Newsletter of the lnstitute of Social Science, The University of Tokyo
ISSN 1340-7155

SocialScienceParent-child
Relationships andChild Development

March 201756

Published by
Institute of Social Science
The University of Tokyo
Editorial Committee
Nakagawa Junji
Ikeda Yoko
Distribution
Social Science Japan is available on
the World Wide Web at:
http://newslet.iss.u-tokyo.ac.jp
All Inquiries toSocial Science Japan
Institute of Social Science
The University of Tokyo
7-3-1 Hongo, Bunkyo-ku
Tokyo 113-0033 JAPANTel +81 3 5841 4988
Fax +81 3 5841 4905
E-mail: ssjinfo@iss.u-tokyo.ac.jp
Cover
Cover photographs by Yoko Ikeda
ISS building and Yasuda Auditorium
at the University of Tokyo, Hongo
Campus
Editorial Notes
All personal names are given in thecustomary order in the native
language of the person unlessotherwise requested.
Acknowledgements
We would like to thank Dr. Maggie
Gibbons for her Japanese to English
translations and Dr. Robert Sautéfor his editorial and proofreading
assistance.
Copyright © 2017 by the Institute ofSocial Science, The University ofTokyo, except where noted. All
rights reserved.

Parent-child Relationships and Child Development
The Center for Social Research and Data Archives at the University of Tokyo celebrates its 20th Anniversary this year. The Center is the home of the Institute of Social
Science’s (ISS's) Social Science Japan Data Archive. This issue’s (SSJN 56) featured
articles, the product of a collaborative research initiative between the Benesse Educational Research and Development Institute and ISS, puts to use the Archive’s
panel surveys on parents and their children. Ishida Hiroshi describes the Centerand the Data Archive and provides a succinct overview of the project. Kimura
Haruo focuses on parents’ concerns over children’s lifestyles, including daily routines and study habits. Ota Masahi explores the effects of family socio-economic
background on school children’s abilities across grade levels. As a key in helping
children to become independent, Tomabechi Natsuho examines family rules for factors that influences rule setting. Kagawa Mei looks into what contributes to mothers’ feelings that they understand their children. She focuses especially on types ofparenting styles. Elaborating on different types of parenting styles, Okabe Satoshi
discusses their effects on children’s learning.
Typically, Japanese school years are referred to as first through sixth grade in elementary school and first through third grade in middle school and in high school.
Making it easier for our worldwide readers, we use 1st- through 12th-year to depict
these grades in this issue’s articles.
ISS Research Report introduces a new ISS associate professor Tanaka Ryuichi, who
discusses his research in the economics of education. This issue’s Focus on ISS, thelast installment of the three-part series by Nakamura Naofumi and Genda Yuji on
Kibougaku and disaster work, introduces a book born out of the kibougaku project.
The section on the ISS Contemporary Japan Group lists three recent speakers andtheir lectures. Please see the list of recent publications by ISS staff to find out theirlatest research.
Managing Editor, Ikeda Yoko

Table of Contents
Parent-child Relationships and Child Development
ISHIDA Hiroshi Everyday Life and Learning of Children:
How Do Japanese Children Live and What Do Japanese Children Learn?.....................................p.3
KIMURA Haruo Attaining Self-reliance in Uncertain Times:
Children and Parents Share Their Experiences..............................................................................p.7
OTA Masashi Children’s Abilities and Parents’ Socio-Economic Backgrounds ..........................p.10
TOMABECHI Natsuho Factors Affecting the Creation and Alteration of
Family Rules for Children............................................................................................................p.16
KAGAWA Mei How Well Do We Know Our Children?:
The Connection Between Parenting Style and Understanding.....................................................p.20
OKABE Satoshi Understanding Parental Involvement in Children’s Education ...........................p.25
ISS Research Report
TANAKA Ryuichi New Developments in Empirical Education Economics in Japan ....................p.30
ISS Contemporary Japan Group.......................................................................................................p.32
Recent Publications by ISS and ISS Staff ..........................................................................................p.34
Focus on ISS
NAKAMURA Naofumi and GENDA Yuji........................................................................................p.36

Page 2Social Science Japan March 2017

Everyday Life and Learning of Children: How Do JapaneseChildren Live and What Do Japanese Children Learn?
1

ISHIDA Hiroshi
collects, preserves, and disseminates social surveys for academic research. Various surveys conducted by the BERD are deposited to the SSJDA
and made available for academic use. More than
100 surveys conducted by the BERD are available
through the SSJDA, including the two popular
sets of surveys, Monograph Series: Elementary
School Students Now and Monograph Series: The
World of Junior High School Students. These surveys are frequently analyzed especially by graduate and undergraduate students.

Ishida Hiroshi is a professor at the Institute of Social Science,
the University of Tokyo
Institute of Social Science
The University of Tokyo
7-3-1 Hongo, Bunkyo-ku
Tokyo 113-0033
E-mail: ishida@iss.u-tokyo.ac.jp

Introduction
The Institute of Social Science (ISS) of the University of Tokyo and the Benesse Educational
Research and Development Institute launched a
new project on “Everyday Life and Learning ofChildren” in January 2014. The two institutions
have a long history of collaboration even before
this new project began. The Benesse Educational
Research and Development Institute or the BERD
is one of leading research institutions on education in Japan. It has been conducting numerous
surveys on education and publishing the results ofthe surveys as well as providing information
about child-rearing and trends in educational
practices. The Center for Social Research and Data
Archives, which is housed in the ISS, manages theSocial Science Japan Data Archive (SSJDA), which1

To promote the use of social surveys deposited in
the SSJDA, the Center for Social Research andData Archives of the ISS organizes year-long Seminars on Secondary Analysis. The data sets deposited by the BERD were used in the Seminars in thepast, and the staff from the BERD acted as lecturers in the Seminars. Based on these previous collaborations, the two institutions agreed to launcha new project and conduct a panel survey of students in elementary, middle, and high schools(grades 1 to 12) about their daily lives and learning experiences and of their parents about theirideas and attitudes towards child-rearing andtheir relationships with their children. The survey
is called the Japanese Longitudinal Study of Children and Parents (JLSCP). It is a longitudinal survey which follows up the same students and parents for a number of years to observe changes.
The Project on “The Everyday Life and Learningof Children”
The new project on “The Everyday Life andLearning of Children” aims to understand thedevelopmental process of learning and daily livesof students as well as changes in the practice andideas of child-rearing and relationships between
parents and children. In particular, the project

The author is grateful to Hashimoto Naomi, Researcher at the Benesse Educational Research and Development Institute, and Kagawa Mei,
Research Associate of the Institute of Social Science, University of Tokyo, for providing me with the details of the survey design of the project
and the Japanese Longitudinal Study of Children and Parents and to the board members of the project for allowing me to introduce various
materials related to the project. Figure 1 and Table 1 are based on the materials appeared in the Benesse Educational Research andDevelopment Institute (ed.), The 2015 Japanese Longitudinal Study of Children and Parents: Preliminary Findings (Tokyo: The Benesse Holdings,2016) and unpublished materials.

Social Science Japan March 2017

Page 3(such as study time at home) by students in elementary, middle, and high school and examine
differences (in study time) across different grades.
We know from the results of the 2015 JLSCP thatstudy time at home generally increases as the students advance the grade.

focuses on the pathways to independence amongchildren. It attempts to describe the processes bywhich students acquire skills and become independent citizens with the ability to learn throughout their entire careers. This project covers students from a wide range of grades: elementary
school (ES) students in grades 1 through 6, middle school (MS) students in grades 7 through 9,
and high school (HS) students in grades 10
through 12. In addition to students, their parents
are asked to fill out questionnaires. Because it ishard to ask students in ES grades 1, 2, and 3 to fillout questionnaires, responses about the behaviorsof these students are obtained from their parents.

The second type of analysis pertains to trends
across different periods. As shown in Figure 1, we
can compare the results of the surveys conducted
in 2015, 2018, 2021, and 2024 and examinechanges in, for example, study time at homeamong first graders in ES. In this comparison, we
will compare students in the same grade in different periods. It is possible, for example, to examine
the impact of the introduction of a new curriculum on the first graders by comparing the resultsof surveys prior to and after the introduction of a
new curriculum.

Figure 1 shows the survey design and three distinct types of analyses that can be conducted byour project. As shown at the top of the figure, thetarget of our analyses are students in ES grades 16, MS grades 7-9, and HS grades 10-12 and theirparents. As shown on the rows of the figure, there
will be multiple waves of the survey since thesurvey is longitudinal. The first wave was conducted in 2015, and we plan to conduct the survey every year. The first type of analysis that canbe conducted using the survey involves comparison across grades at a particular point in time. We
could compare responses to the same question

The third type of analysis takes advantage of thepanel-type nature of survey design by examining
individual change and development. Because
repeating a grade is extremely rare in Japan, a student in ES grade 1 in 2015 is expected to be a student in ES grade 4 in 2018, a student in MS grade
1 in 2021, and a student in HS grade 1 in 2024. We
will be able to observe the developmental process

Figure 1. Survey Design and Three Types of Analyses

ES
G1

ES
G2

ES
G3

ES
G4

ES
G5

ES
G6

MS
G7

MS
G8

MS
G9

HS
G10

HS
G11

HS
G12

(1) Comparison across Grades

2015
:
:
:
2018
:
:
:

(2) Trends across Different Periods

2021
:
:
:
2024
(3) Individual Change and Development

Page 4Social Science Japan March 2017

of the same student as he/she moves from ES to
MS to HS. He/she may experience changes in
attitudes towards his/her study and his/her relationship with parents following the acquisition of
cognitive and non-cognitive skills.
Another distinctive feature of our project deals
with studying the pair of students and parents.
Asking parents to fill out questionnaires allows
researchers to obtain more accurate information
about not only the characteristics of the parents,
including their education, occupation, and income,but also their attitudes and opinions. These pieces
of information are very hard to collect from thestudents. Furthermore, we should be able to perform the three types of comparative analyses discussed above using both student and parent data.
The following examples illustrate the possible
hypotheses that can be verified by our project. (1)We can examine whether the perceptions about
how often students and mothers interact are consistent between students and parents and whether
the consistency is more marked when the students
are in earlier grades. (2) We can observe the impact
of introduction of a new curriculum not only on
students but also on parents and the relationshipbetween the two. A new curriculum may increase
the frequency of interactions between students andparents in ES while the introduction of a new curriculum may not have the same effect on the stu-

dents of MS. (3) We can examine the parallelchanges in individual students and individual parents over the years. The developmental learning
process and acquisition of non-cognitive skills by
students may lead to the changes in the ways theirparents relate to students.
The Design of the Japanese Longitudinal Studyof Children and Parents (JLSCP)
JLSCP is targeted at the pairs of students in elementary, middle, and high schools and their parents residing in Japan. The students were selected
randomly from the list of students who were registered with the Benesse Corporation. Students
were sampled separately from each school grade
after they were stratified by regional block andwhether they were members of Shinken seminars,
supplementary educational program run by the
Benesse Corporation. From February to May,
2014, the BERD sent requests to sampled pairs ofstudents and parents asking to become monitorsof the survey, and 21,569 pairs agreed to participate in the survey. In July and August 2015, thequestionnaire survey was sent to these pairs ofstudents and parent, and they either filled out thequestionnaire by hand and returned by mail or
responded through the internet.
Table 1 shows the number of monitored pairs
who were sent questionnaires, the number of stu-

The Number of Monitored Pairs, the Number of Responses, and the Response Rates by Grade
Table 1. The Number of Monitored Pairs, the Number of Responses, and the Response Rates by GradeChildrenChildren & Parents
GradesNumber of
Monitored Pairs

Number of
Responses

ES Grade 1

1,910

䠉

ES Grate 2

1,774

䠉

ES Grade 3

1,820

䠉

ES Grade 4

1,709

1,345

78.7%

ES Grade 5

1,704

1,292

75.8%

ES Grade 6

1,667

1,335

MS Grade 7

1,717

MS Grade 8

Sub-total
Response
Rates

Number of
Responses

Response
Rates

1,755

91.9%

1,434

80.8%

1,510

83.0%

1,345

78.7%

1,293

75.9%

80.1%

1,336

80.1%

1,343

78.2%

1,351

78.7%

1,838

1,366

74.3%

1,384

75.3%

MS Grade 9

1,824

1,381

75.7%

1,393

76.4%

HS Grade 10

1,795

1,267

70.6%

1,287

71.7%

HS Grade 11

1,808

1,291

71.4%

1,302

72.0%

HS Grade 12

2,003

1,360

67.9%

1,374

68.6%

Total

21,56911,98074.6%

16,764

77.7%

Social Science Japan March 2017

Response
Rates

Parents

䠉

䠉

78.2%

76.1%

69.9%

-

Sub-total
Response
Rates
85.5%

78.2%

76.8%

70.7%

-

Page 5

dents and parents who responded, and the
response rates by grade level. Among the parents,
77.7 percent of 21,569 responded to the survey.
Among the students, the response rate was 74.6
percent (of the total of 16,065 students). The
response rates were highest among students inelementary schools and their parents, followed bythose in middle schools, and the lowest rates
were from those in high schools. The parents ofstudents in ES grade 1 had the highest response
rate, 92 percent. The response rates of parents
were always higher than those of students.
The questionnaire is composed of three sets ofquestions. The first set contains basic questions
about daily lives (time use), behaviors (activities
at school and after school), school work (study
time, favorite subjects), and educational andoccupational aspirations. This set of questions is
asked every year. The second set contains questions asked every three years. Three kinds ofrotating questions are constructed: (1) items related to assistance with household chores and places
to play and hang around, (2) items related to
study, including methods and the content ofPage 6study at school, and (3) items related to social
relationships, including relationships with friends
and adults. The third set of questions focuses on a
specific topic and is asked in only one year.
The Future of the JLSCPThe second wave of the JLSCP was already conducted in July and August 2016, and the data set
is currently cleaned and coded. The questionnaireof the 2016 JLSCP contained the same basic questions which are repeated every year and a seriesof questions about study (the method and content
of study at school and students’ attitudes towards
studying) that are asked every three years. The
third wave of the JLSCP is currently in the planning stage. The preliminary findings from the2016 JLSCP will be reported at the public forumin 2017. The articles included in this issue grewout of the first public forum held in July 2016
reporting the analyses of the first wave (2015) of
the JLSCP. Our project hopes not only to continue
conducting the longitudinal survey but also toreport major findings from subsequent waves of
the JLSCP.

Social Science Japan March 2017

Attaining Self-reliance in Uncertain Times:
Children and Parents Share Their Experiences
KIMURA Haruo
and the Japan Child Panel Survey (JCPS) conducted by Keio University’s Panel Data Research Center (Akabayashi, Naoi, and Shikishima 2016). Bothof these surveys investigate children’s academic
abilities and the formative factors thereof.

Kimura Haruo is a Deputy Manager of Benesse Educational
Research and Development Institute and a visiting associate
professor at the University of Tokyo
Benesse Educational Research and Development Institute1-34 Ochiai
Tama-shiTokyo 206-0033
E-mail: h-kimura@mail.benesse.co.jp

1. Introduction
The Institute for Social Science at the University ofTokyo and the Benesse Educational Research andDevelopment Institute (BERD) have launched amajor research initiative, the Japanese Longitudinal Study of Children and Parents (JLSCP), apanel survey of over 20,000 families. BERD’s
research on children, parents, and teachers dates
back to its founding in 1980. It has conducted
more than 400 surveys, invaluable sources of
empirical insight into education and parenting inJapan that have been used in a variety of ways.
However, most of these surveys have not followed
individual people over time, which is why JLSCP
is a breakthrough project that will reveal “parent
and child development” in unprecedented detail.
Panel studies of students in elementary and middle schools and their parents are rare. Two notable
exceptions are the Japan Education Longitudinal
Study (JELS) led by Mimizuka Hiroaki at Ochanomizu University (see Mimizuka and Makino 2007)

Social Science Japan March 2017

In light of these studies and others, the designersof the JLSCP made children’s development ofself-reliance a focal point of the new survey. To
best capture children’s progress towards independence, the survey will follow children from first
grade through twelfth. This long span allows
researchers to ask detailed questions about
lifestyles and values as well as academics. The
multifaceted results will be a valuable source ofevidence for reviewing and considering educational policies with a broader perspective.
This paper draws upon the first round of surveys,
conducted in 2015, and introduces some of themore striking results that illustrate what children
and parents are experiencing at present. As only
one round of surveys has been completed, wecannot look at how individuals change over time.
However, it is critical that we accurately takestock of what we know now to prepare for futurecomparisons.
2. Parental Attitudes
For some time, observers have been warning thatsocietal trends in Japan such as the aging society,nuclear families, information revolution, anddecline in employment security would make itharder for children to become independent fromtheir parents (e.g., Yamada 1999). The JLSCP survey
asked parents, “Are you anxious about whether
your child will be independent by the time theyreach adulthood?” 51.2 percent of parents said they
were anxious. Figure 1 shows how parental concern varies towards sons and daughters.
The first thing we see is that roughly half of theparents are anxious regardless of the age of theirchildren. Concern does not fall as the children
grow older—parents’ concerns over children

Page 7

tions that eased those concerns, information thatwould be of great benefit to us.

achieving independence are still high even when
students enter middle and high school. The second thing is that parents are more worried aboutsons than daughters. This discrepancy may be
due to girls generally maturing faster than boys
or it may reflect higher expectations placed on
boys. That so many parents are uneasy about
their children becoming self-reliant reflects thesituation of parent-child relations in Japan today.

3. Children’s Lifestyles
Next, we turn to results to questions on children’s
daily routines, which raise several critical points
to consider. First, children are very busy. As theygrow older, children spend more time studying
and consuming media and less time sleeping. 77.8
percent of middle school students and 80.5 percent of high school students selected “my daily
life is busy.” Since the mid-2000s, when a decline
in students’ academic performance became asocial problem in Japan, the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology has
increased its efforts to reverse the decline. These
efforts have had some success, but they may lose
ground if students feel more pressed for time.

What else are parents concerned about? The survey
provided a list of 37 potential sources of concern or
frustration, and parents were asked to mark all thatapplied to them. The results are shown in Table 1.
The most common choice was “tidiness, putting
things away,” selected by 57.1 percent of respondents. “Relationships with friends” was the second
most common choice among parents of elementary
students, while “cell and smart phone use” was aclose second for parents of senior high school students. These choices indicate that parents are concerned about their children’s overall daily lives
besides education. However, parents of middle
school and high school students also frequently
selected items related to academic performancesuch as “school grades” and “career track, school
selection,” showing that parents concerns shift as
their children age.

The second important issue is children’s beliefs intheir own abilities. As children grow, they becomeless likely to report feeling “good” at somethingfor various reasons and lose self-confidence. One
might see this change as unsurprising, but it presumably has a negative effect on adolescents’
identity formation.
Third, there is a gender gap in several areas.
Compared to girls, it seems that boys matureslowly. Girls frequently help with housework andinteract more with other people, having higher
exposure to social and emotional experiences.

As we follow families in future surveys, we willlearn what reduces parental concern over specificissues. For example, if parents report lower levelsof worry about childrearing supports and education at home, we may be able to identify interven-

The fourth concern is the income gap between

Figure 1. Parental levels of concern over children achieving independenceby grade and gender
(%)

80

Boys
60

52.1

40

46.3

55.3

50.1

49.6

45.2

46.3

46.9

54.7

42.6

54.9

42.4

58.2

57.1

60.6

57.1

58.7

58.3

51.8

50.1

50.8

49.2

47.5

8th

9th

10th

11th

12th

45.7

Girls
20

0
1st

2nd

3rd

4th

5th

6th

7th

Grade Level*Rate is the total responding “very concerned” or “somewhat concerned.”

Page 8Social Science Japan March 2017

Table 1. What parents worry about most by children's age group (％)

All ages

Grades 1-3

Grades 4-6

Grades 7-9

Grades 10-12

Tidiness,䐟 putting things
away

57.1

Tidiness,
putting things
away

58.3

Tidiness,
putting things
away

59.7

Tidiness,
putting things
away

57.9

Tidiness,
putting things
away

52.4

䐠 Study habits

39.2

Relationships
with friends

47.5

Relationships
with friends

42.3

School grades

45.7

Cell and smart
phone use

52.0

䐡Relationships
with friends

38.3

Study habits

40.4

Study habits

41.0

Career track,schoolselection

43.6

Career track,schoolselection

51.5

䐢

Family financial
state

34.7

Homework,
preparation,and review

35.5

Gaming style

36.8

Study habits

42.3

Family financial
state

37.4

31.0

Emotional
growth andcharacter

34.8

Emotional
growth andcharacter

33.2

Family financial
state

37.3

School grades

35.7

Homework,䐣 preparation,and review* Columns represent a ranking of the five most prevalent parental concerns for each group. Percentages are of parents in each group
who noted a particular worry.

* Columns represent a ranking of the five most prevalent parental concerns for eachfamilies. Japan has a full-fledged system for supdence. Second, the shift may further advantage
plemental
education
outsideofschoolsuchasstudents
more
affluent families
that can help
group. Percentages are of parents in each groupwhofromnoteda particularworry.
cram schools, but it is costly. Comparing families
their children tackle the new challenges. We mustwith a yearly income below five million yen to
ask if we can maintain a high level of equality infamilies with income of eight million yen or higheducation going forward. Finally, given that ourer reveals that the wealthier families spend morechildren are now struggling to become self-reliant,than twice as much on education every month. In
we need to strike a balance by helping them develaddition, how much parents encourage their chilop not just academically, but also socially and emodren to study also varies widely by household
tionally. These concerns are what motivate us toincome and their cultural environment.
continue this survey and apply its results.
For any of these issues, it is essential that we continuously follow how differences in families’ situations affect children’s development over time
4. Conclusion
In Japan today, there is a debate over how torevise the K-12 curriculum and reform the university entrance system. Both arguments involve
expanding educational goals to enhance various
skills as well as “knowledge.” In today’s rapidlychanging society, children need to work collaboratively and to have a range of practical problem
solving skills. So the idea is to shift from passiveto active learning and to measure skills rather
than knowledge.
In general, I agree with the direction of thesereforms, but I do have some reservations. First,
there is a risk that promoting the development ofdifferent skills will make children feel morepressed for time and may damage their self-confi-

Social Science Japan March 2017

Acknowledgements
The Japanese Longitudinal Study of Children andParents 2015 was a joint project of the Institute forSocial Science at the University of Tokyo and theChildren’s Lifestyles and Learning research project at the Benesse Educational Research andDevelopment Institute. Permission was granted
for the use of the survey data.
References
Akabayashi, Hideo, Michio Naoi, and Chizuru
Shikishima. 2016. Gakuryoku, shinri, katei
kankyō no keizai bunseki [Academic Ability,
Psychology, and Home Environment–An
Economic Analysis]. Tokyo: Yuhikaku.
Mimizuka, Hiroaki and Katsuko Makino. 2007.
Gakuryoku to toranjishon no kiki [Academic
Ability and Transition Crisis]. Kaneko Shobo.
Yamada, Masahiro. 1999. Parasaito singuru no jidai[Age of the Parasite Singles]. Tokyo: Chikuma Shobō.

Page 9Children’s Abilities and Parents’ Socio-Economic
Backgrounds
OTA Masashi
ma et al. (2012), and high school students by
Inoue and Nakanishi (2012).
The existing literature lacks studies that encompass students from elementary through highschool. Also missing is research on how the relationship between students’ ability and family
background vary by grade level. This paper is across-sectional study of students from grades 1-12
that examines how the relationship between students’ ability and parents’ socio-economic background changes as students grow older.

Ota Masashi is a project researcher at Benesse Educational
Research and Development Institute
Benesse Educational Research and Development Institute1-34 Ochiai
Tama-shiTokyo 206-0033
E-mail: m.ota@mail.benesse.co.jp

1. Introduction
The extent to which people’s non-cognitive abilities affect their employment outcomes (Heckman
et al. 2006) has become a topic of interest in Japan.
Recent empirical studies on the impact of noncognitive abilities on socio-economic attainment
include Ishida et al. (2016), Lee and Ohtake (2014),
and Shiotani (2014). These studies laid thegroundwork for others to explore the question:
How much is social class mobility constrained
due to a cycle in which parents’ socio-economic
backgrounds affect children’s skills acquisitionand consequently their socio-economic attainment? Recent studies in Japan on the influence ofparents’ socio-economic background on non-cognitive skills include Akabayashi and Shikishima(2016), a panel study of elementary and middle
school students, and cross-sectional studies of elementary and middle school students by Shikishi1

2. Data, Methodology, and Model
The data used in this analysis are taken from theJapanese Longitudinal Study of Children and Parents 2015 (the 2015 JLSCP), a joint survey conducted by the Institute of Social Science, University of Tokyo, and the Benesse Educational Researchand Development Institute as part of the Children's Life and Learning Research Project. Questionnaires were sent to 21,569 parents of children
in grades 1-12 and 16,776 responses were collected. Responses from 13,302 parents are used in thisanalysis.
The variables assessed here, 1) factual knowledge
and specific techniques; 2) skills of critical thinking, judgement, expression, etc.; and 3) readinessfor learning humanities proactivity, respect fordiversity, partnership, etc. are based in part on the“three elements of competency” which are part of
the framework used in the OECD Education 2030
recommendations (MEXT 2015). In total, nine
items from the 2015 JLSCP are used. The variable“knowledge/techniques” combines responses toquestions on sports and physical activity andmemorization. The variable “critical thinking/judgment/expression” combines responses regarding logical reasoning, original ideas, and ability topresent ideas. 1 Finally, the variable “indepen-

The wording on the logical reasoning item in the questionnaire for students in grades 1-3 is slightly different than the questionnaire for older
students. For younger students, the item states “Thinks in a reasonable way.” For all other students, the item is “Thinks logically (in areasonable way).”

Page 10Social Science Japan March 2017

dence/diversity/cooperation/leadership” combines
answers to items on autonomy, openness to otherviewpoints, ability to get along with many typesof people, and leadership.
The nine items in the survey ask parents to rate
their children’s abilities as “very strong,” “somewhat strong,” “somewhat weak,” “very weak,” or“don’t know.” Parents answering “don’t know”
are excluded from the analysis. The responses“very strong” or “somewhat strong” are combined into a single “strong” group and the “veryweak” and “somewhat weak” are combined into
one “weak” group.
Parents’ socio-economic background is measured
using mothers’ and fathers’ education level(dummy variables of associate degree or higher)
and household income in the previous year, measured in million yen intervals. To examine
whether the effects of parents’ socio-economic
background on their children’s abilities varies
across grade levels, parents were divided bygrade level into four groups—lower elementary(grades 1-3), upper elementary (4-6), middle (7-9)
and high school (10-12).
In this analysis, we do not look at children’s abilities as a whole but rather use combinations ofquestions and answers to discern patterned variations in their abilities and how a family’s socioeconomic background influences these abilities.
The object of this analysis is not to ask if overall

ability is high or low but to see what type of childparents are likely to raise given family background.
The analysis was conducted using Stata LCA Plugin version 1.2 (2015). Homogeneity of latent
structures across groups is assumed and a latentclass multinomial logit model is used.
3. Analysis
3.1 Children’s Grade Level and Ability
In this section, we introduce latent class proportions and conditional response probabilities.
Based on goodness of fit indicators and interpretability, we used an 8-class model. Table 1
shows each latent class configuration by groupand its conditional response probabilities (simultaneous estimation of covariance is discussed
below). Each class is interpreted as follows.
Class 1: Weak overall. The conditional response
probability for “memorization” is 50 percent or
higher, but weak for other items in general.
Class 2: Quiet and cooperative. Weak in logicalreasoning, original ideas, expression, and leadership, but strong in openness to other viewpoints,
getting along with many types of people, andcooperation. Unlikely to seek attention.
Class 3: Better with people than concepts. Weak atlogical reasoning and abstract thought but strong
in expression, getting along with others, and lead-㼀㼍㼎㼘㼑㻌㻝㻚㻌㻤㻙㼏㼘㼍㼟㼟㻌㼙㼛㼐㼑㼘㻌㼘㼍㼠㼑㼚㼠㻌㼏㼘㼍㼟㼟㻌㼜㼞㼛㼜㼛㼞㼠㼕㼛㼚㼟㻌㼍㼚㼐㻌㼏㼛㼚㼐㼕㼠㼕㼛㼚㼍㼘㻌㼞㼑㼟㼜㼛㼚㼟㼑㻌㼜㼞㼛㼎㼍㼎㼕㼘㼕㼠㼕㼑㼟㻌
Table 1. 8-class model latent class proportions and conditional response probabilities㻯㼘㼍㼟㼟㻝
㼃㼑㼍㼗㼛㼢㼑㼞㼍㼘㼘

㻯㼘㼍㼟㼟㻌㼜㼞㼛㼜㼛㼞㼠㼕㼛㼚㻸㼛㼣㼑㼞㻌㼑㼘㼑㼙㼑㼚㼠㼍㼞㼥㻚㻜㻠㻞㼁㼜㼜㼑㼞㻌㼑㼘㼑㼙㼑㼚㼠㼍㼞㼥㻚㻜㻣㻜㻹㼕㼐㼐㼘㼑
㻚㻝㻜㻡
㻴㼕㼓㼔
㻚㻜㻥㻢
㻯㼛㼚㼐㼕㼠㼕㼛㼚㼍㼘㻌㼞㼑㼟㼜㼛㼚㼟㼑㻌㼜㼞㼛㼎㼍㼎㼕㼘㼕㼠㼥㻿㼜㼛㼞㼠㼟
㻚㻞㻡㻡㻹㼑㼙㼛㼞㼕㼦㼍㼠㼕㼛㼚㻚㻡㻣㻤㻸㼛㼓㼕㼏㼍㼘
㻚㻝㻢㻤㻻㼞㼕㼓㼕㼚㼍㼘㻌㼕㼐㼑㼍㼟㻚㻞㻟㻞㻱㼤㼜㼞㼑㼟㼟㼕㼛㼚㻚㻜㻥㻥㻭㼡㼠㼛㼚㼛㼙㼥
㻚㻞㻜㻡㻻㼜㼑㼚㻌㼠㼛㻌㼛㼠㼔㼑㼞㻌㼢㼕㼑㼣㼟㻚㻝㻥㻡㻲㼞㼕㼑㼚㼐㼘㼥㻌㼠㼛㼣㼍㼞㼐㼟㻌㼛㼠㼔㼑㼞㼟 㻚㻝㻞㻤㻲㼞㼕㼑㼚㼐㼘㼥㻌㼠㼛㼣㼍㼞㼐㼟㻸㼑㼍㼐㼑㼞
㻚㻜㻜㻢

Social Science Japan March 2017㻯㼘㼍㼟㼟㻞

㻯㼘㼍㼟㼟㻡

㻯㼘㼍㼟㼟㻢

㻯㼘㼍㼟㼟㻣

㻯㼘㼍㼟㼟㻤

㻮㼑㼠㼠㼑㼞㻌㼣㼕㼠㼔㻽㼡㼕㼑㼠㻘 㻮㼑㼠㼠㼑㼞㻌㼣㼕㼠㼔㻹㼕㼐㻙㼞㼍㼚㼓㼑 㻿㼠㼡㼐㼕㼛㼡㼟㻘㻽㼡㼕㼑㼠㻘
㼏㼛㼛㼜㼑㼞㼍㼠㼕㼢 㼜㼑㼛㼜㼘㼑㻌㼠㼔㼍㼚㼜㼑㼛㼜㼘㼑
㼏㼛㼛㼜㼑㼞㼍㼠㼕㼢㼑㼙㼕㼤㼠㼔㼛㼡㼓㼔㼠㼒㼡㼘㼏㼛㼚㼏㼑㼜㼠㼟
㼑㼠㼔㼍㼚㻯㼘㼍㼟㼟㻟

㻯㼘㼍㼟㼟㻠

㻿㼗㼕㼘㼘㼑㼐
㼒㼛㼘㼘㼛㼣㼑㼞

㻲㼞㼕㼑㼚㼐㼘㼥
㼠㼑㼍㼙㼙㼍㼠㼑

㻿㼠㼞㼛㼚㼓
㼛㼢㼑㼞㼍㼘㼘

㻚㻜㻞㻟
㻚㻜㻣㻝
㻚㻝㻝㻢
㻚㻝㻤㻜

㻚㻝㻤㻞
㻚㻝㻥㻡
㻚㻝㻢㻢
㻚㻝㻞㻣

㻚㻞㻟㻣
㻚㻝㻠㻞
㻚㻜㻢㻡
㻚㻜㻟㻟

㻚㻜㻢㻥
㻚㻜㻣㻜
㻚㻜㻥㻡
㻚㻝㻡㻜

㻚㻜㻢㻢
㻚㻜㻥㻜
㻚㻜㻤㻟
㻚㻜㻠㻣

㻚㻝㻟㻤
㻚㻝㻟㻜
㻚㻝㻟㻢
㻚㻝㻝㻟

㻚㻞㻠㻠
㻚㻞㻟㻞
㻚㻞㻟㻠
㻚㻞㻡㻟

㻚㻢㻣㻝
㻚㻠㻝㻤
㻚㻞㻠㻡
㻚㻞㻡㻤
㻚㻝㻣㻜
㻚㻢㻣㻡
㻚㻣㻥㻞
㻚㻤㻟㻡
㻚㻜㻤㻣

㻚㻤㻢㻡
㻚㻡㻟㻜
㻚㻝㻝㻣
㻚㻡㻠㻠
㻚㻣㻡㻣
㻚㻣㻣㻤
㻚㻢㻟㻜
㻚㻥㻣㻝
㻚㻥㻢㻞

㻚㻢㻞㻤
㻚㻢㻟㻢
㻚㻝㻝㻢
㻚㻤㻜㻟
㻚㻟㻠㻣
㻚㻢㻠㻟
㻚㻠㻤㻤
㻚㻣㻣㻝
㻚㻝㻞㻣

㻚㻡㻝㻣
㻚㻥㻜㻡
㻚㻥㻥㻟
㻚㻡㻠㻜
㻚㻟㻝㻝
㻚㻣㻣㻟
㻚㻣㻞㻣
㻚㻡㻡㻝
㻚㻝㻠㻣

㻚㻣㻠㻠
㻚㻥㻟㻠
㻚㻟㻥㻞
㻚㻜㻜㻠
㻚㻠㻤㻥
㻚㻟㻞㻜
㻚㻢㻠㻤
㻚㻤㻥㻟
㻚㻠㻠㻝

㻚㻣㻜㻣
㻚㻟㻜㻤
㻚㻜㻜㻜
㻚㻜㻣㻥
㻚㻜㻣㻞
㻚㻝㻟㻥
㻚㻝㻣㻡
㻚㻣㻠㻢
㻚㻝㻢㻞

㻚㻣㻤㻡
㻚㻤㻣㻤
㻚㻤㻢㻡
㻚㻣㻢㻢
㻚㻥㻝㻤
㻚㻥㻡㻟
㻚㻥㻞㻠
㻚㻥㻢㻥
㻚㻤㻥㻟

Page 11

Table 2. Childrens' abilities--Multinomial

Table 2 Childrens' abilities--Multinomial logit latent class regression model
Class1

Class2

Class3

Weak overall

Quiet, cooperative

Better with people than concepts

Base category:Class 8 (Strong overall)
School level
Lower elementary

Upper elementary

MiddleHigh(constant)
FemaleMother college graduate
Father college graduate
Household income(constant)
FemaleMother college graduate
Father college graduate
Household income(constant)
FemaleMother college graduate
Father college graduate
Household income(constant)
FemaleMother college graduate
Father college graduate
Household income

B
-.300
-.137
-.009
.466
-.266
-.270
-.006
-.403
-.238
-.079
-.209
.288
-.763
-.075
-.042
.268
-.087
.093
-.394
-.138

**

*
**

**

SE
.456
.262
.307
.293
.075
.313
.216
.231
.239
.037
.248
.175
.185
.188
.026
.266
.187
.203
.206
.031

ership. Not shy.
Class 4: Mid-range mix. Strong at original ideas,
and getting along with others, but weak at logicalreasoning, openness to other viewpoints andleadership. In other words, good at the easieraspects of reasoning and relationships but not themore difficult aspects.
Class 5: Studious and thoughtful. Weak at expression, leadership, and, in general standing out, but
strong academically, and in logical reasoning aswell as exercising autonomy and openness toother viewpoints.
Class 6: Skilled follower. Strong at sports, academic work, and getting along with others but weakat critical thinking and exercising autonomy.
Class 7: Friendly teammate. Weak at most things,
but strong in sports and getting along with different types of people.
Class 8: Strong overall. Good in all categories.
Looking at differences in class proportions reveals
that proportions for students in class 7 and class 8
are relatively stable across all grade levels. On theother hand, grade level differences are found forstudents in classes 1-6. The relationship is not a
simple linear one, but generally the proportions

Page 12exp(B)
B.741-5.629 *
.872
3.864
.991
.279
1.594
-.337
.767
.007
.763
-.951 *
.994
.837 *.668-.772 *
.788
-.272
.924
-.022
.811
-.769 *
1.334
.790 **
.466
-.151
.928
-.270
.959
-.021
1.307
.193
.917
.058
1.097
-.293
.675
.046
.871
-.052 *

SE
2.187
2.036
.668
.608
.057
.407
.337
.312
.318
.040
.338
.237
.221
.219
.031
.234
.173
.174
.179
.024

exp(B).004
47.672
1.322
.714
1.007
.386
2.308
.462
.762
.978
.463
2.204
.860
.763
.979
1.213
1.060
.746
1.047
.949

B
.491
.060
-.431
-.663
-.029
.496
-.262
-.470
-.622
.011
.182
.101
-.295
-.303
-.033
-.033
-.086
-.040
-.493
-.040

*
**
**
*
**
**

*

SE
.202
.143
.153
.158
.022
.213
.152
.166
.168
.020
.214
.156
.165
.166
.023
.240
.178
.190
.194
.024

exp(B)
B
1.633
1.090
1.062
-.336
.650
-.218
.515
-.132
.971
-.110
1.642
.238
.769
-.185
.625
.053
.537
-.517
1.011
-.053
1.200
-.751
1.107
-.409
.744
-.150
.739
-.287
.967
-.014
.968
-1.85
.918
.502
.961
-.202
.611
.021
.961
-.044

for classes 1, 2, and 5 increase as grade levels
increase. For classes 3, 4, and 6, the reverse istrue—proportions fall as children grow older.
Children in classes 1, 2, and 5 share the traits ofintroverts—quiet, weak at self-expression andleadership. These traits become increasingly common as they progress through middle and highschool while the proportion of students who are
weak at logical reasoning declines.
Performing a latent class analysis of students’abilities identifies these eight different groups.
Although the proportions of students in class 7(friendly teammate) and class 8 (strong overall)
do not vary across grade levels, there is a patternof grade-level variation for the other classes.
3.2 Effects of Parents’ Socioeconomic Background on Children’s Abilities
Given these eight groups of student abilities(latent classes), are there differences related toparents’ socio-economic backgrounds? This section examines how much the likelihood of membership in each latent class varies with parents’
education and income. Table 2 presents the latentclass multinomial logit regression model withclass 8 as the base category and shows the likelihood of membership in each latent class by sex,parents’ education, and household income. Table
3 shows the mean value of the independent vari-Social Science Japan March 2017

logit latent class regression model

nceptsexp(B)
B
1.633
1.090
1.062
-.336
.650
-.218
.515
-.132
.971
-.110
1.642
.238
.769
-.185
.625
.053
.537
-.517
1.011
-.053
1.200
-.751
1.107
-.409
.744
-.150
.739
-.287
.967
-.014
.968
-1.855
.918
.502
.961
-.202
.611
.021
.961
-.044

Class4

Class5Class6Class7

Mid-range mix

Studious, thoughtful

Skilled follower

Friendly teammate

**
**
**

**
*
*

**

SE
.181
.129
.137
.138
.021
.242
.177
.195
.191
.027
.377
.333
.292
.299
.039
.685
.500
.462
.486
.066

exp(B)
B
2.974 -1.655 **
.715
.044
.804
.468
.877
.261
.896
-.022
1.269
-.626 *
.831
.078
1.054
.007
.596
-.233
.948
-.067 *
.472
-1.075 **
.664
.228
.861
.076
.750
.121
.986
-.009
.157
.186
1.653
-.505 **
.817
-.071
1.022
-.089
.957
-.047 *

SE
.445
.213
.291
.254
.029
.316
.225
.242
.241
.033
.271
.193
.208
.207
.026
.216
.161
.173
.176
.022

exp(B)
B.191-.823 *
1.045-.641 *
1.597
.312
1.299
.176
.979
-.078 *
.535
-.539
1.082
-.270
1.007
-.322
.792
.357
.935
-.041
.341
-1.363 **
1.256
-.428
1.079
.044
1.129
.392
.991
.030
1.204 -1.138 *
.603
-.504
.932
-.254
.915
-.112
.954
-.012

SE
.411
.281
.305
.270
.034
.292
.216
.240
.263
.029
.315
.253
.255
.266
.027
.484
.393
.390
.396
.042

exp(B)
.439
.527
1.365
1.193
.925
.583
.763
.725
1.429
.959
.256
.652
1.045
1.480
1.030
.320
.604
.776
.894
.988

B
.534
-.086
-.948
-.347
-.051
.621
-.217
-.391
-.522
-.085
.684
-.363
-.403
-.121
-.112
-.029
-.357
-.342
-.409
-.023

*
**
*
*
**
*
**
**
**
*
*
**
*
*

SE
.212
.146
.159
.159
.023
.235
.173
.179
.189
.030
.224
.166
.173
.176
.029
.241
.182
.191
.199
.023

exp(B)
1.706
.918
.387
.707
.950
1.861
.805
.676
.594
.919
1.982
.696
.668
.886
.894
.971
.700
.711
.665
.977

Mean
valuesof gender backgroundand parent bysocioeconomic
background by class
Table 3 Mean values of Table
gender3.andparentsocioeconomic
class

Lower elementary

Upper elementary

MiddleHigh

FemaleMother college graduate
Father college graduate
Household income
nFemaleMother college graduate
Father college graduate
Household income
nFemaleMother college graduate
Father college graduate
Household income
nFemaleMother college graduate
Father college graduate
Household incomenClass1

Class2

Weakoverall

Quiet,
cooperative

.456
.706
.647
5.22
136
.570
.533
.533
6.54
214
.551
.412
.484
6.93
345
.505
.560
.457
6.61
291

1.00
.804
.609
8.45
46
.783
.349
.493
6.91
152
.784
.549
.483
7.16
348
.539
.539
.583
7.70
568

ables for each class after assigning an optimalclass to each case.
Statistically significant gender effects on membership likelihood are found for lower elementary
students in classes 4 and 6, upper elementary students in class 2, middle school students in classes
2 and 7, and high school students in classes 5 and7. The direction of the effects and which classes
had those effects varies. Despite these variations,the results confirm that gender differences exist

Social Science Japan March 2017Class3

Class4

Class5Class6Class7

Class8Better with
Mid-range
peoplemix
thanconcepts

Studious,thoughtful

Skilledfollower

Friendly
teammate

Strongoverall

.555
.813
.727
7.43
256
.563
.651
.560
6.76
252
.565
.665
.624
7.68
340
.401
.571
.563
7.70
496

.304
.828
.730
6.84
204
.429
.643
.731
7.22
308
.343
.690
.749
8.54
239
.407
.523
.570
8.03
86

.498
.411
.442
6.32
548
.469
.493
.408
6.14
446
.359
.466
.473
6.31
457
.415
.464
.473
7.79
330

.512
.701
.646
7.44
972
.526
.688
.655
7.59
756
.494
.635
.603
7.74
780
.522
.619
.630
8.49
797

.531
.514
.393
6.42
735
.474
.492
.429
7.12
667
.512
.510
.455
6.86
576
.522
.550
.464
7.53
418

.435
.583
.519
6.10
905
.475
.636
.487
6.67
423
.344
.571
.479
7.15
163
.646
.563
.646
7.93
48

from elementary to high school.
Turning to parents’ socio-economic status, parents’ educational backgrounds have an effect onlower elementary students in classes 3 and 7
while household income has an effect on classes
1, 4, 6 and 7. For upper elementary students, parents’ education has an effect in classes 2, 3, 4, and7, whereas household income has an effect inclasses 1, 4, 5, and 7. Among middle school students, parents’ education affects members ofPage 13

classes 1 and 7, while household income affects
only class 7.
Parents’ education levels have an effect on highschool students in classes 3 and 7 while householdincome has an effect in classes 1, 2, and 5. In short,the effects of parents’ socio-economic backgroundare evident at all grade levels. Because class 8,
children good at everything, is the base category,all of these effects are negative. The higher parents’ socio-economic status is, the more likely theirchild will be in class 8. The impact of socio-economic status is apparent at all grade levels not
only for class 8, but also for classes 1 and 7.
These results confirm that parents’ socio-economic background affects their children’s abilities
from elementary to high school. Among students
in class 1 (weak overall), class 7 (friendly teammate), and class 8 (strong overall), the effectextends continuously across grades. In the otherclasses we do not see the same broad effect overthe 12-year span, but we can see some variation
across shorter spans in socio-economic background and ability.
4. Conclusion
This paper has discussed how children’s abilities
change according to their grade level and how the
relationship between abilities and parents’ socioeconomic background varies by grade level. After
identifying eight latent classes in the skill sets ofchildren, characteristics of the members of eachclass are compared. In some groups proportions
changed by grade level, while others underwent
little change. The effects of parents’ socio-economic background on children’s abilities persist
throughout their school years. We can see the waythat the influence of family background extends
continually across grades and also see how theconnection between socio-economic status andability varies to some extent by academic year.
Acknowledgment
The 2015 JLSCP is part of the Children's Life andLearning Research Project, a collaboration
between the Institute of Social Science at the University of Tokyo and the Benesse Educational
Research and Development Institute. Permission
to use the data was granted by the Children's Lifeand Learning Research Project.

Page 14

References
Akabayashi, Hideo and Chizuru Shikishima.
2016. “Oya no shakai keizaiteki haikei tokodomono mondai kōdō/QOL: Katei
Kankyō wa hi-ninchi nōryoku no keisei ni
donoyōna eikyō o ataeruka?” [Parents’Socioeconomic Background and Children’s
Problem Behaviors/QOL: How DoesHousehold Environment Affects One’s Formation of Non-cognitive Ability?] in
Gakuryoku shinri kateikankyō no keizai bunseki:
Zenkoku shō-chūgakusei no tsuiseki chōsa kara
mietekita mono [An Economic Analysis of
Academic Ability, Non-Cognitive Ability,
and Family Background: Primary Findings
from a Panel Survey of Japanese School-Age
Children], H. Akabayashi, C. Shikishima,
and M.Naoi (eds.), Pp.105-130. Tokyo:
Yūhikaku.
Inoue, Kimihito and Hiroki Nakanishi. 2013.
“Kōki kindai ni okeru ‘nōryoku’ ikusei
mekanizumu ni kansuru kenkyū: Daigakusei no shakaijin kisoryoku o tegakari toshite” [A Study of Cultivating "Competencies" in the Late Modem Age: Focusing on
University Students’ Basic Abilities as a
Member of Society]. Shakaigaku kenkyūka
nenpō [Bulletin of Sociological Studies] 20:
17-29.
Ishida, Hiroshi, Shin Arita, Sho Fujihara, and Katsunori Ogawa. 2016. "Paneru chōsa kara
miru hi-ninchiteki sukiru, shigoto no futan,
kekkon ni eikyō suru ishiki, shisan nofubyōdō: ‘Hatarakikata to raifusutairu nohenka ni kansuru zenkoku chōsa (JLPS)
2015’ no kekka kara” [Non-cognitive Skills,
Job Responsibilities, Attitudes Linked with
Marriage, and Wealth Inequality: The
Results of “the Japanese Life Course Panel
Survey (JLPS) 2015”]. University of Tokyo
Institute of Social Science Panel Survey Discussion Paper Series 94.
LCA Stata Plugin Version 1.2 [Software], 2015,
University Park: The Methodology Center,
Penn State. Retrieved October 1, 2016.
https://methodology.psu.edu/downloads/lcastata.
Lee, SunYoun and Fumio Ohtake. 2014. "The
Effects of Personality Traits and Behavioral
Characteristics on Schooling, Earnings, andCareer Promotion." RIETI Discussion Paper

Social Science Japan March 2017

Series 14-E-023.
Shiotani, Yoshiya. 2014. "Jakunen dansei no
koyokeitai to sōsharu sukiru” [The Effect ofSocial Skill on Employment Status among
Japanese Young Men]. Riron to hōhō [Sociological Theory and Methods] 29(1): 191-206.
MEXT (Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports,
Science and Technology). 2015. "Overlap
between the Concept of Curriculum
Redesign and ‘Three Elements of Competency’" in 2030 nen ni muketa kyōikuno arikata
ni kansuru dai 2 kai nihon-OECD seisakuSocial Science Japan March 2017

taiwa (hokoku) [The Second Japan-OECD
Policy Dialogue on Education 2030
(Report)] p.9. Retrieved October 1, 2016
http://www.mext.go.jp/b_menu/shingi/chukyo/chukyo3/053/siryo/__icsFiles/afiel
dfile/2015/08/04/1360597_6_1.pdf.
Heckman, James J., Jora Stixrud, and Sergio
Urzua. 2006. "The Effects of Cognitive andNoncognitive Abilities on Labor Market
Outcomes and Social Behavior." Journal ofLabor Economics 24: 411-482.

Page 15

Factors Affecting the Creation and Alteration of
Family Rules for Children
TOMABECHI Natsuho
If we look for the reasons why parents create family rules or not, in addition to their parenting philosophy, likely candidates include parents’ education level, employment, and other determinantsof social class. Characteristics of children that
may affect the setting of family rules include theirgender, academic performance, and generaldemeanor.

Tomabechi Natsuho is a research associate at the Institute ofSocial Science, the University of Tokyo
Institute of Social Science
The University of Tokyo
7-3-1 Hongo, Bunkyo-ku
Tokyo 113-0033
E-mail: tomabechi@iss.u-tokyo.ac.jp

1. Introduction
The rules parents set for their children can beviewed as a contract that serves as one means to
the end of imposing limits on children’s behavior
and managing the everyday needs of children.
The values and behaviors parents want children
to adopt and practice daily are embedded in therules they set. The nature of these rules and how
strictly they are enforced shapes the parent-childrelationship and how children are raised. Setting
family rules is therefore a crucial step in preparing children to become independent.
Rules do not apply only to the parent-child relationship, but the underpinning of those rules islinked to the quality of their interpersonal relationship (Kataoka and Yamazaki 1995). In otherwords, the health of the parent-child relationshipaffects the existence or absence of family rules. On
the other hand, parents may avoid making rules
the heart of their childrearing and opt instead totrust their children to act independently.

Page 16

Of course, one variable that has more impact thanany of the above on the setting of strict rules isthe child’s own development. As children mature,
their attitudes towards life become moreingrained (Tonai 2010). In addition, how children
perceive “obligations” changes as they growolder (Yamagishi 2007). For example, while young
children may give top priority to meeting obligations to their parents, once they reach middle
school, they may see commitments to their friends
as more important. How children respond to conflicting commitments changes over time. Similarly, which family rules are in place and how closely they are followed changes as children mature.
The research project introduced below takes into
account these changes as it seeks to uncover themechanisms that drive the creation of familyrules by clarifying what types of households andwhat kinds of children have family rules.
2. Data and Methods
The Japanese Longitudinal Study of Children andParents (JLSCP) is the source of the data analyzed
below. Children and parents were given different
questionnaires that had some questions in common. Follow-up surveys are planned for thispanel study, but this analysis is based only on thefirst round of responses collected in 2015.
One of the features of the JLSCP is a high numberof questions concerning time use and daily routines. The answers to these questions are suitablefor examining the mechanisms by which familyrules are established. Items used from the parent
surveys are: “family rules in effect,” “mother’s
education level,” “mother’s employment status,”

Social Science Japan March 2017

pline and educate.” “Time use” is calculated byconverting the responses to the aforementioned
questions on time spent watching TV, gaming,using a cell phone or other device, and studying
into units of time. “How often I waste money”
has four possible responses ranging from “never”
to “often.” These four responses are used without
modification. “How often I help at home” is the
combined score from questions about six household tasks.1

and “method for deciding how to discipline.”
Items from the children surveys are: “time use,”“how often I waste money,” “how often I help athome,” “school level” (upper elementary, middle,high), “gender,” and “academic performance”(higher than average, average, below average).
The only item used from both surveys is “how I
view parent involvement in my family.”
Whether family rules are in effect or not is basedon responses to questions on five topics: “timewatching TV or gaming” (TV/Games), “timeusing cell phone” (Cell phone use), “time studying” (Study), “spending money” (Spending), and“how often I help at home” (Helping at home).
The variable “rules in effect” is a dummy variable
set equal to 1 if respondents report having rulesin these five areas, and each is analyzed as adependent variable. “Mother’s education level” isa dummy variable set equal to 1 if mother is a college or university graduate. “Mother’s employment status” is one of three categories—full-time,
part-time, or not employed. Full-time is the basecategory.

For “how parents and children view parents’
involvement,” principal component analysis wasapplied to parents’ responses. The three axes that
express the parenting style axis—the “parent”
axis (parent-centered), “child” axis (child-centered), and “parent-child” axis (falls between“parent-centered” and “child-centered”) are
extracted and analyzed using multivariate logistic
regression analysis.
3. Results
Figure 1 shows the percentage of children who
have family rules about how they spend time, usemoney, and do chores. For each item, the first
three bars are boys and the rest are girls. Upperelementary students are to the left (the darkestbars), middle school students in the middle, andThe variable “method for deciding how to discipline” is a dummy variable equal to 1 if the
response is “both parents consider how to disci-

Figure 1. Percentage of children with family rules by school level and gender

100.0
90.0
80.0
70.0

83.7
65.3

60.0
50.0
40.0
30.0

35.1

69.9

54.7
62.8
53.4
54.2
53.2
46.6
43.2

69.5
51.9

57.2
55.3

46.0

29.9

29.7

60.3

61.7

55.6

46.5

45.7

55.8
53.8
47.9
46.3
34.4

27.1

36.7

20.0
10.0
0.0

1

TV/Games

Cell phone use

Study

Spending

Helping at homeBoys, Upper elementary studentsBoys, Middle school studentsBoys, High school students

Girls, Upper elementary students

Girls, Middle school students

Girls, High school students

The six tasks are “set and clear the table,” “clean,” “cook,” “take out the trash,” “shopping,” and “laundry.” Each item has four possible
Figure1: Percentage
with= 3,familyrules= 5.byTheschool
level
and
genderresponses and scores:“never”= 0, “not often”of= children
1, “sometimes”
and “often”
combined
score
for all
six tasks is used.

Social Science Japan March 2017

Page 17

high school students on the right.2 The largest
gender differences are for rules on time spent
watching television, gaming, and studying. Rules
on use of mobile devices tend to be more common for students in middle school than in elementary or high school, but the percentage
among female middle school students is especially high. The other clear trend is that children areless likely to have rules as they progress throughschool.
Given these changes, multivariate logistic regression analyses were performed for each rule withthe variables of school level and gender. Due tospace limitations, the analysis results are not presented in full here, but Table 1 shows the resultsfor each independent variable.
Looking at what boys and girls had in common,
mothers’ education level was not statistically significant. The results also show that rules are easier to establish when parents cooperate. Elementary and high school students spend a lot of timeon mobile devices, and among boys and girls
who report often wasting money, there is a statistically significant association with having familyrules. In addition, among children who frequently

help around the house, regardless of their schoollevel, there is a statistically significant positive
association with having family rules. There is also
a greater likelihood of having family rules when
the parenting style is either parent-centered or ablend of parent-centered and child-centered.
Rules are less common in child-centered parenting which prioritizes children’s independence.
4. Discussion
Among the results of this study, three findings areespecially important. First, there is a close connection between rule setting and communication
between spouses and between parents and children. Rules are easier to establish when spouses
jointly decide on what the rules and the consequences of breaking them should be. Moreover,rules are also easier to make when the parental
involvement axis is either “parent” or “parentchild.” Based on these results, the series ofprocesses involved in setting family rules anddeciding whether to uphold them is more thansimply imposing discipline or a means of managing daily tasks. Instead, they comprise a way for
spouses, parents, and children to communicate.
The second finding indicates support for previous

Table 1. Associations between having family rules and independent variables
Table 1. Associations between having family rules and independent variables
Results
Boys

Girls

Mother’s education level
Mother’s employment status
Discipline style
TV/Games
Time

Cell phone use
StudyFrequency

If mother is not employed, no rules
for study time or helping at home.
(elementary and high school)

If mother is not employed, no rules
for cell phone use, study time, or
helping at home. (elementary only)

Tendency to have rules when parents cooperate on discipline
Many hours and no rules(elementary and middle school)

No association

Many hours and rules set (elementary and middle school)
Many hours and rules set(elementary and middle school)

No association

Spending money

Frequency high and rules set (elementary and high school)

Helping at home

Frequency high and rules set

Academic performance
Parenting style axis

2

No Association

No association

Grades are low and rules set(high school only)“Parent” axis or “Parent-child” axis and tendency to have rules

Upper elementary students correspond to 4th -6th grade students, middle school students correspond to 7th -9th grade students, and high school
students correspond to 10th -12th grade students in Japan.

Page 18

Social Science Japan March 2017

studies that rules come and go as children
mature. Because the data used in this study arefrom the same point in time, we cannot yet verify
that the number of rules applied to individual
children changes over time. Meanwhile, it is clearthat the percentage of children with family rules
varies across school levels. Changes are especiallyevident for rules regarding how children spend
their time (watching television, gaming, studying), which suggests that as children’s attitude
towards life becomes more established, rules
become less necessary.
The third result is that rule setting mechanisms
vary by gender. Although there is a connection
between time spent watching television and gaming and having rules among boys, there is nosuch connection for girls. Boys whose mothers are
full-time housewives are less likely to have rules
for helping at home than boys whose mothers are
full-time employees. In contrast, among girls in
middle and high school, there is no statisticallysignificant association between mothers’ employment status and rules for doing chores.
These findings suggest that parents decide
whether or not to set rules based on how theirchildren actually play and otherwise spend theirtime, which tends to vary by gender. The fact thatsons of full-time housewives are less likely tohave rules for helping at home suggests that children in families with a traditional gender-based
division of labor are likely to be socialized toaccept this division.
This study’s attempt to identify the determinantsSocial Science Japan March 2017of the establishment and modification of familyrules governing children’s behavior will be tested
and expanded as more panel data tracing changes
in individual families becomes available.
Acknowledgements
The Japanese Longitudinal Study of Children andParents 2015 was a joint project of the Institute forSocial Science at the University of Tokyo and theChildren’s Lifestyles and Learning research project at the Benesse Educational Research andDevelopment Institute. Permission was granted
for the use of the survey data.
References
Kataoka, Minako and Akira Yamazaki. 1995. “Yōjini okeru nakama ninchi no tokuchō: Asobi,
enjo, yakusoku bamen ni oite” [Awarenessof friends in early childhood: play, help, andpromises]. Yōnen kyōiku kenkyū nenpō [TheAnnual of Research on Early Childhood] 17:
83-85.
Tonai Ruriko. 2010. “Katei to seikatsu taiken”[Home and life experiences], in Kodomo no
seikatsu taiken gakushū o dezainsuru [Designing Life-experience Learning for Children].
Yoshifumi Nanri (ed). Pp. 55-58. Tokyo:
Koseikan.
Yamagishi, Akiko. 2007. “Gendai shōgakusei noyakusoku gainen no hattatsu: Jōkyō noshiryo o megutte” [Development of theConcept of Promise in Contemporary
Schoolchildren: Their Contextual Considerations Regarding Promise Keeping]. Shakai
shinrigaku kenkyū [Japanese Journal of Social
Psychology] 22: 285-294.

Page 19

How Well Do We Know Our Children?: The Connection
Between Parenting Style and Understanding
KAGAWA Mei
Once children enter their teens, parents need torelinquish complete control and allow their children to develop self-reliance, albeit while keeping
a watchful eye and imposing restrictions whencalled for.
The changing role of parents reflects changes in
the closeness of parents and children. According
to Watanabe (2014), parents of infants must provide constant, hands-on care while parents ofadolescents become hands-off supporters to giveteens the chance to develop their individuality.

Kagawa Mei is a project research associate at the Institute ofSocial Science, the University of Tokyo
Institute of Social Science
The University of Tokyo
7-3-1 Hongo, Bunkyo-ku
Tokyo 113-0033
E-mail: meika@iss.u-tokyo.ac.jp

1. Introduction
How fully should parents understand their children? When gauging the quality of parent-childrelationships, one could argue that the quality
increases as understanding increases. On theother hand, it may be possible to know too muchabout a child. The pros and cons of parental
understanding change as children grow. We canroughly divide parenting into two phases. The
first phase, from birth to early elementary school,
is primarily physical and emotional care. The second phase emphasizes education.
In the primary socialization process, parents focus
on toilet training and other everyday skills andrules in addition to meeting the children’s basic
needs. As their children progress through elementary school, parents devote increasingly moretime to the task of supporting children’s formal
education to help them prepare for the future.

1

If it is best for parents to give their children moreautonomy, then, parents’ confidence that they
fully understand their offspring should fall as
their children mature. Parents may see that giving
up control means knowing less, but feel the benefits outweigh the costs.
From the standpoint of achieving self-reliance,
therefore, it may be better for parents of teenagers
and adults to feel they do not know everything
about their children. The first task is to clarify
which factors determine how completely parents
believe they understand their children.
One can think of many things that may affect how
well a parent understands a child, but I would
like to focus on the parent-child relationship,especially parenting style. Generally, we would
expect that the more involved parents are and themore frequent the contact between them and theirchildren, the more likely they are to believe they
understand their children. However, sometimes,
even engaged parents can feel uncertain.
2. Two Sides to Parental Understanding of Children
For our purposes, measures of parental understanding include two aspects of children—theirabilities and their feelings. Our analysis is primarily based on the survey responses of mothers.
Each respondent was presented with a list of skills 1

Twenty items were listed in surveys for grades 1-3, 21 items for grades 4-6, and 22 items for grades 7-12.

Page 20

Social Science Japan March 2017

This pattern is reversed for how confident mothers are about understanding their children’s feelings. Roughly one out of four mothers of children
in grades 7-10 answered “don’t know,” a higher
ratio than among other mothers. Children who
become rebellious in adolescence are presumably
harder for mothers to understand.

and asked to rate their children’s aptitude in eacharea by choosing from “strong,” “weak,” and“don’t know.” Parents who selected “don’t know”
more than once were labeled as “unaware (ofchild’s abilities).” Parents were asked how muchthe statement, “I don’t understand my child’s
feelings,” applied to them. The four possible
responses were “applies,” “applies sometimes,”“applies infrequently,” and “does not apply.” Parents who selected either of the first two responses
were also classified as “unaware (of child’s feelings).”

Next, we look for connections between mothers’
uncertainty about their children’s abilities andfeelings and their approach to parenting. Table 1
shows the results of a binomial logit analysis withmothers’ understanding of children’s abilities as
the dependent variable. As noted above, themothers of first grade students differ clearly fromthe mothers of older students. For that reason, theanalysis includes only the mothers of students insecond grade or older. Despite that, the model
itself is not statistically significant for parents ofsecond and third graders.

3. What Types of Parents Feel They Do Not
Understand Their Children?
The first source of variation in mothers’ understanding is the age of the children. As shown in
Figure 1, mothers of first graders are the mostuncertain about their children’s abilities, with 44
percent responding “don’t know” to one or more
aptitude questions. The level of uncertainty isalso high among parents of second graders.

The results show that these variables do not
explain how well mothers believe they know
their children. Looking at the results for children
in fourth grade or older, mothers with positiveparental involvement—those who described theirparenting style as “teaching” and “encouraging
with praise”—are more likely to report knowing
their children’s abilities. Another finding is thatmothers of children in grades 4-6, who talk with
their children about planning for the future,

Youngest children are likely to have had thefewest opportunities to demonstrate their ability
to perform various tasks, thus making it difficult
for mothers to assess their skill levels. Mothers ofchildren in middle school are the least likely toreport not knowing how proficient their children
are. Once children enter high school, mothers
report more uncertainty.

Figure 1. Mothers’ uncertainty rates by child's grade level

Figure 1. Mothers’ uncertainty rates by child's grade level

45

44.4
Uncertain of child’s feelings

40

Uncertain of child’s abilities
35
30
25

21.5

%
19.1
17.7

25.2

25.4

20.8

18.5

20
15

24.9

23.9
18.5
19.7

19.6

4th

5th

16.8

18.7

25.0
22.9

22.8

21.0

21.3

11th

12th

19.8

15.6

18.7

15.8

10
5
0
1st

2nd

3rd

6th

7th

8th

9th

10th

Grade

Social Science Japan March 2017

Page 21

report higher rates of understanding their children. Our analysis also shows that families’socioeconomic status has very little effect on
mothers’ awareness of their children’s emotional
state and abilities.
Turning from skill sets to feelings, Table 2 presents results from the analysis of parental awareness of children’s feelings. Unlike the results
shown in Table 1, here we find that the only statistically significant result is for parents of second
and third graders who describe their parenting
style as “teaching.” For children in grades 4 andhigher, parents who see themselves as “teaching”
are no more likely to understand their children’s
feelings than other parents.
Table 2 also shows that the “praise and encourage” style of parenting has a positive effect onunderstanding while the “control and restrict”
style has a negative effect for all grade levels. For
children in grades 4-6, the “control and restrict”
squared term is also significant.
Basically, mothers who practice “control andrestrict” parenting are less likely to believe they
understand their children’s feelings, and the more
controlling mothers are, the less aware they
believe themselves to be. In regards to topics ofconversation, mothers are more likely to feel they
understand their children if they discuss immediate concerns such as school, friends, and gradeswith them than if they discuss events in the news.
The two aspects of children considered here—
abilities and feelings—differ in the following
ways. Mothers’ understanding of both aspects is
the result of everyday interactions with their children, but the relationship between time spent
together and understanding level is probably
stronger for feelings than for abilities.
Providing emotional support results in mothers
being more confident they know how their children are feeling. As for ability levels, mothers that“praise and encourage” tend to report being moreaware, an effect that is further amplified if theyalso take on the “teaching” role. Awareness ofchildren’s skill levels is, at least in part, a functionof the number of opportunities children have toTable 1: Factors affecting mothers' understanding of children's abilities

Table 1. Factors affecting mothers' understanding of children's abilities
Grades 2-3
S.E.
#####
-.064
.139
.097
.153

Grades 4-6
S.E.
0
.048
.121
-.155
.137

.047
.418
.005
-.001
-.050
.150
.067
.076
.022
.020
.002

.342 *
.079
.081
.000
-.087
.226 ***.132 *
.051
.015
-.022
.000
.008
.035
.010
-.083
.150 **.097

B

Mother's education level

vs. High school or lower
Junior college, vocational school
College, graduate school
Mother's employment status vs. Not employed
RegularFull-time, non-regularPart-time, non-regular
Annual household income (¥100,000)
Child gender
Male dummy
Parenting approachTeach(standardized)
Praise, encourageControl, restrict
Teach squared
Praise, encourage squared
Control, restrict squaredChild's misbehavior
Topics discussed with child School
Friends
GradesPlans for the future
Current events
LR chi square (d.f.)
sig.

.161
.242
.125
.002
.108
.089
.062
.058
.060
.046
.040
#####
#####
#####
#####
#####
#####

B

.155
.176
.114
.001
.100
.062
.055
.051
.045
.040
.035
.017
.090
.086
.068
.058
.055

Grades 7-9

.227
-.041

S.E.
0
.123
.148

Grades 10-12BS.E.
0.418 ***
.112
.206
.143

.270
.137
-.093
-.001
-.016
.314 ***.128 *
.050
-.078
.044
.033
.045 **
.093
-.009
.065
-.004
.015

.171
.185
.133
.002
.106
.060
.059
.055
.041
.039
.038
.017
.105
.099
.087
.071
.063

.313
-.018
-.206
.000
-.153
.230 **.132 *
.062
-.034
.050
.017
-.018
.128
.039
-.065
.105
.113

B

17.12 (13)65.13 (19)77.55 (19)

.194

.000

.000

117.22 (19)
.000

2

.008

.023

.030

.042

N

2238

2879

2992

2706

McFadden R

.167
.168
.130
.001
.103
.085
.055
.054
.048
.039
.034
.016
.104
.097
.094
.087
.062

* p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01, *** p < 0.001* p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01, *** p < 0.001
Page 22Social Science Japan March 2017

Table 2: Factors affecting mothers' understanding of children's feelings

Table 2. Factors affecting mothers' understanding of children's feelings
Grades 2-3
S.E.
#####
.020
.145
.217
.164

Grades 4-6
S.E.
0.263 *
.124
.234
.144

Grades 7-9
S.E.
0
-.158
.112
-.140
.138

Grades 10-12
B
S.E.
0
.000
.117
.010
.149

-.110
-.220
-.051
.004
-.174
.239 *.339 ***-.701 ***
-.074
.075
-.082

.146
.375
.180
.001
.227 *.090.215 ***-.523 ***
.022
.000-.102 **-.060 **
.207 *.162.248 ***
-.081
.013

-.103
-.227
.046
.000
.160
.087
.332 ***-.594 ***
.011
.020
-.055
-.078 ***
.235 *.201 *.162 *
.064
-.010

-.013
.161
.041
.001
.119
.060
.240 ***-.555 ***
-.059
-.002
-.091 *-.093 ***
.110
.211 *
.134
.052
.077

B

Mother's education level

vs. High school or lower
Junior college, vocational schooCollege, graduate school
vs. Not employed
Mother's employment status
RegularFull-time, non-regularPart-time, non-regular
Annual household income (¥100,000)
Child gender
Male dummy
Parenting approachTeach(standardized)
Praise, encourageControl, restrict
Teach squared
Praise, encourage squared
Control, restrict squaredChild's misbehavior
Topics discussed with child
SchoolFriends
GradesPlans for the future
Current events
LR chi square (d.f.)

.175
.226
.136
.002
.116
.093
.069
.078
.063
.049
.048
#####
#####
#####
#####
#####
#####

B

.157
.191
.121
.002
.106
.066
.059
.061
.048
.043
.037
.017
.091
.089
.070
.062
.059

B

.148
.161
.124
.001
.095
.053
.054
.054
.037
.035
.037
.015
.091
.088
.077
.065
.057

.158
.172
.134
.001
.106
.077
.057
.053
.045
.040
.035
.017
.106
.100
.094
.090
.064

242.56 (13)289.71 (19)437.20 (19)335.75 (19)

sig.

.000

.000

.000

.000

McFadden R2

.112

.103

.130

.118

N

2236

2858

2980

2700

**pp< <
0.05,** p **< 0.01,
p < 0.001
0.05,
p <***0.01,*** p < 0.001

demonstrate their skills. How these factors differ
across grade levels is not all that clear, but it islikely that they basically coincide.
4. Uncertainty about Your Child and Parenting
Problems
Thus far we have shown that mothers who reporthigher levels of awareness of their children’s capabilities and feelings are more likely to have affirmative parenting styles. Those who report being
less aware of their children’s feelings are more
likely to practice command and control parenting.
While our model assumes parental involvementwith children determines how much parents feelthey understand them, it is more likely thatinvolvement with children and how much parents understand their children mutually influence
one another. For example, control-based parenting may be a result as well as a cause of misunderstanding one’s children. Once this dynamic
emerges, it is not hard to imagine a vicious cycleof misunderstanding and resentment in the par-Social Science Japan March 2017ent-child relationship.
Looking at current attitudes toward childrearing,
one rarely sees endorsements of control-based
parenting. Instead, parents are expected to place
more importance on shaping the will of their children rather than imposing their own will andinteracting with their children in a way thatdevelops their independence. With this in mind,
it is difficult to believe that mothers intentionally
opt for control-based parenting based on theirpersonal preferences.
Under what circumstances are these mothers raising their children? If we look at the types of worries and the levels of anxiety they are experiencing, mothers who feel they do not understandtheir children have more worries overall. Not
only are they concerned about their children, theyalso report being worried about themselves.
Mothers who do not understand their children’s
feelings tend to believe that they are not manag-

Page 23

ing their own lives well. Their sense of disappointment or failure is bound to be reflected intheir relationships with their children. In thesecases, telling mothers who are already stretchedto the limit that control-based parenting is not thebest method will only add to their distress.
What can be done to avoid this outcome?
Through our longitudinal survey, we will closely
monitor how parental involvement changes overtime. With any luck we will find some hints as tohow parents can improve their situation, the typeof discovery that motivates us to continue to collect and analyze data for years to come.

Page 24

Acknowledgement
The Japanese Longitudinal Study of Children andParents 2015 was a joint project of the Institute forSocial Science at the University of Tokyo and theChildren’s Lifestyles and Learning research project at the Benesse Educational Research andDevelopment Institute. Permission was granted
for the use of the survey data.
Reference
Watanabe, Hideki. 2014. “Ichijiteki shakaika karanijiteki shakaika e” [From Primary Socialization to Secondary Socialization], in Ekkyo
suru kazoku shakaigaku [Transboundary Family Sociology]. Hideki Watanabe and Hirohisa Takenoshita (eds.). Pp. 87-104. Tokyo:
Gakubunsha.

Social Science Japan March 2017

Understanding Parental Involvement in Children’s
Education
OKABE Satoshi
Exploring the possibility that coaching is more
effective in enhancing children’s learning than
encouraging and praising, I challenge the validityof the link between supporter-style parenting andlearning.
A different sort of problem in earlier studies,including those mentioned above, is the lack ofclarity on whether parents or children are judging
the nature of parental involvement. The fact thatthe two sides can have different views of thesame relationship has received too little attention,a point also made by Harris (1998) and Pinker(2002).
Okabe Satoshi is a researcher at Benesse Educational
Research and Development Institute
Benesse Educational Research and Development Institute1-34 Ochiai
Tama-shiTokyo 206-0033
E-mail: sokabe@mail.benesse.co.jp

1. Parenting and Child Learning
Broadly speaking, parental involvement in theirchildren’s education takes two forms—supporting and coaching. Supporters offer generalencouragement and praise, and many studies
have found that supporters have a positive effecton their children’s academic achievement (see, forexample, Benesse Educational Research andDevelopment Institute 2009, 2010; Nishimura andYagi 2016). Honda (2008) uses survey data toassess the impact of “coach-like” parents andfinds that strict parental attitudes towards studying and personal habits (the first principal component; “zealous reinforcement of the importanceof improving grades” had the highest load factor)
were correlated with their children’s grades.
Much research on parenting and children’s learning has concluded that supporter-style parenting,i.e., encouraging and praising children, has a positive impact on children’s learning. Other
research, however, attributes the positive impact
to parents’ role in directly coaching their children.

Social Science Japan March 2017

In other words, researchers have implicitly
assumed that parents and children agree on thenature of the family’s parenting style. This presumption by researchers can affect their conclusions. In assessing parental involvement, there
needs to be clarity on whether parents or children
provide inputs.
2. The Goal of This Paper and Its Hypothesis
In light of these two problems in the existing literature, this paper has two goals. First, after
explaining how supportive and coach-like parenting styles differ in practice, I describe how theseparenting styles affect children’s education.
Second, I evaluate how much overlap exists
between parents’ and children’s assessments ofparental involvement and then re-examine theconnection between parenting styles and learning.
The question of how many parents use both coachand supporter tactics, like the question of whether
or not there is intergenerational agreement on
parents’ involvement, has major implications forour understanding of childhood education.
3. Data Sources
The data analyzed here are from the JapaneseLongitudinal Study of Children and Parents 2015
(the 2015 JLSCP), which was jointly conducted inJuly and August 2015 by the Institute for Social

Page 25

Science at the University of Tokyo and the Benesse
Educational Research and Development Institute.
Questionnaires were sent to 16,065 families withstudents ranging from fourth graders to twelfth
graders. Responses were received from 11,982 students and 12,069 parents. This paper looks at thesubset of 10,810 families that submitted responses
from mothers and children—3,644 families withupper elementary students, 3,704 middle school
families, and 3,462 high school families.
4. Analysis
4.1 Parental involvement factor structure andparent-child perception types
A factor analysis of responses from children andparents to questions on parental involvement
extracted two factors (I Coaches, II Supporters)with factor correlations of 0.449 for children and
0.237 for parents. These results indicate that theinter-correlation between the factors is not strong,but a moderatecorrelation does exist (see tables
1 and 2).
Next, combining positive and negative factor
scores produces four types of involvement: mostly coach, coach and supporter, mostly supporter,and mostly uninvolved. Overall, 33.7 percent ofchildren and 25.6 percent of parents indicatedparents act as “coach and supporter.”
Looking at differences across grade levels, chil-

Table
Table
1. Children'sChildren's
views
views
ofofparental
ofparental
parental
involvement
involvement(factor(factoranalysis)analysis) Table
Table
Table
2.Parents'
Parents'
2. Parents'
views
views
parentalof parental
involvement
involvement(factor(factoranalysis)analysis)Table
1.1.Children's
views
involvement(factoranalysis)2.
views
ofofparental
involvement(factoranalysis)

Coach
Coach Supporter
Supporter
Teaches
Teaches
howhow
to approach
to approachan assignment
an assignment.979.979
-.051
-.051
Teaches how to approach an assignment
assig
assignment .957.957
-.050
-.050
Teaches
Teaches
howhow
to doto an
do assignment
an assignment.911.911
-.043
-.043
Teaches
Teaches
howhow
to doto an
do assignment
an assignment.809.809
-.039
-.039
Shows
what
is interestingabout
an assignment.605.605
Shows
what
isisinteresting
about
anan
assignment
Shows what is interesting about assignment
an assign.170.170
Shows
whatinteresting
about
assignment .632.632.134.134
OffersOffersencouragement
encouragement
afterafter
failurefailure-.017-.017.878.878
OffersOffersencouragement
encouragement
afterafter
failurefailure.011.011.791.791
interests
Encourages
Encourages
me me
to pursue
to pursue
my interests
my interests
-.034
-.034
.747.747
Encourages me to pursue my interests
intere.028.028.667.667
Praises
Praises
me me
when
when
I doI well
do well.081.081.727.727
Praises
Praises
me me
when
when
I doI well
do well-.018-.018.582.582
Factor
Factorcorrelation
correlation
matrices
matricesϨϨϩϩ
Factor
Factorcorrelation
correlation
matrices
matrices
ϨϨ
ϩϩ
ϨϨ
1.000
1.000
.449.449
ϨϨ
1.000
1.000
.237.237ϩϩ.449.449
1.000
1.000
ϩϩ
.237.237
1.000
1.000
*Factorextraction
method:Maximum
likelihood;
Promax *Factor*Factorextraction
extraction
method:method:Maximum
Maximum
likelihood;
likelihood;
Rotation:
Promax
Promaxrotatro*Factor extraction
method:Maximum
likelihood;
Rotation:Rotation:
Promax rotation.
*Factorextraction
method:Maximum
likelihood;
Rotation:Rotation:
Promaxrotation.
ParentParentactions
actions

Page 26

Coach
Coach Supporter
Supporter

ParentParentactions
actions

Social Science Japan March 2017

dren in grades 4 through 7 and their parents weremost likely to choose “coach and supporter”
while “mostly uninvolved” was the most popular
response for children in grades 7 and higher andtheir parents (see charts 1 and 2).
4.2 Rate of concurrence between parents' andchildren's view of parental involvement
A simple cross-tabulation of responses regarding
the four types of involvement mentioned aboveshows that parents and children are in agreement
in only 48.2 percent of families (table 3). In short,parents and children characterize parental
involvement differently in roughly half of all
families.

Parents'views

Table 3.
3. Parents'
Parents' vs.
vs. children's
children's perceptionsof ofinvolvement
typetype
Table
perceptions
involvement
Children's views&
Not
Coach CoachSupporter Supporter involved

Total

Coach
Coach &
Supporter

9.0%

8.5%

1.5%

5.3%

24.4%

4.7%

15.5%

2.6%

2.9%

25.6%

Supporter
Not involved

1.6%
4.7%

4.9%
4.9%

6.7%
4.5%

5.6%
17.0%

18.9%
31.1%

Total

20.2%

33.7%

15.3%

30.8% 100.0%

Although the majority of studies assume that parents and children see parental involvement thesame way, it is clear that in reality this is true only
in half of all families. The intergenerational perception gap is around half for students of all ages.

Social Science Japan March 2017

The highest level of parent-child agreement isfound in families with students in seventh grade
or elementary school (“coach and supporter”
being the most common type). Among students
in eighth grade or higher, “mostly uninvolved”
has the highest ratio, a finding that fits with theoverall trends described above in section 5-1.
4.3 The relationship between perceptions ofinvolvement and learning
How do different types of parental involvement
relate to children’s academic achievement? I verified how four measures of learning—grades (outcome), time spent studying (behavior), desire tolearn (attitude), and self-reliance (attitude)—are
correlated with parental involvement types(charts 3 and 4).
The highest affirmative rate was between the
combined learning measures and “coach and supporter” involvement. “Mostly supporter”
involvement also had a relatively high rate. On
the other hand, “mostly coach” and “mostly uninvolved” rates were similarly low. In sum, thehybrid “coach and supporter” type of involvement is more positively correlated with student
learning than any other type.
4.4 The relationship between parent-child consensus and learning
The next question is whether we can discern apattern between student learning and the level ofPage 27

Table 4. Logistic regression analysis of middle school students' learning measures
Independent variables

Coeff.
Control variables
Male dummy
Father dummy
Mother college grad dummy

Model I
Objective variable:
Class rank
Upper rank 1;
Middle or lower 0
Odds ratio

Coeff.

Model II
Objective variable:
Time spent studying
Upper rank 1;
Middle or lower 0
Odds ratio

Model III
Objective variable:
Interested inModel IV
Objective variable:
Self-reliant

Yes 1; No 0
Coeff.

Odds ratio

Yes 1; No 0
Coeff.

Odds ratio

0.048
0.534
0.365

1.049
1.706 ***
1.441 ***

-0.2210.134
0.263

0.802 **
1.143
1.301 **

-0.247-0.006
0.095

0.781 **
0.994
1.100

0.242
-0.2010.277

1.274 **
0.818 *
1.320 **

0.659
0.335
0.166

1.933 ***
1.399 **
1.180

0.380
0.341
0.157

1.463 **
1.407 **
1.170

0.832
0.653
0.072

2.298 ***
1.921 ***
1.075

0.903
0.718
0.053

2.467 ***
2.050 ***
1.055

0.755
0.584
0.277
-1.652

2.128
1.794
1.319
0.192

0.072
0.078
0.279
-0.9731.074
1.081
1.322 *
0.378 ***

0.607
0.387
0.149
-0.5291.835 ***
1.472 **
1.160
0.589 ***

0.727
0.496
0.408
0.046

2.069 ***
1.641 ***
1.503 **
1.047

Parent-child consensus/non-consensus
on "coach & supporter." Base: Excludes
consensus on "coach & supporter."Coach & supporter consensus
Coach & supporter--child only
Coach & supporter--parent only
Parent-child consensus/non-consensus
on "supporter." Base: Excludes
consensus on "supporter."Supporter consensus
Supporter--child only
Supporter--parent only
Constant
Nagelkerke coeff. of determination
Goodness of fit (p value)

0.062
0.000
3,088

***
***
*
***

parent-child agreement on the parent’s type of
involvement. Taking the four measures of learning as objective variables, the two types of
involvement positively correlated with the highest scores were “coach and supporter” and “mostly supporter.” Treating agreement/non-agreement as the explanatory variable, and using gender and parent education level as control variables, a logistic regression analysis produced theresults shown in table 4.
Due to space limitations, only the results for middle school students are shown. The relationshipbetween academic effort and perception ofparental involvement is strongest when parent
and child both select either “coach and supporter” or “mostly supporter,” followed by thesetypes being selected only by the child. The relationship was weakest when only the parent
selected these types. Results for elementary students were similar, but the results for high school
students were somewhat less clear.

0.024
0.000
3,050

0.044
0.000
3,117

0.053
0.000
3,113

coaches or are generally uninvolved and theirchildren’s academic effort.
The second key finding is that parents and children share the same view of parental involvement
no more than half of the time. Therefore, the presumption of parent-child agreement built into
earlier studies is simply invalid. In addition to therelationship between parental involvement andlearning being clearest when both parents andchildren agree that parents are acting as coachand supporter or mostly supporter, academic
effort is higher when only the children select oneof these categories than when only the parents
select them.

5. Results and Implication
This analysis has produced two clear results.
First, a constant ratio exists for the children ofparents who act as both academic supporters andcoaches, the hybrid style of involvement, showing
a positive correlation with learning.

These findings have two implications for researchon parenting and education. First, there is a modest correlation between supporter parenting andcoach parenting. Also, because the relationshipwith children’s learning is relatively strong, thetwo types should not be treated as totally distinct.
The presumption for analysts going forward
should be that the two parenting styles overlap.
Second, even when their focus is parental
involvement, researchers should pay more attention to children’s views for the utterly simple reason that their education, not the parents’ education, is what really concerns us.

The results also show that supporter type
involvement has a relatively positive relationshipwith learning. On the other hand, there is only aweak relationship between parents who act as

Finally, I would like to offer a couple of practicalsuggestions on raising children. The strength of
the two main conclusions of this paper is limited
because they are based on cross-sectional data

Page 28

Social Science Japan March 2017

from one point in time. The only way to reliably
identify a cause-and-effect relationship between
parenting styles and children’s education is to follow individuals over time using panel data. If ourconclusions remain intact as long-term data
become available, then, it means that parents are
faced with a tall order. Not only will parents needto switch between coaching and supporting, they
will need to ensure that children recognize theirparents’ involvement type. Another finding of
this analysis is a considerable decline in the percentage of parents acting as coaches and supporters once children are in high school. The level ofparent-child consensus also drops. It may be thatchildren shift their attention to other relationships
at later stages of development. With reliable data,
we can expect to learn more about the true
nature, effects, and limits of parental involvement.
Acknowledgements
The Japanese Longitudinal Study of Children andParents 2015 was a joint project of the Institute forSocial Science at the University of Tokyo and theChildren’s Lifestyles and Learning research project at the Benesse Educational Research andDevelopment Institute. Permission was granted
for the use of the survey data.

Social Science Japan March 2017

References
Benesse Educational Research and Development
Institute. 2009. Dai-ni kai kodomo seikatsu jittai chōsa hōkoku-sho [Second Report on theChildren’s Lifestyles Field Study].
________. 2010. Dai-yon kai kosodate seikatsu jittai
chōsa hōkoku-sho [Fourth Report on the Parenting Lifestyle Field Study].
Harris, Judith R. 1998. The Nurture Assumption:
Why Children Turn Out the Way They Do.
New York: Free Press.
Honda, Yuki. 2008. “Katei kyōiku” no airo: kosodate
ni kyōhaku sareru hahaoya-tachi [Education at
Home Stalemate: Mothers Fixated on Parenting]. Tokyo: Keiso Shobo.
Nishimura, Kazuo and Tadashi Yagi. 2016. Kosodate no arikata to rinri-kan , kōfuku-kan ,shotoku keisei: Nihon ni okeru jisshō kenkyū[Parenting Styles and Ethics, Well-being,and Income Formation—an Empirical Studyof Japanese families]. RIETI Discussion
Paper Series 16-J-048.
Pinker, Steven. 2002. The Blank Slate: The Modern
Denial of Human Nature. New York: Viking.

Page 29

ISS Research Report

New Developments in Empirical Education
Economics in JapanTANAKA Ryuichi
able to observe many favorable relationships
between education and positive outcomes such aschanges in school curricula and increased levelsof academic achievement. Therefore, providing
empirical evidence of the “effectiveness of education” is a core agenda of human capital theory.

Tanaka Ryuichi is an associate professor at the Institute ofSocial Science, the University of Tokyo
Institute of Social Science
The University of Tokyo
7-3-1 Hongo, Bunkyo-ku
Tokyo 113-0033
E-mail: ryuichi.tanaka@iss.u-tokyo.ac.jp

Empirically assessing the effects of education is a
primary mission of the field of education economics. A topic that has been widely researched is
how various school environments affect academic
achievement outcomes. Empirically evaluating
hypotheses on how children are affected by teaching practices requires individual data. However,Japan’s strict rules protecting personal information have largely kept researchers from accessing
individual student data, and, as a result, empirical analysis in education economics in Japan lags
far behind that of Western nations.

In economics, education is considered an investment in human capital formation. This framing is
known as human capital theory. Investment is a
dynamic process where current resources are sacrificed in order to gain more resources in the
future. Becoming educated requires sacrificing
time and other opportunity costs. From a societal
standpoint, investing in education is meant toincrease the productivity of workers (human capital) in the same way as investing in physical capital or stocks.

Recently, as the importance of evidence-based
policy formation has gained wider recognition,
there has been some gradual movement towardsupporting quantitative research by giving
researchers permission to use student data. For
example, there has been more discussion on how
to give researchers access to student scores on the
National Academic Achievement Test which isadministered yearly by the Ministry of Education,
Culture, Sports, Science and Technology. The factthat education policymakers have begun to recognize the importance of evidence-based policymaking is a major step forward.

For education to function as human capital
investment, it must generate future benefits. For
example, if a college degree raises future laborproductivity, then college graduates’ incomes—aproxy indicator of productivity—should be higher than those with less formal education. Moreover, if education is effective, then we should be

Having access to individual National Academic
Achievement Test scores opens up multiple linesof research. For example, Tanaka and Ishizaki(2016) used individual National Academic
Achievement Test scores of sixth grade students
in a particular municipality to test if a causal relationship between language art activity in curricu-

Page 30

Social Science Japan March 2017

ISS Research Reportla and Japanese language and math scores exists.
Their research has already found a positive relationship between various language art activities
and academic achievement. Telling students atthe start of a lesson what the goals of the lesson
are, for example, has a positive effect on language
and math scores. Tanaka and Ishizaki were alsoable to use the individual student data to showthat the positive effects of language art activities
are most evident among students who have low
test scores. Detecting how the effects of teaching
methods may vary for students with different
achievement levels is only possible with access toindividual test data, and this study is an example
showing the importance to use individuals’ data.
The results of tests by the Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) and Trends inInternational Mathematics and Science Study(TIMSS) comprise the most important databases
for cross-national comparisons in empirical education economics. Inoue and Tanaka (2016) showthat students whose teachers have master ’s
degrees in the natural sciences tend to be more
proficient in science than the students of otherteachers.
Recent developments in empirical analysis,
including the use of econometric methods thatemphasize causal inferences, have had a major
impact on how educational effects are measured.
We now have a variety of measurement methods
at our disposal. In education as in other areas, themost convincing research designs for drawing
causal inferences involve randomized trials.
Unfortunately, in Japan, the use of randomized
trials in education policy evaluation is all but
unheard of.
To get around the obstacles to randomized trials
in Japanese schools, Akabayashi Hideo of Keio
University, Araki Hiroko of Kindai University,and I have partnered with Chance for Children, anonprofit organization, to start a randomized trialof vouchers. The trial offers vouchers to students
for tutoring classes. Although the scale of theSocial Science Japan March 2017

study is rather small, eliminating various biases
from the sample using the randomized research
design, we found evidence that vouchers increase
academic achievement. We can expect randomized studies of educational effects to be conducted on a larger scale in the future.
Causal inferences based on the analysis ofdetailed, individual-level data are crucial when
designing evidence-based policies, and the sameis true when assessing education policies. We canlearn much from analyzing large, detailed data
sets that have been compiled through governmental, non-governmental, and academic
research. These resources contain evidence of the
progress of natural experiments on how systems
differ and evolve. We can look forward to manystudies that take advantage of these sources.
When drawing causal inferences, using a robust
research design such as randomized control trials
to gauge educational effects is ever more important. Expanding randomized trials beyond pilot
studies will make it possible to choose more effective education policies. The accumulation of reliable evidence is an essential part of making evidence-based policy formation possible. Collecting
reliable evidence based on sound causal inferences is the mission of empirical researchers, andthe importance of this mission in the economics of
education is no small thing.
References
Tanaka, Ryuichi and Issui Ishizaka. 2016. “Doteaching practices matter for students' academic achievement?” Presented at the Japanese Economic Association Autumn Conference, September 10, Tokyo.
Inoue, Atushi and Ryuichi Tanaka. 2016. “Rikei
bun'ya no shūshi-gō o hoyū shi ta kyōin ga
jidō seito no rikei kamoku no gakuryoku ni
ataeru kōka ni tsuite” (Impact of teacherswith science master’s degrees on students’science achievement). Presented at theJapanese Economic Association Autumn
Conference, September 10, Tokyo.

Page 31

ISS Contemporary Japan Group at the Instituteof Social Science, The University of Tokyo
ISS Contemporary Japan Group seminar series provides English-speaking residents of the Tokyo area with anopportunity to hear cutting-edge research in social science and related policy issues, as well as a venue forresearchers and professionals in or visiting Tokyo to present and receive knowledgeable feedback on their latest
research projects. Seminars are open to everyone. Admission is free and advance registration is not required.
For further information, please consult the CJG website: http://web.iss.u-tokyo.ac.jp/cjg/.

Kato Junko(Professor of Political Science at the University of Tokyo)
October 27, 2016
The Politics of Tax Increases: Japan’s Shōhizei Consumption Tax in
Comparative Perspective
Why has Prime Minister Abe Shinzo repeatedly delayed increasing Japan’s
consumption tax rate even though it is much lower than in other countries? Why has the Japanese
government accumulated the largest debt despite maintaining the lowest level of taxation among mature
democracies? I will solve these puzzles by placing Japanese tax politics in comparative perspective. Japan is a
critical case that embodies a path-dependency in tax politics. In most advanced democracies, theinstitutionalization of effective revenue raising during the period of high growth consolidated state funding
capacity. Japan, however, failed to introduce effective revenue measures before the end of high growth andhas therefore confronted strong opposition to tax increases. Extending further this implication from myprevious work (Kato 2003), I will analyze the politics of shōhizei for the last three decades. Since the 1990s,
Japan has experienced continuous changes in party politics, including the breakup of the predominant
Liberal Democratic Party (LDP), the formation of the LDP-centered coalition government, and alterations inpartisan rule. Nonetheless, Japanese tax politics has remained intact. This consequence will be explained bycomparing Japan with other countries.

Page 32

Social Science Japan March 2017

Michael Strausz(Associate Professor of Political Science at Texas Christian University)
November 29, 2016
Help Wanted: Labor Shortages, an Aging Society, and Japan’s Restrictive
Immigration Policy
Japan's population is composed of an extremely small percentage of foreign
residents when compared with other advanced industrialized countries. This is particularly puzzling when
considering that Japan's population is rapidly declining and aging, and that Japan is facing some of the mostintense labor shortages in the world. This presentation will put Japan's restrictive immigration policy incomparative perspective. Ultimately, I will explain Japan's restrictive immigration policy with reference to
two key factors: the outcome of domestic political disputes between business and the government, and thenature of elite debates and disputes about the appropriate role for foreign residents in Japan.

Sanford Levinson(Professor of Law and Government at the University of Texas at Austin)
December 16, 2016
The American Judicial System(s) as Part of the Political Process
Although political scientists have long emphasized the connection between
courts (and, therefore "law") and politics, it is only in recent years that theseconnections have been assimilated into ordinary public discourse in the United States. A key issue in the
recent election was dominance over the future of the United States Supreme Court. Controlling the Court,
more than ever before, was seen as an linked to electoral success. Especially important, in this regard, is thefact of lifetime tenure coupled with the incentive to appoint relatively young justices. The overt politicizationof the judiciary has become even more glaringly true with regard to the judges on state courts, which hear
literally millions of more cases than do national courts. Most state judges are elected or otherwise politicallyaccountable. The contrast with most other judicial systems in the world, including Japan's, is obvious.
Whether reform is possible, assuming it is desirable, is doubtful, especially at the national level, because of
the near impossibility of constitutional amendment.

Social Science Japan March 2017

Page 33

Recent Publications by ISS and ISS Staff
宇野重規（編）S. ウォルビー, H. ゴットフリート, K. ゴットシャル,『民主主義と市民社会（リーディングス 戦後日本の思想水脈 第３巻）』
（岩波書店）2016年8月

大沢真理（編著）
・大沢真理（編訳）『知識経済をジェンダー化する―労働組織・規制・福祉国家』（ミネルヴァ書房）2016年8月

齋藤哲志（著）『フランス法における返還請求の諸法理―
原状回復と不当利得』（有斐閣）2016年9月

Page 34

田中亘（著）『会社法』（東京大学出版会）2016年9月

Social Science Japan March 2017

Recent Publications by ISS and ISS Staff*For more publications, please visit the ISS Homepage (http://jww.iss.u-tokyo.ac.jp/, http://www.iss.u-tokyo.ac.jp/).

田中亘・森・浜田松本法律事務所（編）『日本の公開買付け―制度と実証』

東京大学社会科学研究所・大沢真理・佐藤岩夫（編）『ガバナンスを問い直すⅠ― 越境する理論のゆくえ』（有斐閣）2016年10月（東京大学出版会）2016年11月

東京大学社会科学研究所・大沢真理・佐藤岩夫（編）『ガバナンスを問い直すⅡ―市場・社会の変容と改革政治』（東京大学出版会）2016年11月

Social Science Japan March 2017矢野眞和・濱中淳子・小川和孝（著）『教育劣位社会―教育費をめぐる世論の社会学』（岩波書店）2016年12月

Page 35

Focus on ISS
The Social Sciences of Hope in Kamaishi: How “Kibougaku” Was Applied to Disaster Work (Part 3)
NAKAMURA Naofumi and GENDA Yuji
Social Sciences of Hope, People in Charge
In this final report on our post-3/11 fieldwork in the Kamaishi region, we introduce one
more product of our research team’s efforts, Social Sciences of Hope, People in Charge. The
book has fifteen chapters divided into three parts. In part one, the editors discuss problem setting and present an overview of the Kamaishi research project. Part two is a collection of essays, “Memories of Disaster: Oral Histories” by members of the Kibougaku
research team who reflect on the oral histories they collected. In addition to the participants in the oral history project, our researchers also interviewed sixty-plus other residents. After sharing informant reports, researchers reassessed the oral histories and wrote
up their views on the problems affecting Kamaishi.
Part three of the book features contributions by public officials from Kamaishi and Kitakyushu, a city thatprovided aid to Kamaishi, as well as managers from the Kamaishi iron works, part of the Nippon Steel and
Sumitomo Metal Corporation. These local leaders shared their personal accounts of facing the destruction
and horrifying loss of life. Their experiences and insights add greater dimension to this book of recollections. The bird’s eye perspective of the disaster that public officials from Kamaishis and Kitakyushu struggled to attain (given that the oral histories were collected in an open-ended way without a specific focus,
cognitive biases may need to be corrected) were revealing. Most important, the testimony of these people,
who literally put their lives on the line of the recovery efforts, is immeasurably valuable for our understanding of the 3/11 tragedy.
People in Charge: Trust and a Shared Sense of Hope
The keyword of this book, mochiba (持ち場, the situation “in charge”), is also featured in its title. The directtranslation is “post,” a place where someone works or carries out their duties, or “position” or “job.” Whileat their posts, people are responsible for dealing with any problems that arise, foreseen or unforeseen, withwhatever resources they have. Positions of responsibility may have been determined ahead of time, people
may volunteer to take charge in times of crisis, or people may have responsibility thrust upon them. These“paths” to leadership are taken not just by government officials, but also by people in the private sector,
community associations, emergency shelters, or other autonomous organizations.
In the dire conditions immediately after the earthquake and tsunami, we witnessed a great many individuals frantically working in the affected areas to fulfill their sense of duty. Their commitment to leading their
mission was what halted the tremendous momentum of the disaster before the destruction was complete.
The people who stoically persevered in restoring and defending the basic systems that enable a society tofunction had access to a crucial resource—longstanding relationships of trust in families and the communitythat were established before the quake.
Without mutual trust, it would have been impossible to work through the grief or impose any sort of orderon the chaos. We needed the support of others to maximize our own contributions. When your post is a disaster area, you turn to people you trust in normal times to get your bearings and move forward.
Upholding fairness and justice is much more difficult in life-and-death situations. Even in times of crisis,
however, we can maintain some “not on my watch” standards that add a small degree of stability. In
Kamaishi, a shared determination to survive transformed into a mutual commitment to rebuild, no matterthe obstacles. In extreme circumstances, a shared sense of hope critically empowered citizens to pull theircommunity back from the brink of annihilation and begin moving forward.
As we conclude our introduction of the Kamaishi oral history collection project, we believe that everyday
trust building efforts and shared hope in the worst of times are the foundations that makes it possible forpeople to fulfill their personal mission to do what they can to halt the damage and lead the recovery.

Page 36

Social Science Japan March 2017