This seems to have been alluded to in some other comments, but I’m going to make it a bit more explicit and point out that observing the parenting of adopting families is likely to impose a rather strong filter on the parental environments under observation. Adopting families are not only very much in the minority, they’re likely to have a systematic tendency to differ from the majority in specific ways.
I suspect that families who adopt are likely to fall into a particular cluster of parenthood values, but I’d be hesitant to actually try to detail those values without reference to any actual study. I would speculate though, that they might be less invested in seeing their children grow up to be similar to themselves.
Also, what happened to the attitude that published studies are often wrong? Where did the skepticism go? Why do LWers suddenly think they understand how parenting works???
Also, what happened to the attitude that published studies are often wrong?
Even if published studies are often wrong they still constitute evidence in favor of the conclusion they present—just weaker.
Where did the skepticism go?
Got beat up by the arrogance and the phenomenon whereby some kinds of subject seem to be limited to the realm of experts or professional while others are considered fair game for everyone to have an opinion on.
Why do LWers suddenly think they understand how parenting works???
Most of us have seen it happen. We’ve probably at least got the basics down.
I have an additional problem with the studies. How do you determine how parenting style influenced the child? You cannot re-run the experiment. A correlation between the scores of parents and adopted children (in any test) implies an influence. However, it is not required.
To give a simple example, take some test which has just two options: “Yes” and “No”, both for parents and children.
Assume that 50% of the parents have “yes” and 50 “no”. There are two different parenting styles: One guarantees that the children will get “yes”, and one will guarantee “no”. Clearly this is a large impact of parenting!
But what happens if all parents choose between those two styles with 50% probability? You won’t see any correlation between the parents and the children.
While this example is unrealistic, it is not so absurd to imagine some children which try to become different from their parents, while others try to become similar. The parents are important in that case, but a simple correlation will not show this.
Twin studies are better to find influences of parenting.
This seems to have been alluded to in some other comments, but I’m going to make it a bit more explicit and point out that observing the parenting of adopting families is likely to impose a rather strong filter on the parental environments under observation. Adopting families are not only very much in the minority, they’re likely to have a systematic tendency to differ from the majority in specific ways.
This seems plausible to me. Can you think of specific ways in which they might be biased in an important way?
I suspect that families who adopt are likely to fall into a particular cluster of parenthood values, but I’d be hesitant to actually try to detail those values without reference to any actual study. I would speculate though, that they might be less invested in seeing their children grow up to be similar to themselves.
I’d further speculate that adoptive parents have on average more prior interest in raising children than biological parents.
That’s a pretty plausible bias.
Also, what happened to the attitude that published studies are often wrong? Where did the skepticism go? Why do LWers suddenly think they understand how parenting works???
Even if published studies are often wrong they still constitute evidence in favor of the conclusion they present—just weaker.
Got beat up by the arrogance and the phenomenon whereby some kinds of subject seem to be limited to the realm of experts or professional while others are considered fair game for everyone to have an opinion on.
Most of us have seen it happen. We’ve probably at least got the basics down.
I have an additional problem with the studies. How do you determine how parenting style influenced the child? You cannot re-run the experiment. A correlation between the scores of parents and adopted children (in any test) implies an influence. However, it is not required.
To give a simple example, take some test which has just two options: “Yes” and “No”, both for parents and children. Assume that 50% of the parents have “yes” and 50 “no”. There are two different parenting styles: One guarantees that the children will get “yes”, and one will guarantee “no”. Clearly this is a large impact of parenting! But what happens if all parents choose between those two styles with 50% probability? You won’t see any correlation between the parents and the children. While this example is unrealistic, it is not so absurd to imagine some children which try to become different from their parents, while others try to become similar. The parents are important in that case, but a simple correlation will not show this.
Twin studies are better to find influences of parenting.