The Developmental Implications of Home Environments

  • Laura C. Johnson


Recent changes in patterns of female labor-force participation combined with dramatic increases in the number of families headed by single parents have had profound influence on the nature of child rearing and family life in North America. At a time when such major alterations are occurring in family life, what is the reason to focus on the home, such a traditional child-care setting? The answer is that homes continue to be the main setting in which the great majority of young children are reared. Despite drastic demographic changes in the character of North American family life, with increased maternal labor-force participation and the resulting increase in parents’ use of extrafamilial child-care arrangements, the home environment continues to provide the setting in which most children spend most of their time during their early years. Whether in the child’s own home or that of a family day-care provider, a neighbor, or a relative, the indoor and outdoor environments of a home provide the primary settings for child development.


Home Environment Outdoor Play Play Area Play Space Developmental Implication 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Barry, V. T. R. Kidspace: Family life in the city. Children Today, 1982, 11–15.Google Scholar
  2. Clarke-Stewart, A. Child care in the family. New York: Academic Press, 1977.Google Scholar
  3. Cochran, M. A comparison of group and family child-rearing patterns in Sweden. Child Development, 1977, 48, 702–707.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Cohen, U., Hill, A., Lane, C. G., McGinty, T., & Moore, G. T. Recommendations for child play areas. Milwaukee, WI: University of Wisconsin School of Architecture and Urban Planning, 1979.Google Scholar
  5. Cooper Marcus, C. Easter Hill Village: Some social implications of design. New York: Free Press, 1975.Google Scholar
  6. Gaunt, L. Can children play at home? In P. F. Wilkinson Ed.), Innovation in play environments. London: Croom Helm, 1980.Google Scholar
  7. Golden, M., Rosenblath, L., Grossi, L., Policare, M., Freeman, Jr., H., & Brownlee, E. The New York infant day care study. New York: Medical and Health Research Association of New York City, 1978.Google Scholar
  8. Johnson, L., & Dineen, J. The kin trade. Toronto: McGraw-Hill Ryerson, 1981.Google Scholar
  9. Johnson, L., Shack, J., & Oster, K. Out of the cellar and into the parlour. Ottawa, Ontario: Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation, 1980.Google Scholar
  10. Moore, G. T., Lane, C. G., Hill, A. B., Cohen, U., & McGinty, T. Recommendations for child care centers. Milwaukee, WI: School of Architecture and Urban Planning, 1979.Google Scholar
  11. Nikitin, B. & L. Myinashi deti [We and our children] ( 2nd ed. ). Moscow: Molodaia gvardiia, 1980.Google Scholar
  12. Olson, M. Remote office work: Implications for individuals and organizations. New York: New York University Center for Research on Information Systems, 1981.Google Scholar
  13. Osmon, F. L. Patterns for designing children’s centers. New York: Educational Facilities Laboratories, 1971.Google Scholar
  14. Pollowy, A-M. The urban nest. Stroudsburg, PA: Dowden, Hutchinson and Ross, 1977.Google Scholar
  15. Prescott, E. A comparison of three types of day care and nursery school care. Paper presented at the Society of Research in Child Development, Philadelphia, PA, 1973.Google Scholar
  16. Prescott, E. Is day care as good as a good home? Young Children, 1978, 44, 13–19.Google Scholar
  17. Skripalev, V. Stadion v kvartire (A gym at home). Moscow: Fizkultura i sport, 1981.Google Scholar
  18. Toffler, Alvin, The third wave. New York: Morrow, 1980.Google Scholar
  19. Urban Design Centre. Design for child care. Vancouver, B.C., 1974.Google Scholar
  20. Rubenstein, J. L. & Howes, C. Caregiving and infant behavior in day care and in homes. Developmental Psychology, 1979, 15, 1–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Family day care in the United States (Final report of the National Day Care Home Study). Vol. 1: Summary of findings. Washington, DC: Author, 1981.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Plenum Press, New York 1987

Authors and Affiliations

  • Laura C. Johnson
    • 1
  1. 1.Social Planning Council of Metropolitan TorontoTorontoCanada

Personalised recommendations