MARINUS H VAN UZENDOORN, Louis W C TAVECCHIO,GEERT-JAN STAMS, MIEKE VERHOEVEN, AND ERNA REILING

Leiden Umversity

Attunement Between Parents and Professional

Caregivers: A Comparison of Childrearing

Attitudes in Different Child-Care Settings

In a survey of a national sample (n = 568 chil-dren) ofparents and nonparental caregivers frontfour types of chüd care—day care, after-schoolcare, family day care, and babysitter care—westudied the attunement of childrearmg attitudesbetween parents and nonparental caregivers andperceptions of their relatwnships to one anotherand to the chüd from an ecological Systems per-spective Parents within the same family wererather consistent m their childrearmg attitudesand beliefs, but wefound some discontinuities be-tween parents and Professional caregivers intheir childrearmg attitudes and perceptions ofthequality of the child-caregiver relationship Lackof attunement in authontarian control and sup-port was associated with a lower degree of chüdwell-being Better communicatwn between par-ents and caregivers was associated with greaterattunement and with a higher degree of chüdwell-being

Center for Chüd and Family Studies, Leiden Umversity P 0Box 9555 NL 2300 RB Leiden, the Netherlands (vamjzen®rulfsw leidenumv nl)

Key Word;, öfter school care babysitttng child care child-rearmg attitudes day care center ecological Systems

In many Western industnahzed countnes parentsshare their chüdrearmg responsibihties with pro-fessional caregivers Childrearmg is not the ex-clusive domam of mothers Dunng the past fewdecades, the participation of mothers m the labormarket has been steadily growmg At the sameUrne, fathers became more mvolved m childrear-mg, and an increasmg number of children werespending time in day care centers, family daycare, after-school care, or with babysitters Somemonths after birth, many children Start to mteractwith several caregivers on a regulär basis Chil-dren become embedded m a network of parentaland nonparental caregivers (Belsky & Eggebeen,1991, Lamb, Sternberg, Hwang, & Broberg, 1992)From a cross-cultural perspective the mvolvementof three or more caregivers in raising young chil-dren is not a new or even a rare phenomenon Inmany Afncan cultures, for example, shanng theresponsibihties of child care among several adultsand older siblings is common (Nsamenang, 1992)

How is the mput of different caregivers coor-dinated9 How similar or dissimilar are the child-rearmg attitudes of the caregivers9 Does the simi-lanty vary with the type of care that the childreceives9 In previous studies, some researchersconcluded that parents and professional care-givers were in major agreement about child-careissues (Nelson & Garduque, 1991), whereas other

Journal of Mamage and the Family 60 (August 1998) 771-781 771

772 Journal ofMarriage and the Family

researchers found that parents and caregivers inday care centers differed in their perceptions ofthe child's behavior (Feagans & Manlove, 1994).In the study presented here, we compare the atti-tudes and perceptions of mothers, fathers, andProfessional caregivers in three domains: child-rearing, the quality of the relationship betweenchild and caregiver, and the relationship betweenparental and Professional caregivers. Our mainfocus is the attunement of caregivers to eachother. To what extent do parents and professionalcaregivers share beliefs about the quality of thechild-caregiver relationship and perceptions ofthe communication among the caregivers?

The theoretical framework of our study is de-rived from the ecological Systems model, whichdirects attention to the interaction between the de-veloping child and the multiple social contexts inwhich development takes place (Bronfenbrenner,1979; Peters & Kontos, 1987). Although themodel also includes the wider socioeconomic andcultural contexts (exosystems and macrosystems)äs relevant for the study of childrearing and childdevelopment, we focus in particular on the micro-system—the immediate environment in which thechild is a recurring, participating member, such ästhe family and the professional care setting. InPeters and Kontos' adaptation of the ecologicalSystems model, two issues are crucial on the micro-system level. First, the consistency between care-givers within the same microsystem is important(e.g., the consistency of childrearing attitudes andbeliefs between the parents within the same fam-ily). Second, the continuity of childrearing atti-tudes and beliefs between different microsystemsis relevant (e.g., the continuity of childrearing at-titudes and beliefs among parental and non-parental caregivers of the same child). With thedeveloping child äs the focus, we describe whatPeters and Kontos call:

the consistency of experiences afforded by a sin-gle microsystem environment based upon, inpart, the commonly shared attitudes, beliefs andexpectations of the adult members of that envi-ronment (e.g., father and mother). At the sametime, one can describe the continuity of experi-ences across different microsystems (e.g., homeand day care center), again based, in part, on thecommonality or similarity of attitudes, beliefsand expectations held by the various sets of car-ing adults. (p. 7)

We use the term "attunement" to indicate bothcontinuity and consistency.

In an ecological Systems framework, consis-tency and continuity among microsystems are notassumed to be positive or negative in their effectson the child's development (Peters & Kontos,1987). Judgments about the consistency and con-tinuity within and among microsystems requirecareful description of the characteristics of mi-crosystems äs they interact with the developingchild. It is unclear how attunement of caregivers'attitudes and beliefs about childrearing, the qualityof the child-caregiver relationship, and communi-cation may affect the development of children.Discrepant care (e.g., care that varies in quality ortype between parents and Professionals) maycause feelings of disorientation and insecurity inyoung children, and caregivers' attunement toeach other may constitute an important conditionin the stability of care (Howes, 1991; Shimoni &Ferguson, 1992). To a certain degree, however,some lack of attunement may provide the childwith opportunities to learn and to develop skillsfor dealing with a heterogeneous network of rela-tionships later in life. Furthermore, in a heteroge-neous network, deficiencies in one relationshipmay be compensated by other participants in thenetwork, äs has been documented, for example, inthe area of attachment (Howes & Hamilton, 1993;Pianta, 1992). From this perspective, the goodness-of-fit between parents and caregivers may not beimportant for the children's well-being in profes-sional care settings (Erwin, Sanson, Amos, &Bradley, 1993).

In this study of a national sample of Dutchchildren receiving nonparental care, we focus onthe similarities and discrepancies in the childrear-ing attitudes and beliefs of parents and non-parental caregivers. In an exploratory way, wealso address the issue of the consequences for thechildren's well-being in the context of the non-parental care setting. In many studies, child-rearing attitudes have been shown to crystallizeinto two global dimensions: support and control(e.g., Rollins & Thomas, 1979). The dimension ofsupport involves sensitivity to and Stimulation ofthe child's initiatives. Support concerns the socio-emotional äs well äs the cognitive cues of thechild. The dimension of control involves the re-striction of the child's impulses to violate certainrules or regulations and is not necessarily relatedto the kind of support that is provided. The con-trol dimension often is divided into authoritariancontrol and authoritative control. Authoritariancontrol means the forced restriction of unwantedbehavior without explanation, whereas authorita-

Ch'ddrearing Attitudes 773

tive control implies the discursive regulation ofbehavior by emphasizing its potentially harmfulconsequences (Baumrind, 1971; Hoffman, 1984;1988; Kochanska, 1995). We speculate that dis-crepancies in childrearing attitudes may especiallyaffect children's well-being if the discrepanciesbetween professional caregivers and parents arelarger than the discrepancies between the mater-nal and paternal attitudes and beliefs (cf. Rutter,1995, p. 20). That is, the discontinuities betweenmicrosystems may be more problematic if theyhave become larger than the inconsistencieswithin the child's most important microsystem(the family) because the child may have grownused to the somewhat (but not extremely) differ-ent interactions with his or her mother and father.

Beside childrearing attitudes, the caregiver'sperception of the quality of the relationship withthe child may constitute an important aspect of at-tunement between caregivers. The same child mayfunction in different ways in different childrearingcontexts, and different caregivers may have differ-ent views of the same child. If professional care-givers perceive that the quality of their relation-ship with the child is better than the relationshipthat the parents have with the child, this may indi-cate an important discontinuity between micro-systems. We suggest that the absence of commu-nication between caregivers about the child intheir care also may enhance the risk of disconti-nuity between microsystems. Attunement of pro-fessional caregivers to parents may emerge in thecommunication between parental and nonparentalcaregivers who are involved in the care of a spe-cific child. Lack of attunement may be caused bya lack of communication. In previous studies,more communication between parents and care-givers was associated with better quality of care(Endsley, Minish, & Zhou, 1993; Ghazvini &Readdick, 1994). Furthermore, caregivers fromdifferent microsystems may have different per-ceptions of their communication with each other.Discontinuities between caregivers' perceptionsof their communication across microsystems mayhamper the effective and regulär exchange of In-formation and beliefs about childrearing.

Lastly, different types of child care may havedifferent implications for the attunement betweenthe caregivers. We expect more discrepancies be-tween parents and professional caregivers in daycare centers and after-school care than betweenparents and babysitters or between parents andcaregivers in family day care. Day care is profes-sional, out-of-home care for infants and toddlers;

after-school care is professional out-of-home carefor school-aged children after school hours; fam-ily day care is out-of-home care for young chil-dren in a family context; and babysitting care isnonparental care within the hörne of the child. Inthe case of family day care and babysitting, theinformal nature and the small scale of the caremay be conducive to more frequent and intensivecommunication between nonparental and parentalcaregivers and to more similar views and attitudes.In this type of care, the parent always leaves thechild with the same caregiver who is also presentwhen the child is picked up. This is not always thecase in day care centers. This may have an effecton the opportunity to communicate and may par-tially explain differences in the quality of commu-nication. In many cases the parents, themselves,have chosen the specific babysitter or the providerof family day care because that person fits theneeds and expectations of the parents. In theNetherlands, waiting lists for day care centers andafter-school care are long, and parents do not havea choice between different day care centers orprofessional day care providers (Clerkx & VanUzendoorn, 1992). Therefore, from the Start, theselection of family day care providers and baby-sitters may lead to more attunement. To lest thishypothesis, we compare the four different child-care settings in terms of the attunement amongthe three main caregivers involved.

METHOD

Participants

In the context of a large study of professional carein the Netherlands, a representative sample of thefour different forms of child care was composed.The sample was drawn so that it contained a ran-dom 10% of the various child-care facilities, exceptbabysitting. The randomly selected participants—mothers, fathers, and professional caregivers—were contacted by phone or letter. One hundredbabysitters were contacted through advertisementsin regional papers. In January, 1995, question-naires were distributed to 1,890 individuals. After6 weeks, participants who had not completed thequestionnaire were recontacted. Finally, 1,485questionnaires were received, a return rate of 79%.

The participants—almost always the completeset of three caregivers per child—included 521professional caregivers with a mean age of 30.5years (SD = 8.3), 517 mothers with a mean age of33.2 years (SD = 3.9), and 447 fathers with a

774 Journal ofMarnage and the Family

mean age of 35 3 years (SD = 46) Participantswere m four kinds of care settmgs (a) day care cen-ters, consisting of 369 Professionals, 366 mothers,and 326 fathers, (b) after-school care, consistingof 65 Professionals, 62 mothers, and 48 fathers,(c) family day care, consisting of 36 profession-als, 35 mothers, and 28 fathers, (d) babysittmgconsisting of 51 babysitters, 54 mothers, and 45fathers The total sample contamed 568 famihes,mcludmg a small proportion of smgle parents (2%)

The socioeconomic Status, a combmation ofthe educational and vocational background ofboth parents, was somewhat above the Dutch av-erage and was not the same in the famihes usmgthe four types of caregivmg arrangements So-cioeconomic Status was highest in famihes withbabysitters, and they differed significantly fromthe families that chose other types of caregivmg(See Table l ) In the Netherlands, babysittmg is amore expensive solution to the problem of non-parental care than the scarce, but subsidized, formalProvision of care Because of the informal nature ofmost babysittmg arrangements, it was not possibleto compose a representative sample of babysitterson the basis of a well-defined population

The target children m the study (n - 568)ranged m age from 0 to 6 years There were 395children in day care (mean age = 1 6 years, SD =

l l, percentage female = 47), 70 children m after-school care (mean age = 47 years, SD = l 0, per-centage female = 42), 37 children in family daycare (mean age = 1 3 , SD = 0,9, percentage fe-male = 53), and 66 children in babysittmg arrange-ments (mean age = 27, SD = 1,8, percentage fe-male = 46) The differences in the genderdistnbution among types of care were not signifi-cant, xV/= 3, n = 496) = l 09, p = 78 Childrenin after-school care were, of course, significantlyolder than the other children

More Information on background vanables ispresented in Table l We found differences amongProfessional child-care settmgs with respect to thesize of the group, the caregiver-child ratio, the ageof the professional caregiver, äs well äs the voca-tional traimng and occupational expenence of thecaregiver In babysittmg arrangements and mfamily day care, professional caregivers were, ofcourse, occupied with fewer children than in daycare centers and m after-school care Consequently,there was a more favorable child-caregiver ratioChildren spent less time m the care of babysittersthan m day care centers The age of babysitters andcaregivers m family day care was relatively old,whereas vocational traimng was, in most cases,lacking In the Netherlands, family day care andbabysittmg are not considered professional activi-

TABLE l MEANS (AND STANDARD DEVIATIONS) FOR SELECTED BACKGROUND CHARACTERISTICS BY TYPE OF CHILD CARE

Variable

Number of children

Hours of care

Size of group

Percentage of female children

Age of children (years)

Ratio of caregivers to child

Age of mother

Age of father

Socioeconomic Status of parents

Age of professional caregivers

Vocational traimng of caregivers

Expenence m years of caregivers

Day Care Center

395

21 Oa

(68)

11 3a

(37)

47

16"(11)

24a

(09)

32 8a

(37)

35 Oa

(44)

108"(29)29 3a

(71)19a

(06)47a

(32)

After School Care

70

93C

(43)135"(51)42

47b

(10)17"

(09)360"(39)37 8b

(50)106"(32)28 2a

(62)22b

(08)34b

(38)

Note Different superscnpts mdicate significant post hoc differences (p <

Family Day Care

37

200ab

(76)2 40

(17)

53

13"(09)

63C

(35)

31 9a

(31)339"(47)

10 8a

(21)353"(56)02C

(07)

23b

(19)

05)

Babysitting

66

17 2b

(81)23C

(13)

46

27C

(18)59C

(30)33 8a

(46)35 8a

(48)126"(20)38 5b

(131)00C

(00)23"

(28)

Childrearing Attitudes 775

lies for which formal training is required. The oc-cupational experience in number of years wasabout two times äs low for babysitters and familyday care providers äs for the other types of pro-fessional caregivers.

Instruments

Mothers, fathers, and Professional caregiverswere asked to complete several measures of child-rearing attitudes, assessments of the child-caregiverrelationship, and questionnaires about the commu-nication between parents and Professional care-givers.

Childrearing Practices Report (CRPR). TheCRPR (Block, 1965) originally consisted of 91items measuring Childrearing attitudes, values, be-haviors and goals. Kochanska, Kuczynski, andRadke-Yarrow (1989), relying on conceptual guide-lines derived from Block's original solution, se-lected only factors identified in the literature ästhe components of more comprehensive patternsof Childrearing, namely authoritarian control andauthoritative control. The following items wereconsidered representative of authoritarian control:physical punishment, verbal reprimands, prohibi-tions, discouraging the child's emotional expres-sion, emphasizing fear of the external consequencesof transgressions, and strict supervision. The itemsthat reflected authoritative control emphasized in-ductive methods, rational guidance, encouragementof independence, and open expression of affect.

Although the CRPR is originally a Q-sort mea-sure, in a study by Dekovic, Janssens, and Gerris(1991), the Instrument was presented in Likert-typeformat. They found acceptable reliabilities, withCronbach's alphas of .71 for the authoritarian pat-tern and .65 for the authoritative pattern. We foundCronbach's alphas of .71 (professional caregivers),.73 (mothers), and .75 (fathers) for the authoritar-ian pattern and .67 (mothers) and .68 (professionalcaregivers and fathers) for the authoritative pattern.Moreover, the CRPR scales showed independence,with correlations ranging from .00 to -.05.

Nijmegen Childrearing Questionnaire (NCRQ).The NCRQ was devised by Gerris et al. (1993) tomeasure the Childrearing processes of parentalsupport and control in the context of a nationalsurvey on parenting in Dutch families. The Instru-ment consists of several 7-point Likert scales,such äs responsiveness and conformistic childrea-ring. In the study presented here, two NCRQ

scales, responsiveness and expression of affec-tion, were used to measure support. Support maybe considered a "behavior manifested by a parenttoward a child that makes the child feel comfort-able in the presence of the parent and confirms inthe child's mind that he is basically accepted andapproved of äs a person by the parent" (Rollins &Thomas, 1979, p. 230).

Responsiveness was operationalized äs the de-gree to which the caregiver responds to the needs,Signals, and moods of the child. An example of anitem is: "When the child is worrying about some-thing or feels sad, I know what is going on."Affection-expression was operationalized äs thedegree to which parents show observable andphysical expressions of positive affection andfondness toward the child. This concept can be il-lustrated with two items: "I often show my sonthat I love him," and "I often smile at my son."

In order to construct scales, Gerris et al. (1993)used an oblique rotation procedure in factor-analyzing the data, allowing the factors to correlatewith each other. The Cronbach's alphas for thesupport scales were .87 for affection-expression(both parents) and .91 (father) and .85 (mother) forresponsiveness. We combined both support scalesinto one because factor analysis showed one-dimensional Solutions, with explained variancesranging from 36% (mothers) to 40% (professionalcaregiver). The alphas were .84 (parents) and .86(professional caregiver).

Parent Caregiver Relationship Inventory (PCRI)and Child Caregiver Relationship Inventory(CCRI). The PCRI was used to assess the percep-tion of the quality of the relationship between pro-fessional caregiver and parents. The CCRI wasused to assess the perception of the quality of theChildrearing relationship, that is, the relationshipbetween professional caregiver and child. Bothinventories were adapted from the Barrett-Lennard Relationship Inventory developed in1962 by Barrett-Lennard to assess the patient'sperception of the quality of the therapeutic rela-tionship, focusing on dimensions of the therapist'sempathic response. The items were thoroughly re-vised to describe the quality of the parents' orchildren's relationship with the professional care-givers. Gurman (1977) reviewed several studieson the internal reliability and test-retest reliabilityof different versions of the Barrett-Lennard Rela-tionship Inventory in different contexts, and heconcluded that the inventory proved stable and re-liable.

776 Journal ofMarriage and the Family

We factor-analyzed the data of the PCRI and theCCRI and found one-dimensional Solutions. In thecase of the PCRI—28 items that measured thequality of the relationship between Professionalcaregiver and parents—the alphas were .93 (fa-thers) and .94 (mothers and professional care-givers), with the explained variance ranging from45% to 51%. Confirmatory factor analysisshowed high Bentler-Bonett fit indices, rangingfrom .97 to .99, and an acceptable ratio of chi-square to degrees of freedom: 2.7 for the profes-sional caregivers, 2.5 for the mothers, and 2. l forthe fathers. An example of a PCRI item is: "I feelthat this parent really values me äs a caregiver."

In the CCRI—27 items that measured thequality of the childrearing relationship between theProfessional caregiver and the child—the alphaswere .92 (professional caregivers), .93 (mothers),and .95 (fathers), with an explained variance be-tween 41% and 57%. Confirmatory factor analysisshowed high Bentler-Bonett fit indices, rangingfrom .97 to .99, and an acceptable ratio of chi-square to degrees of freedom: 3.1 for the profes-sional caregivers, 2.5 for the mothers, and 2.7 forthe fathers (Bollen, 1989, p. 261-281; Dünn,Everitt, & Pickles, 1993). An example of a CCRIitem is: "I don't understand the feelings of thischild." The PCRI and the CCRI are available fromthe first author.

Satisfaction. Satisfaction with the relationship be-tween child and professional caregiver was as-sessed with a 5-point Likert-type scale. The in-strument consisted of 12 items. The internalreliability, in terms of Cronbach's alpha, washigh: .84 for the professional caregivers, .91 forthe mothers, and .93 for the fathers. With respectto convergent validity, the intercorrelations be-tween the CCRI and the Satisfaction scale provedacceptable: .47 (professional caregivers), .65(mothers), and .66 (fathers). All correlations weresignificant, (p < .001). The selected items are rep-resentative of the interaction between caregiverand child in the context of professional child carein diverse settings. This can be illustrated with thecontent of one item: "How satisfied are you withthe degree to which the professional caregiversucceeds in resolving conflicts between chil-dren?" The scale is available from the first author.

Contentment. Contentment with the exchange ofInformation between parent and professionalcaregiver was measured with a 5-point Likert-type scale. The Instrument comprised five items

related to the exchange of Information betweenthe professional caregiver and the parent aboutchild care. The internal reliability was high: .82for the professional caregivers, .85 for the moth-ers, and .84 for the fathers. The scale is availablefrom the first author.

Communication. The communication scale wasconstructed to assess the quality of communicationbetween parent and professional caregiver from ashared perspective. The scale consisted of six vari-ables: perception of the quality of the relationshipbetween parent and professional caregiver (PCRI-father, PCRI-mother, PCRI-caregiver) and content-ment with the exchange of Information betweenparent and professional caregiver, experienced bythe father, the mother, and the professional care-giver. The communication scale is the sum of thestandardized items, divided by their number (6).The internal consistency of the communicationscale was satisfactory: standardized Cronbach'salpha = .74, with corrected item-total correlationsranging from .31 to .58 (n = 361).

Well-being. The well-being of the child was mea-sured on a scale developed to assess the degree towhich the child feels at ease in the professionalchild-care setting. The concept can be illustratedwith the following item: "This child likes to go tothe child-care setting." The scale consisted ofnine variables, referring to the perspectives of thecaregivers. Fathers, mothers, and professionalcaregivers rated the children's well-being inde-pendently on three aspects using Likert-typescales with four response categories ranging fromyes (1) to I don't know (4). The fourth categorywas treated äs a missing value. The scores rangedfrom 4.3 to 9.

Because of the high negative skewness of thedistribution, the well-being scale was convertedby a reflect-and-inverse transformation procedure(Tabachnick & Fidell, 1989, pp. 84-85). This re-sulted in an acceptable degree of skewness. Scoreson the transformed scale ranged from .18 to 1.0.The reliability of the transformed scale was satis-factory, with a Cronbach's alpha of .71 (n = 334).

RESULTS

Attunement Among Caregivers

Mean differences. Attunement among the threecaregivers involved in this study can be analyzedin two ways: differences in mean scores and

Childrearing Attitudes 777

strength of correlations. Starting with the first ap-proach, we used a repeated measures analysis ofcovariance to describe consistencies and continu-ities of attitudes and beliefs within and across caresettings. Because mothers, fathers, and Professionalcaregivers of the same child were involved, type ofcaregiver was the repeated measure (the within-subject factor). We controlled for the followingdifferences among the four care settings: hours ofcare, socioeconomic Status of the parents, andcaregivers' years of experience. (See Table 1.) Theother differences are intrinsic characteristics ofthe care setting (e.g., the larger caregiver-childratio in family day care and babysitting than in daycare centers and after-school care). Includingthese intrinsic differences in the care settingswould have led to the confounding of covariatesand settings. In Table 2, the means and Standarddeviations on scales for caregiving styles, child-caregiver relationship, and parent-caregiver rela-tionship are presented. We found significant dif-ferences among caregivers on the fol lowingvariables: support, authoritative control, qualityof the child-caregiver relationship, satisfactionwith the child-caregiver relationship, and qualityof the parent-caregiver relationship. None of thecovariates proved to be significant. Results showthat mothers emphasized support and authorita-tive control more than fathers or professionalcaregivers. Professional caregivers appeared toshow less authoritarian control. Mothers and fa-thers were more satisfied with the relationship be-tween the child and caregiver than were profes-sional caregivers. The professional caregivers,however, were more content than the parentsabout their relationship with the mothers and thefathers.

In the case of authoritarian control, a signifi-cant interaction (i.e., type of caregiver χ type ofcare) was found, F(6,776) = 2.22; p < .05, withsocioeconomic Status äs a significant covariate.After we controlled for socioeconomic Status, re-sults showed that babysitters were more authori-tarian (M = 3.1, SD = .58) than parents (M = 2.9,SD = .49, and M = 2.9, SD = .65 for mothers andfathers, respectively, with children in the care ofbabysitters). Parents who used some sort of insti-tutional care for their children were more authori-tarian (M = 2.9, SD = .60, and M = 3.0, SD = .67for mothers and fathers with children in day carecenters; M = 3.0, SD = .61, and M = 3.2, SD = .65for mothers and fathers with children in after-school care) than the caregivers (M = 2.8, SD =.60, and M = 2.8, SD = .68, for day care centersand after-school care, respectively). No differ-ences were found in family day care (M = 3.1 forall caregivers).

Correlations. In Table 3, the correlations amongmeasures for caregiving style, child-caregiver re-lationship, and parent-caregiver relationship arepresented. These correlations shed more light onthe issues of consistency and continuity (i.e., thebetween-parent and the professional-parent agree-ment, respectively) and reveal differences be-tween pairs of caregivers. Table 3 indicates thatmothers and fathers were more attuned to eachother than to the professional caregiver. For ex-ample, scores on support ränge from a correlationof .42 for mothers and fathers with children inday care centers to a low of .32 for parents withchildren in after-school care, whereas profes-sional and parental scores do not exceed the valueof .18 (in after-school care). Although parents'scores were significantly correlated, äs expected,

TABLE 2. MEANS (AND STANDARD DEVIATIONS) OF CAREGIVING STYLES,CHILD-CAREGIVER RELATIONSHIP, AND PARENT-CAREGIVER RELATIONSHIP VARIABLES

Professional Mother Father

Caregiver M SD M SD M SD df

Caregiving styleSupportiveAuthoritarianAuthoritative

Child-caregiver relationshipQualitySatisfaction

Parent-caregiver relationshipQualityContentment

5.02.95.0

5.44.1

5.14.1

(.56)(.62)(.44)

(.45)(.32)

(.57)(.42)

5.33.05.1

5.44.3

5.04.1

(.42)(.59)(.36)

(.46)(.39)

(.55)(.53)

5.03.05.0

5.34.2

4.84.0

(.50)(.66)(.42)

(.53)(.45)

(.58)(.51)

39.2***ns

8.7***

4.5**4.5**

25.6***ns

(2,393)

(2,393)

(2,364)(2,361)

(2,352)

**p<-01. ***/?<-001.

778 Journal ofMarriage and the Family

TABLE 3 CORRELATIONS BETWEEN PARENTS' AND PROFESSIONAL CAREGIVERS' STYLES,CHILD CAREGIVER RELATIONSHIP, AND PARENT-CAREOIVER RELATIONSHIP IN CHILD-CARE SETTINGS

Day Care Center

Childreanng

Caregivmg stylesSupportive

ProfessionalMother

AuthontananProfessionalMother

AuthontattveProfessionalMother

Child caregiver relationshipRelationship

ProfessionalMother

SatisfactionProfessionalMother

Parent-caregiver relationshipRelationship

ProfessionalMother

ContentmentProfessionalMother

Mother

05

07

17**

18***

09*

17***

12*

Father

0242***

0547***

12*36***

0446***

0347***

11*49***

19***51***

After-School Care

Mother

-04

16

03

13

14

18

03

Father

1832*

1771***

-1546***

28*65***

31*72***

1245**

2235*

Family Day Care

Mother

-32

-01

06

-20

10

13

22

Father

0437*

0041*

0467***

-0511

-0868***

1344*

43*56***

Babysitting

Mother

18

14

11

28*

20

21

34*

Father

0238**

0642**

0640**

-0954***

1852***

1543**

0647**

*p<Q5 **p<Q\ ***/>< 001, one-tadedtests

the atütudes and beliefs of the Professional care-givers were not correlated with those of the par-ents, with some exceptions The outlying positionof the professional caregiver seemed independentof the type of care However, m the domam ofparent-caregiver relationships, the discrepanciesbetween the parental and nonparental caregiverswere smallest

Correlates ofAttunement

Next we explored the relationship between conti-nuity and consistency, on the one hand, and thechild's well-being m the professional care settmg,on the other We analyzed discontmuity betweenparents and professional caregivers, äs well äsparental mconsistency, by way of discrepancyscores, expressmg differences in childreanng atti-tudes We hypothesized that a lack of attunementbetween parents and professional caregiverswould be negatively associated with the child'swell-being in the care settmg We found no signif-icant correlations for discontmuity or mconsistencywith child well-being In other words, discontmuitybetween parents and professional caregivers wasunrelated to the child's well-being, and mconsis-tency between parents was unrelated to the child's

well-being We also investigated the outcome ofthe combmed effect of consistency and continuityon the child's well-being (e g , what if the conti-nuity is greater than the consistency7) In thiscase, too, none of the correlations was significantOne-way analyses of vanance showed that typeof care and well-being were not related, F(3,39l)= l66,p= 17

In order to further explore the effects of dis-contmuity and mconsistency, we analyzed theconsequences of the more extreme discrepanciesfor the child's well-bemg For discontmuity, wedivided the discrepancy scores for childrearmg at-titudes mto three groups, usmg the lower and upperquartiles and the mtermediate 50% A negativediscrepancy classification, m which the profes-sional caregiver was less authontanan, less au-thontative, or less supportive than the parents, wascomposed of those m the lowest quartile A posi-tive discrepancy classification, m which the care-giver was more authontarian, more authontative,or more supportive than the parents, was composedof those m the upper quartile An average discrep-ancy classification was composed of the remammgparticipants For mconsistency, the classificationof the three groups was based on absolute discrep-ancy scores because m this case the direction of

Childrearing Attitudes 779

differences seemed irrelevant. Gare settings didnot differ in the number of participants assigned tothe three categories. That is, in every care setting,about equal numbers of participants appeared toshow a similar attunement or lack of attuneraent.

For the analysis of discontinuity, we comparedthe means on well-being in the three classificationgroups. We examined the full-fledged model byperforming sequential analysis of covariance,with the type of care and the child's age äs co-variates and consistency entered first. In this waywe controlled for the influence of consistency inexploring the main effects, and we controlled forthe influence of all main effects in exploring theinteraction effects. This analysis revealed a sig-nificant result for discontinuity on authoritariancontrol, F(2,360) = 3.62, p = .028. For Support,the results just failed to reach significance,F(2,361) = 2.93, p = .055. We did not find any in-teraction effects. With respect to authoritariancontrol, children feit significantly less at ease inthe care setting when the Professional caregiversshowed a more authoritarian attitude than themothers. For support, results suggest that childrenfeit less comfortable when the professional wasless supportive than the mother. Results for in-consistency were not significant.

Furthermore, the quality of the relationship be-tween the caregivers and the parents may deter-mine, in part, whether discontinuities betweenparental care and professional care emerge. Theoverall score for quality of communicationproved to be higher in family day care than in thethree other care settings, F(3,495) = 6.19, p =.0004. The quality of communication did not ap-pear to be associated with discontinuities in child-rearing attitudes between parents and nonparentalcaregivers. Across the four care settings, however,better communication between parents and care-givers was associated with smaller discrepanciesin the parental and nonparental perceptions of therelationship between the child and the caregiver(i.e., the CCRI scores for mother and caregiverwere r = -.32, p < .001, n = 465; for father andcaregiver, r = -.36, p < .001, n = 383). In day carecenters, in particular, better communication wasassociated with more attuned perceptions of thechild-caregiver relationship across microsystems.Lastly, the quality of communication was, indeed,related to the children's well-being in the care set-ting, r (393) = .15, p < .001, one-tailed.

DlSCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS

Our survey is a European study of the attunementof the childrearing attitudes and beliefs of parentsand nonparental caregivers from different child-care settings. We found considerable discrepan-cies in childrearing attitudes and in perceptions ofthe child-caregiver relationship and the parent-caregiver relationship. Across all four care set-tings, mothers and fathers were more attuned toeach other than to nonparental caregivers. That is,both parents appeared to agree more with eachother than with nonparental caregivers about thebasics of childrearing and child care. Althoughthe ecological Systems framework is neutral aboutthe consequences of discontinuities in micro-systems for the developing child, there may because for concern in view of the importance ofthe two microsystems (the family and the care set-ting) that dominate the child's life in the first fewyears after birth.

We were able to show that discontinuity be-tween the two microsystems of parental and non-parental care is associated with the child's well-being. When caregivers were more authoritarianthan mothers, children feit significantly less at easein the care setting. When caregivers were lesssupportive than mothers, children also tended tofeel less at ease in the care setting. With the possi-ble exception of authoritarian control (e.g., if bothparents and professional caregivers are exces-sively authoritarian), it seems in the child's bestinterest if parents and nonparental caregivers areattuned to each others' childrearing styles. Wesuggest that continuity between microsystems isespecially important for the well-being of youngchildren because these children still lack the meta-cognitive abilities to put discontinuities into per-spective (Main, 1991).

The parents appeared to be more satisfied withthe quality of the child-caregiver relationship thanthe professional caregivers, who appeared to bemore content with the parent-caregiver relation-ship. Professional caregivers may be inclined toevaluate the quality of care less in terms of theirrelationship with the parents and more in terms oftheir relationship with the child, and they do notseem to overestimate its quality.

It is somewhat disappointing to note that at-tunement does not necessarily emerge with bettercommunication between parents and caregivers.Discrepancies in parents' and caregivers' child-rearing attitudes did not disappear with bettercommunication. However, better communication

780 Journal ofMarriage and the Family

was associated with less discrepant ideas aboutthe quality of the child-caregiver relationship, andit also showed a modest positive correlation withthe child's well-being in the care setting. This isconvergent with results reported by Ghazvini andReaddick (1994) and Endsley et al. (1993), whofound that better communication between parentsand caregivers was associated with better qualityof care. Furthermore, Ainslie (1990) found thatmothers of secure children were inclined to com-municate more frequently with caregivers thanmothers of insecure children. Communication be-tween parents and nonparental caregivers is animportant factor in the quality of care. Neverthe-less, it does not always seem to bridge the gap be-tween the basic childrearing attitudes of parentsand nonparental caregivers.

Therefore, it may be important to guaranteethe attunement between parents and caregivers interms of basic childrearing attitudes before thechild enters nonparental care. In choosing non-parental care, Professionals and parents shouldseek goodness-of-fit in basic childrearing atti-tudes because goodness-of-fit seems hard to reachthrough frequent communication after the childStarts attending nonparental care. Goodness-of-fitmay, however, also be difficult to attain in ad-vance. When there are few day care facilities tochoose from, parents tend to send their children tothe first Option that fits their needs for location,opening hours, and price, rather than to the Optionthat fits their childrearing attitudes. Informal carewith babysitters and in small family day care cen-ters does not prevent discrepancies in childrearingattitudes among the three caregivers. On the con-trary, considerable discrepancies can be found inthese types of care in which prior attunement maybe more readily realized. On the other hand, infamily day care the provider is her own boss andmay be more independent in her views on chil-drearing. Further, family day care homes fre-quently include the provider's children, which in-creases the likelihood that she stays with her owncaregiving style. The discrepancies tended to belarger in the case of the fathers who might nothave participated in the search for prior attune-ment äs much äs the mothers. Considering the im-portance of continuity between microsystems foryoung children, we suggest that, in the ecologicalSystems model (Bronfenbrenner, 1979; Peters &Kontos, 1987), the ways to enhance attunementbetween the child's main caregivers through priorselection and later communication should be stud-ied more carefully.

In sum, our study provided evidence for con-siderable discrepancies between parents and pro-fessional caregivers in their childrearing attitudesand views of the quality of the relationship be-tween child and caregiver. Discrepancies in author-itarian control and support were associated with alower degree of child well-being in the care set-ting. Better communication between parents andnonparental caregivers did lead to better attunementin terms of the perception of the child-caregiverrelationship and to a higher degree of child well-being. We suggest that attunement of basic child-rearing attitudes—through careful matching ofparents and caregivers—should be reached beforeparents decide on nonparental care for their child.After choosing a care setting, parents should beable to communicate openly with the caregiversabout the children in their care. Both prior match-ing and later communication may help the childto feel more at ease in the care setting.

NOTEWe acknowledge the financial support of Programmer-ings College Onderzoek Jeugd [Programming Board onYouth Research] Grant 144 to Louis Tavecchio andMarinus van Uzendoorn. We are grateful for the assis-tance of P. G. M. van Baardewijk, A. M. J. Brauers, andW. H. M. Greijn in collecting the data. The first authorwas a fellow of the Netherlands Institute for AdvancedStudy in the Humanities and Social Sciences when themanuscript was fmished.

REFERENCES

Ainslie, R. C. (1990). Family and center contributions tothe adjustment of infants in full-time day care. NewDirections for Child Development, 49, 39-52.

Barrett-Lennard, G. T. (1962). Dimensions of therapistresponse äs causal factors in therapeutic change. Psy-chological Monographs, 76, (43, Whole No. 562).

Baumrind, D. (1971). Current patterns of parental au-thority. Developmental Psychology Monographs, 4,1-103.

Belsky, J., & Eggebeen, D. (1991). Early and extensivematernal employment and young children's socio-emotional development: Children of the NationalLongitudinal Survey of Youth. Journal of Marriageand the Family, 53, 1083-1110.

Block, J. H. (1981). The Childrearing Practices Report(CRPR): A sei of Q items for the description ofparental socialization attitudes and values. Unpub-lished manuscript, Institute of Human Development,University of California, Berkeley.

Bollen, K. A. (1989). Structural equations with latentvariables. New York: Wiley.

Bronfenbrenner, U. (1979). The ecology of human de-velopment. Cambridge, MA: Harvard UniversityPress.

Clerkx, L. E., & Van Uzendoorn, M. H. (1992). Childcare in a Dutch context. On the history, current Status,

Childreanng Attitudes 781

and evaluation of nonmaternal child care in theNetherlands In M E Lamb, K J Sternberg, C PHwang, & A G Broberg (Eds), Child care m con-text Cross-cultural perspectives (pp 55-81) Hills-dale, NJ Erlbaum

Dekovic, M , Janssens, M A M , & Gems, J R M(1991) Factor structure and construct vahdity of theBlock Child Rearmg Practices Report (CRPR) Psy-chological Assessment, 3, 182-187

Dünn, G, Eventt, B , & Pickles, A (1993) Modelimgcovarmnces and latent variables usmg EQS LondonChapman & Hall

Endsley, R C , Mmish, P A , & Zhou, Q (1993) Par-ent mvolvement and quality of day care m propnetarycenters Journal of Research m Childhood Educatwn,7, 53-61

Erwin, P J , Sanson, A , Amos, D , & Bradley, B S(1993) Family day care and day care centers Care-givers, family and child differences, and their imph-cations Early Child Development and Care, 86, 89-103

Feagans, L V , & Manlove, E E (1994) Parents, m-fants, and day-care teachers Interrelations and impli-cations for better child care Journal of Applied De-velopmental Psychology, 15, 585-602

Gems, J R M , Vermulst, A A, Boxtel van, D A A M ,Janssens, J M A M , Zutphen van, R A H , &Fellmg, A J A (1993) Parentmg m Dutch famihesA representative description of Dutch family life mterms of vahdated concepts representmg charactens-tics of parents, children, the family äs a System andparental socio-cultural value orientations NijmegenUniversity of Nijmegen, Institute of Family Studies

Ghazvim, A S , & Readdick, C A (1994) Parent-caregiver communication and quality of care in di-verse care settings Early Childhood Research Quar-terly, 9, 207-222

Gurman, A S (Ed ) (1977) The patient's perception ofthe therapeutic relationship In A handbook of re-search Effective psychotherapy (pp 503-543) NewYork Pergamon Press

Hoffman, M L (1984) Parent disciphne, moral mter-nahzation, and development of prosocial motivationIn E Staub, D Bar-Tal, J Karylowski, & J Reykowski(Eds ), Development and mamtenance of prosocialbehavior(pp 117-138) New York Plenum Press

Hoffman, M L (1988) Moral development In M HBornstein & M E Lamb (Eds ), Developmental psy-chology An advanced textbooL (2nd ed , pp 497-548)Hillsdale.NJ Erlbaum

Howes, C (1991) Caregivmg environments and theirconsequences for children The expenence in theUnited States In E Melhuish & P Moss (Eds ), Daycare for young children International perspectives(pp 185-197) London/New York Tavistock/Rout-ledge

Howes, C , & Hamilton, C E (1993) The changing ex-penence of child care Changes m teachers and inteacher-child relationships and children's social com-petence with peers Early Childhood Research Quar-terly, 8, 15-32

Kochanska, G (1995) Children's temperament, moth-ers' disciphne, and secunty of attachment Multiplepathways to emergmg mternahzation Child Develop-ment, 66, 597-615

Kochanska, G , Kuczynski, L , & Radke-Yarrow, M(1989) Correspondence between mothers' self-reported and observed childreanng practices ChildDevelopment, 60, 56-63

Lamb, M E (m press) Nonparental child care Context,quality, correlates, and consequences In W Dämon(Gen Ed ), I E Sigel, & K A Rennmger (VolEds ), Handbook of child psychology Child psychol-ogy in practice New York Wiley

Lamb, M E , Sternberg, K J , Hwang, C P , &Broberg, A G (Eds) (1992) Child care m contextCross-cultural perspectives Hillsdale, NJ Erlbaum

Main, M (1991) Metacogmtive knowledge, metacogm-tive momtonng, and Singular (coherent) versus multiple(mcoherent) models of attachment Fmdmgs and direc-tions for future research In C M Parkes, J Stevenson-Hmde, & P Mams (Eds ), Attachment across the lifecycle(pp 127-159) London Routledge

Nelson, F, & Garduque, L (1991) The expenence andperception of contmuity between home and day carefrom the perspectives of child, mother, and caregiverEarly Child Development and Care, 68, 99-111

Nsamenang, A B (1992) Human development m cul-tural context A Third World perspective NewburyPark, CA Sage

Peters, D L, & Kontos, S (1987) Contmuity and dis-contmuity of expenence An Intervention perspectiveIn D L Peters & S Kontos (Eds ), Contmuity anddiscontinuity of expenence in child care (pp 1-16)Norwood, NJ Ablex

Pianta, R C (Ed)(1992) Beyond the parent The roleofother adults in children's lives New York Jossey-Bass

Rolhns, B C , & Thomas, D L (1979) Parental sup-port, power and control techmques m the socializationof children In W R Burr, R Hill, F J Nye, & J LReiss (Eds ), Contemporary theones about the family(Vol l ,pp 317-364) London Free Press

Rutter, M (1995) Maternal deprivation In M Born-stein (Ed ), Handbook of parentmg Vol 4 Appliedand practical parenting (pp 3-31) Mahwah, NJ Erl-baum

Shimom, R , & Ferguson, B (1992) Rethmking parentmvolvement in child care programs Child & YouthCare Forum, 21, 105-118

Tabachmck, B G , & Fidell, L S (1989) Usmg multivariate stalistics New York Harper & Row