Evaluation of the interactionist model of socioeconomic status and problem behavior: A developmental cascade across generations

The current multigenerational study evaluates the utility of the interactionist model of socioeconomic influence on human development (IMSI) in explaining problem behaviors across generations. The IMSI proposes that the association between socioeconomic status (SES) and human development involves a...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Development and psychopathology 2010-08, Vol.22 (3), p.695-713
Main Authors: Martin, Monica J., Conger, Rand D., Schofield, Thomas J., Dogan, Shannon J., Widaman, Keith F., Donnellan, M. Brent, Neppl, Tricia K.
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Addictive behaviors
Adolescent
Adults
Behavior
Causality
Child
Child Behavior Disorders - psychology
Child Development
Child, Preschool
Children
Children & youth
Childrens health
Drug abuse
Emotions
Families & family life
Family - psychology
Female
Humans
Intergenerational Relations
Male
Maternal & child health
Mental health
Models, Psychological
Parents & parenting
Social Class
Socioeconomic factors
Socioeconomic status
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:The current multigenerational study evaluates the utility of the interactionist model of socioeconomic influence on human development (IMSI) in explaining problem behaviors across generations. The IMSI proposes that the association between socioeconomic status (SES) and human development involves a dynamic interplay that includes both social causation (SES influences human development) and social selection (individual characteristics affect SES). As part of the developmental cascade proposed by the IMSI, the findings from this investigation showed that Generation 1 (G1) adolescent problem behavior predicted later G1 SES, family stress, and parental emotional investments, as well as the next generation of children's problem behavior. These results are consistent with a social selection view. Consistent with the social causation perspective, we found a significant relation between G1 SES and family stress, and in turn, family stress predicted Generation 2 (G2) problem behavior. Finally, G1 adult SES predicted both material and emotional investments in the G2 child. In turn, emotional investments predicted G2 problem behavior, as did material investments. Some of the predicted pathways varied by G1 parent gender. The results are consistent with the view that processes of both social selection and social causation account for the association between SES and human development.
ISSN:0954-5794
1469-2198
DOI:10.1017/S0954579410000374