focus on fostering positive family environments and children’s reading motivation rather than solely on direct instruction or parenting style modifications.
Rationale
This study aims to address several gaps in the existing literature on parenting styles and children’s language and reading development.
Previous research has primarily focused on Western cultures and direct effects of parenting styles on children’s academic outcomes (Carreteiro et al., 2016; Fakeye, 2014; Kiuru et al., 2012).
However, the mechanisms underlying these relationships, particularly in non-Western contexts, remain underexplored.
The researchers identified a need to examine how parenting styles indirectly influence children’s language skills and reading comprehension through family investment and family process pathways.
This approach integrates multiple theoretical frameworks, including the family investment model, family process model (Conger & Donnellan, 2007), and motivation developmental model (Pomerantz et al., 2007).
Additionally, the study addresses the unique context of rural China, where parental migration is common.
By comparing non-parental-migration (NPM) and parental-migration (PM) children, the research aims to understand how family background moderates the relationships between parenting styles and children’s academic outcomes.
The longitudinal design of the study allows for a more comprehensive understanding of the long-term impacts of parenting styles on children’s language and reading development, addressing the limitations of previous cross-sectional studies (Bingham & Mason, 2018; Chen & Ren, 2019).
Method
The study employed a longitudinal design, tracking participants from grade three (Wave 1) to grade four (Wave 2).
Data was collected through questionnaires completed by primary caregivers and children, as well as language and reading assessments administered to the children.
Procedure
At Wave 1, primary caregivers completed questionnaires on parenting styles and family background. Children filled out questionnaires on parental migration status and family cohesion.
At Wave 2, children completed a reading motivation questionnaire and underwent assessments of language skills (vocabulary knowledge and syntactic awareness) and reading comprehension.
Sample
The study included 685 Mandarin-speaking third-graders (mean age = 9.23 years, SD = 0.66; 341 girls) randomly recruited from eight elementary schools in rural China.
The sample comprised 256 NPM children and 422 PM children, with 7 unreported. At Wave 2, 643 children (mean age = 10.26 years, SD = 0.44; 321 girls) remained in the study.
Measures
- Parenting Styles: Measured using six subscales of the Parenting Styles and Dimensions Questionnaire (PSDQ, Robinson et al., 2001).
- Children’s Books in the Home: Assessed on a six-point scale.
- Family Cohesion: Measured using a six-item Family Cohesion Scale.
- Reading Motivation: Assessed using an 11-item Reading Motivation Scale for Chinese children.
- Language Skills: Measured through vocabulary knowledge and syntactic awareness tasks.
- Reading Comprehension: Assessed using two Chinese reading comprehension tasks.
Statistical measures
The study used structural equation modeling (SEM) to analyze the data, including confirmatory factor analysis, direct effects model, mediation model, and multigroup analysis.
The analysis was conducted using Mplus 8.3 software, employing the full information maximum likelihood method to handle missing data.
Results
Hypothesis 1: Parenting styles indirectly affect children’s language skills and reading comprehension through family investment and family process pathways.
Results: Supported. Authoritative parenting was positively related to the number of children’s books, which in turn was associated with reading motivation and language/reading outcomes.
Authoritarian parenting was negatively related to family cohesion, which was associated with reading motivation and language/reading outcomes.
Hypothesis 2: The indirect pathways linking parenting styles to children’s language skills and reading comprehension differ between NPM and PM children.
Results: Partially supported. The path from authoritarian parenting to family cohesion was significantly different between NPM and PM children.
For PM children, authoritarian parenting had a significant negative effect on family cohesion, while for NPM children, this relationship was not significant.
Insight
This study provides valuable insights into the complex relationships between parenting styles, family environment, and children’s language and reading outcomes in rural Chinese contexts.
The findings suggest that parenting styles do not directly influence children’s language skills and reading comprehension but rather operate through indirect pathways involving family investment (e.g., provision of books) and family processes (e.g., family cohesion).
The research extends previous work by demonstrating the crucial mediating role of reading motivation in these relationships.
It highlights how different parenting styles can shape the family environment, which in turn affects children’s motivation to read and, ultimately, their language and reading skills.
The study also sheds light on the importance of considering cultural context when examining parenting styles and their effects.
In contrast to some Western studies, authoritative parenting in this Chinese sample did not show significant effects through family cohesion pathways.
This finding underscores the need for culturally sensitive approaches when studying parenting and child development across different societies.
The comparison between NPM and PM children reveals how family background can moderate the effects of parenting styles.
The finding that authoritarian parenting has a more negative impact on family cohesion for PM children suggests that these children may be more vulnerable to the negative effects of harsh parenting practices.
Future research could explore these relationships in urban Chinese contexts or other cultural settings to further understand the role of socio-economic and cultural factors.
Additionally, investigating other components of family investment and family processes could provide a more comprehensive picture of how parenting styles influence child development.
Strengths
This study had several methodological strengths, including:
- Longitudinal design allows for examination of long-term effects
- Large sample size (685 participants at Wave 1)
- Inclusion of both NPM and PM children, allowing for comparison
- Use of multiple measures for key constructs (e.g., language skills, reading comprehension)
- Integration of multiple theoretical frameworks (family investment, family process, and motivation developmental models)
- Use of advanced statistical techniques (SEM, multigroup analysis) to examine complex relationships
Limitations
This study also had several methodological limitations, including:
- Focus on rural Chinese children limits generalizability to urban or non-Chinese populations
- Reliance on self-report measures for parenting styles, which may be subject to social desirability bias
- Use of single measurements for family investment (number of books) and family process (family cohesion) components
- Potential confounding factors not accounted for (e.g., genetic influences, school environment)
- Lack of observational data to complement self-report measures
These limitations suggest caution in generalizing the findings to other populations or contexts.
The reliance on self-report measures for parenting styles may not fully capture the complexities of parent-child interactions.
The use of single measurements for family investment and process components may oversimplify these constructs.
Future research could address these limitations by including more diverse samples, using multiple methods to assess parenting styles, and incorporating a wider range of family environment measures.
Implications
The findings of this study have significant implications for educational practice, parenting interventions, and policy-making in rural China and potentially other similar contexts:
- Educational interventions: Rather than focusing solely on modifying parenting styles, interventions should aim to enhance the overall family learning environment. This could include programs to increase access to books and other educational resources in the home, as well as initiatives to promote family cohesion and positive emotional climates.
- Promoting reading motivation: Given the crucial mediating role of reading motivation, schools and families should prioritize fostering children’s interest in reading. This could involve creating engaging reading programs, providing diverse reading materials, and encouraging parent-child reading activities.
- Tailored support for PM families: The findings suggest that children in PM families may be more vulnerable to the negative effects of authoritarian parenting. Support services for these families should focus on maintaining family cohesion and providing additional emotional support for children.
- Cultural sensitivity in parenting interventions: The study highlights the importance of considering cultural context when designing parenting interventions. Programs developed in Western contexts may need to be adapted to better align with Chinese cultural values and family dynamics.
- Holistic approach to child development: The indirect pathways identified in this study emphasize the need for a holistic approach to supporting children’s language and reading development. This involves considering not just direct instruction but also the broader family environment and children’s psychological characteristics.
- Policy implications: Policymakers should consider measures to support families in creating positive learning environments at home, particularly in rural areas where educational resources may be limited. This could include initiatives to provide books to families or programs to enhance parental involvement in children’s education.
- Teacher training: Educators should be trained to recognize the influence of family factors on children’s academic performance and to work collaboratively with families to support children’s learning.
The real-world impact of these findings could be substantial, potentially leading to more effective educational strategies and family support programs in rural China.
However, it’s important to note that the effectiveness of any interventions based on these findings may be influenced by factors such as local resources, cultural attitudes, and individual family circumstances.
References
Primary reference
Yu, L., Huang, J., Liu, P. D., Yeung, S. S. S., Lin, D., Cheung, H., & Tong, X. (2024). How parenting styles affect the development of language skills and reading comprehension in primary school students. British Journal of Educational Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjep.12718
Other references
Bingham, G. E., & Mason, A. (2018). Contexts of African American children’s early writing development: Considerations of parental education, parenting style, parental beliefs, and home literacy environments. Academic Socialization of Young Black and Latino Children: Building on Family Strengths, 61-89. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-04486-2_4
Carreteiro, R. M., Justo, J. M., & Figueira, A. P. (2016). Reading processes and parenting styles. Journal of psycholinguistic research, 45(4), 901-914. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10936-015-9381-3
Chen, J. J., & Ren, Y. (2019). Relationships between home-related factors and bilingual abilities: A study of Chinese-English dual language learners from immigrant, low-income backgrounds. Early Childhood Education Journal, 47, 381–393. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10643-019-00941-9
Conger, R. D., & Donnellan, M. B. (2007). An interactionist perspective on the socioeconomic context of human development. Annu. Rev. Psychol., 58(1), 175-199. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.58.110405.085551
Fakeye, D. (2014). Parenting style and primary school pupils’ reading achievement in South-Western Nigeria. African Research Review, 8(2), 280. https://doi.org/10.4314/afrrev.v8i2.16
Kiuru, N., Aunola, K., Torppa, M., Lerkkanen, M. K., Poikkeus, A. M., Niemi, P., Viljaranta, J., Lyyra, A.-L., Leskinen, E., Tolvanen, A., & Nurmi, J. E. (2012). The role of parenting styles and teacher interactional styles in children’s reading and spelling development. Journal of School Psychology, 50(6), 799–823. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsp.2012.07.001
Pomerantz, E. M., Moorman, E. A., & Litwack, S. D. (2007). The how, whom, and why of parents’ involvement in children’s academic lives: More is not always better. Review of Educational Research, 77(3), 373–410. https://doi.org/10.3102/003465430305567
Robinson, C. C., Mandleco, B., Roper, S. O., & Hart, C. H. (2001). The parenting styles and dimensions questionnaire (PSDQ). Handbook of Family Measurement Techniques, 3, 319–321.
Keep Learning
- How might the findings of this study differ if conducted in an urban Chinese context or a Western society? What cultural factors could account for these differences?
- The study found that authoritative parenting did not significantly impact family cohesion in this Chinese sample. How does this challenge or support existing theories of parenting styles developed in Western contexts?
- How might the relationship between parenting styles and children’s academic outcomes evolve as children enter adolescence? What additional factors might come into play?
- The study focused on reading motivation as a mediating factor. What other psychological characteristics of children might be important to consider in future research on this topic?
- How might the findings of this study inform the development of culturally sensitive parenting interventions in non-Western contexts?
- The study found differences between NPM and PM children. What other family structure variables might be important to consider in future research on parenting styles and children’s academic outcomes?
- How might genetic factors interact with the environmental factors examined in this study to influence children’s language and reading development?
- Given the limitations of self-report measures for parenting styles, what alternative methods could be used to assess parenting behaviors more accurately in future studies?
- How might the relationship between parenting styles and children’s academic outcomes be influenced by broader societal factors such as educational policies or economic conditions?
- The study focused on language skills and reading comprehension. How might the findings differ if examining other academic domains such as mathematics or science?
