↓ Skip to main content

Parents’ Nonstandard Work Schedules and Child Well-Being: A Critical Review of the Literature

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Prevention, September 2013
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

news
12 news outlets
blogs
2 blogs
policy
4 policy sources
twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
143 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
203 Mendeley
Title
Parents’ Nonstandard Work Schedules and Child Well-Being: A Critical Review of the Literature
Published in
Journal of Prevention, September 2013
DOI 10.1007/s10935-013-0318-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jianghong Li, Sarah E. Johnson, Wen-Jui Han, Sonia Andrews, Garth Kendall, Lyndall Strazdins, Alfred Dockery

Abstract

This paper provides a comprehensive review of empirical evidence linking parental nonstandard work schedules to four main child developmental outcomes: internalizing and externalizing problems, cognitive development, and body mass index. We evaluated the studies based on theory and methodological rigor (longitudinal data, representative samples, consideration of selection and information bias, confounders, moderators, and mediators). Of 23 studies published between 1980 and 2012 that met the selection criteria, 21 reported significant associations between nonstandard work schedules and an adverse child developmental outcome. The associations were partially mediated through parental depressive symptoms, low quality parenting, reduced parent-child interaction and closeness, and a less supportive home environment. These associations were more pronounced in disadvantaged families and when parents worked such schedules full time. We discuss the nuance, strengths, and limitations of the existing studies, and propose recommendations for future research.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 203 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 <1%
Czechia 1 <1%
Australia 1 <1%
Unknown 200 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 31 15%
Researcher 27 13%
Student > Master 24 12%
Student > Bachelor 20 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 9 4%
Other 33 16%
Unknown 59 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 33 16%
Social Sciences 29 14%
Medicine and Dentistry 22 11%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 11 5%
Nursing and Health Professions 7 3%
Other 34 17%
Unknown 67 33%