Cultural Values and Behavior Among African American and European American Children

Abstract

Objectives:

This study explores the relationships of individualistic (e.g., competition, material success) and collectivistic values (e.g., familism, respect) with risky and prosocial behavior among African-American and European-American youth. While previous work has focused upon immigrant adolescents, this study expands the research exploring cultural values to other racial-ethnic groups and to a younger developmental period. This study builds upon culture as individually experienced beliefs and practices, potentially espousing multiple cultural orientations and relationships to behavior.

Methods:

Data from Cohort 3 of a study of 219 urban, suburban, and rural children included African-American (42%) and European-American(58%) children, 54% female, ranging from grades 1–5 (mean age = 9). Multigroup structural equation models were tested resulting in a measurement model that fit similarly across groups (RMSEA=.05, CFI =.94).

Results:

African-American children reported higher levels of individualism, and African-American and European-American children reported espousing similar levels of collectivism. Children in higher grades were found to be more collectivistic and less individualistic. Individualistic values were related to children’s lower prosocial and higher rates of problem and delinquent behavior. Collectivistic cultural values were associated with reduced rates of problem behaviors, controlling for race-ethnicity, gender and grade.

Conclusions:

Results provide support for the assertion that youth espouse multiple cultural orientations and that collectivistic cultural values can serve as promotive factors for children of diverse backgrounds. Practice and policy should seek to understand the role of family, school, and community socialization of multiple cultural orientations and nuanced associations with risk and resilience.

Keywords:

Cultural values, Collectivistic, Individualistic, Pro-social behaviors, Problem and Risky behaviors

Method

Participants

The current data is from Cohort 3 of the LEGACY Together Project, collected in 2011–12, including a sample of 302 1st-5th grade elementary school-aged children recruited from 32 afterschool program sites. On average, these afterschool programs were relatively diverse; 16.30% African Amerian, 65.98% European American, 12.05% Latino/a, 3.25% Asian, and 2.42% other-identified. These afterschool program sites were housed in 75 schools that varied in level of urbanicity (8% rural, 61% suburban, and 29.3% urban i.e., based on Phan and Glander (2008). Also, the neighborhoods in which these afterschool programs were implemented varied in their level of disadvantage (Range: −0.95 – 2.50), which is a standardized index of census-based poverty indicators (i.e., poverty, unemployment, less than high school education, female-headed households, residential instability.)

The participating children self-identified as 30% African-American, 47% European American, 6% Latino/a, and 17% mixed race-ethnicity or other; 54% female; and were 7–11 years old (Mean age = 8.50, SD =1.10). The sample (n=68) of Latino and mixed race youth was too small for separate analyses; as such, this study focuses on the African-American and European-American children only. Additionally, 15 children were excluded from the current study due to missing data on key study variables. Therefore, the current study includes 219 children, 55% female, 42% African-American and 58% European-American(58%), and the mean age is 8 years old (SD = 2.38).

Procedures

Consent for parents of children was obtained via letters sent to the home from the afterschool programs to which they could decline their child’s participation at any time and their data would be deleted; children were asked to assent prior to conducting the survey. The research team provided password-protected, personal digital assistants (PDAs) for survey completion, which took approximately 45–60 minutes. To make the process more developmentally appropriate and maintain children’s attention to the surveys, joke and cartoon breaks were built into the PDAs after each 15-minute section. The survey focused on various dimensions of youth self-perceptions, behavior, and community context, in addition to sections examining youth cultural orientations, the focus of the current study. All study procedures were approved by the university Institutional Review Board.

Measures

The following sections describe the measures. Demographic data were collected and consisted of child gender (0 = boy, 1 = girl), grade (0 = 1st – 3rd, 1 = 4th – 5th), age, and race-ethnicity (0 = African-American, 1 = European American).

Cultural values.

The Mexican American Cultural Values Scale (MACVS) was used to assess cultural values of individualism and collectivism among Mexican American families in a longitudinal study in Arizona (Knight et al., 2009; Knight, Mazza, & Carlo, 2018). The current study is the only one we could identify using an African-American and European-American sample with this tested and reliable instrument. Four subscales from the MACVS were used to assess individualistic values (competition and personal achievement, n = 4 items; material success, n = 5 items) and collectivistic values (family obligation, n = 5 items, respect, n = 8 items). With our sample, the measure demonstrated acceptable reliability (Cronbach alpha’s ranging from .71 – .86) for the subscales of respect (.86 for African-Americans and .87 for European Americans), familism (.87 and .78 respectively), competition, (.73 and .68), and material success (.82 and .84). Further psychometric information is provided later when discussing construct validity.

Child behavioral outcomes.

Children’s socio-emotional and behavioral outcomes were assessed using child reports of the Strengths, Difficulties, Questionnaire (SDQ) (Goodman, Meltzer, & Bailey, 2003; Mellor, 2004). The SDQ is comprised of 27 items to which participants responded on a 3-point scale indicating the degree to which each item is “not true, sometimes true, or very true.” We modified two of the original 25 items to make the items clearer and unambiguous for elementary children (Mellor, 2004). The SDQ sums and averages the scores on the items resulting in a total score and subscale scores on conduct problems, emotional symptoms, and prosocial behavior.

The conduct problem scale (Mean = 1.42, SD = .41; α = .58) included five items (e.g., I get very angry and often lose my temper). The emotional symptoms scale (Mean = 1.57, SD = .50; α = .78) included six items (e.g., I worry a lot). The prosocial behavior scale (Mean = 2.52, SD = .48, a = .80) included six items (e.g., ‘I try to be nice to other people” and “I care about their feelings”). All subscales demonstrated adequate to high reliability and the child-reported SDQ has been found to be congruent with parent reports (Mellor, 2004).

Problem behaviors and substance use were assessed by a developmentally-appropriate self-report measure obtained from Loeber and colleagues’ Pittsburgh longitudinal study of delinquency (Russo et al., 1993). These items begin by asking children if they know how and where to obtain fairly mundane items like apples or money, progressing to riskier items like cigarettes or alcohol. The subsequent five items, and focus of the current study, assess involvement in experimenting with substances and problem behaviors to which youth could respond yes or no. Items included theft (taking things from others that don’t belong to you), vandalism (destroying or damaging something that doesn’t belong to you), smoking cigarettes, drinking alcohol, and experimenting with marijuana. A count variable was created measuring the total number of problem behaviors for which children reported an affirmative response. Scores ranged from 0 to 7 (Mean = .83, SD = 1.22).

Data Analysis

Missing data analyses were conducted on all variables of interest and showed that only 6% or less of the data was missing on most variables for this sample; approximately 5% of the data was missing for the problem behavior measure. Full information maximum likelihood (FIML) estimation was used for all analytical models in Mplus (Muthén & Muthén, 2010). No significant race-ethnicity, gender, or grade level differences were observed between the children that responded and did not respond to the measures of interest.

Results

First, exploratory factor analyses (EFA) (SPSS v.22) using principal axis factoring (PAF) and varimax rotation was performed on a 22-item MACVS measure without any constraints. In the initial analyses, the scree plot indicating the number of factors and associated eigenvalues, a proxy for variance accounted for by the factor, suggested a 3 or 4 factor model. The 3-factor EFA suggested 3 factors with most loadings above .40 representing 1) the respect and familism subscales; 2) the material success subscale and one item from the competition and personal achievement subscale; and 3) the competition and personal achievement scale with only two items with loadings over .40. Given that a factor needs to have at least three variables to be considered a factor (Tabachnick & Fidell, 2007), factor 3 was considered meaningless. We then conducted a 2-factor EFA (see ). Factor 1, collectivistic values was comprised of the same items as before (i.e. respect and familism) and explained 32% of the variance. Factor 2, individualistic values, included the material success, competition and personal achievement items and explained 49% of the variance. Two items, one each from the collectivistism and individualism factors, were removed as their factor loadings were below .40 along with an item that cross-loaded on both factors (Hair, Black, Babin, Anderson, & Tatham, 1998) (See ).

Table 1

MACVS ITEMSTOTAL SAMPLEAFRICAN AMERICANEUROPEAN AMERICANCollectivisticIndividualisticCollectivisticIndividualisticCollectivisticIndividualistic1. No matter what, children should always treat adults with respect (R).63.00.58.10.67−.042. Children should respect adults like they are parents (R).54.02.63−.04.50.003. It is important for children to understand that adults should have final say when decisions are made (R).54.00.57.01.53.014. Children should be on their best behavior when visiting homes of friends or relatives (R).83−.01.81.10.84−.085. Children should always honor adults and never say bad things about them (R).69.04.62.14.74−.046. Children should follow rules, even if they think the rules are unfair (R).71.10.67.14.77.097. Children should always be polite when speaking to an adult (R).75.00.68.06.82−.018. Children should be taught that it is their duty to care for their parents when their parents get old (F).60.20.68.23.54.159. If a relative is having a hard time financially, one should help them out if possible (F).81.04.87.11.77−.0710. A person should follow rules, even if they think the rules are unfair (F).71.07.73.18.69−.0111. Older kids should take care of and be role models for their younger brothers and sisters (F).59.05.57.15.58.0112. Parents should be willing to make great sacrifices to make sure their children have a better life (F).68.16.68.28.66.0613. The more money one has, the more respect they should get from others (M).09.60.24.50−.01.6214. Parents should encourage children to do everything better than others (C).14.53.18.39.13.5915. The best way for a person to feel good about himself/herself is to have a lot of money (M)−.07.83−.01.81−.14.8416. Owning a lot of nice things makes one very happy (M).13.51.23.51.06.4617. Children should be taught that it is important to have a lot of money (M).05.83.09.85.00.8418. Money is the key to happiness (M)−.07.79−.04.69−.08.8519 Parents should teach their children to compete to win (C).03.68.06.65.00.67Open in a separate window

Next, confirmatory factor analyses (CFA) (MPlus v. 7) was conducted to evaluate the 2-factor (collectivistic and individualistic values) model fit. Following conventions of Hu and Bentler (1999), which suggestan acceptable fit is indicated by a non-significant chi-square; a comparative fit index (CFI) of .90 or above; a root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA) of .06 or less; and SRMR of .08 or less, this model had an acceptable fit (χ2 (152) = 243.28, p < .001; RMSEA = .05, CFI =.93; SRMR = .07). Examination of the standardized estimates showed that two items in the collectivistic values factor (i.e., “Children should respect adults like they are parents”; “It is important for children to understand that adults should have final say when decisions are made”) and two items in the individualistic values factor (i.e., “Parents should encourage children to do everything better than others”; “Owning a lot of nice things makes one very happy”) had very low factor loadings (Range = .49 – .53) compared to the other items, suggesting that these items were not contributing to their respective factors (Furr, 2011). Therefore, these items were removed, and a CFA was performed again. This model had a good fit (χ2 (90) = 135.02, p < .01; RMSEA = .05, CFI =.96; SRMR = .06).

Next, multi-group CFAs were performed for the 2-factor model to examine measurement invariance across the African-American and European-American sample. Using the guidelines provided by Muthén and Muthén (2010), the models were first freely estimated such that factor loadings were allowed to vary across the African-American and European-American sample. Next, constrained models were examined in which factor loadings were not allowed to vary across the two racial-ethnic groups. Among African-Americans, the loadings were somewhat higher for 2 items in the familism scale representing family obligations (i.e., “Children should be taught that it is their duty to care for their parents when their parents get old” and “If a relative is having a hard time financially, one should help them out if possible”); the difference between the loadings was .10 – .14. However, the Satorra-Bentler chi-square difference test (https://www.statmodel.com/chidiff.shtml) was not statistically significant (χ2diff = 7.87, dfdiff = 13, ns) suggesting that the 2-factor model of cultural values was invariant, thus measured similarly overall, across the African-American and European-American samples. provides descriptive data on all of the key measures in the study including means, standard deviations, internal consistency reliability and preliminary correlational data.

Table 2

123456M (SD)α1.Individualistic Values-2.35 (1.15).852.Collectivistic Values.06-3.72 (.80).913.SDQ – Conduct problems.35**−.13-1.42 (.41).584.SDQ -Emotional Symptoms.17*−.12.44**-1.57 (.50).785.Russo et al. -Problem Behavior.27**−.24**.39**.06-.83 (1.22)-6.SDQ – Prosocial Behavior−.31**.10−.43**−.08−.47**-2.52 (.48).80Open in a separate window

Structure Equation Modeling (SEM) analyses were performed in Mplus v.7 to examine whether cultural values varied by race-ethnicity, gender, and grade (research question 2) and the association of cultural values with behavioral outcomes (research question 3). Individualistic and collectivistic values were included as latent variables. Findings related to research questions 2 and 3 are presented incrementally, although the comprehensive model was tested simultaneously (See ). Overall, the model had a moderately acceptable fit (χ2 (187) = 286.33, p < .001; RMSEA =.05, CFI = .94; SRMR = .06).

Open in a separate window

Results showed that European-American children endorsed less individualistic values than African-American children (β = −.42, p < .01; 95% CI = [−.65, −.19]); however, African-American and European-American children did not significantly differ in their reports of collectivistic values as measured in this study. Boys and girls endorsed similar level of collectivistic and individualistic values. Also, children in 4th and 5th grades reported significantly less individualistic values (β = −.47, p < .01; 95% CI = [−.70, −.24]) and more collectivistic values (β = .30, p = .04; 95% CI = [.06, .53]) compared to children in 1st, 2nd, and 3rd grades.

In terms of the relationships between values and behavior, children who endorsed more collectivistic values reported significantly less problem behaviors (β = −.24, p = .03, 95% CI = [−.42, −.06]). Children who endorsed more individualistic values reported significantly less prosocial behaviors (b = −.30, p < .001, 95% CI = [−.44, −. 16]) but more conduct problems and delinquent problem behaviors (bconduct problems = .35, p < .001, 95% CI = [.24, .46]; bproblem behavior = .28, p < .001, 95% CI = [.15, .41]).

Additional analyses were performed to examine if the association of cultural values with behavioral outcomes differed between European-American and African American children. First, a model was tested that allowed the paths to vary between groups. Second, a fully constrained model was examined such that all estimates were constrained to be equal across the two groups. The Satorra-Bentler chi-square difference test was not statistically significant (χ2diff = 26.08, dfdiff = 29, p = 0.62), suggesting that the model fit equally well for both groups of students. Therefore, the pattern of associations between cultural values and behavior were similar (i.e., not significantly different from one another) among African-American and European-American children.

Discussion

The present study was conducted to examine the cultural values of individualism and collectivism for African-American and European-American school-age children; whether these cultural values (collectivism and individualism) varied with children’s race-ethnicity, gender, and grade level; and to explore the degree to which collectivistic and individualistic cultural values were associated with children’s behavioral outcomes taking into account their race-ethnicity, gender, and grade level. Findings demonstrated that we could measure cultural values with reliability and validity across African-American and European-American racial-ethnic groups; however, at the item level, there were some small variations with higher loadings of a few items describing family respect and obligations for African-American children. Nevertheless, these variations were not large enough to result in significantly different conceptualizations of cultural values based upon our exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses. Further, once configured conceptually, all children in the sample were found to endorse collectivism similarly (with some items regarding family obligations that had higher loading for African-American children deleted) and African-American children actually reported higher levels of individualism. Thus, using these measures of cultural values and youth socio-behavioral outcomes, our findings did not provide support a dichotomous notion of classifying racial-ethnic groups as solely individualistic or collectivistic. Instead, our findings supported the notion that both value orientations can co-exist (Triandis et al., 1990; Tamis-LeMonda et al., 2007). Collectivistic and individualistic values were found in both groups and, collectivistic values were associated with more adaptive behavior regardless of race-ethnicity.

Supporting Boykin’s (1986) triple quandry theory, African-American children possessed both individualistic and collectivistic values; they actually indicated higher levels of individualistic values that were less adapatative behaviorally. This finding may be due to the value of competition and material success being stressed in some contexts. For example, previous research has found schools to encourage individual values of competition (Tyler et al., 2006). Previous research has found a more materialistic emphasis among those who are less-advantaged economically, and this may well be the case in this study (Kasser & Ahuvia, 2002; Kasser et al., 2004). However, given the relationship in our study of individualistic values to problem behaviors for African-American and European-American children, families and other contexts might do well to encourage more collectivistic approaches that help youth to be attuned to the impact of their actions personally and for the group. For the European-American children, this is another example of how they, presumably in an overarching individualistic society, exhibited more collectivistic values at an individual level, albeit items measuring family obligations had lower loadings for this group. It also points to the potential diversity within the group of children labeled as European-American, in this northeastern state where many know the ethnicity of their forebears, they may emanate from groups across Europe that vary in the degree to which family obligations and respect are of import. It is also possible that youth in multi-cultural contexts influence each other in terms of their cultural values.

All the children in the sample with more collectivistic values reported engaging in significantly less delinquent problem behaviors. Conversely, children high in an individualistic orientation reported less prosocial behavior, increased conduct problems, and experimentation with drugs and alcohol, vandalism, and theft. Children with an individualistic cultural orientation may be over-focused on themselves and material gain whereas collectivistic children may possess more empathy and awareness of how their actions affect others.

The role of age and gender were also examined in this study. Grade differences were observed, with 4th and 5th graders reporting more collectivistic but less individualistic values than children in 1st, 2nd, and 3rd grade. According to Eriksonian theory (1994) and cultural perspective-taking theory (Quintana, 1994), older children, regardless of their race-ethnicity, may be more collectivistic. As young people grow, they are expected to have less egocentric notions of self and an awareness of others that may be related to collectivism and prosocial behaviors. Based on Gilligan’s (1982) work on gender socialization and the “care perspective,” we posited that girls would demonstrate higher levels of collectivistic orientation due to how girls are socialized to consider the consequences of their actions on others and are expected to exhibit less conduct problems or delinquent behaviors. Surprinsingly however, irrespective of age, girls and boys demonstrated similar levels of collectivistic and individualistic values.

In sum, we contend that these data support the belief that collectivism and individualism should be considered with complexity, across culture, gender, and the multiple socio-cultural contexts that influence children’s actions, and interactions. While we find collectivistic values to be related to more prosocial behavior, previous research with adolescents has found a more individualistic orientation might foster academic achievement and motivation; an important topic for future exploration given mixed prior research findings in this regard (Tseng, 2004; Tyler et al., 2006). Based on stage-environment fit models (Eccles, Midgley, Wigfield, Buchanan, Reuman, Flanagan, & MacIver, 1993; Gutman & Eccles, 2007), we contend that children balance these cultural value orientations according to specific contexts (i.e., school, home, community, faith community, extracurricular activities). However, in this study, we find collectivtistic values to be more helpful in terms of behavioral outcomes for this sample but future research could also explore relationships with academic and mental health outcomes across multiple contexts.

Strengths and Limitations

These findings indicate that cultural values are significantly related to elementary-age children’s behavior. Much of the scholarship examining cultural values with immigrant adolescents and young adults in the U.S. using African-American and European Americans for comparison. We further extend the predominant scholarship to better understand our sample of African-American and European-American elementary-school-aged children in urban, suburban, and rural regions of a northeastern state, supporting the external validity of our findings across a fairly broad group of children. Future work might attend to the potential role of neighborhood structure and interactions in diverse children’s endorsement of cultural values, given that neighborhoods are also cultural socialization agents (Witherspoon, Daniels, Mason, & Smith, 2016).

As with any study, there are limitations, one being the cross-sectional design. Also, our study predominantly uses child self-reported measures, though previous research has demonstrated child self-reports to correspond with other parent and teacher sources (Mellor, 2004). It would be important for future work to examine development and change in cultural values as children age with multiple reports and how this may be related to prosocial and risky behaviors. In terms of exploring developmental effects in future research, it is possible that certain cultural values may be especially important for younger children, but autonomy and individualistic values may play a stronger role in influencing behaviors in later adolescence and adulthood.

We acknowledge that our study focused on African-American and European-American children and that the sample of Latino, Asian, Native American and other-identified children in our original dataset was small. Notwithstanding, there are fewer studies examining the cultural values of African-American and European-Americanchildren; all of whom are young people living in increasingly diverse environments. We hope this study will serve as a springboard for other studies examining the role of cultural values for children of diverse ethnic and racial groups across development with implications for future research that examines the role of family and community contexts in cultural socialization and youth.

Table 3

RaceGenderGradeAfrican-AmericanEuropean AmericanBoyGirl1st,2nd,3rd grade4th, 5th gradeMMtdfMMtdfMMtdf(SD)(SD)(SD)(SD)(SD)(SD)Individualistic2.652.143.35**2162.462.261.292162.542.023.25**216Value(1.19)(1.07)(1.17)(1.12)(1.15)(1.08)Collectivistic3.693.74−.382173.663.76−.93171.633.633.86−2.04*217Value(.87)(.75)(.94)(.66)(.81)(.76)SDQ-Conduct1.541.333.54**159.871.521.343.24**2071.421.42−.15207Problems(.45)(.36)(.44)(.37)(.40)(.43)SDQ-Emotional1.661.512.01*170.191.561.58−.212131.601.521.22192.07Symptoms(.55)(.45)(.49)(.50)(.53)(.43)Russo et al-1.15.612.96**1731.17.573.08**108.69.84.82.14173Problem Behavior(.122)(1.18)(1.54)(.81)(1.11)(1.39)SDQ- Prosocial2.372.64-147.382.432.60−2.52*176.782.522.53−.15212Behavior(.55)(.37)3.98***(.53)(.41)(.50)(.45)Open in a separate window

Acknowledgments

Funding support was provided from the William T. Grant Foundation, Grant #8529; the Wallace Foundation, Grant #20080489; and the National Institutes of Health/National Institute for Drug Abuse, Grant # R01 DA025187 to Emilie Smith (PI), and an NIH Diversity Supplement to Dawn Witherspoon.

We acknowledge the many staff, parents, and children whose participation made this study possible. Andrea Farnham contributed to earlier versions of this paper.

Footnotes

Conflict of Interest:

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Research involving Human Participants was approved and monitored by The Pennsylvania State University Institutional Review Board (IRB # 23990) and have been performed in accordance with the ethical standards as laid down in the 1964 Declaration of Helsinki and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

Contributor Information

Emilie Phillips Smith, University of Georgia.

Dawn P. Witherspoon, The Pennsylvania State University.

Sakshi Bhargava, The Pennsylvania State University.

J. Maria Bermudez, University of Georgia.