Cited by 232Early Childhood Education and DevelopmentSchool Choice and PerformanceYouth Development and Social Support

Does early child care affect children's development?

Open access
Felfe, Christina, Lalive, Rafael·2018·Journal of Public Economics

Abstract

We study how early child care (ECC) affects children's development in a marginal treatment effect framework that allows for rich forms of observed and unobserved effect heterogeneity. Exploiting a reform in Germany that induced school districts to expand ECC at different points in time, we find strong but diverging effects on children's motor and socio-emotional skills. Children who were most likely to attend ECC benefit in terms of their motor skill development. Children who were least likely to attend ECC gain in terms of their socio-emotional skill development, especially boys and children from disadvantaged families, such as those with low education or migration backgrounds. Simulating expansions of ECC, we find that a moderate expansion fosters motor skills for all children and language skills for boys and immigrant children. A progressive expansion of ECC improves all children's socio-emotional development but neither their motor skills nor their language skills.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jpubeco.2018.01.014

Cites

3 of 3 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Most carefully designed studies show that the provision of early childcare is beneficial, especially for children from disadvantaged backgrounds.

    “though most carefully designed studies show that the provision of early childcare is beneficial, especially for children from disadvantaged backgrounds (Havnes and Mogstad 2015, Cornelissen et al. 2018, Felfe and Lalive 2018, Gormley and Gayer 2005).”

    From Educational Inequality* (2022) · cites this paper as Felfe and Lalive 2018

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Felfe, C., & Lalive, R.
Affiliations
  • University of St.Gallen (CH)
  • Center for Economic and Policy Research (US)
Corresponding author
Lalive, Rafael
Venue
Journal of Public Economics
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2018-03
Volume
159
Pages
33-53
ISSN
0047-2727 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2794134803
Cited by
232
References
3
Citations by year
2026: 15 · 2025: 25 · 2024: 42 · 2023: 33 · 2022: 31 · 2021: 30 · 2020: 21 · 2019: 15 · 2018: 11 · 2017: 6 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 1
FWCI
62.42
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Public Economics (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • KOPS (University of Konstanz) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
  • SSRN Electronic Journal (submittedVersion)
  • IRIS (submittedVersion)
  • SERVAL (Université de Lausanne) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • Swiss National Science Foundation (51NF40-160590)
  • Swiss National ScienceFoundation
  • University of St. Gallen
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Education › Early Childhood Education and Development
  • Social Sciences › Education › School Choice and Performance
  • Social Sciences › Safety Research › Youth Development and Social Support
Keywords
early childhood care, child development, motor skills, socioemotional skills, language skills, heterogeneous effects, school district reform, immigrant children, disadvantaged families, gender differences

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review