RESUMEN
A large body of literature has established that chaos in the home environment, characterized by high levels of disorganization, lack of household routine, crowding, noise, and unpredictability, undermines social-emotional and behavioral development in early childhood. It is less clear whether household chaos is linked to elevated risk for behavior problems in adolescence. The aims of this study were 3fold: (1) characterize the variability of adolescent and caregiver reports of household chaos over time; (2) examine associations among caregiver and adolescent reports of chaos over a 9-month period; (3) consider how between- and within- individual variability in household chaos predicts adolescent externalizing and internalizing problems. This study drew data from the Family Income Dynamics study, a 9-month longitudinal study. Participants included 104 adolescents between 14 and 16 years old (55% female; M age = 14.85) and their caregiver (92% female) from low- and middle-income families. Results showed that adolescent-reports of household chaos were more variable over time compared to caregivers' reports. Adolescent-reports of household chaos had positive within- and between-level associations with externalizing problems and between-level associations with internalizing, while caregiver-reports of chaos had no links to behavior. This work highlights the importance of adolescents' own perceptions of household chaos when considering its links to adolescent development.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: There are well-documented links between structural racism and inequities in children's opportunities. Yet, when it comes to understanding the role of the built environment, a disproportionate focus on redlining obscures other historical policies and practices such as blockbusting, freeway displacement, and urban renewal that may impact contemporary child development. We hypothesized that historical structural racism in Allegheny County, Pennsylvania's, built environment would be associated with fewer contemporary educational, socioeconomic, and health opportunities. We also hypothesized that these measures would explain more collective variance in children's opportunities than redlining alone. METHODS: We used geospatial data from the US Census, Mapping Inequality Project, and other archival sources to construct historical measures of redlining, blockbusting, freeway displacement, and urban renewal in ArcGIS at the census tract level. These were linked with data from the Child Opportunity Index 2.0 to measure children's opportunities across domains of education, socioeconomic status, and health. We ran spatial regression analyses in Stata 18.0 to examine individual and collective associations between structural racism and children's opportunities. RESULTS: Historical redlining, blockbusting, and urban renewal were largely associated with fewer contemporary educational, socioeconomic, and health opportunities, and explained up to 47.4% of the variance in children's opportunities. The measures collectively explained more variance in children's opportunities than redlining alone. CONCLUSIONS: In support of our hypotheses, novel measures of structural racism were related to present-day differences in children's opportunities. Findings lay the groundwork for future research focused on repairing longstanding harm perpetuated by structural racism.