IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/mtu/wpaper/24_02.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The effect of income on New Zealand children’s behaviour: The influence of maternal stress and children’s screen use

Author

Listed:
  • Monk Jaimie

    (Motu Economic and Public Policy Research)

  • Kate Prickett

    (Victoria University of Wellington)

  • Arthur Grimes

    (Motu Economic and Public Policy Research)

  • Philip S. Morrison

    (Victoria University of Wellington)

Abstract

This paper explores how a family’s income affects the behavioural development of children. The research finds that New Zealand children in higher-income households have fewer reported behavioural problems than children in lower-income households, even once socio-demographic and parenting differences are accounted for. In contrast, children across the income groups have similarly reported strengths (prosocial behaviour). New Zealand children grow up in a wide variety of environments, each of which shapes their development. Growing up free from the burden of poverty is linked to fewer behaviour problems. But the way poverty impacts children’s behaviour is poorly understood, particularly in Aotearoa New Zealand, yet is essential in targeting support to parents during the developmentally crucial early-to-middle years of childhood. This research explores the differences in New Zealand children’s behavioural outcomes between high- and low-income families and finds that a higher family income supports children’s behavioural development. Results emphasise the importance of the ‘first 1,000 days’. The associations between income and behaviour problems are greater during the preschool years when compared with when children were 8 years old. An examination of mothers’ stress and children’s screen time found that both factors explain part of the association between income and reports of children’s behaviour problems. These pathways however were strongest—or only existed—during the early childhood years suggesting a higher income provides for decreases in mothers’ stress, potentially freeing them up for more engaged parenting. Large amounts of screen time during early childhood are associated with poorer child outcomes, but the benefit of parents moderating children’s screens when they are older, or in small doses is unclear.

Suggested Citation

  • Monk Jaimie & Kate Prickett & Arthur Grimes & Philip S. Morrison, 2024. "The effect of income on New Zealand children’s behaviour: The influence of maternal stress and children’s screen use," Working Papers 24_02, Motu Economic and Public Policy Research.
  • Handle: RePEc:mtu:wpaper:24_02
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://motu-www.motu.org.nz/wpapers/24_02.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Martin Dooley & Jennifer Stewart, 2007. "Family income, parenting styles and child behavioural–emotional outcomes," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 16(2), pages 145-162, February.
    2. Kevin Milligan & Mark Stabile, 2011. "Do Child Tax Benefits Affect the Well-Being of Children? Evidence from Canadian Child Benefit Expansions," American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, American Economic Association, vol. 3(3), pages 175-205, August.
    3. Rasheda Khanam & Son Nghiem, 2016. "Family Income and Child Cognitive and Noncognitive Development in Australia: Does Money Matter?," Demography, Springer;Population Association of America (PAA), vol. 53(3), pages 597-621, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Cooper, Kerris & Stewart, Kitty, 2020. "Does household income affect children’s outcomes? A systematic review of the evidence," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 107029, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    2. Cooper, Kerris & Stewart, Kitty, 2017. "Does Money Affect Children’s Outcomes? An update," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 103494, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    3. Kerris Cooper & Kitty Stewart, 2021. "Does Household Income Affect children’s Outcomes? A Systematic Review of the Evidence," Child Indicators Research, Springer;The International Society of Child Indicators (ISCI), vol. 14(3), pages 981-1005, June.
    4. Kerris Cooper & Kitty Stewart, 2017. "Does Money Affect Children's Outcomes? An update," CASE Papers /203, Centre for Analysis of Social Exclusion, LSE.
    5. Ao, Xiang & Chen, Xuan & Zhao, Zhong, 2022. "Is care by grandparents or parents better for children's non-cognitive skills? Evidence on locus of control from China," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 71(C).
    6. Mari, Gabriele & Keizer, Renske, 2020. "Families of Austerity: Welfare Cuts and Family Stress in Britain," SocArXiv vdej8, Center for Open Science.
    7. Sarah E. Johnson & David Lawrence & Francisco Perales & Janeen Baxter & Stephen R. Zubrick, 2019. "Poverty, Parental Mental Health and Child/Adolescent Mental Disorders: Findings from a National Australian Survey," Child Indicators Research, Springer;The International Society of Child Indicators (ISCI), vol. 12(3), pages 963-988, June.
    8. Xu, Hui & Zhang, Zheyuan & Zhao, Zhong, 2023. "Parental socioeconomic status and children’s cognitive ability in China," Journal of Asian Economics, Elsevier, vol. 84(C).
    9. Deng, Lanfang & Tong, Tingting, 2020. "Parenting style and the development of noncognitive ability in children," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 62(C).
    10. Paul Contoyannis & Martin Dooley, 2010. "The role of child health and economic status in educational, health, and labour market outcomes in young adulthood," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 43(1), pages 323-346, February.
    11. Mari, Gabriele, 2024. "Pandemic Income Support Programs and Adolescent Mental Health in the UK, Ireland and Australia," SocArXiv pzr4k, Center for Open Science.
    12. Elizabeth M. Caucutt & Lance Lochner & Youngmin Park, 2017. "Correlation, Consumption, Confusion, or Constraints: Why Do Poor Children Perform so Poorly?," Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 119(1), pages 102-147, January.
    13. Andrea M. Mühlenweg & Franz G. Westermaier & Brant Morefield, 2016. "Parental health and child behavior: evidence from parental health shocks," Review of Economics of the Household, Springer, vol. 14(3), pages 577-598, September.
    14. Milovanska-Farrington, Stefani, 2019. "The effect of family welfare support on the likelihood of having another child and parents’ labor supply," Research in Economics, Elsevier, vol. 73(3), pages 243-263.
    15. Clemente Pignatti & Zachary Parolin, 2024. "The effects of an unconditional cash transfer on parents' mental health in the United States," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 33(10), pages 2253-2287, October.
    16. Elizabeth Washbrook & Paul Gregg & Carol Propper, 2014. "A decomposition analysis of the relationship between parental income and multiple child outcomes," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 177(4), pages 757-782, October.
    17. Alex Proshin, 2020. "Impact of Child Subsidies on Child Health, Well-being and Parental Investment in Human Capital: Evidence from Russian Longitudinal Monitoring Survey 2011-2017," PSE Working Papers halshs-02652268, HAL.
    18. Deborah A. Cobb-Clark & Nicolás Salamanca & Anna Zhu, 2019. "Parenting style as an investment in human development," Journal of Population Economics, Springer;European Society for Population Economics, vol. 32(4), pages 1315-1352, October.
    19. Lebihan, Laetitia & Mao Takongmo, Charles-Olivier, 2019. "Unconditional cash transfers and parental obesity," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 224(C), pages 116-126.
    20. Duque, Valentina & Gilraine, Michael, 2022. "Coal use, air pollution, and student performance," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 213(C).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    child development; family wellbeing; poverty; children’s technology use; child behaviour;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • I31 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Welfare, Well-Being, and Poverty - - - General Welfare, Well-Being
    • I32 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Welfare, Well-Being, and Poverty - - - Measurement and Analysis of Poverty
    • I14 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Health - - - Health and Inequality

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:mtu:wpaper:24_02. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Maxine Watene (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/motuenz.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.