IHS Programs

Get HNN

Our free e-zine

Religion and Child Development: Absence of Evidence in a Report by Bartkowski et al.

Jean Mercer, Ph.D

April 28, 2007

For any nation, optimal development of the younger generation is an essential key to economic and political security. The study of factors that determine good early development is deservedly a topic of high priority among psychologists, sociologists, and social workers.

Bartkowski, Xu, and Levin (2007) investigated the role of family religious commitment as a factor in early development, using a body of data from the Early Childhood Longitudinal Study, a multi-wave investigation of development of kindergarteners and first-graders in the United States. Bartkowski et al. deplored what they considered to be a previous lack of empirical research on connections between family religious interest and child development. Although they commented on problems of interpretation in their own study, Bartkowski et al. concluded that "religion is good for kids" (p.16).

The present paper is a discussion of background material, choice of data, and conclusions reached by Bartkowski et al. It is suggested, not that "religion is bad for kids", but that the investigation of this question is more complex than the Bartkowski group seems to have considered, and that statistical analysis cannot substitute for an informed conceptual approach.

Research on children and religion

Bartkowski et al. cited the research of Strayhorn, Weidman, and Larson (1990), a study that concluded that behavior of Head Start children was uncorrelated with the religiosity of their mothers. Although Bartkowski et al. did not mention this point, the Strayhorn et al. measure of religiosity was peculiarly suited for an evangelical Protestant group, including assessments of the closeness of the parent’s relationship with God and the frequency of experiencing God’s approval for good deeds, items that might be quite unfamiliar to Jews or members of the Religious Society of Friends.

Bartkowski et al. commented that a search of the EBSCOhost database showed no further material investigating the effect of religious upbringing on child development. Such a search would have been more effective if a broader question had been asked about aspects of moral and social development, particularly the effects of parenting styles. As Bartkowski et al. point out (p.2), parenting and disciplinary methods have been shown to be associated with religious belief systems (see also Mercer, in press). Examination of the effects of such methods is a possible indirect approach to understanding the impact of family religious practices.

Issues of religious belief have also been investigated empirically, for example, by Barrett, Richert, and Driesenga (2001), who studied the ideas about God’s abilities expressed by children from religious schools and preschools. Comparison of those ideas with the children’s beliefs about human agency was a step toward understanding of the effects of religious instruction and participation. In addition, there are older studies of the effects of Sunday school attendance and of Boy Scout membership (Whiteman & Kosier, 1964), although these tend to focus on late school age and early adolescence.

A more thorough reading of the literature might have helped Bartkowski et al. to establish a more complex conceptualization of ways in which early development and family religious activity could be connected.

Measures of religious participation

Because of their dependence on Early Childhood Longitudinal Study information, Bartkowski et al. were restricted to some very simple measures of religious participation, with stress on the congruence of fathers’ and mothers’ religious attendance. The measures included the question, "Do you and your [current partner] often, sometimes, hardly ever, or never have arguments about religion?" Although Bartkowski et al. commented that this "variable taps the manner in which religion can serve as… a source of conflict and division, in families" (p.9), it is not completely obvious whether such arguments have to do with actual beliefs or with practices that one partner wants the other to abandon or to share. Attempts to convert a belief system would seem to have a different marital significance than attempts to change behavior such as frequency of attendance at services or compliance with religious dietary restrictions or the use of contraception. Interpretation of these measures is difficult.

Measures of child development

Although Bartkowski et al. stated that the Early Childhood Longitudinal Study included measures of cognitive and of fine motor development, the former presumably a highly meaningful outcome, neither of these seems to have been included in the analysis, nor were measures of academic performance used. In fact, it appears that there were no objective measures of child development employed. Instead, parental and teacher assessments of children’s emotional characteristics and "approaches to learning" were analyzed. Bartkowski et al. noted that parents might be biased and provide socially acceptable answers to questions about religious participation as well as about their children’s development, and that teacher assessments were sought as a way to provide greater objectivity. Bartkowski et al. did not discuss the possibility that kindergarten and first-grade teachers may be quite aware of their pupils’ family religious involvement and may evaluate the children in ways impacted by this knowledge. The absence of objective measures of development in this study makes it difficult to support the conclusion that religious participation was "good for the kids."

Causal and correlational conclusions

In spite of their implied conclusion that religious involvement caused improved child development, Bartkowski et al. acknowledged that the direction of causality (if any) was unclear. Rather than a lack of religious participation causing poor social development, it is possible that a congregation may not welcome a family with poorly-behaved children (as Bartkowski et al. note on p. 21). Indeed, parents whose children act out excessively may find that their lives are too disorganized and demanding for them regularly to seek activities outside the home. However elaborate the statistical analysis, a study of this type is severely handicapped with respect to interpretation, making it impossible to conclude that one of the measured factors caused another.

General conclusion

The summary statement "religion is good for kids" is not justified by the evidence Bartkowski et al. offer. In addition, it should be considered that religious activity or discussion may be without importance in themselves, but affect development only as members of broader classes of parental behaviors. Membership in a religious group, said by Bartkowski et al. to provide a nomos or meaning system, may have functions similar to those of membership in secular groups such as the Sierra Club or a bowling team; the appropriate comparison may not involve religion, but the organization of family life around shared interests. Disagreement about religion may be an example of general marital conflict, well demonstrated to have a deleterious effect on early emotional development. Church attendance may be a measure of a family’s functional organization, similar to achievement of punctual attendance at school or at the workplace. To support their conclusion, Bartkowski et al. would have to demonstrate that religious participation has, not only some effect on development, but a more positive effect than results from parental engagement in secular life and in a well-functioning marriage.

References

Barrett, J.L., Richert, R.A., & Driesenga, A. (2001). God’s beliefs versus Mother’s: The development of nonhuman agent concepts. Child Development, 72, 50-65.

Bartkowski, J.P., Xu, X., & Levin, M.L. (2007). Religion and child development: Evidence from the Early Childhood Longitudinal Study. Social Science Research, doi:10.1016/j.ssresearch.2007.02.001.

Mercer, J. (in press, 2007). Destructive trends in alternative infant mental health approaches. Scientific Review of Mental Health Practice.

Strayhorn, J.M., Weidman, C.S., & Larson, D. (1990). A measure of religiousness, and its relation to parent and child mental health variables. Journal of Community Psychology,18, 34-43.

Whiteman, P.H., & Kosier, K.P. (1064). Development of children’s moralistic judgments: Age, sex, IQ, and certain personal-experiential variables. Child Development, 35, 843-850.

JEAN MERCER, PhD is a developmental psychologist with a doctorate from Brandeis University and is Professor Emerita at Richard Stockton College in New Jersey. She has been a Board member and officer of the New Jersey Association for Infant Mental Health for many years and is the author of a number of books and articles about early development. Most recently, Mercer co-authored Parenting Beyond Belief: On Raising Ethical, Caring Kids Without Religion, released by Amacom Books in April 2007.

Additional Links: