Mothers’ beliefs about children’s learning in Hong Kong and the United States

Abstract

Chinese and American mothers’ beliefs about children’s learning and parents’ role in it were examined using notions salient in Chinese culture. Mothers from Hong Kong (n = 66) and the United States (n = 69) indicated their endorsement of the ideas that children’s learning reflects children’s morality, and parents’ support of children’s learning reflects parents’ love and duty. Mothers also reported on the extent to which their worth is based on children’s performance. Chinese (vs. American) mothers believed more that children’s learning reflects morality and parents’ support of children’s learning reflects love; these differences accounted for their feelings of worth being more dependent on children’s performance. Chinese (vs. American) mothers believed less that parents’ support is a duty.

Keywords

China contingent self-worth culture learning parental beliefs

A wealth of research, mostly conducted in the United States, has documented the important role of parents’ beliefs in children’s development (for reviews, see Bornstein, 2006; Bugental & Johnston, 2000). One arena of children’s development receiving substantial attention is the academic arena (for reviews, see Pomerantz, Moorman, & Cheung, 2012; Wigfield, Eccles, Schiefele, Roeser, & Davis-Kean, 2006). Investigators concerned with differences in East Asian and American parenting have been particularly interested in parents’ beliefs in this arena (e.g., Hess, Chih-Mei, & McDevitt, 1987; Holloway & Hess, 1985; Stevenson, Chen, & Lee, 1993). Because East Asia and the United States have historically been characterized by distinct ideas about learning, presumably due to the different cultural ideologies prevalent in the two regions, East Asian and American parents may hold different beliefs about children’s learning, which they may transmit to children.

Focusing on Chinese and European American mothers, the current research was designed to examine whether there are differences in their beliefs about children’s learning and parents’ role in it, with emphasis on two ideas that may be particularly salient in Chinese culture: (1) Children’s learning reflects their morality and (2) Parents’ support of children’s learning is indicative of parents’ love and duty. The implications of such beliefs for mothers’ views of themselves were also evaluated. We investigated whether the heightened tendency for Chinese (vs. American) mothers to see children’s learning as reflecting morality and parents’ support of children’s learning as indicative of their love and duty would account for Chinese (vs. American) mothers’ heightened tendency to base their worth on children’s performance, which appears to contribute to differences in Chinese and American parenting (Ng, Pomerantz, & Deng, in press).

Parents’ beliefs about learning

Children’s learning as reflecting morality

Confucian and Greek philosophies have historically influenced China and the United States, respectively. There are major differences in how the Confucian and Greek philosophers approached learning (see Tweed & Lehman, 2002). Confucius emphasized the cultivation of one’s character through learning, whereas Socrates focused on pursuing the truth and gaining knowledge (Tweed & Lehman, 2002). To Confucius, learning was essentially a moral endeavor, the purpose being to develop virtuous qualities such that one could attain self-perfection and be a noble person (Li, 2005). As Li (2002) documented by asking college students in mainland China about their beliefs regarding learning, learning and morality are embedded in each other in Chinese culture: Individuals engaged in learning are expected to become more virtuous; conversely, virtuous individuals are expected to value learning, thereby seeking to learn more.

Integral to the Confucian view of learning is the high value placed on effort (Ho, 1994). Given that it is practically impossible to attain perfection of the self, what matters is continually making the effort toward such perfection; diligence in learning is thus considered a virtue (Li, 2003). Research suggests that this idea about learning may be socialized at an early age. For example, when Chinese and European American preschoolers are presented with stories of protagonists that are persistent versus give up in their learning, Chinese (vs. European American) children are more likely to favor the persistent protagonist over the one that gives up, believing that the persistent one is more virtuous (Li, 2004; see also Tao & Hong, 2000). In line with research showing that Chinese tend to attribute performance to effort (e.g., Chen & Stevenson, 1995; Hess et al., 1987), not only is diligence imbued with moral meaning, it is also believed to be instrumental for achievement (Ho, 1994). As such, achievement can be indicative of one’s morality as it is assumed to reflect one’s diligence in pursuing self-perfection through learning.

Parents’ role in children’s learning

Given that children’s education is intertwined with their moral development in Chinese culture, it is not surprising that Chinese parents believe they should play a central role in children’s academic pursuit. Chao (1994) proposed that Chinese parenting can be understood through the indigenous notion of guan. According to Chao, guan, translated as “to govern,” “to care for,” and “to love,” is considered a responsibility of parents in Chinese culture and is manifested in parents’ chiao shun (training) of children–that is, the continual monitoring and correcting of children’s behavior to ensure that children are not falling short of societal standards. Because of the emphasis on learning in China, such training often involves making sure children exert the effort necessary to do well in school (Chao, 1994).

Consistent with the idea that Chinese parents have a culturally prescribed role to support children’s learning, Chao (1996) reported that Chinese immigrant mothers believe they need to invest in and make sacrifices for children’s achievement. Such beliefs appear to be translated into actual practice: Parents of Chinese (vs. European) descent show heightened involvement in children’s learning (e.g., Chen & Stevenson, 1989; Cheung & Pomerantz, 2011; Ng, Pomerantz, & Lam, 2007). Such involvement on the part of Chinese parents is likely to be guided by guan. Chao (1994, p. 1116) reported that immigrant Chinese mothers were more likely than European American mothers to endorse that “mothers primarily express love by helping children succeed, especially in school.” Thus, it is possible that parents’ support of children’s learning is seen as motivated by parents’ love for children in Chinese culture.

Implications of parents’ beliefs about learning for their child-based worth

Crocker and colleagues (Crocker & Knight, 2005; Crocker & Wolfe, 2001) maintain that individuals often base their feelings of worth on particularly significant areas of their lives; these areas regulate their behavior, leading to efforts to minimize failure and maximize success in them (see also Kernis, 2003). One area on which parents base their feelings of worth is children’s performance, with meaningful variation among European American mothers (Grolnick, Price, Beiswenger, & Sauck, 2007). Mothers’ tendency to base their worth on children’s performance is stronger in China than the United States, with such a difference accounting for the well-documented (for reviews, see Ng et al., in press; Pomerantz, Ng, & Wang, 2008) tendency for Chinese (vs. American) parents to be more psychologically controlling–that is, attempting to regulate children’s psychological lives (Ng et al., in press).

Chinese parents may base their worth on children’s performance more than do American parents in part because they believe more strongly that children’s learning reflects morality and parents’ support of children’s learning reflects love and duty. In both China and the United States, the more parents believe that children’s learning reflects morality, the more they may see children’s performance in school as indicating that parents have raised children to be morally-upright members of society. Similarly, if parents believe the support they provide for children’s learning reflects love and duty, children’s performance in school may attest to their love for children as well as their fulfillment of their parental duties. Given the importance of morality as well as parental love and duty in China and the United States, when parents view children’s learning as reflecting morality and parents’ support of children’s learning as reflecting love and duty, they may base their worth on children’s performance in school in both countries.

Overview of the current research

The current research was designed to investigate the idea that parents in China and the United States have different beliefs about children’s learning and parents’ role in it, with attention to beliefs that may be particularly salient in Chinese culture–that is, children’s learning reflects children’s morality and parents’ support of children’s learning is indicative of parents’ love and duty. Empirical evidence in regards to such beliefs is scarce, despite the widely shared conjecture that such notions influence parenting (e.g., Cheung & Pomerantz, 2011; Huntsinger, Jose, Larson, Krieg, & Shaligram, 2000; Ng et al., 2007). Two specific aims guided the research. The first was to evaluate if Chinese and American parents differ in their beliefs about children’s learning and parents’ role in it. It was anticipated that Chinese (vs. American) parents would be more likely to view children’s learning as reflecting children’s morality and parents’ support of children’s learning as indicative of parents’ love and duty.

The second aim was to examine if such differences in parents’ beliefs underlie the difference in the extent to which their feelings of worth are dependent on children’s performance. Based on prior research, it was expected that Chinese parents’ would base their worth on children’s performance more than would their American counterparts because of their beliefs about children’s learning. Mothers of elementary-school children in Hong Kong and the United States reported on their endorsement of the two beliefs about learning (i.e., children’s learning as reflecting morality and parents’ support of children’s learning as reflecting love and duty) as well as the extent to which their worth is based on children’s performance.

Method

Participants

Participants were 135 mothers of fourth- and fifth-grade children (see Ng et al., 2007). Sixty-six mothers resided in Hong Kong (mothers’ mean age = 40.55 years; children's mean age = 9.97 years; 45% girls) and 69 resided in the Midwestern United States (mothers’ mean age = 39.41 years; children's mean age = 9.76 years; 39% girls). American mothers were all of European descent, except for one of Hispanic descent. Chinese mothers were generally less educated than their American counterparts, reflecting the fact that college degrees were less common in Hong Kong when mothers were of college age. Five percent of Chinese mothers and 22% of American mothers had an advanced degree (e.g., MA or PhD), 8% of Chinese mothers and 40% of American mothers had a college degree, and 73% of Chinese mothers and 38% of American mothers had a high school diploma. Household incomes in the two countries were generally reflective of the middle class at the time the research was conducted. According to mothers, in Hong Kong, household annual incomes ranged from HK$240,000 or below to HK$1,200,000 to HK$1,440,000, with a modal income of HK$240,000 to HK$480,000. In the United States, the range was $20,000 or below to $160,000 or above, with a modal income of $80,000 to $100,000. Most mothers worked outside the home at least part-time (71% in China and 68% in the United States) and were married (91% in China and 87% in the United States). Although the two samples differed in terms of mothers’ educational attainment, they were similar in terms of representing the middle class of each country, with similar rates of employment and divorce. Notably, mothers’ educational attainment was not associated with any of the central constructs when adjusting for country, |r|s < .09, ns; thus, not surprisingly, when it was included as a covariate in the central analyses, it did not account for any of the findings.

Procedure and measures

Mothers received a set of questionnaires in the mail, which they returned when they visited the lab for another study (see Ng et al., 2007). The measures were originally in English. To generate the Chinese versions, standard translation and back-translation procedures (Brislin, 1980) were followed by a team of native English- and Chinese-speakers, with repeated discussion to modify the wording of items to ensure the equivalence of the measures across the two countries (Erkut, 2010). The means and standard deviations of the measures are presented in Table 1.

Table 1.

Chinese and American mothers’ beliefs about learning and their child-based worth.

	Chinese		American
	M	SD	M	SD	d	95% CI
Morality of children’s learning	4.04_a	0.88	3.40_b	1.00	0.67	0.33, 1.02
Parents’ support of children’s learning as love	3.58_a	0.83	3.14_b	0.85	0.52	0.18, 0.87
Parents’ support of children’s learning as duty	4.97_a	0.89	5.48_b	0.77	−0.61	−0.96, −0.26
Child-based worth	3.68_a	1.04	3.10_b	1.35	0.48	0.13, 0.82

Note. An effect size (d) of .20 is small, .50 is medium, and .80 is large (Cohen, 1992). Means with different subscripts are significantly (p < .01) different between countries.

Beliefs about learning

Although there has been much theoretical attention to the beliefs about learning studied in the current research, the scarce empirical work to date has not relied on multi-item scales that can be practically administered to parents (Chao, 1994; Tao & Hong, 2000). Thus, new measures of beliefs about learning were developed for this study by a team of Chinese and European Americans who were familiar with both cultural backgrounds as well as the constructs. In a separate study of Chinese and American mothers (N = 215), examination of a subset of the items (with minor wording adjustments) for each measure of mothers’ beliefs about learning used in the current study indicated that, in addition to being internally reliable as reported below, the measures are stable over a year (rs = .42 to .70, ps < .001; Ng & Pomerantz, 2012). Their validity is evident in the fact that, adjusting for country, mothers’ belief about the morality of children’s learning was not associated with their involvement in children’s learning (rs = .05 and .03, ns), but beliefs about parents’ support of children’s learning as love and duty were (rs = .19 to .30, ps < .01); all three beliefs were associated with mothers’ heightened investment in children's school (performance rs = .20 to .32, ps < .01), with the exception of one time point for viewing parents’ support of children’s learning as indicating love (r = .13, ns; Ng & Pomerantz, 2012).

Mothers’ beliefs about the morality of children’s learning were assessed with eight statements about children’s effort and performance in school as reflective of whether children were good or bad children (e.g. “If kids don’t try their hardest in school, they are probably bad kids;” for the full list of items, see Table A1 in the Appendix). Mothers rated their agreement with each statement (1 = Very much disagree to 7 = Very much agree). The mean was taken, with higher numbers indicating greater endorsement of the idea that children’s learning reflects their morality (αs = .70 in Hong Kong and .83 in the United States).

Mothers’ beliefs about parents’ support of children’s learning as love were examined with seven statements describing how parents’ assistance with and concern about children’s learning reflect parents’ love for children (e.g., “If parents love their children, they should try their best to help their children to do well in school;” for the full list of items, see Table A2 in the Appendix). Mothers rated their agreement with each statement (1 = Very much disagree to 7 = Very much agree). The mean was taken, with higher numbers indicating greater endorsement of the idea that parents’ support of children’s learning reflects parents’ love for children (αs = .63 in Hong Kong and .79 in the United States).

Mothers’ beliefs about parents’ support of children’s learning as duty were assessed with 12 statements describing parents’ assistance with and concern about children’s learning as the duty of parents (e.g., “It is parents’ duty to teach children how to do their homework;” for the full list of items, see Table A3 in the Appendix). Mothers rated their agreement with each statement (1 = Very much disagree to 7 = Very much agree). The mean was taken, with higher numbers indicating greater endorsement of the idea that parents’ support of children’s learning is parents’ duty (αs = .82 in Hong Kong and .85 in the United States).

Child-based worth

The extent to which mothers based their worth on children’s performance was examined using items from Eaton and Pomerantz’s (2004) scale. Mothers rated (1 = Very much disagree to 7 = Very much agree) 10 statements about whether their feelings of worth depend on children’s success and failure (e.g., “When my daughter succeeds, I feel good about myself;” for the full set of items, see Ng et al., in press).The mean was taken, with higher numbers indicating greater child-based worth (αs = .82 and .93 in Hong Kong and the United States). Prior research using these items indicates that in addition to being internally reliable, they are temporally reliable; moreover, the items possess discriminant and convergent validity (e.g., they are moderately associated with mothers’ endorsement of performance goals) as well as predictive validity (i.e., they predict psychologically controlling parenting concurrently and longitudinally; Ng et al., in press).¹

Results

Following a preliminary set of analyses in which we evaluated the equivalence of the measures between China and the United States, we conducted two sets of analyses to test the main hypotheses. In the first, we examined whether Chinese mothers’ beliefs about learning differed from those of their European American counterparts; we also tested whether there were differences, as in prior research, in their tendency to base their worth on children’s performance. In the second set, we evaluated whether the differences between Chinese and European American mothers’ beliefs about learning mediated the differences in their child-based worth.

Measurement equivalence

Two-group Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) in the context of Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) was conducted to assess the metric and intercept invariance of the measures between China and the United States. For each measure, the latent construct was based on four parcels; these parcels comprised two to three items determined randomly, except for one parcel for the parental support as love measure that contained only one item. A set of nested models was examined for each measure with comparisons between unconstrained and constrained models. These models were identical, except that the parameters of the unconstrained model were freely estimated, whereas the factor loadings and intercepts of the constrained model were forced to be equal between countries. The models all fit the data well, χ²(N = 135)s < 10.35, CFIs > .99, RMSEAs < .02.Moreover, the fit of each unconstrained model did not differ significantly from that of the corresponding constrained model, as indicated by the chi-square difference tests, Δχ² s < 7.70, ns. Thus, the measures possess metric and intercept invariance across China and the United States, allowing for valid comparisons of the means and associations between the two countries.

Differences between Chinese and American mothers

Beliefs about learning

In a set of preliminary analyses, we explored the associations among the beliefs about learning. As shown in Table 2, the more mothers viewed children’s learning as reflective of morality, the more they saw parents’ support of children’s learning as reflective of love; although this trend was significant among American but not Chinese mothers, the difference between the two did not reach significance, Z = 1.90, ns. In both countries, mothers’ beliefs about the morality of learning were not associated with their beliefs about parents’ support of children’s learning as their duty. Chinese mothers who viewed such support as love also viewed it as a duty, but this was not the case for American mothers, with the association differing significantly in the two countries, Z = 2.30, p < .05.

Table 2.

Correlations among mothers’ beliefs and child-based worth.

	1	2	3	4
1. Morality of children’s learning	–	.44***	.08	.46***
2. Support of children’s learning as love	.13	–	−.04	.33**
3. Support of children’s learning as duty	.11	.35**	–	−.06
4. Child-based worth	.35**	.13	.14	–

Note. Correlations for the Chinese sample are below the diagonal; those for the American sample are above the diagonal.

** p < .01; *** p < .001

A Multivariate Analysis of Variance (MANOVA) was conducted on the beliefs about the morality of children’s learning, parental support of children’s learning as love, and parental support of children’s learning as duty. The MANOVA yielded a multivariate effect of country, Wilks’ lambda = .78, F(3, 130) = 12.10, p < .001. As anticipated, the univariate tests revealed that Chinese mothers believed more than did American mothers that children’s learning reflects their morality (see Table 1), F(1, 132) = 14.81, p < .001. Also consistent with expectations, Chinese (vs. American) mothers viewed parents’ support of children’s learning as indicative of parents’ love for children, F(1, 132) = 9.22, p < .01. Surprisingly, Chinese mothers were less likely than their American counterparts to report that such support is parents’ duty, F(1, 132) = 12.77, p < .001. An examination of the findings within each country showed that although mothers in both countries indicated that parents’ support of children’s learning is more an act of duty than love, ts > 11.40, ps < .001, this was particularly true of American mothers, given that they were more likely than their Chinese counterparts to report that such support is a duty.

Child-based worth

It was expected that, as in prior research, Chinese (vs. American) mothers’ feelings of worth would be more dependent on children’s performance. An Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) yielded a main effect of country, F(1, 134) = 7.82, p < .01: Chinese mothers based their worth on children’s performance more than did American mothers (see Table 1).

Mediation processes

To examine if the differences in Chinese and American mothers’ beliefs about the morality of children’s learning and parents’ support of children’s learning as love underlie the difference in their child-based worth, Baron and Kenny’s (1986; see also Kenny, Kashy, & Bolger, 1998) guidelines for detecting mediation were followed. These guidelines require that the mediator (i.e., mothers’ beliefs) and the dependent variable (i.e., child-based worth) are associated when adjusting for the independent variable (i.e., country), and that the association between the independent variable and the dependent variable is reduced when adjusting for the mediator. Although the Sobel test has been widely used to test the significance of the indirect effect (Baron & Kenny, 1986), the nonparametric resampling procedure of bootstrapping is recommended, especially when the sample size is not large as in the current case (MacKinnon, Lockwood, Hoffman, West, & Sheets, 2002; see also Preacher & Hayes, 2008). Bootstrap analyses were conducted with 5,000 samples to test the significance of the indirect effect (i.e., from country to beliefs about learning to child-based worth).There were no differences between China and the United States in the associations between each of the beliefs about learning and child-based worth (see Table 2), Zs < 1.23, ns.

As shown in Figure 1, mothers’ belief about the morality of children’s learning contributed to the country difference in mothers’ child-based worth. Such a belief was positively associated with mothers’ child-based worth when analyses adjusted for country. When adjusting for this belief, the difference in Chinese and American mothers’ child-based worth was reduced such that it was no longer significant, with the ratio of the indirect effect to the total effect being .58. Bootstrapping indicated that the indirect effect was significant, 95% (bias-corrected and accelerated) CI = .15 to .60. Mothers’ belief about parents’ support of children’s learning as indicating love also appeared to contribute to the difference in Chinese and American mothers’ child-based worth (see Figure 2). Such a belief was positively associated with mothers’ child-based worth when analyses adjusted for country. Once analyses adjusted for this belief, the country difference in mothers’ child-based worth was no longer significant; the ratio of the indirect effect to the total effect was .26, with the bootstrap analysis indicating a significant indirect effect, 95% (bias-corrected and accelerated) CI = .04 to .35.

Figure 1.

Mothers’ belief about the morality of children’s learning as a mediator of the country difference in mothers’ child-based worth.

Figure 2.

Mothers’ belief about parents’ support of children’s learning as love as a mediator of the country difference in mothers’ child-based worth.

Given that both mothers’ beliefs about the morality of learning and parents’ support of children’s learning as reflecting love contributed to the difference in Chinese and American mothers’ child-based worth, an additional mediation model was tested with the two beliefs entered simultaneously as mediators. Results indicated an indirect effect via mothers’ belief about the morality of children’s learning, β(130) = .38, p < .001, 95% (bias-corrected and accelerated) CI = .12 to .58. However, the indirect effect via mothers’ belief about parents’ support as reflecting love just failed to reach significance, 95% (bias-corrected and accelerated) CI = .00 to .26, given that such a belief no longer predicted mothers’ child-based worth, β(130) = .14, ns. Notably, bootstrap analyses comparing the two indirect effects did not reveal a significant difference, 95% CI = −.02 to .51, suggesting that the two did not differ sizably.

Discussion

Although differences in Chinese and American parenting practices related to children’s learning have been attributed to cultural beliefs about learning and parents’ role in it (e.g., Cheung & Pomerantz, 2011; Huntsinger et al., 2000; Ng et al., 2007), there has been little empirical examination of such beliefs. The current research demonstrated that Chinese and American mothers differed in their beliefs about learning and parents’ role in it. Chinese mothers saw learning as a moral endeavor that parents support out of love more than did American mothers, who surprisingly viewed such support as a duty more than did Chinese mothers. Notably, in both China and the United States, the more mothers believed children’s learning reflects morality and parents’ support of children’s learning indicates love, the more they felt their worth depended on children’s performance, with no evidence that this relation differed in the two countries. Moreover, Chinese (vs. American) mothers’ stronger tendency to hold such beliefs accounted for their tendency to base their worth on children’s performance more.

The current research provided empirical evidence that two Chinese ideas about learning—children’s learning as reflecting morality and parents’ support of children’s learning as indicating love—are indeed held more by Chinese (vs. American) parents, contributing to Chinese parents' tendency to base their worth on children’s performance more. These beliefs appeared to be meaningful for American mothers as well, given that they were similarly associated with mothers’ child-based worth. The results illustrate two important points about going beyond the Western ideas that consistently guide psychological research, which has largely been conducted exclusively in the West (Arnett, 2008; Henrich, Heine, & Norenzayan, 2010). First, such an approach can reveal important concepts in non-Western cultures that may be overlooked using a mainstream approach, but that are relevant. Indeed, Allwood and Berry (2006) have argued that Western psychology is essentially an indigenous psychology, in the sense that it is “culture-bound” (p. 263) and thus limited in its ability to explain the psychology of individuals in non-Western societies. Focusing on research on parenting, Bornstein (2006) also points out that there has been a focus on constructs that “accord with ideals mostly or exclusively appropriate to middle-class, industrialized and developed, Western countries” (p. 899), thereby neglecting cultural diversity in parenting.

Second, stepping outside of a Western framework can also contribute to a fuller understanding of individuals’ behavior in the West by revealing important psychological constructs that have been overlooked but exist nonetheless in Western culture (Leung, 2007). For example, the Chinese notion of guan (Chao, 1994) has been found to be relevant in the West, with American students reporting better psychological functioning the more they perceive their parents as using practices related to guan (Stewart, Bond, Kennard, Ho, & Zaman, 2002). The applicability of Chinese cultural concepts in the West is not surprising given growing evidence that seemingly opposing values often coexist in parenting (Raeff, 2010; Tamis-LeMonda et al., 2008). Many American mothers in the current research believed that children’s learning reflects morality and parental support of children’s learning reflects love, albeit to a lesser extent than did Chinese mothers. Moreover, mothers’ beliefs were meaningfully related to their feelings about themselves in the United States, as was also the case in China.

Notwithstanding Greek philosophies that depict learning as a pursuit of truth and knowledge (Tweed & Lehman, 2002), American parents may associate children’s learning with morality due to influence of the protestant work ethic (Weber, 1959). Because each individual is expected to fulfill their God-given responsibility by utilizing their endowed abilities through hard work, hard work is imbued with moral significance (Furnham, 1987; Heine, 2007). Moreover, American parents may view their support of children’s learning as a duty, because childrearing is considered a God-given responsibility in Protestantism (Rigby, 2004). This may explain why American mothers reported parental support of children’s learning as a duty more than did Chinese mothers. It is also consistent with Hsu’s (1953, p. 80) description of American and Chinese parents’ sense of obligation to children in his pioneering work: “The important thing to Americans is what parents should do for their children; to Chinese, what children should do for their parents.”

Notably, cultural beliefs are unlikely to be static despite their typically long historical roots. Rather, they are likely to be challenged as conflicting values arise with societal development (Greenfield, 2010; Kağitçibaşi, 2011). In the case of China, its modernization, rapid societal changes, and increasing contact with Western learning beliefs are likely to influence parents’ beliefs about learning. Although children’s learning may be seen as a moral endeavor in Chinese culture, Chinese parents also heavily focus on the instrumental value of children’s schoolwork (Fong, 2004). Many Chinese children, whether in the mainland, Taiwan, or Hong Kong, are under insurmountable pressure to achieve in school, which is viewed as a determinant of their future success. Under the One Child Policy, mainland Chinese parents have been reported to increasingly view their only child’s schoolwork as a financial investment that serves to guarantee their future living standard (Fong, 2004). On one hand, it is possible that such an instrumental view of children’s learning may undermine the tendency for parents to view learning as virtuous in itself. On the other, such a view may not conflict with the traditional view of learning as a moral endeavor: In ancient China, although learning was considered a path to self-perfection, performing well in the imperial examination was also a major path to upward mobility (Tweed & Lehman, 2002).

Several limitations of the current research warrant interpreting the results with caution and point to directions for future research. First, because of the limited sample recruited from just one site in each country, additional research is needed to generalize the current findings to larger populations of Chinese and American parents, particularly those not of European descent. Second, we obtained mothers’ reports, but not informants’ reports, of mothers’ beliefs about learning and their child-based worth given that such beliefs and feelings might not be readily observed by others. There are tradeoffs, however, associated with the use of self-reports (e.g., mothers may underreport the extent to which they base their worth on children’s performance). Third, causal conclusions are precluded due to the concurrent design of the study. Future research designed to identify causal direction is needed. Fourth, this research did not assess mothers’ practices. Prior research has linked Chinese and American mothers’ child-based worth to their heightened psychological control (Ng et al., in press); it would be fruitful to identify the role of mothers’ learning beliefs in such parenting as well. Despite these caveats, the current research suggests that mothers’ beliefs about children’s learning and parents’ role in it contribute to the tendency for Chinese mothers to base their worth on children’s performance to a greater extent than do American mothers, which appears to contribute to differences in parenting in China and the United States.

Footnotes

Appendix

Table A3.

Mothers’ beliefs about parents’ support of children’s learning as duty.

1. It is parents’ duty to teach children how to do their homework.

2. Parents have no obligation to help children to do well in school. (reverse-scored)

3. When children struggle with their schoolwork, parents are at fault if they have not provided children with some form of assistance (e.g., helping them or hiring a tutor).

4. It is a parent’s duty to sacrifice time and energy to help children with their schoolwork.

5. Although it would be nice if parents took responsibility for their children’s performance in school, it is not necessary. (reverse-scored)

6. Parents can provide children with assistance with their schoolwork but it is not their responsibility to do so. (reverse-scored)

7. It is often important that parents make sacrifices to motivate their children to try their hardest in school.

8. Parents are responsible for motivating children to work hard in school.

9. It is the duty of the parent to make sure that children work their hardest in school.

10. Parents are responsible for helping children to value school.

11. Parents can encourage children to try their best in school, but it is not their responsibility. (reverse-scored)

12. It is not the responsibility of parents to make sure children work hard when it comes to school. (reverse-scored)

Funding

This research was supported by National Institute of Mental Health Grant R01 MH57505.

Note

References

Allwood

C. M.

Berry

J. W.

(2006). Origins and development of indigenous psychologies: An international analysis. International Journal of Psychology, 41, 243–268. doi: 10.1080/00207590544000013

Arnett

J. J.

(2008). The neglected 95%: Why American psychology needs to become less American. American Psychologist, 63, 602–614. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.63.7.602

Baron

R. M.

Kenny

D. A.

(1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 1173–1182. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.51.6.1173

Bornstein

M. H.

(2006). Parenting science and practice. In Renninger

A. K.

Sigel

I. E.

(Volume Eds.) Damon

Lerner

R. M.

(Eds.), Handbook of child psychology: Vol. 4. Child psychology in practice (6th ed., pp. 893–949). New York, NY: Wiley. doi: 10.1002/9780470147658.chpsy0422

Brislin

R. W.

(1980). Translation and content analysis of oral and written materials. In Triandis

H. C.

Berry

J. W.

(Eds.), Handbook of cross-cultural psychology: Vol. 2, Methodology (pp. 389–444). Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.

Bugental

D. B.

Johnston

(2000). Parental and child cognitions in the context of the family. Annual Review of Psychology, 51, 315–344. doi: 10.1146/annurev.psych.51.1.315

Chao

R. K.

(1994). Beyond parental control and authoritarian parenting style: Understanding Chinese parenting through the cultural notion of training. Child Development, 65, 1111–1119. doi:10.1111/1467-8624.ep7252822

Chao

R. K.

(1996). Chinese and European American mothers’ beliefs about the role of parenting in children’s school success. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 27, 403–423. doi:10.1177/0022022196274002

Chen

Stevenson

H. W.

(1989). Homework: A cross-cultural examination. Child Development, 60, 551–561. doi:10.1111/147-4624.ep7252708

10.

Chen

Stevenson

H. W.

(1995). Motivation and mathematics achievement: A comparative study of Asian-American, Caucasian-American, and East Asian high school students. Child Development, 66, 1215–1234. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8624.1995.tb00932.x

11.

Cheung

C. S.

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. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8624.2011.01582.x

12.

Crocker

Knight

K. M.

(2005). Contingencies of self-worth. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 14, 200–203. doi:10.1111/j.0963-7214.2005.00364.x

13.

Crocker

Wolfe

C. T.

(2001). Contingencies of self-worth. Psychological Review, 108, 593–623. doi:10.1037//0033-295X.108.3.593

14.

Eaton

M. M.

Pomerantz

E. M.

(2004). Parental contingent self-worth scale. Unpublished manuscript, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.

15.

Erkut

(2010). Developing multiple language versions of instruments for intercultural research. Child Development Perspectives, 4, 19–24. doi:10.1111/j.1750-8606.2009.00111.x

16.

Fong

(2004). Only hope: Coming of age under China’s one-child policy. Stanford, CA: Stanford University.

17.

Furnham

(1987). Predicting protestant work ethic beliefs. European Journal of Personality, 1, 93–106. doi: 10.1002/per.2410010204

18.

Greenfield

P. M.

(2010). Particular forms of independence and interdependence are adapted to particular kinds of sociodemographic environment: Commentary on “Independence and interdependence in children’s developmental experiences.” Child Development Perspectives, 4, 37–39. doi: 10.1111/j.1750-8606.2009.00114.x

19.

Grolnick

W. S.

Price

C. E.

Beiswenger

K. L.

Sauck

C. C.

(2007). Evaluative pressure in mothers: Effects of situation, maternal, and child characteristics on autonomy support versus controlling behavior. Developmental Psychology, 43, 991–1002. doi:10.1037/0012-1649.43.4.991

20.

Heine

S. J.

(2007). Culture and motivation. In Kitayama

Cohen

(Eds.), Handbook of Cultural Psychology (pp. 714–733). New York, NY: Guilford.

21.

Henrich

Heine

S. J.

Norenzayan

(2010). The weirdest people in the world? Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 33, 61–135. doi:10.1017/S0140525X0999152X

22.

Hess

R. D.

Chih-Mei

McDevitt

T. M.

(1987). Cultural variations in family beliefs about children’s performance in mathematics: Comparisons among People’s Republic of China Chinese-American, and Caucasian-American families. Journal of Educational Psychology, 79, 179–188. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.79.2.179

23.

D. Y. F.

(1994). Cognitive socialization in Confucian heritage cultures. In Greenfield

P. M.

Cocking

R. R.

(Eds.), Cross-cultural roots of minority child development (pp. 285–313). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

24.

Holloway

S. D.

Hess

R. D.

(1985). Mothers’ and teachers’ attributions about children’s mathematics performance. In Sigel

I. E.

(Ed.), Parental belief systems: The psychological consequences for children (pp. 7–24). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

25.

Hsu

F. L. K.

(1953). Americans and Chinese: Passage to differences. Honolulu: University of Hawai‘i Press.

26.

Huntsinger

C. S.

Jose

P. E.

Larson

S. L.

Krieg

D. B.

Shaligram

(2000). Mathematics, vocabulary, and reading development in Chinese American and European American children over the primary school years. Journal of Educational Psychology, 92, 745–760. doi:10.1037//0022-0663.92.4.745

27.

Kağitçibaşi

(2011). Sociocultural change and integrative syntheses in human development: Autonomous-related self and social-cognitive competence. Child Development Perspectives, 6, 5–11.doi:10.1111/j.1750-8606.2011.00173.x

28.

Kenny

D. A.

Kashy

D. A.

Bolger

(1998). Data analysis in social psychology. In Gilbert

D. T.

Fiske

S. T.

(Eds.), The handbook of social psychology: Vol. 1 (4th ed., pp. 233–265). Boston, MA: McGraw-Hill.

29.

Kernis

M. H.

(2003). Toward a conceptualization of optimal self-esteem. Psychological Inquiry, 14, 1–26. doi:10.1207/S15327965PLI1401_01

30.

Leung

(2007) Asian social psychology: Achievements, threats, and opportunities. Asian Journal of Social Psychology, 10, 8–15. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-839X.2006.00205.x

31.

(2002). A cultural model of learning: Chinese “heart and mind for wanting to learn.” Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 33, 248–269. doi: 10.1177/0022022102033003003

32.

(2003). The core of Confucian learning. American Psychologist, 58, 146–147. doi: 10.1037/0003-066X.58.2.146

33.

(2004). Learning as a task or a virtue: U.S. and Chinese preschoolers explain learning. Developmental Psychology, 40, 595–605. doi: 10.1037/0012-1649.40.4.595

34.

(2005) Mind or virtue: Western and Chinese beliefs about learning. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 14, 190–194. doi:10.1111/j.0963-7214.2005.00362.x

35.

MacKinnon

D. P.

Lockwood

C. M.

Hoffman

J. M.

West

S. G.

Sheets

(2002). A comparison of methods to test mediation and other intervening variable effects. Psychological Methods, 7, 83–104. doi:10.1037//1082-989X.7.1.83

36.

F. F.

Pomerantz

E. M.

(2012). Unpublished data, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.

37.

F. F.

Pomerantz

E. M.

Deng

(in press). Why are Chinese mothers more controlling than American mothers? “My child is my report card”. Child Development.

38.

F. F.

Pomerantz

E. M.

Lam

S. F.

(2007). European American and Chinese parents’ responses to children’s success and failure: Implications for children’s responses. Developmental Psychology. doi:10.1037/0012-1649.43.5.1239

39.

Pomerantz

E. M.

Moorman

E. A.

Cheung

C. S.

(2012). Parents’ involvement in children’s learning. In Harris

K. R.

(Eds.), APA educational psychology handbook (pp. 417–440). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

40.

Pomerantz

E. M.

F. F.

Wang

(2008). Culture, parenting, and motivation: The case of East Asia and the United States. In Maehr

M. L.

Karabenick

S. A.

Urdan

T. C.

(Eds.), Advances in Motivation and Achievement: Social Psychological Perspectives (Vol. 15, pp. 209–240). Bingley, UK: Emerald Group Publishing.

41.

Preacher

K. J.

Hayes

A. F.

(2008). Asymptotic and resampling strategies for assessing and comparing indirect effects in multiple mediator model. Behavior Research Methods, 40(3), 879–891. doi:10.3758/BRM.40.3.879

42.

Raeff

(2010). Independence and interdependence in children’s developmental experiences. Child Development Perspectives, 4, 31–36. doi: 10.1111/j.1750-8606.2009.00113.x

43.

Rigby

C. L.

(2004). Protestantism and feminism. In McGrath

A. E.

Marks

D. C.

(Eds.), The Blackwell companion to Protestantism (pp.332–343). Malden, MA: Blackwell. doi: 10.1002/9780470999196.ch32

44.

Stevenson

H. W.

Chen

Lee

S.-Y.

(1993). Mathematics achievement of Chinese, Japanese, and American children: Ten years later. Science, 259, 53–58. doi: 10.1126/science.8418494

45.

Stewart

S. M.

Bond

M. H.

Kennard

B. D.

L. M.

Zaman

R. M.

(2002). Does the Chinese construct of guan export to the West? International Journal of Psychology, 37, 74–82. doi: 10.1080/00207590143000162

46.

Tamis-LeMonda

C. S.

Way

Hughes

Yoshikawa

Kalman

R. K.

Niwa

E. Y.

(2008). Parents’ goals for children: The dynamic coexistence of individualism and collectivism in cultures and individuals. Social Development, 17, 183–209. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9507.2007.00419.x

47.

Tao

Hong

(2000). A meaning system approach to Chinese students’ achievement goals. Journal of Psychology in Chinese Societies, 1, 13–38.

48.

Tweed

R. G.

Lehman

D. R.

(2002). Learning considered within a cultural context: Confucian and Socratic approaches. American Psychologist, 57, 89–99. doi: 10.1037/0003-066X.57.2.89

49.

Weber

(1959). The protestant ethic and the spirit of capitalism. New York, NY: Charles Scribner’s Sons.

50.

Wigfield

Eccles

J. S.

Schiefele

Roeser

R. W.

Davis-Kean

(2006). In Eisenberg

(Volume Ed.) W.

Damon

R. M.

Lerner

(Eds.). Handbook of child psychology: Vol. 3. Social, emotional, and personality development (6th ed., pp. 933–1002). New York, NY: Wiley.