No full-text available
To read the full-text of this research,
you can request a copy directly from the authors.
Toward a Definition of Self-Care Children: A Commentary on Steinberg (1986)
Abstract
This Comment responds to an article by Steinberg (1986) in which he stressed the desirability of investigating a wide variety of after-school experiences when examining consequences for latchkey (self-care) children. In presenting his results, he inadvertently confounded latchkey children with adolescents who spend time at a friend's house or who "hang out" with friends without adult supervision. Steinberg reported that these adolescents showed greater susceptibility to peer pressure to engage in antisocial activities. We point out that these adolescents do not fit the usual conceptualization of latchkey children and that Steinberg's study may lend support to practitioners and policy makers who assume negative latchkey consequences in the absence of research evidence. To avoid future confusion we indicate the need for a definition of latchkey children and offer a tentative definition.
... I was not sufficiently clear in my earlier article (1986) in noting that the youngsters who were classified as unsupervised and either at a friend's house or "hanging out"-youngsters who, as it turned out, were most at risk for misbehavior-did not have parents at home in the afternoon, and this seems to have led to a misunderstanding on the part of Rodman and colleagues. I am not sure how Rodman et al. (1988) drew the conclusion that "he [Steinberg] cannot determine from the data he collected whether the parents of many of his so-called latchkey children are at home" (p. 293; italics added), for indeed I could determine this, and the answer is none of them were. ...
... But excluding self-care youngsters who are not at home from studies of after-school care-by defining these children out of existence-is neither sensible nor responsible science. Rodman et al. (1988) also propose to restrict the self-care category to children "between the ages of approximately 6 and 13 years" p. 294). Their rationale for the upper age limit is that "the paramount latchkey issue for parents is whether elementary school-age children are able to spend time at home alone" (p. ...
... Within the subsample of youngsters in my study who did not go home after school, not having a parent at home in the afternoon was ecologically confounded with "hanging out" or being at a friend's house unsupervised; youngsters whose parent was not at home were twice as likely as those whose parent was at home to "hang out" after school or go, unsupervised, to a friend's home. It is this sort of confound that leads Rodman et al. (1988) to suggest that the term self-carebe reserved only for youngsters who care for themselves at home. That such an ecological confound exists makes the self-care phenomenon difficult to study, but it does not justify excluding a priori a sizable subset of self-care children from investigation. ...
Rodman, Pratto, & Nelson (1988) take issue with the classification of youngsters who are unsupervised after school, but not in their own home, as "latchkey" or "self-care" children in studies that examine the effects of after-school care experiences on children's behavior and development. They also take issue with including young adolescents, 14-15 years, in such studies. On the basis of these concerns, they dismiss as spurious and misleading findings from a previous study (Steinberg, 1986), which suggested that latchkey youngsters who spend after-school hours away from home may be at greater risk for misbehavior than latchkey youngsters who are in their own homes. They then propose that researchers use the term self-care to refer only to elementary-school youngsters who are home alone (or with a younger sibling) after school. Arguments against these proposals are offered. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2012 APA, all rights reserved)
... As Riley and Steinberg (1993) note: a 10-year-old in the care of a 12-year-old sibling is considered "supervised" by both Steinberg (1986) and Cole and Rodman (1987), but "latchkey" by Cain and Hofferth''(1989) and Vandell and Ramanan (1991). Vandell and Corasaniti's (1987) "latchkey" group could contain a third grader cared for by a 1 7-year-old, (p. 2) Some researchers limit the self-care population to those children who are on their own because their parents are at work (Galambos & Maggs, 1991;Rodman, Pratto & Nelson, 1988), whereas other re-searchers base self-care status on the child's whereabouts after school, not the parents' (Richardson et al., 1989;Steinberg, 1986). In practice, this means that children can be considered "unsupervised" if they spend after-school time at the local shopping mall or park, even if their moth-ers or fathers are at home all the while. ...
Reports a 4-yr qualitative study of 53 children and their employed parents which explored variations among self-care arrangements and children's reactions to these arrangements, to provide a richer understanding of the ways children spend their time after school. The 31 girls and 22 boys ranged in age at the start of the study from 7–12 yrs. Families were diverse in socioeconomic status, ethnicity, and family structure. Results show that variations occurred along many dimensions, including the range of activities and settings accessible to children, the extensiveness of children's after-school responsibilities, the availability of social supports, and children's interpretations of objectively similar after-school arrangements. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2012 APA, all rights reserved)
This paper utilizes a resilience perspective and a review of research to identify societal, community, family, and individual factors related to the after-school period that place many children at increased risk for poor developmental and behavioral outcomes. We define and discuss the importance of four key dimensions of children's after-school experiences: safety, developmental appropriateness, cultural relevance, and stability. We recommend that families and practitioners collaborate and include children in the decision making to create after-school care that is individualized. Whenever possible, after-school settings should include opportunities for both enhancing academic achievement and having fun. While emphasizing that all children need appropriate after-school environments, we discuss the importance of assessment and of plan development and monitoring when working with youths at risk for aggressive behavior, impaired relationships with peers and adults, and poor performance in school.
Compared 6th graders in adult care during out-of-school hours with 6th graders in self-care situations on 2 occasions (winter and summer). Hierarchical multiple regression analyses examined how well out-of-school care situations predicted 3 dimensions each of peer experience and self-image, concurrently and longitudinally. Additional analyses assessed the role of parent–adolescent relations in moderating the relation between self-care and adolescent behavior. Results revealed no differences between adolescents in adult care and those in self-care at home. Self-care girls who were more distant from adult supervision (e.g., they spent unsupervised time hanging out), however, reported more problem behavior and contact with more deviant peers in relation to other girls and to boys. Parental acceptance and firm control, however, appeared to buffer girls from engaging in problem behavior when in self-care away from home. Orthogonal contrasts between groups showed that girls and boys in self-care away from home were more involved with peers than those in self-care at home or in adult care. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2012 APA, all rights reserved)
This comment responds to an article by Steinberg (1986) in which he stressed the desirability of investigating a wide variety of after-school experiences when examining consequences for latchkey (self-care) children. In presenting his results, he inadvertently confounded latchkey children with adolescents who spent time at a friend's house or who "hang out" with friends without adult supervision. Steinberg reported that these adolescents showed greater susceptibility to peer pressure to engage in antisocial activities. We point out that these adolescents do not fit the usual conceptualization of latchkey children and that Steinberg's study may lend support to practitioners and policy makers who assume negative latchkey consequences in the absence of research evidence. To avoid future confusion we indicate the need for a definition of latchkey children and offer a tentative definition. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2012 APA, all rights reserved)
This study examines the adaptation of children in self-care compared with children in adult-care to out-of-school relationship contexts and solitude. Thirty-six French children aged 9–11 years were interviewed about their out-of-school activities and responses to solitude. The theoretical framework integrates Weiss' (1974) notion of relational provisions and Valsiner's (1984, 1987) constraint theory to understand individual adaptation in the social and solitary contexts of self-care. Triangulation of quantitative and qualitative analyses revealed complexity and variability of the structural organization and children's adaptation in self-care contexts. Although self-care children reported more activities outdoors alone than did adult-care children, the development of the capacity to be alone may protect children's psychological well-being. Moreover, the inherent structure of self-care, i.e., parental absence, demanded that children lead the promotion of their own development in self-care contexts. In a few extreme instances, children were indeed homeless in the afternoon.
Latchkey children, those children left at home alone when not in school, are increasingly gaining the attention of youth service professionals. Unfortunately, little consistent latchkey research is available by which to guide school-age child care (SACC) program development. In this paper, the authors build upon their research and applied work in the latchkey/SACC field to address issues on which researchers and SACC programmers can work together to increase our understanding of the latchkey phenomenon and contribute to the development of research-based SACC programs.
An increasing number of schools and youth service organizations are developing school-age child care programs to serve children who wound otherwise be left in self-care. The purpose of this study was to identify the differences between families using a self-care arrangement and the implications of these differences for school-age child care program development. A sample of 164 families with school-age children in self-care (or the care of another school-age sibling), was drawn from a Southern metropolitan school system. Parents were surveyed about their self-care arrangement, the types of school-age child care services they needed, and barriers to having those needs met. Using discriminant analysis, the 164 families were reclassified into three groups. The resulting family profiles are examined in relation to school-age child care program development.
This study investigated long-term effects of being in a “latchkey” or self-supervised child care situation compared with being in an adult-supervised arrangement. Data on former child care arrangements and several measures of cognitive development, emotional adjustment, and the personality traits of dominance, responsibility, and achievement via independence were collected from 248 college students. Students who reported having been in adult care did not differ from students who regularly cared for themselves during out-of-school hours on any of the dependent measures, which concurs with previous findings on short-term effects of the self-care arrangement. Age at which the self-care situation was initiated, and gender, individually and collectively, failed to predict outcome on any dependent measure. These results suggest that children are resilient to short-term separation from their parents and may be able to structure their time constructively during out-of-school hours.
Does the type of after-school care affect a fifth-grade child's self-perception, substance use, or school performance/attendance? Children in three types of care, self (n = 28), sibling (n = 20), and adult (n = 106), were recruited to address this question. Data were obtained via the Self-Perception Profile, self-report of risk-taking behavior, and school records. Self-care was significantly more prevalent in Caucasian (23%) and Hispanic (19%) families. No significant differences were found across care groups in self perception, academic performance, or attendance. Ten to twelve percent of children reported substance use in each care group, though the type of substance use differed across care group. These data suggest that type of after-school care is not related to increased risk but may be related to type of substance use.
Every child reaches a point somewhere between infancy and young adulthood when he or she takes a step toward independence by caring for himself or herself for a period of time when no adult is present. Family decisions to allow their children to care for themselves vary widely, depending among other things on the family’s view of the risks associated with self-care, the child’s readiness for self-care, the circumstances in which the child will care for himself or herself, and the resources available to provide adult supervision. One child, for instance, may take that step toward independence at age 11 or 12, at home alone in a low-crime neighborhood, reassured by the presence of a reliable neighbor, well rehearsed on how to respond to the telephone and doorbell, and connected to a parent via the telephone. Another child may first experience self-care at a much younger age, in a high-crime neighborhood, with no trustworthy neighbors, and no telephone. The consequences for children of being left unsupervised also vary; some children suffer no ill effects, and in fact enjoy their independence, while other children find the self-care experience to be scary and detrimental to their healthy development. The latter circumstance may occasionally result in tragedy. 1 News reports sensationalize the tragic consequences of leaving children unsupervised (as when Detroit parents returned home after 45 minutes away to find that all seven of their children, ages seven months to nine years, had perished in a swift-moving, smoky fire), 2 while failing to acknowledge the millions of children in self-care who suffer no negative consequences. In making the decision to leave a child in self-care, parents must consider not only the potential risks to the child but also the legal implications. In most states the laws about child supervision are unclear, but legal authorities can interpret self-care as child neglect or endangerment. Only two states explicitly outlaw self-care, defined in terms of the age of the child and the duration or setting of neglect. Illinois state law prohibits leaving a child under age 13 unsupervised for 24 hours or more. 3 Maryland specifically pro
Families using self-care, in-home, and out-of-home child care arrangements were compared on a number of demographic variables. Certain variables (e.g., family income; marital status) were, as expected, related to the type of child care in use. However, one unexpected trend also was identified: regardless of the type of child care arrangement reported by parents, as the age of children increased across the out-of-home, in-home, and self-care family groups so too did the number of hours children spent at home alone. This trend is discussed in relation to two confounding areas of which researchers should be aware when conducting school-age child care needs assessment surveys and conducting self-care studies: (a) the context within which the self-care decision is made; and (b) the reasoning that goes into making the self-care decision.
Studied 108 5th grade children, of employed mothers, attending school in the black ghetto of North Philadelphia. The California Test of Personality, the California Short-Form Test of Mental Maturity, the Iowa Tests of Basic Skills, and the Parent Behavior Inventory were administered. Other information was gathered from teachers and school and community records. 38 mothers were interviewed. Data reduction included t tests, chi-squares, and a cluster analysis. Results indicate that more girls than boys were unsupervised, and that these girls exhibited impoverished cognitive development. Full-time employment of the mother was a positive influence. Maternal quality, mother-child relationships, and maternal attitudes toward employment were also influential. Findings suggest a 2-variable theory as the explanation of the effects of maternal employment on children. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2012 APA, all rights reserved)
Data on adolescents' after-school experiences and their susceptibility to peer pressure were derived from surveys administered to a heterogeneous sample of 865 adolescents in Grades 5–9. Consistent with the findings of previous studies, the results show that Ss who reported home after school were not significantly different from those who were supervised by their parents at home during after-school hours. However, when a 2nd sample of latchkey children (
n = 594) was studied to include greater variation in after-school experiences, Ss who were more removed from adult supervision were found to be more susceptible to peer pressure to engage in antisocial activity. Ss who were home alone were less susceptible to peer pressure than are those who were at a friend's house after school, and those who were at a friend's house, in turn, were less susceptible than were those who describe themselves as "hanging out." Moreover, latchkey Ss whose parents knew their whereabouts and those who had been raised authoritatively were less susceptible to peer influence than were their peers, even if their afternoons were spent in contexts in which adult supervision was lax and susceptibility to peer pressure was generally high. (17 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2012 APA, all rights reserved)
Compared 26 4th-grade and 22 7th-grade self-care (latchkey) children with 26 4th-grade and 22 7th-grade matched children in adult care to investigate whether the latchkey arrangement has negative consequences for children. Ss were interviewed on demographic and childcare arrangement data and administered the Self-Esteem Inventory, the Personal Reaction Survey, and the Behavior Rating Form. There were no significant differences found between the 2 matched samples on any of the measures. Results suggest that the growing public and professional concern about the negative effects of self-care arrangements may not be warranted. (30 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2012 APA, all rights reserved)
Recent media reports have suggested that there is widespread concern about the well-being of children who are home alone during part of the day. This essay reviews several of the major questions parents, researchers, and family life educators may have about self-care. A brief review of five related research studies is also included. The following topics are covered: defining the self-care arrangement, the number of children in self-care, impact of self-care for children's development, and guidance for parents and children.
In recent years there has been a growing interest in self-care ("latchkey") arrangements, but virtually no research has been done on time in self-care. We investigated factors associated with the amount of time children spend in self-care. Using a magazine-distributed questionnaire, we obtained responses from 1,194 mothers who had children under age 14 in self-care to some extent. Child's age and mother's hours per week of paid employment were significantly related to greater use of self-care arrangements. Mother's frequency of attendance at religious services was related to lesser use of self-care. Mother's marital status showed a less clear relationship to self-care use.
The self-care (or latchkey) arrangement has emerged in the 1980s as a topic of strong interest to parents, practitioners, and policy makers. This essay reviews the major policy issues and questions about self-care. The following topics are covered: the meaning of self-care, consequences of self-care for children's development, policy implications, and resources for family life educators.
The link between adolescent abuse, the adolescent's psychological functioning, and locus of control orientation is explored. Maltreated adolescents experience such problems as low self-esteem, antisocial behavior, and suicidal tendencies. It is argued that the adolescent's locus of control orientation, deriving from his/her experiences in the home, may determine the extent to which the adolescent exhibits problematic behavior and personal maladjustment. Although locus of control in abused adolescents has not been investigated, studies show that individuals who experience the same types of problems evidenced by abused adolescents are more likely to have perceptions of external control. The nature of the relationship between locus of control and abuse may depend upon the duration of the abuse (i.e., long- versus short-term abuse). For example, adolescents who have experienced abusive behavior throughout childhood are expected to be more externally oriented than those adolescents who have been abused for a shorter time. Thus, long-term abused adolescents will be more likely to have perceptions of external control than nonabused adolescents, with short-term abused adolescents falling in the middle. The distinction between short- and long-term abuse in the context of locus of control may be important to consider when designing treatment programs for abused adolescents.
Who's watching our children: The latchkey child phenomenon
- California Senate Office of Research
New directions in research with the locus of control construct
- H M Lefcourt
- H. M. Lefcourt
School-age child care: A policy report
- M Seligson
- A Genser
- E Gannett
- W Gray
- M. Seligson
- A. Genser
- E. Gannett
- W. Gray
Latchkey children and PALS
- R E Bill
- R. E. Bill