Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39062410›Full record

ArticleBehavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland)2024

Impact of Provincial Income Inequality on Parenting Styles in China during COVID-19.

Rui Jin, Na Liu, Hao Zhou, Mingren Zhao

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Rui JinFaculty of Education, Shenzhen University, Shenzhen 518060, China.ORCID 0000-0001-5363-454X
Na LiuFaculty of College of Foreign Languages, Zhejiang Ocean University, Zhoushan 316022, China.ORCID 0000-0001-8154-1017
Hao ZhouFaculty of Education, Shenzhen University, Shenzhen 518060, China.ORCID 0000-0002-3232-657X
Mingren ZhaoFaculty of Education, Shenzhen University, Shenzhen 518060, China.

Funding

National Social Science Fund of China BHA210136
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Research on Chinese parenting styles using representative samples is limited, particularly during COVID-19, with most studies focusing on individual factors while neglecting regional influences. This study examines the impact of provincial income inequality, measured by the Gini coefficient, on parenting styles and how these effects vary across subgroups. Using data from the China Family Panel Studies (CFPS) 2020, encompassing 3768 children aged 7-16 years from 25 regions, we employed a multinomial logistic regression model to analyze the predictability of provincial income inequality on parenting styles identified through latent class analysis. Three parenting styles emerged during the first year of COVID-19: authoritarian (48.2%), autonomy granting (27.7%), and average-level undifferentiated (24.1%). A higher Gini coefficient related to a greater likelihood of parents adopting authoritarian or autonomy-granting parenting styles over average-level undifferentiated parenting. Subgroup analyses revealed a higher likelihood of adopting autonomy-granting and authoritarian parenting for male children compared to female. Mothers with lower education levels and parents in rural areas tend to favor authoritarian parenting in response to higher income inequality. This trend was less evident among more educated mothers and parents living in urban areas. These findings suggest that parenting styles in China are influenced by complex and region-specific factors.

Indexed as

CFPSincome inequalitylatent class analysisparenting styles

Identifiers

PMID39062410
PMCPMC11273907

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.