Social Preferences and Parental Influence in Preschoolers Avner Ben-Ner, University of Minnesota John List, University of Chicago Louis Putterman, Brown University Anya Samak, University of Wisconsin, Madison
Motivation • The transmission of values, cultural norms and attitudes across generations has been long theorized on as well as empirically documented • The role of parents, schools and religious and other institutions has been emphasized • However, little is actually known about specific channels and mechanisms of transmission or sources of particular values, norms and attitudes, including altruistic preferences Shared, values, role modeling and emulation: Giving 2 by children and parents�
Importance • Values and non-cognitive skills important for earnings (Heckman; etc.) • Intergenerational transmission of earning ability (Becker A Treatise on the Family ; Heckman; etc.) • Altruistic preferences important for society: philanthropy, work behavior in firms Shared, values, role modeling and emulation: Giving 3 by children and parents�
Limited literature • Correlation between children’s and parents’ altruistic tendencies (Rushton; Alice Rossi, 2001, Developmental Roots of Adult Social Responsibility) • Engaging in charitable behavior when young [presumably under parental influence] is a strong predictor of adult altruistic behavior (Harvey Rosen, Stephen Sims, 2011, Altruistic Behavior and Habit Formation) • Talking to children about giving raises the probability that children give by at least .13. No evidence that parental role-modeling affects children's giving, except among non-African-American girls (Mark Ottoni-Wilhelm et al., 2012, Raising Charitable Children: The Effects of Verbal Socialization and Role-modeling on Children's Giving) Shared, values, role modeling and emulation: Giving 4 by children and parents�
Intergenerational transmission of values How? • Family : shared environment and genes • Teaching and role modeling : in families (parents to children) and other institutions, in broad culture • Emulation : by children of parents and other adults, as well as peers • Time : prolonged process • Life cycle : effects vary with age Shared, values, role modeling and emulation: Giving 5 by children and parents�
Our strategy Design a study that addresses these effects • Focus on giving in dictator games by parents, other adults and preschoolers (3-5 year olds)* • Evaluate effects of • Family • Role modeling • Emulation • Obviously, can’t say anything about the role of time and effects over the life cycle • *Dictator game experiments with young children: Harbaugh et al. (2000), Bettinger and Slonim (2006), Benenson et al. (2007), Fehr et al. (2008), Houser et al. Shared, values, role modeling and emulation: Giving 6 by children and parents�
The theoretical questions in the DG context [family/inheritance effect] Is parents’ and children’s giving correlated? [teaching/role modeling effect] Do parents behave differently when they expect that their giving is shown to their children then when they know that it is not revealed to them? [emulation effect] Do children behave differently in a dictator game in which they are shown what their parents did in a similar situation as compared to a game in which they are not shown what others did? Shared, values, role modeling and emulation: Giving 7 by children and parents�
Methods • A sample of 700 parents (fathers or mothers) of preschoolers were invited to participate with their children in a study • Conducted at GECC, not too far from here • 167 pairs of parent-child showed up • Most families: low incomes, diverse ethnicities, majority non-white Shared, values, role modeling and emulation: Giving 8 by children and parents�
Design • Parents completed background surveys several months before experiment • Children underwent cognitive and developmental levels testing several months before experiment • Parents and shortly later children participated in dictator game experiments • Everything was truthful to both parents and children Shared, values, role modeling and emulation: Giving 9 by children and parents�
Shared, values, role modeling and emulation: Giving 10 by children and parents�
Shared, values, role modeling and emulation: Giving 11 by children and parents�
Hello! We are going to play a few games today! • • Here is a picture of a girl from another school. This girl has a lot of toys to play with at her home. Do you see her toys in the picture? Show me where they are. This girl didn’t get to play the game today. • On this plate there are some stickers. [SHOW STICKER PLATE] They are yours now. You are going to decide how many to keep, and how many to send to this girl. • You can keep as many of your stickers as you want, and you can send none, some, or all of your stickers to her. It is up to you how many you keep and how many you send. Shared, values, role modeling and emulation: Giving 12 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qsj1N0rlsG8&feature=youtube_gdata_player by children and parents�
No statistically significant order effects. We are using only giving to ‘poor’ data Summary Statistics for Adults’ Giving Summary Statistics for Children’s Giving Shared, values, role modeling and emulation: Giving 13 by children and parents�
Empirical strategy Possible heterogeneity in the emulation behavior of children and role modeling by adults. • Heterogeneity may be associated with child “type,” which is unobservable and age (and other demographics), which is observable and can be controlled for in analysis Emulation • Different types of children emulate adults to different degrees or even direction (contrarians), which cannot be detected by fixed effects (giving in the No Influence condition and in the Influence condition) • We define child type by Yni (Selfish<3, Fair=3, Generous>3) and interact it with parent giving in Show to evaluate its effect on emulation Shared, values, role modeling and emulation: Giving 14 by children and parents�
Empirical strategy contd. Role modeling • Parents may give differently, depending on their child’s type • (1) the teaching or role modeling may vary with child type, and • (2) parents may want to show behavior that depends on what different types of children expect of them. • The two effects cannot be disentangled, but their effect can be estimated by interacting child type with the amount that a parent gives in the Show condition. • A null estimated effect may indicate either that parents don’t take child type into consideration or they don’t know it Shared, values, role modeling and emulation: Giving 15 by children and parents�
Empirical strategy contd. Estimation method • With an endowment of 6 units, the optimal choice of some children and adults may reflect a corner solution (wanting to give less than 0 – take money away – or give more than 6). • A related issue arises from the fact that giving was possible in increments of one unit. • We use latent variable models – ordered probit – to deal with both issues. Shared, values, role modeling and emulation: Giving 16 by children and parents�
Notation • Xns : Adult giving in the No Show • R = round 3 of child experiment, condition dummy for Influence – No Influence condition • Xs : Adult giving in the Show condition • Child type • Yni : Child giving in the No • Selfish : Yni = 0, 1 or 2 Influence condition • Fair : Yni = 3 • Yi : Child giving in the Influence conditions • Generous : Yni = 4, 5 or 6 • x* = latent variable for Xns and Xs • Di = vector of dummies for: child type, gender, age and ethnicity • y* = latent variable for Yni and Yi • di = individual dummy variables • Dshow = dummy variable, =1 for (child or adult, depends on the Show condition = 0 for No Show context) Shared, values, role modeling and emulation: Giving 17 by children and parents�
Three analyses [family/inheritance effect] Yni~Xns [teaching/role modeling effect] Xs~Xns (adult FE, child type, parent gender v. child gender, demographics) [emulation effect] Yi~(Xs-Yni) (child FE, child type, parent gender v. child gender, demographics) Shared, values, role modeling and emulation: Giving 18 by children and parents�
Shared, values, role modeling and emulation: Giving 19 by children and parents�
Shared, values, role modeling and emulation: Giving 20 by children and parents�
Shared, values, role modeling and emulation: Giving 21 by children and parents�
Previous table continued – upper part of table omitted – very similar on estimates shown above Shared, values, role modeling and emulation: Giving 22 by children and parents�
Findings • [ family/inheritance ] No correlation between Yni and Xns. No family effect • [ teaching/role modeling ] Parents of Generous children give more in the Show condition than parents of Fair and Selfish children (controlling for the parents’ own type, Xns). • The effect is somewhat stronger for fathers v. mothers Shared, values, role modeling and emulation: Giving 23 by children and parents�
Recommend
More recommend
