Family Income Dynamics, Early Childhood Education and Care, and Early Child Behaviour Problems in Norway.

The purpose of this study is to examine whether the differences between family income is connected with changes in children’s behavioural problems. The purpose is also to examine whether Early Childhood Education and Care (ECEC) can prevent the potential negative effects associated with low-income families.

Overall, the results show that higher family income (income-to-needs) was associated with fewer behavioural problems among children. The authors also found that centre care seem to protect children from the potential negative effects (i.e. behavioural problems) that are connected with growing up in a low-income household. However, this only applied to internalised behavioural problems.

The authors find that when a family's income is higher (income-to-needs), internalised and externalised problems of the child decrease. Internalised problems included the child being too dependent on and clingy towards adults, the child became unsettled by any changes in routines, and the child was very frightened and nervous. Externalised problems included the child being unable to concentrate for longer periods of time, switching quickly between different activities, hitting other children and getting into fights.

The authors use data from the Norwegian Mother and Child Cohort Study (MoBa) which primarily consists of questionnaire data recorded six times during pregnancy and after birth. Data was collected during the 17th, 22nd, and 30th week of pregnancy. Data was also collected when the child was 6, 18 and 36 months old. In 2010, around 90,000 mothers of around 100,000 children had filled out the baseline questionnaire. This corresponds to over 40% of all Norwegian mothers that were able to participate in the survey.

Data showed correlation between, among other things, behavioural problems and household income. Behavioural problems were reported by the child's mother when the child was 18 and 36 months old. Household income was measured in relation to the needs of the family; i.e. the income of a family with an ‘income-to-needs’ of 1 point corresponded to the poverty line. If the number was lower than 1, the family's income was below the poverty line. If the number was above, the family's income was above the poverty line.

Type of ECEC centre was also included in the data. This data was collected when the child was 18 and 36 months old. The mother was asked, among other things, whether the child was being taken care of at home by either mother or father, in home-based care by an unqualified minder, or if the child was in centre care. The researchers created two dummy variables in connection with the child's care: 1) homecare and 2) family care or unqualified care. Centre care was not included.

Zachrisson, H.D. & Dearing, E. (2015). Family Income Dynamics, Early Childhood Education and Care, and Early Child Behaviour Problems in Norway. Child Development 86(2), 425-440.