Early Education and Development, 25: 1–18

Copyright # 2014 Taylor & Francis Group, LLC

ISSN: 1040-9289 print/1556-6935 online
DOI: 10.1080/10409289.2013.780503

Socialization Values and Parenting Practices as

Predictors of Parental Involvement in Their
Children’s Educational Process

Eve Kikas
Institute of Psychology, Tallinn University
Tiia Tulviste
Institute of Psychology, University of Tartu
Kätlin Peets
Department of Psychology, University of Turku;
Institute of Psychology, Tallinn University

Research Findings: The purpose of this study was to examine associations between parental socia-
lization values (including inconsistency in values), parenting practices, and parental involvement in
their children’s education. Altogether 242 Estonian mothers and fathers of first-grade children parti-
cipated in the study. We found that mothers were overall more involved in their children’s education
than fathers. Whereas emphasis on social values at home was related to paternal and (marginally) to
maternal home-based academic involvement, emphasis on self-direction values at home among
mothers was related to their home-based general involvement. Also, inconsistency in family socia-
lization values had a negative impact on paternal involvement. Finally, positive practices were most
consistently related to all types of involvement among mothers and fathers. Practice or Policy: The
findings of the present study emphasize the importance of concordance in mother-father values. For
teachers, it emphasizes the need to cooperate with both spouses and to discuss broader topics, includ-
ing their values and practices. The results additionally indicate the importance of finding ways to
enhance collaboration with less-educated parents. The results have practical implications for teachers
who can potentially help parents to become more involved in their children’s education.

Home and school constitute two proximal environmental contexts for young children’s academic
and social development (Bronfenbrenner & Morris, 1998; Downer & Myers, 2010). There is
widespread consensus that parents’ involvement in their children’s education both at home
and at school is an important factor contributing to children’s adaptive development
(Hoover-Dempsey, Whitaker, & Ice, 2010; Reynolds & Shlafer, 2010; Tan & Goldberg, 2009;
Waanders, Mendez, & Downer, 2007). Thus, it is important to identify factors that enhance or
inhibit parental involvement in education. It is known that involvement in children’s education
depends on such factors as the parent’s education level (Davis-Kean, 2005; Flouri & Buchanan,

Correspondence regarding this article should be addressed to Eve Kikas, Institute of Psychology, Tallinn University,
Narva mnt 25, 10120 Tallinn, Estonia. E-mail: eve.kikas@tlu.ee
2 KIKAS, TULVISTE, AND PEETS

2003; Hung, 2005; Manz, Fantuzzo, & Power, 2004), the child’s age (Epstein, 1995; Kikas, Peets,
& Niilo, 2010; Manz et al., 2004), academic skills (Flouri & Buchanan, 2003; Levin et al., 1997),
but also school and teacher characteristics (e.g., teacher invitations; see Hoover-Dempsey et al.,
2010). Yet less attention has been paid to examining how parental values and practices influence
parents’ involvement in the educational process of the child.
Socialization values (e.g., ideas about what qualities need to be encouraged in children) shape
the ways in which parents raise their children and how they organize their children’s home
environment (see Hill, 2010; Hirsijärvi & Perälä-Littunen, 2001; Hoff, Laursen, & Tardif,
2002; Holden, 1995). Few researchers have studied the link between socialization values and
parental involvement in children’s education (for an overview, see Hill, 2010). There are no
large-scale quantitative studies with participants outside the United States. As far as we know,
there are no studies about the extent to which inconsistency between spousal socialization values
might impact parental involvement in education. Moreover, studies have differentiated between
three dimensions of parenting (warmth vs. rejection, structure vs. chaos, autonomy support vs.
coercion) and respective practices (affection, behaviorally and psychologically controlling
practices) where their use varies among parents (Skinner, Johnson, & Snyder, 2005). Parenting
practices may also influence the amount and type of parental involvement. However, these
relations have not been studied at the beginning of the child’s school career.
Although the role of fathers’ involvement in upbringing their children has been highlighted in
recent years, fathers are still less engaged in this process (Hoffert, Pleck, Stueve, Bianchi, &
Sayer, 2002; Hung, 2005; Tam, 2009). Also, too little research has been conducted with fathers
(Grief & Grief, 2004). We do not know, for example, whether the role of socialization values
and parenting practices in predicting parental involvement is similar for mothers and fathers.
Thus, the aim of the present study was to examine the role of maternal and paternal socializa-
tion values, inconsistency in their values, and parenting practices in parents’ involvement in chil-
dren’s education in intact families at the time when children start school. Although most parents
are eager to facilitate their children’s transition to school, it is likely that some interindividual
differences could potentially occur because of differences in socialization values and preferred
parenting practices.

PARENTAL INVOLVEMENT

Parental involvement is a multidimensional construct (Epstein, 1995; Seginer, 2006) that

includes different home- and school-based activities (Anderson & Minke, 2007; Fantuzzo,
Tighe, & Childs, 2000; Green, Walker, Hoover-Dempsey, & Sandler, 2007; Manz et al.,
2004). Home-based involvement includes those parental behaviors at home that are either
directly or indirectly related to the child’s school activities. Direct involvement in the child’s
education (also called academic involvement; see Kikas et al., 2011) includes communicating
with the child about school matters and helping the child with homework (e.g., Fantuzzo
et al., 2000; Manz et al., 2004; Seginer, 2006). Forms of indirect involvement in education at
home (called also general involvement; see Kikas et al., 2011) include a variety of activities,
such as reading, talking with the child, engaging in creative activities, and making visits to
museums. Some of them, such as home reading, are practiced in many countries (e.g., Sénéchal
& LeFevre, 2002; Yamamoto, Holloway, & Suzuki, 2006), whereas others vary between
 PARENTAL INVOLVEMENT IN CHILDREN’S EDUCATION 3

cultures and social groups (see Yamamoto et al., 2006). Another important field of involvement
is home–school conferencing—communication with school staff on educational topics related to
the specific child. School-based involvement includes various activities in which parents engage,
for instance, participating in school trips, volunteering in the classroom, and attending school
programs (e.g., Fantuzzo et al., 2000; Manz et al., 2004).

SOCIALIZATION VALUES

It is likely that involvement in children’s education may be affected by parents’ socialization

values—the qualities that parents consider important to install in children. Since Kohn’s
(1977) studies, special attention has been paid to social and self-direction values, because it
has repeatedly been found that parents differ mainly in the extent to which they value
self-direction over conformity. Cultures, social groups, and families differ with regard to
socialization-related beliefs and values. When parents give priority to social values, such as pol-
iteness, obedience, trustworthiness, and respect for others, they socialize their children toward
interdependence. By contrast, when they value such self-direction values, such as creativity,
self-confidence, and autonomy, they socialize them toward independence (Greenfield, Keller,
Fuligni, & Maynard, 2003; Kagitçibaşi, 1996, 2005; Kohn, 1977).
There is some evidence that socialization values are related to parents’ involvement in their
children’s upbringing. For instance, Gaunt (2005) showed that fathers’ preference for
openness-to-change values (e.g., self-direction and stimulation) was associated with higher
paternal involvement in infant and toddler care. The emphasis on either social or self-directed
values at home or school may be differentially related to the amount and type of involvement
in educational activities. Greenfield, Quiroz, and Raeff (2000) found that Latino immigrant par-
ents in the United States were likely to stress social values and were concerned about children’s
social development rather than their cognitive development and individual school accomplish-
ments. Parents who emphasize social values may consider that teachers are the main educators
of children and thus may be less engaged in children’s education. In contrast, parents who give
priority to self-direction values (e.g., independence, creativity, and self-confidence) may con-
sider cooperation and sharing of responsibilities with teachers as detrimental. It is also possible
that parents with different value orientations may differ in their type rather than in their amount
of involvement in children’s education. Giving priority to social values (e.g., politeness, obedi-
ence, and trustworthiness) is likely to be related to a more traditional parenting style, such as
strict control of children. Such parents may directly control how children do their homework.
Parents who emphasize self-direction values, in contrast, are likely to cultivate the view that
autonomy is critical to children’s learning and to be more indirectly involved in children’s edu-
cation, for example, in developing children’s general curiosity and the cognitive and language
abilities needed for school success (general involvement).
Studies have shown that fathers tend to emphasize social values less than mothers (Tulviste &
Ahtonen, 2007); however, it is not known whether the relations between value emphasis and
involvement activities differ as well. Moreover, the degree of convergence in the parents’ value
systems (especially their values and attitudes in the domain of child rearing) has an impact on
the social and emotional development of the child (Block, Block, & Morrison, 1981). The extent
to which people agree or disagree about the importance of various values could be regarded
4 KIKAS, TULVISTE, AND PEETS

as a factor that decreases conflicts and increases cooperation. It is likely that high agreement
between spousal values could be explained in turn by spouses’ higher frequency of discussing
their child-rearing practices and values with each other. This consistency may be related to
an overall positive family context that supports fathers’ involvement, which in turn is an
important factor contributing to positive child outcomes (Kelly, 2000). Studies have indicated that
fathering is more sensitive to the family climate than mothering (National Institute of Child Health
and Human Development [NICHD] Early Child Care Research Network, 2000), and thus fathers
are more likely to be involved in their child’s education in harmonious rather than discordant mar-
riages and relationships (Carlson & McLanahan, 2002; Coiro & Emery, 1998; Flouri & Buchanan,
2003; Nelson, Clampet-Lundquist, & Edin, 2002). Thus, it is possible that inconsistency in
parental value orientations might influence specifically the involvement practices of fathers.

PARENTING PRACTICES

Although parenting also entails participation in the child’s educational process, studies of
parenting practices have not specifically stressed it. Generally speaking, three bipolar dimen-
sions of parenting practices have been brought out: warmth versus rejection, structure versus
chaos, and autonomy support versus coercion (see Skinner et al., 2005), and three parenting
practices, respectively, have been described. Positive practices comprise generally supportive
behaviors that are supplemented with warmth, acceptance, encouragement, and a high interest
in child’s activities. Behavioral control includes setting firm rules and confronting the child
when he or she does not follow these rules. Psychological control includes intrusive and coerc-
ive behaviors that suppress autonomy and may induce shame and guilt (Barber, 1996). Whereas
behavioral control is directed toward regulating the child’s behavior, psychological control
includes an attempt to control the child’s psychological world (Barber, Olsen, & Shagle, 1994).
Some earlier studies have shown that parents who show a higher level of positive parenting
and behavioral control (related also to the authoritative parenting style; see Baumrind, 1966) are
more involved in the child’s education (e.g., Noack, 2004; Steinberg, Lamborn, Dornbusch, &
Darling, 1992). Parental psychological control is generally related to children’s maladjustment
(see Barber, 1996). However, the few studies that have examined relations between psychologi-
cal control and parental involvement in adolescent education indicate that these relations can be
culture specific. For example, Cheung and Pomerantz (2011) found positive relations between
psychological control and involvement among adolescents’ parents in China but nonsignificant
relations in the United States. Psychologically controlling parents may accompany their involve-
ment in their children’s education with intrusiveness and heightened control (e.g., checking
homework each evening). These practices are more likely to be valued in authoritarian countries
like China (and the former Soviet Union) but not in democratic countries such as the United
States. So far, there have not been any studies of children who have just started school, and there
have been only a few studies on fathers.

CONTEXT OF THE STUDY

The present study was carried out in Estonia, a small country with a population of 1.29 million
that has recently witnessed rapid social transformations. Similar to findings from some other
 PARENTAL INVOLVEMENT IN CHILDREN’S EDUCATION 5

societies in transition, the socialization value systems of Estonian parents reveal remarkable
diversity and complexity (Tulviste & Ahtonen, 2007; Tulviste & Kikas, 2010; Tulviste, Mizera,
De Geer, & Tryggvason, 2007; Wang & Tamis-LeMonda, 2003). In the socialization value sys-
tem of Estonian parents, social values coexist with values that stress self-direction and
self-maximization. Also, a recent study conducted by Tulviste and Kikas (2010) revealed that
in Estonia, parents and teachers consider the development of self-direction values more impor-
tant at school, whereas social values are more highly valued in the family context. Previous stu-
dies have shown that there is, on average, a high degree of similarity in socialization values held
by mothers and fathers from the same family (Tulviste & Ahtonen, 2007). However, a compara-
tive study conducted in Estonia and Finland demonstrated that socialization values held by
mothers and fathers were more similar in Finnish than in Estonian families. Namely, Estonian
mothers emphasized the characteristics related to benevolence (e.g., being kind, nice, and
friendly) more and conformity (e.g., respect for parents and the elderly, politeness) less than
did fathers (Tulviste & Ahtonen, 2007).
As for parenting practices, Estonian mothers have been found to exhibit higher behavioral
control with their preschool and preadolescent children than Euro-American, Finnish, and
Swedish mothers (Junefelt & Tulviste, 1997; Tulviste, 2004), which may be explained by the
fact that Estonian mothers were sheltered from modern democratic ideas of upbringing during
the Soviet period (see also Shor, 2006, for Russia). As nowadays there is more emphasis on
the importance of democratic practices, one might expect to see changes toward less directive
and controlling parenting in some families.
This diversity makes Estonia a good place to study the question of to what extent parental
involvement in children’s education is related to differences in parents’ socialization value orien-
tation (i.e., their emphasis on social vs. self-direction values), value inconsistency, and parenting
practices.

AIMS AND HYPOTHESES

Although several studies have examined parental involvement in children’s education, the
degree to which socialization values and parenting practices play a role in involvement at the
beginning of the child’s school career has received less attention. So far, it is not known whether
the role of socialization values and parenting practices in predicting parental involvement is
similar for mothers and fathers. Interestingly enough, there is no information about the extent
to which inconsistency between the socialization values of spouses impacts parental school
involvement. Thus, the aim of the present study was to examine the role of socialization values
(social and self-directed values), value inconsistency, and parenting practices (positive practices,
behavioral control, and psychological control) in mothers’ and fathers’ involvement
(home-based academic involvement, home-based general involvement, school-based involve-
ment, parent–teacher conferencing) in their children’s education in intact families. The study
questions and hypotheses were as follows.
First, how do social and self-directed values (as emphasized at home and at school) predict
different types of maternal and paternal involvement in children’s education? We expected
similar relations for mothers and fathers such that higher scores on self-direction values at
home would be positively related to general home-based involvement but higher scores on
6 KIKAS, TULVISTE, AND PEETS

social values would be positively related to home-based academic involvement. We expected

mothers who valued more highly self-direction at school to be more involved in home–school
conferencing. Second, how does family inconsistency in values predict involvement? We
expected value inconsistency to negatively predict paternal but not maternal involvement
(Coiro & Emery, 1998; Flouri & Buchanan, 2003; NICHD Early Child Care Research
Network, 2000). Third, how do positive practices, behavioral control, and psychological con-
trol predict involvement? Are the predictors different for maternal and paternal involvement?
We anticipated that parents with higher levels of positive practices and behavioral control
would be more involved in their child’s education at home and at school (cf. Noack,
2004; Steinberg et al., 1992) and that psychological control would be either unrelated or
positively related to parental involvement (cf. mixed results for U.S. and Chinese parents
in Cheung & Pomerantz, 2011; Tam, 2009).
We also checked parental education level and child sex on the basis of prior research. Namely,
studies have generally shown that parents with more education are more involved in their
children’s education (Davis-Kean, 2005; Flouri & Buchanan, 2003; Hung, 2005; Manz et al.,
2004). However, the results concerning child sex are mixed: Whereas Manz et al. (2004) showed
that U.S. families with boys showed higher home–school communication, Tam (2009) found that
in Hong Kong, parents of girls were more involved in education than parents of boys.

METHOD

Participants and Procedure

Data were collected as part of a larger project. Schools around Estonia were selected to include
both smaller and larger schools and schools from both urban and rural areas. School principals
were contacted in order to inform them about the project and invite them to participate. All of the
invited principals agreed to participate, and altogether 31 schools (53 classrooms) across Estonia
participated in the study. Once the principals had agreed, they informed the teachers. Letters
were sent to the parents of all children in these classrooms (947 families). Informed consent
was received from 874 families.
Altogether 580 mothers and 333 fathers of first-grade students filled out the questionnaires.
However, this study includes only the 262 families in which both parents filled out the question-
naires. In addition, we excluded 20 participants who chose more than five values in the question-
naire measuring socialization values (see the next section for a description of the questionnaire).
The final sample included 242 mothers and 242 fathers (biological or stepparents) who lived
together. The mothers ranged in age from 23 to 51 years (M ¼ 34.68, SD ¼ 5.06); 17 mothers
did not complete their secondary education (i.e.,
11 years of education; labeled basic
education), 138 had a secondary education (i.e., 12 years of education), 87 had a university
education or were currently studying at university (i.e., more than 12 years of formal education).
The fathers ranged in age from 22 to 58 years (M ¼ 37.10, SD ¼ 5.85). Nineteen fathers had
a basic education, 144 had a secondary education, and 72 had a university education or were
university students. Seven fathers did not specify their education level.
Researchers delivered the questionnaires to schools. Teachers sent the questionnaires to
parents via the children. Questionnaires were placed in envelopes with a letter explaining the
 PARENTAL INVOLVEMENT IN CHILDREN’S EDUCATION 7

aims of the project and describing the procedure. Each envelope included two questionnaire
forms—one for mothers and the other for fathers. Participants were instructed to complete the
questionnaire alone at home. Upon request the participants could receive more information by
telephone or e-mail. Parents had 1 week to complete the questionnaires. The questionnaires were
returned in sealed envelopes to the teachers, who in turn gave them back to the researchers.
A reminder was sent once to those parents who had not returned the questionnaires.

Measures and Coding

Parental involvement in children’s education. Parental involvement was measured

using an abridged version of the Family Involvement Questionnaire for Elementary School
(Manz et al., 2004), which was adapted for Estonian conditions (Kikas et al., 2011).
According to confirmatory factor analysis (see Kikas et al., 2011), it contains four subscales:
school-based involvement (six items; e.g., ‘‘I participate in parent and family social
activities’’), home-based academic involvement (three items; e.g., ‘‘I spend time working
with my child on numerical skills’’), home-based general involvement (three items; e.g.,
‘‘I bring home learning materials for my child [books, videos, etc.]’’), and home–school con-
ferencing (six items; e.g., ‘‘I talk to my child’s teacher about my child’s accomplishments’’).
Responses were provided on a 5-point Likert scale (1 ¼ never, 2 ¼ rarely, 3 ¼ from time to
time, 4 ¼ frequently, 5 ¼ always). Internal consistencies of the scales were good (Cronbach’s
a s ¼ .77–.95).

Questionnaire on socialization values (Tulviste, 2013; Tulviste & Kikas, 2010). Part-
icipants were given a list of 17 qualities and were asked to choose five qualities that they
considered the most important for children to develop at home. Next participants were given
the same list of 17 qualities, but this time they were asked to mark five that they considered the
most important for children to be encouraged to learn at school. The list included three
qualities from the social values scale connected with interpersonal relations (politeness, obedi-
ence, respect for others) and three from the self-direction scale (independence, creativity,
self-confidence), as well as several others (smartness, self-confidence, ambitious, healthy life-
style, etc.) to draw a broader picture of similarities and differences in mothers’ and fathers’
values. Half of the parents first received the list of qualities they considered important at home
(with the instruction to mark five), and the other half first received the list of qualities they
considered important at school. In data analysis, all value items were coded 1 ¼ selected or
0 ¼ not selected.
Social and self-direction scores were calculated separately for the home and school contexts
(and separately for mothers and fathers) by counting the number of social or self-direction qua-
lities that the parents chose among the five most important qualities. In addition, we calculated
the degree of value inconsistency between mothers and fathers. We counted the number of
values (at home and at school) that were chosen by only one parent. In other words, both
mothers and fathers could choose up to five values that they endorsed at home and up to five
values that they endorsed at school. If fathers and mothers chose a different set of values at home
(five values from mothers and five values from fathers) as well as at school (five values from
mothers and five values from fathers), the score obtained was 20.
8 KIKAS, TULVISTE, AND PEETS

Parenting practices. The parenting practices questionnaire was adapted from the Child
Rearing Practices Report (see Aunola & Nurmi, 2004; Roberts, Block, & Block, 1984),
which covers three dimensions of parenting practices. Positive practices (10 items) include
items that measure parental warmth and caring (e.g., ‘‘I show my child that I love him=her’’),
supporting independence (e.g., ‘‘I encourage my child to be independent’’), and general interest
in the activities of the child (e.g., ‘‘I talk to my child about his=her friends’’). Behavioral control
(3 items) addresses behavior related to confronting the child when he or she does not follow
the rules (e.g., ‘‘I punish my child when he=she misbehaves’’). Psychological control (3 items)
covers such behaviors as controlling the child by guilt induction (e.g., ‘‘I let my child know how
much I have done for him=her’’). Parents were asked to rate each item on a 5-point scale
(1 ¼ never, 2 ¼ rarely, 3 ¼ from time to time, 4 ¼ frequently, 5 ¼ always). Internal consistencies
of the scales were acceptable (positive practices: a ¼ .77=.84; behavioral control: a ¼ .71=.67;
psychological control: a ¼ .72=.72, respectively, for mothers=fathers).

RESULTS

Descriptive Statistics

Means and standard deviations of all of the scales are provided in Table 1. We first examined the
frequency of the four types of involvement among mothers and fathers. Results showed that both
mothers and fathers differed in terms of how much they engaged in different types of involve-
ment: mothers, F(3, 690) ¼ 363.11, p < .001, g2p ¼ 0:6; fathers, F(3, 693) ¼ 380.14, p < .001,
g2p ¼ 0:62. Both mothers and fathers were most frequently involved in academic activities at
home, followed by general home-based activities, conferencing with teachers, and participating
in school events (all pairwise comparisons were significant at p < .001).

TABLE 1
Means and Standard Deviations for the Variables

Mothers Fathers

Variable M SD Min Max M SD Min Max t p

Values
Social values at home 1.47 0.83 0 3 1.37 0.84 0 3 1.56 .12
Self-direction values at home 1.26 0.82 0 3 1.16 0.83 0 3 1.62 .11
Social values at school 1.11 0.79 0 3 1.10 0.87 0 3 0.13 .90
Self-direction values at school 1.29 0.84 0 3 1.27 0.80 0 3 0.31 .76
Parenting practices
Positive parenting 4.47 0.35 3 5 4.18 0.49 2 5 8.82 <.001
Behavioral control 3.13 0.82 1 5 3.27 0.78 1 5 2.53 .01
Psychological control 2.31 0.85 1 5 2.38 0.86 1 5 1.28 .20
Parental involvement
School-based involvement 2.57 0.72 1 5 1.82 0.60 1 5 14.09 <.001
Home-based involvement: academic 4.54 0.72 2 5 3.65 1.00 1 5 12.36 <.001
Home-based involvement: general 3.74 0.75 1 5 3.13 0.84 1 5 1.46 <.001
Home–school conferencing 3.19 1.01 1 5 2.13 1.00 1 5 12.88 <.001

Note. The mean of inconsistency in values was 9.46 (SD ¼ 4.22, min ¼ 0, max ¼ 18).
 PARENTAL INVOLVEMENT IN CHILDREN’S EDUCATION 9

When comparing the two types of socialization values within the same context, we found that
at home, social values were emphasized more than self-direction values by both mothers and
fathers: mothers, t(241) ¼ 2.30, p ¼ .02, d ¼ 0.15; fathers, t(241) ¼ 2.30, p ¼ .02, d ¼ 0.15. In
contrast, at school, self-direction values were emphasized more than social values only by
mothers, t(241) ¼ 2.11, p ¼ .03, d ¼ 0.14.
Finally, we tested the degree to which mothers and fathers differed on our study variables (see
Table 1). Mothers showed significantly higher scores on all four involvement dimensions
(ds ¼ 0.67–0.90), but parents did not differ in their value orientations at home or school. As
for parenting practices, mothers scored higher than fathers on positive practices (p < .001,
d ¼ 0.58) and lower than fathers on behavioral control (p ¼ .01, d ¼ 0.14).

Focal Analyses

Analyses were conducted using the software program Mplus 6.12 (Muthén & Muthén, 1998–
2010). At first 10 imputed data sets were created to handle missing values on some of the study
variables (the rate of missingness varied from 0% to 4.1%). In the analysis phase, Mplus auto-
matically pools information (estimates and standard errors) from all of the imputed data sets.
When estimating a path model, we used maximum likelihood estimation with robust standard
errors. In addition, because parents (families) were nested in schools (altogether 31 schools),
standard errors were adjusted for clustering (using the Type ¼ Complex method in Mplus).
First we highlight some correlations among socialization values and parenting practices (see
Table 2 for correlations). It was found that value orientations were context specific, meaning that
the types of values that parents chose in the home context were unrelated to the values selected
in the school context. In addition, there were a few significant associations between values and
parenting practices. Namely, fathers who emphasized social values at home tended to show
higher positive practices and behavioral control, whereas maternal use of psychological control
was positively related to emphasizing social values at home and negatively related to
self-direction value orientation at home.

Path analysis. In the path model, four types of involvement (for both mothers and fathers,
altogether eight scores) were treated as endogenous variables. More specifically, four types of
involvement were regressed on four socialization values (maternal or paternal social and
self-direction values at home and school), inconsistency in values, and three parenting practices
(mothers’ or fathers’ positive practices, behavioral control, and psychological control). Specifi-
cally, we estimated only maternal socialization values and parenting practices when predicting
mothers’ involvement, and the same for fathers. In addition, we checked parental education (two
dummy-coded education variables: mothers’=fathers’ higher education vs. basic education,
secondary education vs. basic education) and the sex of the child. The findings are presented
in Tables 3 and 4.
Maternal involvement. With regard to control variables, mothers who had more education
were more involved at school (standardized estimate ¼ .82, p ¼ .02). Also, mothers engaged in
academic activities at home to a greater extent with boys (standardized estimate ¼ .23,
p ¼ .04). Although self-directed values at home predicted mothers’ home-based general involve-
ment (standardized estimate ¼ .13, p ¼ .04) and social values at home marginally predicted their
 TABLE 2
Bivariate Correlations Between Mothers’ and Fathers’ Socialization Values, Parenting Practices, and Different Types of Involvement

Variable 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

1. Social values at home — .42 .02 .04 .22 .14 .12 .09 .07 .19 .05 .14
2. Self-direction at home .37 — .07 .00 .05 .03 .03 .11 .04 .04 .00 .07
3. Social values at school .09 .01 — .40 .03 .05 .04 .12 .08 .07 .03 .09
4. Self-direction at school .01 .01 .36 — .01 .04 .00 .05 .15 .03 .04 .06
5. Inconsistency .21 .07 .03 .01 — .18 .02 .07 .18 .18 .24 .24
6. Positive parenting .07 .06 .05 .11 .06 — .07 .18 .22 .41 .48 .31
7. Behavioral control .05 .00 .03 .05 .05 .10 — .26 .18 .01 .11 .26

10
8. Psychological control .18 .15 .14 .09 .02 .08 .25 — .04 .21 .24 .12
9. School-based involvement .01 .01 .03 .03 .01 .23 .07 .11 — .26 .33 .67
10. Home-based .14 .08 .00 .06 .00 .29 .05 .04 .20 — .52 .40
involvement: academic
11. Home-based .10 .12 .11 .05 .08 .44 .17 .05 .24 .32 — .49
involvement: general
12. Home–school .07 .01 .06 .10 .05 .39 .27 .09 .41 .36 .44 —
conferencing

Note. Correlations for mothers and fathers are presented below and above the diagonal, respectively.

p < .05.  p < .01.  p < .001.
 PARENTAL INVOLVEMENT IN CHILDREN’S EDUCATION 11

TABLE 3
Coefficients for Mothers’ Involvement

Home-based Home-based
School-based involvement: involvement: Home–school
involvement Academic General conferencing

Variable Estimate SE Estimate SE Estimate SE Estimate SE

Control variables
Sex of the child .06 .12 .23 .11 .15 .12 .07 .08
Higher education .82 .35 .04 .30 .00 .30 .10 .32
vs. lower education
Secondary education .38 .34 .25 .30 .03 .29 .30 .30
vs. lower education
Socialization values
Social values at home .01 .07 .10y .06 .07 .06 .04 .07
Social values at school .06 .07 .02 .07 .11 .07 .06 .08
Self-direction values .07 .06 .07 .06 .13 .06 .03 .05
at home
Self-direction values at .03 .05 .02 .07 .04 .05 .01 .05
school
Inconsistency .00 .06 .05 .06 .05 .05 .04 .06
Parenting practices
Positive parenting .22 .08 .32 .08 .40 .05 .38 .05
Behavioral control .08 .06 .04 .06 .13 .04 .23 .05
Psychological control .10 .08 .10 .07 .01 .06 .02 .06
R2 .13 .15 .23 .24

Note. Analyses were conducted with imputed data. Standardized estimates are provided. For binary variables, StdY
standardized estimates are presented (only the endogenous variables were standardized; see the Mplus manual [Muthén &
Muthén, 1998–2010]). Although coefficients are reported in separate tables, associations for mothers and fathers were
estimated in the same model.
y
p < .10.  p < .05.  p < .01.  p < .001.

home-based academic involvement (standardized estimate ¼ .10, p ¼ .10), other effects were non-
significant. The effect of self-directed values was (albeit marginally) different from fathers, Wald
statistic (df ¼ 1) ¼ 2.72, p ¼ .10, whereas the effect of social values was not, Wald statistic
(df ¼ 1) ¼ 1.73, p ¼ .19. As for parenting practices, when mothers engaged in higher levels of
positive practices, they were more likely to be involved in their children’s education (associations
were significant for all four types of involvement). In addition, mothers who reported greater
behavioral control had higher scores on home-based general involvement (standardized
estimate ¼ .13, p < .001) and home–school conferencing (standardized estimate ¼ .23,
p < .001). Altogether, 13% to 24% of the variance was explained in the four types of involvement.
Paternal involvement. Fathers with more education were overall more involved in their
children’s education (three out of four associations were significant). Fathers who had a
secondary education did not differ from fathers with a basic education, with one exception—
fathers with a secondary education were more likely to engage in academic activities at home
(standardized estimate ¼ .27, p ¼ .003). Fathers who endorsed higher levels of social values at
home were also academically more involved at home (standardized estimate ¼ .15, p ¼ .001).
12 KIKAS, TULVISTE, AND PEETS

TABLE 4
Coefficients for Fathers’ Involvement

Home-based Home-based
School-based involvement: involvement: Home–school
involvement Academic General conferencing

Variable Estimate SE Estimate SE Estimate SE Estimate SE

Control variables
Sex of the child .03 .13 .01 .10 .02 .10 .09 .11
Higher education vs. .72 .21 .57 .20 .21 .32 .61 .24
lower education
Secondary education vs. .42 .22 .56 .19 .23 .31 .43 .24
lower education
Socialization values
Social values at home .04 .10 .15 .05 .08 .06 .03 .07
Social values at school .03 .07 .10 .06 .03 .09 .01 .05
Self-direction values at home .04 .08 .03 .06 .02 .07 .07 .07
Self-direction values at school .12 .07 .00 .05 .05 .06 .04 .06
Inconsistency .15 .08 .08 .07 .19 .07 .20 .07
Parenting practices
Positive parenting .16 .06 .35 .06 .39 .07 .23 .07
Behavioral control .17 .06 .05 .06 .06 .06 .24 .07
Psychological control .00 .06 .15 .06 .15 .06 .03 .06
R2 .14 .23 .27 .21

Note. Analyses were conducted with imputed data. Standardized estimates are provided. For binary variables, StdY
standardized estimates are presented (only the endogenous variables were standardized; see the Mplus manual [Muthén &
Muthén, 1998–2010]). Although coefficients are reported in separate tables, associations for mothers and fathers were
estimated in the same model.

p < .05.  p < .01.  p < .001.

In addition, inconsistency in parental values was related to all types of involvement except for
home-based academic involvement, suggesting that the discrepancy with regard to what mothers
and fathers considered important at school or at home had an important impact on paternal
involvement activities. Two out of three coefficients were also significantly different from
mothers: school-based involvement, Wald statistic (df ¼ 1) ¼ 2.04, p ¼ .15; home-based general
involvement, Wald statistic (df ¼ 1) ¼ 4.87, p ¼ .03; home–school conferencing, Wald statistic
(df ¼ 1) ¼ 3.11, p ¼ .08.
With regard to parenting practices, positive practices were again most consistently related to all
types of involvement. Also, behavioral control made a unique contribution to school-
based involvement (standardized estimate ¼ .17, p ¼ .004) and home–school conferencing
(standardized estimate ¼ .24, p < .001). However, despite the fact that behavioral control was a sig-
nificant predictor of school-based involvement for fathers, and it predicted home-based general
involvement for mothers, these coefficients were not significantly different for the two parents:
school-based involvement, Wald statistic (df ¼ 1) ¼ 1.08, p ¼ .30; home-based general involvement,
Wald statistic (df ¼ 1) ¼ 0.75, p ¼ .39. Finally, psychological control predicted both types of
home-based involvement (academic: standardized estimate ¼ .15, p ¼ .02; general: standardized
estimate ¼ .15, p ¼ .01), and these coefficients were significantly different from mothers: academic,
 PARENTAL INVOLVEMENT IN CHILDREN’S EDUCATION 13

Wald statistic (df ¼ 1) ¼ 5.77, p ¼ .02; general, Wald statistic (df ¼ 1) ¼ 4.34, p ¼ .04. Altogether,
predictors explained 14% to 27% of the variance in the four involvement outcomes.

DISCUSSION

To our knowledge, the present study is the first to examine the role of maternal and paternal
socialization values, value inconsistency, and parenting practices in the degree to which parents
are involved in their children’s education at the beginning of school. We found few relations
between value orientations at home and value inconsistency and involvement, some of which
differed between mothers and fathers. Emphasis on social values was related to home-based aca-
demic involvement in fathers but the effect was marginal in mothers. In addition, mothers’
emphasis on self-direction values was related to their home-based general involvement.
As expected (with the exception of home-based academic involvement), value inconsistency
was related to paternal but not maternal involvement. Positive practices were the most consistent
predictors of all types of parental involvement, whereas relations between the use of
psychological control and involvement somehow differed in mothers and fathers.

Parental Value Orientations and Value Inconsistency as Predictors of Involvement

This study shows that socialization values are context specific and that families differ in their
emphases on values at home and at school. Both mothers and fathers believed that at home social
values should be more developed than those of self-direction, whereas at school only mothers
emphasized self-direction values more than social values. This finding supports the recent view that
values receive different importance depending on the context in which they are considered (see
Daniel et al., 2012). However, the finding that correlations between social and self-direction value
orientations in two contexts were nonsignificant refers to considerable variation between families.
As in other countries (Hoffert et al., 2002; Hung, 2005; Tam, 2009), fathers were less
involved in their children’s education than mothers. Both mothers and fathers were more
involved at home than at school, and they most frequently supported children’s academic activi-
ties (e.g., homework). The specific emphasis on academic involvement may be related to the
time of the study—the beginning of children’s school careers. Estonian school curricula are
rather demanding; children are assessed and given home assignments from the very beginning
of school. However, an earlier study (Kikas et al., 2011) showed a similar order of involvement
activities for mothers of younger and older children as well.
We found support for our hypothesis that parents who emphasize self-direction values
(self-confidence, independence, and creativity) are indirectly involved (e.g., practicing creative
activities to stimulate exploration) in their child’s education only in the case of mothers. These
are clearly activities that support cognitive development and autonomy development in children
and that provide general and not just academic knowledge. The finding that an emphasis on
self-direction values was not related to other types of involvement indicates heterogeneity in par-
ental behavior. For instance, some parents who value self-direction qualities may consider their
child to be responsible for his or her academic tasks (e.g., homework or learning at school) and thus
may not take an active role in this type of support. It means that they may engage in homework and
conferencing with teachers only when a teacher requests it and problems have emerged. However,
14 KIKAS, TULVISTE, AND PEETS

it is also possible to support self-direction qualities during the process of helping a child with
homework, for example, when discussing the learning process, different ways to be successful,
and so on. The present study did not examine the quality of academic (and its types) involvement.
However, those fathers (also, there was a marginal effect for mothers) who believed that
social qualities like politeness and obedience should be developed at home also tended to sup-
port children in their specific learning activities at home. Emphasizing social values has also
been found to be related to more traditional views of education that generally emphasize only
academic development and clearly differentiate between parents’ and teachers’ roles in chil-
dren’s education (Greenfield et al., 2000). Helping with homework at the beginning of school
is a traditional parental task, and it was also the most emphasized form of involvement in the
present study. This finding shows that parents with a social value orientation take even more
responsibility for helping their children with homework.
An important finding is that the more the parents disagreed with regard to their socialization
values, the less involved the fathers were in their children’s education for all types of involve-
ment except academic home-based involvement. Inconsistency, however, was unrelated to
mothers’ involvement. Similarly, earlier studies found that fathers’ involvement in taking care
of younger children depends on the general family atmosphere and on the quality of the relation-
ship (cf. Carlson & McLanahan, 2002; Coiro & Emery, 1998; Flouri & Buchanan, 2003; Nelson
et al., 2002; NICHD Early Child Care Research Network, 2000). The present study contributes
to the literature by showing that fathers’ involvement in education is also vulnerable to incon-
sistency in socialization values, which could reflect a more negative family atmosphere in gen-
eral. Fathers’ direct academic involvement was not related to parental value inconsistency or
their value orientation.

Parenting Practices as Predictors of Involvement

Positive practices were the most consistent predictors of parental involvement in children’s edu-
cation, predicting all four involvement dimensions for both mothers and fathers. This suggests that
parents who are generally supportive and encourage their children to discuss problems and
difficulties (i.e., give their child the feeling of belonging; Skinner et al., 2005) also help children
with their homework, take time and care to participate in school events, and are interested in tea-
chers’ opinions (cf. Noack, 2004; Skinner et al., 2005; Steinberg et al., 1992). The finding that the
parents with high behavioral control engaged in more discussions with teachers may refer to the
possibility that they search for more information about their child or that they would like to coor-
dinate their activities with the school demands. High behavioral control in combination with
positive practices is a feature of the authoritative parenting style, which has been found to be linked
to higher parental involvement in children’s education (Noack, 2004; Steinberg et al., 1992).
Behavioral control additionally predicted paternal school-based involvement but maternal
home-based general involvement; however, the relations were not significantly different for par-
ents. However, mothers and fathers differed in the ways in which psychological control was
related to some types of involvement. What is surprising is that fathers with higher psychological
control were more involved in their child’s educational process at home (for similar results in
China, see Cheung & Pomerantz, 2011). High psychological control is a feature of an authori-
tarian parenting style with an emphasis on obedience, the implementation of manipulative
 PARENTAL INVOLVEMENT IN CHILDREN’S EDUCATION 15

techniques, and the use of guilt induction (see Barber, 1996; Baumrind, 1966; Darling &
Steinberg, 1993; Skinner et al., 2005; Soenens & Vansteenkiste, 2010). and thus it is not sup-
portive of autonomous development. However, it is related to a generally high need to control
the child’s behavior. One can only hypothesize that fathers with higher psychological control
check their children’s homework and other activities. Still, it should be emphasized that fathers
in general showed low use of psychological control. The question of whether such activities are
supportive of children’s learning needs to be examined in the future.

Limitations

One should also highlight some limitations of the present study. First, our study was not longi-
tudinal, and one may only hypothesize about the direction of effects. Future longitudinal studies
are needed to examine the role of socialization values and parenting in influencing the changes
in different types of involvement. Second, we studied only a set of parental activities at home
and at school that might play an important role in children’s school adaptation and success.
Many other aspects of parental school involvement were not addressed in the present study
(e.g., communicating with teachers via the Internet, discussing education and learning with a
child). Also, parental behavior is likely to be influenced by children’s own characteristics
(e.g., highly able and independent children do not need much assistance). Third, the parents
in the present study had to pick five values from the predetermined 17-item list, but we paid
attention mainly to those six items related to social and self-direction values. In addition, the
participants might have selected more qualities if we had not limited their choice. Fourth, we
used only self-report questionnaires with rating scales to examine parenting practices and
involvement. However, the meaning of ‘‘frequently’’ and so on as related to the use of specific
practices may have different meanings in different sociocultural contexts and families. Our
understanding of the findings could benefit from using more specific scales (e.g., using ‘‘every
day’’ instead of ‘‘frequently’’) and other measures besides self-reports (e.g., teacher reports,
reports of activity frequency) and could also benefit from further qualitative studies (e.g., inter-
views with parents, teachers, or children). Fifth, we could analyze only the data from families
with two responding parents. Thus, the results cannot be generalized to all intact families. Sixth,
this study was carried out in a country that has evidenced rapid transitions in the past 20 years.
Future studies should test whether our results are applicable to other sociocultural contexts.
Lastly, we did not study children. In the future, relations between values, practices, and different
types of involvement should be examined together with children’s academic outcomes.

Conclusions

As parental involvement has been found to have a major impact on a child’s educational accom-
plishments and well-being (Hoover-Dempsey et al., 2010; Reynolds & Shlafer, 2010; Tan &
Goldberg, 2009; Waanders et al., 2007), enhancement of home–school collaboration should
be a priority of today’s schools. Building cooperation between teachers and parents is especially
important when children start their school career, as it helps to make the transition to school
smoother and facilitate adaptation, which in turn has a positive impact on children’s future
development (see Jimerson, Egeland, & Teo, 1999). Today, the supportive role of the activities
16 KIKAS, TULVISTE, AND PEETS

of both parents in children’s developmental outcomes is acknowledged. However, like fathers in

other countries (Hoffert et al., 2002; Hung, 2005; Tam, 2009), fathers in the present study were
less involved in their children’s educational process than mothers. Thus, it is important to find
new ways to incorporate both mothers and fathers into children’s educational activities.
The most important finding of our study is that fathers’ involvement is sensitive to incon-
sistency with spousal values but also to their education level. Our finding emphasizes the
importance of concordance in mother–father values, which may be related to the general positive
atmosphere and concordant activities in the family. For teachers, it emphasizes the need to
cooperate with both spouses and discuss broader topics (e.g., their values and practices). The
findings additionally indicate the importance of finding ways to collaborate more with less
educated parents. One possibility is to educate parents in topics of child development, for
instance, discussing the importance of positive encouragement and support but also behavioral
control in children’s adaptive development.

FUNDING

Research for this article was supported by the Estonian Research Council (Grants No. IUT03-03,
SF0180025s08, and ETF9033).

REFERENCES

Anderson, K., & Minke, K. (2007). Parent involvement in education: Toward an understanding of parents’ decision mak-
ing. Journal of Educational Research, 100, 311–323.
Aunola, K., & Nurmi, J.-E. (2004). Maternal affection moderates the impact of psychological control on child’s
mathematical performance. Developmental Psychology, 40, 965–978.
Barber, B. K. (1996). Parental psychological control: Revisiting a neglected construct. Child Development, 67,
3296–3319.
Barber, B. K., Olsen, J. A., & Shagle, S. (1994). Associations between parental psychological control and behavioral
control and youth internalized and externalized behaviors. Child Development, 65, 1120–1136.
Baumrind, D. (1966). Effects of authoritative parental control on child behavior. Child Development, 37, 887–907.
Block, J., Block, J., & Morrison, A. (1981). Parental agreement-disagreement on child-rearing orientations and
gender-related personality correlates in children. Child Development, 52, 965–974.
Bronfenbrenner, U., & Morris, P. A. (1998). The ecology of developmental processes. In W. Damon (Series Ed.) &
R. M. Lerner (Ed.), Handbook of child psychology: Vol. 1. Theoretical models of human development (5th ed.,
pp. 993–1028). New York, NY: Wiley.
Carlson, M., & McLanahan, S. (2002). Fragile families, father involvement, and public policy. In C. Tamis-LeMonda &
N. Cabrera (Eds.), Handbook of father involvement: Multidisciplinary perspectives (pp. 461–488). Mahwah, NJ:
Erlbaum.
Cheung, C., & Pomerantz, E. M. (2011). Parents’ involvement in children’s learning in the United States and China:
Implications for children’s academic and emotional adjustment. Child Development, 82, 932–950.
Coiro, M., & Emery, R. (1998). Do marriage problems affect fathering more than mothering? A quantitative and
qualitative review. Clinical Child and Family Psychology Review, 1, 23–40.
Daniel, E., Schiefer, D., Moellering, A., Benish-Weisman, M., Boehnke, K., & Knafo, A. (2012). Value differentiation
in adolescence: The role of age and cultural complexity. Child Development, 83, 322–336.
Darling, N., & Steinberg, L. (1993). Parenting style as context: An integrative model. Psychological Bulletin, 113,
487–486.
Davis-Kean, P. E. (2005). The influence of parent education and income on child achievement: The indirect role of
parent expectations and the home environment. Journal of Family Psychology, 19, 294–304.
 PARENTAL INVOLVEMENT IN CHILDREN’S EDUCATION 17

Downer, J., & Myers, S. (2010). Application of developmental=ecological model to family-school partnership. In
S. Christenson & A. Reschly (Eds.), Handbook of school-family partnerships (pp. 3–29). New York, NY: Routledge.
Epstein, J. L. (1995). School=family=community partnerships: Caring for the children we share. Phi Delta Kappan,
76, 701–713.
Fantuzzo, J. W., Tighe, E., & Childs, S. (2000). Family Involvement Questionnaire: A multivariate assessment of family
participation in early childhood education. Journal of Educational Psychology, 92, 367–376.
Flouri, E., & Buchanan, A. (2003). What predicts fathers’ involvement with their children? A prospective study of intact
families. British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 21, 81–98.
Gaunt, R. (2005). The role of value priorities in paternal and maternal involvement in child care. Journal of Marriage and
Family, 67, 643–655.
Green, C., Walker, J., Hoover-Dempsey, K., & Sandler, H. (2007). Parents’ motivations for involvement in children’s
education: An empirical test of a theoretical model of parental involvement. Journal of Educational Psychology,
99, 532–544.
Greenfield, P. M., Keller, H., Fuligni, A., & Maynard, A. (2003). Cultural development through universal developmental
tasks. Annual Review of Psychology, 54, 1–23.
Greenfield, P. M., Quiroz, B., & Raeff, C. (2000). Cross-cultural conflict and harmony in the social construction of the
child. In S. Harkness, C. Raeff, & C. M. Super (Eds.), New directions for child and adolescent development: Vol. 87.
Variability in the social construction of the child (pp. 93–108). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Grief, J., & Grief, G. (2004). Including fathers in school psychology literature: A review of four school psychology
journals. Psychology in the Schools, 41, 575–580.
Hill, N. (2010). Culturally-based worldviews, family processes, and family-school interactions. In S. Christenson &
A. Reschly (Eds.), Handbook of school-family partnerships (pp. 101–127). New York, NY: Routledge.
Hirsijärvi, S., & Perälä-Littunen, S. (2001). Parental child-rearing beliefs. European Journal of Psychology of Education,
16, 87–116.
Hoff, E., Laursen, B., & Tardif, T. (2002). Socioeconomic status and parenting. In M. Bornstein (Ed.), Handbook of
parenting: Vol. 2. Biology and ecology of parenting (2nd ed., pp. 231–252). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Hoffert, S., Pleck, J., Stueve, J., Bianchi, S., & Sayer, L. (2002). The demography of fathers: What fathers do. In C.
Tamis-LeMonda & N. Cabrera (Eds.), Handbook of father involvement: Multidisciplinary perspectives (pp. 33–62).
Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Holden, G. W. (1995). Parenting attitudes toward childrearing. In M. H. Bornstein (Ed.), Handbook of parenting: Vol. 3.
Status and social conditions of parenting (pp. 359–392). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Hoover-Dempsey, K., Whitaker, M., & Ice, C. (2010). Motivation and commitment to family-school partnerships.
In S. Christenson & A. Reschly (Eds.), Handbook of school-family partnerships (pp. 30–60). New York,
NY: Routledge.
Hung, C.-L. (2005). Family background, parental involvement and environmental influences on Taiwanese children. The
Alberta Journal of Educational Research, 51, 261–276.
Jimerson, S., Egeland, B., & Teo, A. (1999). A longitudinal study of achievement trajectories: Factors associated with
change. Journal of Educational Psychology, 91, 116–126.
Junefelt, K., & Tulviste, T. (1997). Regulation and praise in American, Estonian, and Swedish mother-child interaction.
Mind, Culture, and Activity, 4, 24–33.
Kagitçibaşi, Ç. (1996). Family and human development across cultures. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Kagitçibaşi, Ç. (2005). Autonomy and relatedness in cultural context. Implications for self and family. Journal of
Cross-Cultural Psychology, 36, 403–422.
Kelly, J. (2000). Children’s adjustment in conflicted marriage and divorce: A decade review of research. Journal of the
American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 39, 963–973.
Kikas, E., Peets, K., & Niilo, A. (2011). Assessing Estonian mothers’ involvement in their children’s education and trust
in teachers. Early Child Development and Care, 181, 1079–1094.
Kohn, M. L. (1977). Class and conformity: A study in values (2nd ed.). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Levin, I., Levy-Shiff, R., Appelbaum-Peled, T., Katz, I., Komar, M., & Meiran, N. (1997). Antecedents and conse-
quences of maternal involvement in children’s homework: A longitudinal analysis. Journal of Applied Developmental
Psychology, 18, 207–227.
Manz, P., Fantuzzo, J., & Power, T. (2004). Multidimensional assessment of family involvement among urban
elementary students. Journal of School Psychology, 42, 461–475.
18 KIKAS, TULVISTE, AND PEETS

Muthén, L. K., & Muthén, B. O. (1998–2010). Mplus user’s guide (6th ed.). Los Angeles, CA: Muthén &
Muthén.
National Institute of Child Health and Human Development Early Care Research Network. (2000). Factors associa-
ted with fathers’ caregiving activities and sensitivity with young children. Journal of Family Psychology, 14,
200–219.
Nelson, T., Clampet-Lundquist, S., & Edin, K. (2002). Sustaining fragile fatherhood: Father involvement among
low-income, noncustodial African-American fathers in Philadelphia. In C. Tamis-LeMonda & N. Cabrera (Eds.),
Handbook of father involvement: Multidisciplinary perspectives (pp. 525–554). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Noack, P. (2004). The family context of preadolescents’ orientations toward education: Effects of maternal orientations
and behavior. Journal of Educational Psychology, 96, 714–722.
Reynolds, A., & Shlafer, R. (2010). Parent involvement in early education. In S. Christenson & A. Reschly (Eds.), Hand-
book of school-family partnerships (pp. 158–174). New York, NY: Routledge.
Roberts, G., Block, J., & Block, J. (1984). Continuity and change in parents’ child-rearing practices. Child Development,
55, 586–597.
Seginer, R. (2006). Parents’ educational involvement: A developmental ecology perspective. Parenting: Science and
Practice, 6, 1–48.
Sénéchal, M., & LeFevre, J. (2002). Parental involvement in the development of children’s reading skill: A five-year
longitudinal study. Child Development, 73, 445–460.
Shor, R. (2006). Physical punishment as perceived by parents in Russia: Implications for professionals involved in the
care of children. Early Child Development and Care, 176, 429–439.
Skinner, E., Johnson, S., & Snyder, T. (2005). Six dimensions of parenting: A motivational model. Parenting: Science
and Practice, 5, 175–235.
Soenens, B., & Vansteenkiste, M. (2010). A theoretical upgrade of the concept of parental psychological control: Pro-
posing new insights on the basis of self-determination theory. Developmental Review, 30, 74–99.
Steinberg, L., Lamborn, S., Dornbusch, S., & Darling, N. (1992). Impact of parenting practices on adolescent
achievement: Authoritative parenting, school involvement, and encouragement to succeed. Child Development, 63,
1266–1281.
Tam, V. W. (2009). A comparison of fathers’ and mothers’ contributions in the prediction of academic performance of
school-age children in Hong Kong. International Journal of Psychology, 44, 147–156.
Tan, E., & Goldberg, W. (2009). Parental school involvement in relation to children’s grades and adaptation to school.
Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 30, 442–453.
Tulviste, T. (2004). Socio-cultural variation in mothers’ control over children’s behavior. Ethos, 32, 34–50.
Tulviste, T. (2013). Socialization values of mothers and fathers: Does the child’s age matter? Trames: Journal of the
Humanities and Social Sciences, 17, 129–140.
Tulviste, T., & Ahtonen, M. (2007). Child-rearing values of Estonian and Finnish mothers and fathers. Journal of
Cross-Cultural Psychology, 38, 137–155.
Tulviste, T., & Kikas, E. (2010). Qualities to be developed in children at home and at school. Journal of Applied
Developmental Psychology, 31, 315–321.
Tulviste, T., Mizera, L., De Geer, B., & Tryggvason, M.-T. (2007). Child-rearing goals of Estonian, Finnish, and
Swedish mothers. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 48, 487–497.
Waanders, C., Mendez, J., & Downer, J. (2007). Parent characteristics, economic stress and neighborhood context
as predictors of parent involvement in preschool children’s education. Journal of School Psychology, 45, 619–636.
Wang, S., & Tamis-LeMonda, C. S. (2003). Do child-rearing values in Taiwan and the United States reflect cultural
values of collectivism and individualism? Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 34, 629–642.
Yamamoto, Y., Holloway, S., & Suzuki, S. (2006). Maternal involvement in preschool children’s education in Japan:
Relation to parenting beliefs and socioeconomic status. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 21, 332–346.
Copyright of Early Education & Development is the property of Taylor & Francis Ltd and its
content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the
copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email
articles for individual use.