Quantity of Maternal Time and Child and Adolescent Development: Response to Kalil and Mayer (2016) and to Waldfogel (2016)

• Author: Kei Nomaguchi,Kathleen E. Denny,Melissa A. Milkie
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1111/jomf.12258
• Published date: 01 February 2016
• Date: 01 February 2016

K N Bowling Green State University

M A. M University of Toronto∗

K E. D Trinity University∗∗

Quantity of Maternal Time and Child and

Adolescent Development: Response to Kalil and

Mayer (2016) and to Waldfogel (2016)

Our study of the association between mater-

nal time and developmental outcomes of

children and adolescents in the April 2015 issue

of Journal of Marriage and Family (Milkie,

Nomaguchi, & Denny, 2015a) has drawn

much attention, which reects how strongly

researchers and the public care about the rela-

tionship between mothers’ time and children’s

well-being. We appreciate the commentaries by

Waldfogel (2016) and Kalil and Mayer (2016).

Their insights will stimulate research that will

further our understanding of maternal and

parental time and their relationship to children’s

and adolescents’ well-being.

Waldfogel urges investigation of variations

in the role of maternal time in inuencing child

outcomes by social and demographic contexts

and suggests examining alternatives to maternal

time. We agree and expand on her suggestions

in this response. Kalil and Mayer argue that the

theoretical framework sets up a “straw man.”

Department of Sociology, Bowling Green State University,

213 Williams Hall, Bowling Green, OH 43403.

∗Department of Sociology, Universityof Toronto, 725

Spadina Ave., Toronto, ON M5S 2J4 Canada.

∗∗Department of Sociology and Anthropology, Trinity

University,1 Trinity Place, San Antonio, TX 78212

(kdenny@trinity.edu).

We disagree and briey articulate howour study

derives from aspects of intensive-mothering ide-

ology. Kalil and Mayer emphasize the centrality

of mothers’ social statuses in shaping children’s

development and the importance of quality

activities for children. These are entirely consis-

tent with our conclusions. They are misguided

about the interpretation of “amount” or quantity

of time, however. This is understandable given

the complexity of assessing children’s time

“with” mothers.

In responding to these commentaries, we

recap intensive-mothering ideology and the

assumptions implied by it. Then we discuss

the theoretical and methodological challenges

that the commentaries identify, which future

research should consider carefully: distinguish-

ing between quantity time and quality of time

or activities; conceptualizing children’s time

with mothers compared to alternative time use

arrangements; social class and time with chil-

dren; measurement and selection issues; varia-

tions by child age, family structure, and child

gender; and the role of maternal employment.

I M  I A

Intensive-mothering ideology places children

at the center of mothers’ lives and suggests

that they require vast amounts of time, effort,

270 Journal of Marriage and Family 78 (February 2016): 270–275

DOI:10.1111/jomf.12258