Publications by authors named "Danielle A Crosby"

Surveys differ in the measurement of nonstandard work, such that some surveys require respondents to indicate whether they work either a standard or a nonstandard schedule, whereas others allow respondents to indicate that they work both types of schedules. We test whether these measurement decisions influence the estimated prevalence of maternal nonstandard work, using data from two sources: the Current Population Survey (N = 1,430) and the Fragile Families and Child Wellbeing Study (N = 2,524). Using propensity score techniques, we find that giving respondents the option of reporting work at more than one type of schedule doubles the prevalence of nonstandard work, compared to allowing respondents to indicate only one type of schedule.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Many mothers work in jobs with nonstandard schedules (i.e., schedules that involve work outside of the traditional 9-5, Monday through Friday schedule); this is particularly true for economically disadvantaged mothers.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF
Article Synopsis
  • Researchers used instrumental variables (IV) techniques to analyze data from employment-focused experiments to understand how different types of preschool childcare affect the behavior of low-income children.
  • While ordinary least squares (OLS) regression previously suggested a small positive link between center-based care and externalizing behaviors, the IV approach showed that children who attended center-based care reported fewer behavioral problems when starting elementary school.
  • The study emphasizes the importance of using different analytical methods to draw causal conclusions in developmental research, particularly regarding the social behavior of children from low-income backgrounds.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

The impacts of New Hope, a program to increase parent employment and reduce poverty, were measured 5 years after parents were randomly assigned to program or control groups. New Hope had positive effects on children's school achievement, motivation, and social behavior, primarily for boys, across the age range 6-16. In comparison to impacts measured 2 years after program onset, effects on achievement were robust, but effects on social behavior were reduced.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF