Skip to main content
Fachgebiete
Automobil + Motoren Bauwesen + Immobilien Business IT + Informatik Elektrotechnik + Elektronik Energie + Nachhaltigkeit Finance + Banking Management + Führung Marketing + Vertrieb Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe Versicherung + Risiko
DE
EN
Themenseiten
Organisationspsychologie Projektmanagement Marketing Smart Manufacturing
Bücher
Zeitschriften
Weitere Formate
Podcasts Webinare Technik Webinare Wirtschaft Kongresse Veranstaltungskalender Awards
Jetzt Einzelzugang starten
Zugang für Unternehmen
Referenzkunden
MTZ-Fachkongress

Antriebe und Energiesysteme von morgen


Austausch von Automobil- und Energiewirtschaft

Am 14./15. Mai geht es in Chemnitz um die Mobilitätswende durch Elektro- und Wasserstofffahrzeuge.
Erweiterte Suche
Anmelden
nach oben
Demography
Erschienen in: Demography 3/2016

21.04.2016

Household Crowding During Childhood and Long-Term Education Outcomes

verfasst von: Leonard M. Lopoo, Andrew S. London

Erschienen in: Demography | Ausgabe 3/2016

Einloggen

Aktivieren Sie unsere intelligente Suche, um passende Fachinhalte oder Patente zu finden.

search-config
loading …

Abstract

Household crowding, or having more household members than rooms in one’s residence, could potentially affect a child’s educational attainment directly through a number of mechanisms. We use U.S. longitudinal data from the Panel Study of Income Dynamics to derive new measures of childhood crowding and estimate negative associations between crowding during one’s high school years and, respectively, high school graduation by age 19 and maximum education at age 25. These negative relationships persist in multivariate models in which we control for the influence of a variety of factors, including socioeconomic status and housing-cost burden. Given the importance of educational attainment for a range of midlife and later-life outcomes, this study suggests that household crowding during one’s high school years is an engine of cumulative inequality over the life course.
Vorheriger Artikel Relationship Between the Formation Conditions and Durations of One-Person Households in the Seoul Metropolitan Region
Nächster Artikel The (Conditional) Resource Dilution Model: State- and Community-Level Modifications

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 102.000 Bücher
  • über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Automobil + Motoren
  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
  • Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
  • Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 67.000 Bücher
  • über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Versicherung + Risiko




Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren
Fußnoten
1
Deep poverty is usually defined as income below half the federal poverty threshold (Shaefer and Edin 2013).
 
2
In 2009, the poverty threshold for a family of three with one adult and two children was $17,285 (U.S. Census Bureau n.d.).
 
3
Each interviewed family in the PSID was assigned a head of household. The head was at least 16 years old and had the primary financial responsibility within the family. In nearly all cases, the head was male. Although the children born into the PSID could have various relationships with the head (e.g., a grandchild, a niece/nephew), the vast majority were the head’s children. For instance, among those born in 1968, 81 % were children of the head, and 13 % were grandchildren, nieces, or nephews. For the remaining 6 %, the relationship status was not reported. For simplicity, we use the terms head of household and parent interchangeably.
 
4
The PSID question asks the respondent to report the number of rooms in the household for the “family.” Some respondents may adjust their count of rooms to take into account the presence of nonfamily members in the household. However, we have no means to ascertain the extent to which that is the case.
 
5
The PSID recorded the Census Needs Standard using a schedule reported by the U.S. Census Bureau based on the size of the family and number of children. This schedule is available online (http://​www.​census.​gov/​hhes/​www/​poverty/​data/​threshld/​index.​html).
 
6
 
7
The PSID started collecting information on the “Spanish or Hispanic descent” of the heads of household in 1985. We created a variable for Hispanic that overlaps with the racial categories (i.e., among Hispanic respondents, some are white, some are African American, and the rest fall into the “other race” category).
 
8
Most housing cost burden measures include, in addition to annual mortgage payments or rent, mortgage interest, property taxes, the cost of utilities, and housing (or rental) insurance (see, e.g., Newman and Holupka 2014a). In selected years, the PSID measured some of these variables, but only the mortgage or rental payment was consistently measured throughout the period of our study.
 
9
We ran several preliminary logistic regression models to determine whether model choice changed our findings, and found that the results were substantively identical.
 
10
Another potential modeling option that would reduce omitted variable bias is a family fixed-effects model. In such a model, one compares the crowding experienced between (among) siblings to reduce bias in the crowding coefficients. Factors that are common among siblings, such as parental supervision, are removed from the estimation process and cannot bias coefficient estimates. These models are predicated on variation in crowding between siblings. Unfortunately, ever-crowding does not vary much between siblings. For example, only 14 % of the cases had variation in crowding (measured as a HCR > 1) between ages 15 and 18. Even a continuous measure of crowding showed very little variation. Given this low level of variation, we chose not to use a family fixed-effects model.
 
11
In supplemental analyses, we estimated these models separating the respondents into four quartiles based on their INTR and found no evidence of heterogeneous effects by SES.
 
12
In supplemental analyses, we estimated models to determine whether crowding mattered at specific ages in the high school years. Our results suggest that the effects are constant from ages 15 to 18 and do not surface before age 15.
 
Literatur
Ahrentzen, S. (2003). Double indemnity or double delight? The health consequences of shared housing and “doubling up.” Journal of Social Issues, 59, 547–568.CrossRef
Berger, L. M., Heintze, T., Naidich, W. B., & Meyers, M. K. (2008). Subsidized housing and household hardship among low-income single-mother households. Journal of Marriage and Family, 70, 934–949.CrossRef
Berkman, L. F., Ertel, K. A., & Glymour, M. A. (2011). Aging and social intervention: Life course perspectives. In R. H. Binstock & L. K. George (Eds.), Handbook of aging and the social sciences (7th ed., pp. 337–351). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.CrossRef
Bramley, G. (2012). Affordability, poverty and housing need: Triangulating measures and standards. Journal of Housing and the Built Environment, 27, 133–151.CrossRef
Burr, J. A., Mutchler, J. E., & Gerst, K. (2010). Patterns of residential crowding among Hispanics in later life: Immigration, assimilation, and housing market factors. Journals of Gerontology, Series B: Psychological Sciences and Social Sciences, 65, 772–782.
Clark, W. A. V., Deurloo, M. C., & Dieleman, F. M. (2000). Housing consumption and residential crowding in U.S. housing markets. Journal of Urban Affairs, 22(1), 49–63.CrossRef
Conley, D. (2001). A room with a view or a room of one’s own? Housing and social stratification. Sociological Forum, 16(2), 263–280.CrossRef
Dannefer, D. (1987). Aging as intracohort differentiation: Accentuation, the Matthew effect, and the life course. Sociological Forum, 2, 211–236.CrossRef
Dannefer, D. (1988). Age structure, the life course, and “aged heterogeneity”: Prospects for research and theory. Comparative Gerontology, 2, 1–10.
Dannefer, D. (2003). Cumulative advantage/disadvantage and the life course: Cross-fertilizing age and social science theory. Journals of Gerontology, Series B: Psychological Sciences and Social Sciences, 58, S327–S337.
Evans, G. W., Hart, B., & Maxwell, L. E. (1999). Parental language and verbal responsiveness to children in crowded homes. Developmental Psychology, 35, 1020–1023.CrossRef
Evans, G. W., Lepore, S. J., Shejwal, B. R., & Palsane, M. N. (1998). Chronic residential crowding and children’s well-being: An ecological perspective. Child Development, 69, 1514–1523.
Evans, G. W., Saegert, S., & Harris, R. (2001). Residential density and psychological health among children in low-income families. Environment and Behavior, 33, 165–180.CrossRef
Ferraro, K. F., Shippee, T. P., & Shafer, M. H. (2009). Cumulative inequality theory for research on aging and the life course. In V. L. Bengtson, D. Gans, N. M. Putney, & M. Silverstein (Eds.), Handbook of theories of aging (2nd ed., pp. 413–434). New York, NY: Springer.
Friedman, S., & Rosenbaum, E. (2004). Nativity status and racial/ethnic differences in access to quality housing: Does homeownership bring greater parity? Housing Policy Debate, 15, 865–901.CrossRef
Gennetian, L. A., Duncan, G., Knox, V., Vargas, W., Clark-Kaufman, E., & London, A. (2004). How welfare policies affects adolescents’ school outcomes: A synthesis of evidence from experimental studies. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 14, 399–423.CrossRef
Gennetian, L. A., Lopoo, L. M., & London, A. S. (2008). Maternal work hours and adolescents’ school outcomes among low-income families in four urban counties. Demography, 45, 31–53.CrossRef
Goux, D., & Maurin, E. (2005). The effect of overcrowded housing on children’s performance at school. Journal of Public Economics, 89, 797–819.CrossRef
Gove, W. R., & Hughes, M. (1983). Overcrowding in the household: An analysis of determinants and effects. Waltham, MA: Academic Press.
Gove, W. R., Hughes, M., & Galle, O. R. (1979). Overcrowding in the home: An empirical investigation of its possible pathological consequences. American Sociological Review, 44, 59–80.CrossRef
Hall, M., & Greenman, E. (2013). Housing and neighborhood quality among undocumented Mexican and Central American immigrants. Social Science Research, 42, 1712–1725.CrossRef
Hendricks, J. (2012). Considering life course concepts. Journals of Gerontology, Series B: Psychological Sciences and Social Sciences, 67, 226–231.
Holupka, C. S., & Newman, S. J. (2011). The housing and neighborhood conditions of America’s children: Patterns and trends over four decades. Housing Policy Debate, 21, 215–245.CrossRef
Immergluck, D., & Smith, G. (2006). The impact of single-family mortgage foreclosures on neighborhood crime. Housing Studies, 21, 851–866.CrossRef
Leventhal, T., & Newman, S. (2010). Housing and child development. Children and Youth Services Review, 32, 1165–1174.CrossRef
London, A. S., & Frazier, C. B. (2013). Crowded living conditions, health, and well-being. In K. B. Fitzpatrick (Ed.), Poverty in America: A crisis among America’s most vulnerable. Volume 2: The importance of place in determining their future (pp. 139–160). Santa Barbara, CA: ABC-CLIO.
Lopoo, L. M. (2005). Maternal employment and teenage childbearing: Evidence from the PSID. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 24, 23–46.CrossRef
McConnell, E. D. (2015). Restricted movement: Nativity, citizenship, legal status, and the residential crowding of Latinos in Los Angeles. Social Problems, 62, 141–162.CrossRef
McLanahan, S., & Sandefur, G. (1994). Growing up with a single parent: What hurts, what helps? Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Myers, D., Baer, W. C., & Choi, S.-Y. (1996). The changing problem of overcrowded housing. Journal of the American Planning Association, 62, 66–84.CrossRef
Newman, S. J., & Holupka, C. S. (2014a). Housing affordability and investments in children. Journal of Housing Economics, 24, 89–100.CrossRef
Office of the Deputy Prime Minister. (2004). The impact of overcrowding on health & education: A review of evidence and literature. London, UK: Office of the Deputy Prime Minister.
O’Rand, A. M. (1996). The precious and the precocious: Understanding cumulative disadvantage and cumulative advantage over the life course. Gerontologist, 36, 230–238.CrossRef
O’Rand, A. M. (2002). Cumulative advantage theory in life course research. Annual Review of Gerontology and Geriatrics, 22, 14–30.
Regoeczi, W. C. (2002). The impact of density: The importance of non-linearity and selection on flight and fight responses. Social Forces, 81, 505–530.CrossRef
Regoeczi, W. C. (2003). When context matters: A multilevel analysis of household and neighbourhood crowding on aggression and withdrawal. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 23, 457–470.CrossRef
Regoeczi, W. C. (2008). Crowding in context: An examination of differential responses of men and women to high-density living environments. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 49, 254–268.CrossRef
Rosenbaum, E., & Friedman, S. (2004). Generational patterns in home ownership and housing quality among racial/ethnic groups in New York City, 1999. International Migration Review, 38, 1492–1533.CrossRef
Schuetz, J., Been, V., & Ellen, I. G. (2008). Neighborhood effects of concentrated mortgage foreclosures. Journal of Housing Economics, 17, 306–319.CrossRef
Shaefer, H. L., & Edin, K. (2013). Rising extreme poverty in the United States and the response of federal means-tested transfers. Social Service Review, 87, 250–268.CrossRef
Solari, C. D., & Mare, R. D. (2012). Housing crowding effects on children’s well-being. Social Science Research, 41, 464–476.CrossRef
Wells, N. M., & Harris, J. D. (2007). Housing quality, psychological distress, and the mediating role of social withdrawal: A longitudinal study of low-income women. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 27, 69–78.CrossRef
Withers, S. D. (2011). Demographic polarization of housing affordability in six major United States metropolitan areas. Urban Geography, 18, 296–323.CrossRef
Metadaten
Titel
Household Crowding During Childhood and Long-Term Education Outcomes
verfasst von
Leonard M. Lopoo
Andrew S. London
Publikationsdatum
21.04.2016
Verlag
Springer US
Erschienen in
Demography / Ausgabe 3/2016
Print ISSN: 0070-3370
Elektronische ISSN: 1533-7790
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s13524-016-0467-9

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 3/2016

Demography 3/2016 Zur Ausgabe

OriginalPaper

Family Income and Child Cognitive and Noncognitive Development in Australia: Does Money Matter?

OriginalPaper

Maternal Risk Exposure and Adult Daughters’ Health, Schooling, and Employment: A Constructed Cohort Analysis of 50 Developing Countries

OriginalPaper

Relationship Between the Formation Conditions and Durations of One-Person Households in the Seoul Metropolitan Region

OriginalPaper

The (Conditional) Resource Dilution Model: State- and Community-Level Modifications

OriginalPaper

Who Coresides With Parents? An Analysis Based on Sibling Comparative Advantage

OriginalPaper

The Family Life Course and Health: Partnership, Fertility Histories, and Later-Life Physical Health Trajectories in Australia