Effects of Parent-Child Collaborative Vegetable-Cooking on Psychological Development ()
1. Introduction
Although there is no longer a unified ideal way that a family should be in Japan, the nuclear family remains central. The concentration of the Japanese population in large cities and the rapid growth of the single household are important factors. Households across Japan are divided into 54% of the nuclear family type, 38% single households, with other households, including multigenerational families living together, amount to 8% of the total (Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare in Japan, 2020). In modern Japan, there are many time constraints that fall on a single family that fall less onerously upon nuclear families due to their collaboration, it is necessary to routinely and consciously incorporate the scenes of emotional interaction, where relatedness between parent and child is more likely to occur, relative to the viewpoint of psychological development of the parent and child.
Parent-child co-preparation of meals is an emotional interaction in everyday life, a form of parent-child collaborative work. Parent-child co-cooking promotes children’s psychological development and leads to positive parental thoughts and behaviors; prior research suggests that co-cooking experiences with diluted lactic beverages and hot cake mixes can foster psychological development, including non-recognition abilities and the acquisition of new cognitive abilities for children and their parents (Kotani et al., 2016; Tajima et al., 2018). Collaborative cooking experiences produce parent-child communication and have the potential to guide the growth of non-cognitive abilities as well, including children’s social skills, challenging their minds by solving problems, producing curiosity, identifying the psychological importance that co-cooking experiences have. However, it is not yet clear what cooking experiences drive psychological development most effectively. Dilution-type lactic beverages and hot cake mixes, which are easy to use in cooking, show a special and non-routine recreational proximity component for dietary habits. Vegetable dishes are attracting attention as dishes that can be naturally encountered in daily eating experiences and that can include complex cooking processes. Previous studies of the cooking of vegetables indicate an experiential program of vegetable cooking has a positive impact on children’s self-efficacy in cooking among terms of non-cognitive abilities (Jarpe-Ratner et al., 2016). However, the impact that psychological development of everyday co-cooking in the home is not a temporary event and has not yet been tested so far.
In addition, we conducted a survey research experience using the questionnaire method, with the purpose of estimating the influence of the ideal means of parent-child co-cooking on the child’s psychological development, focusing on vegetable dishes, as these can be regularly cooked at home with diverse accompanying elements and using cooking processes.
2. Method
We adopted a survey method using a questionnaire, conducted among parents with first children between 3 and 12 years old, looking back one year from the time of the survey. Vegetable dishes were defined as raw vegetable salads, hot vegetable salads, potato salads, dressings, stir-fries, stews, soups, noodles, rice dishes, and all other dishes using vegetables, including dishes that also contain meat, fish, and eggs.
Some respondent mothers indicated that their parent-child collaborative cooking with vegetables took place at least once a month (parent-child collaborative cooking with vegetables group, n = 420), those that indicated that did not have collaborative cooking experience with vegetable cooking but did cook collaboratively at least once a month (parent-child collaborative non-vegetable cooking, n = 133), and those who responded that they did not have parent-child collaborative cooking experience (parent-child collaborative cooking, inexperienced group, n = 240) based on a pre-survey concerning their food education experience. In each group, the sizes of children’s age groups (1 - 2, 3 - 4, or 5 - 6 years of primary school) and male-to-female ratio were almost equal. In addition, in the vegetable cooking and the non-vegetable cooking, the frequencies of collaborative cooking between about once a month and more than once a week were equally assigned as far as possible (Table 1).
Table 1. Breakdown of assignment by segment of survey subjects.
Group |
Age |
Co-cooking
frequency |
n |
% |
Group of parents and
children who have
experience cooking
vegetable dishes together |
The first year of kindergarten (3 - 4 years old) |
At least once a week |
35 |
4.4 |
About once a month |
35 |
4.4 |
The second year of kindergarten (4 - 5 years old) |
At least once a week |
35 |
4.4 |
About once a month |
35 |
4.4 |
The third year of kindergarten (5 - 6 years old) |
At least once a week |
35 |
4.4 |
About once a month |
35 |
4.4 |
The first grade of elementary school (6 to 7 years old) |
At least once a week |
35 |
4.4 |
About once a month |
35 |
4.4 |
The third grade of elementary school (8 to 9 years old) |
At least once a week |
35 |
4.4 |
About once a month |
35 |
4.4 |
The fifth grade of elementary school (10 to 11 years old) |
At least once a week |
35 |
4.4 |
About once a month |
35 |
4.4 |
Group of parent-child
co-cooking experiences
other than vegetable cooking |
The first year of kindergarten (3 - 4 years old) |
At least once a week |
2 |
0.3 |
About once a month |
20 |
2.5 |
The second year of kindergarten (4 - 5 years old) |
At least once a week |
4 |
0.5 |
About once a month |
20 |
2.5 |
Group of parent-child
co-cooking experiences
other than vegetable cooking |
The third year of kindergarten（5 - 6 years old) |
At least once a week |
1 |
0.1 |
About once a month |
14 |
1.8 |
The first grade of elementary school (6 to 7 years old) |
At least once a week |
2 |
0.3 |
About once a month |
20 |
2.5 |
The third grade of elementary school (8 to 9 years old) |
At least once a week |
5 |
0.6 |
About once a month |
20 |
2.5 |
The fifth grade of elementary school (10 to 11 years old) |
At least once a week |
6 |
0.8 |
About once a month |
19 |
2.4 |
Parent-child co-cooking
naive group |
The first year of kindergarten (3 - 4 years old) |
- |
40 |
5.0 |
The second year of kindergarten (4 - 5 years old) |
- |
40 |
5.0 |
The third year of kindergarten (5 - 6 years old) |
- |
40 |
5.0 |
The first and second grade of elementary school
(6 - 8 years old) |
- |
40 |
5.0 |
The third and fourth grade of elementary school
(8 - 10 years old) |
- |
40 |
5.0 |
The fifth and sixth grade of elementary school
(10 - 12 years old) |
- |
40 |
5.0 |
Total |
793 |
100.0 |
2.1. Questionnaire Survey
A questionnaire survey was conducted using an internet research company (Cross Marketing Inc.). Responses were collected from July to August 2021. The questionnaire included 8 screening questions, 21 face sheet questions, 151 questions on psychological and behavioral development, and 180 questions in total on the ideal means of action and psychological development for joint cooking among parents and children. Items were drawn from the following instruments: the Behavioral Rating Item (Miki, Kotani, & Ohsawa, 2015) (Table 2), Parental Nutrition Attitude Scale (Nakamichi & Nakazawa, 2003), Parental Self-esteem Emotion (Yamamoto, Matsumoto, & Yamanari, 1982; Susaki & Anii, 2013), Parental Dietary Awareness Survey (Takahata et al., 2006) (Table 3), Children’s Social Skills Scale (Nakadai & Kanayama, 2002), Children’s Self-esteem Emotion (Yamamoto, Matsumoto, & Yamanari, 1982; Susaki & Anii, 2013), and Critical Thought Attitude Scale (Hirayama & Kusumi, 2004) (Table 4). Responses to question items related to psychological development were collected on a 4-point Likert scale questionnaire, from “not at all (1),” to “not very much (2),” “slightly so (3),” and “very much so (4).” The approximate daily vegetable intake of the children was also administered using a 4-point Likert scale, from 0 to less than 0.5 cups (1), more than 0.5 cups to less than 1 cup (2), more than 1 cup to less than 2 cups (3). and more than 2 cups (4).
Table 2. Breakdown of assignment by segment of survey subjects.
Question group |
Content of questions |
I |
II |
Factor name |
Child’s perspective from the parent’s perspective |
When you are cooking, does your child seem happy when you are entrusted with the task? |
0.964 |
−0.238 |
Child’s communication
skills: 9 items (α = 0.92) |
Does your child feel happy or satisfied when you are cooking? |
0.933 |
−0.133 |
Is your child concentrating when you are cooking? |
0.751 |
0.052 |
Is your child motivated and proactive when you are cooking? |
0.723 |
−0.018 |
Do your children actively seek praise and approval from their parents when they are cooking? |
0.675 |
0.043 |
When you are cooking, does your child express himself or herself by expressing his or her
impressions of what he or she has done or made? |
0.617 |
0.231 |
When you are cooking, does your child respond properly to your parents’ proposes (instructions, questions, and suggestions)? |
0.538 |
0.256 |
When you are cooking, do your children actively accept your parents’ proposes (instructions,
questions, suggestions, assessments), such as “Oh, I see,” or “I understand”? |
0.529 |
0.279 |
When you are cooking, do your children actively ask you questions, suggestions, requests, or orders? |
0.454 |
0.314 |
When you are cooking, does your child think of other ways to cook or arrange things for the next time he or she cooks? |
−0.23 |
0.968 |
Independent thinking
and behavior of children: 7 items (α = 0.88) |
When you are cooking, do your children talk about what went well and what didn’t, such as “what to do next” to make use of their experience? |
−0.066 |
0.854 |
When you are cooking, does your child devise his or her own way of doing things when things don’t go well? |
0.112 |
0.741 |
When you are cooking, does your child act in
consideration of his or her parents’ feelings? |
0.103 |
0.614 |
When you are cooking, do your children listen to their parents’ opinions and work on it in their own way? |
0.096 |
0.612 |
When you are cooking, does your child think and work on his or her own, using what he or she has learned before? |
0.282 |
0.577 |
When cooking, does your child do things his or her own way without listening to his or her parents? |
−0.044 |
0.547 |
Child’s perspective from the parent’s perspective |
Inter-factor correlation I |
− |
0.669** |
|
Inter-factor correlation II |
|
− |
|
Appearance of the parent |
When you are cooking, do you feel your child’s growth from what he or she says and does? |
0.986 |
−0.204 |
Parent’s cooperative
skills: 8 items (α = 0.92) |
When you are cooking, do you give your child an evaluation (praise, point out, etc.) or feedback? |
0.854 |
−0.077 |
Do you feel happy or satisfied when you are
cooking? |
0.711 |
0.089 |
When you are cooking, do you sometimes admire what your child says or does? |
0.604 |
0.192 |
Do you support your child’s activities while you are cooking? |
0.594 |
0.211 |
When you are cooking, do you tolerate your child’s mistakes to some extent? |
0.557 |
0.217 |
When you are cooking, do you focus and watch
intently what your child is doing? |
0.535 |
0.23 |
When you are cooking, do you actively respond to your child’s suggestions (questions, requests, and impressions)? |
0.462 |
0.315 |
When you are cooking, do you ask questions or give instructions that make your child think? |
−0.023 |
0.795 |
Parents’ receptive
parenting skills:
6 items (α = 0.83) |
When you are cooking, do you put yourself in your child’s shoes and give suggestions, instructions, and advice? |
0.059 |
0.763 |
When you are doing logic, do you tolerate your child’s antics to some extent? |
−0.121 |
0.619 |
Do you respect your child’s pace and way of doing things when you are cooking? |
0.257 |
0.505 |
When you are cooking, do you share your
experiences and knowledge with your children? |
0.22 |
0.486 |
When you are cooking, do you leave as much to your child as possible? |
0.161 |
0.458 |
Inter-factor correlation I |
− |
0.763** |
|
Inter-factor correlation II |
|
− |
|
Parent-child interaction |
When you are eating something cooked together, do you and your child enjoy interacting with each other? |
0.892 |
|
Parent-child satisfaction: 6 items (α = 0.93) |
When you are eating something cooked together, do you and your child enjoy interacting with each other? |
0.884 |
|
Parent-child interaction |
When you and your child are eating cooked food together, do you and your child have a lively
conversation? |
0.88 |
|
|
When you are cooking together, do you and your child enjoy interacting with each other? |
0.855 |
|
When you are cooking together, is the interaction between you and your child smooth? |
0.847 |
|
When you are cooking together, do you and your child have a lively conversation? |
0.821 |
|
Note: α, Cronbach’s α coefficient (approximately between the sub-items constituted).
Table 3. Results of the factor analysis of the mother’s development.
Question group |
Content of questions |
I |
II |
Factor name |
Parental care attitude |
When my children are playing alone and I think they are bored, I join them and play with them. |
0.852 |
−0.215 |
Response: 7 items
(α = 0.84) |
When I am at home, I have time to spend with my
children, such as playing ball or playing games. |
0.771 |
−0.141 |
I show my affection by hugging my child and saying kind words |
0.68 |
0.034 |
When I go out somewhere and feel that my child is tired, I rest or hold him/her. |
0.628 |
0.002 |
When I think my child is frustrated, I ask him, “What’s wrong?” |
0.56 |
0.22 |
When a child behaves incorrectly, I ask why he or she did it and discuss what should have been done. |
0.483 |
0.251 |
When I go out with my family, I try to take in the places my children want to go as much as possible, not just for the convenience of their parents. |
0.458 |
0.22 |
In places where it is necessary to be quiet, such as libraries and movie theaters, I make the child quiet |
−0.038 |
0.798 |
Control: 4 items
(α = 0.74) |
When my child does not keep the promise he has made to me, I will teach him that promise again |
0.036 |
0.781 |
When a child is playing with a friend and forcibly takes a toy that the friend is using, I make him return it |
0.021 |
0.533 |
When a child doesn’t do what he is supposed to do, I say, “Do it.” |
−0.103 |
0.523 |
Inter-factor correlation I |
− |
0.391** |
|
Inter-factor correlation II |
|
− |
|
Parental self-esteem |
I think I have many good qualities. |
0.832 |
0.073 |
Positive parental
self-esteem:5 items
(α = 0.88) |
I think, at least, of a valuable person. |
0.826 |
0.102 |
I am positive about myself. |
0.765 |
−0.041 |
For the most part, I am satisfied with myself. |
0.728 |
−0.11 |
I think I can do things as well as people can. |
0.665 |
−0.087 |
I sometimes think I’m a total wretch. |
−0.031 |
0.838 |
Negative parental
self-esteem: 3 items
(α = 0.80) |
I sometimes think of myself as a useless person. |
0.069 |
0.808 |
I am afraid that no matter what I do, I will fail. |
−0.05 |
0.608 |
Inter-factor correlation I |
− |
−0.393** |
|
Inter-factor correlation II |
|
− |
|
Parental food awareness survey |
I believe that the dining table is a place where people gather to heal their hearts. |
0.904 |
−0.078 |
Aggressiveness and
perceived utility of table interaction: 5 items
(α = 0.87) |
I want to cherish mealtime. |
0.881 |
−0.106 |
I think that the dining table is a place to nurture children’s minds. |
0.869 |
−0.104 |
I enjoy eating with my children. |
0.731 |
0.04 |
I want my children to eat their parents’ homemade
cooking. |
0.404 |
0.325 |
I enjoy cooking. |
−0.109 |
0.864 |
Aggressiveness of food preparation: 6 items
(α = 0.83) |
I am devising ways to enjoy eating. |
0.155 |
0.688 |
I cook with my children. |
0.162 |
0.537 |
I’m not confident about cooking |
−0.174 |
0.534 |
I want to cherish the taste of my home. |
0.369 |
0.46 |
I incorporate seasonal events and seasonal festivals into my diet. |
0.357 |
0.408 |
Inter-factor correlation I |
− |
0.696** |
|
Inter-factor correlation II |
|
− |
|
Note: α, Cronbach’s α coefficient (approximately between the sub-items constituted).
Table 4. Results of the factor analysis of child development.
Question group |
Content of questions |
I |
II |
III |
|
Child social skills
scale |
Children are more likely to change their minds and come to terms with their peers when
confronted. |
0.807 |
−0.057 |
0.019 |
Self-control: 4 items (α = 0.84) |
Child social skills
scale |
Children are the ones who control their feelings in situations of conflict with their peers. |
0.76 |
−0.024 |
0.07 |
|
Children are the ones who respond appropriately when their peers say unpleasant things to them. |
0.717 |
0.082 |
0.02 |
Children are the ones who feel comfortable
receiving criticism without being offended. |
0.702 |
0.042 |
−0.065 |
Children are the ones who actively talk to their peers. |
−0.061 |
0.893 |
−0.008 |
Assertiveness: 3 items (α = 0.86) |
Children are the ones who invite their friends to various activities |
0.047 |
0.834 |
−0.028 |
Children make friends easily. |
0.054 |
0.721 |
0.04 |
Children are willing to help their peers in
classroom activities. |
−0.084 |
0.111 |
0.851 |
Cooperativity: 3 items (α = 0.83) |
Children help teachers without being told. |
0.046 |
−0.041 |
0.838 |
Children willingly put away play equipment and teaching materials in the classroom. |
0.072 |
−0.061 |
0.669 |
Inter-factor correlation I |
− |
0.408** |
0.51** |
|
Inter-factor correlation II |
|
− |
0.436** |
|
Inter-factor correlation III |
|
|
− |
|
Child’s self-esteem |
Children seem to think they have a variety of good qualities. |
0.791 |
−0.031 |
|
Positive child’s
self-esteem: 5 items(α = 0.87) |
Children seem to believe that they are at least as valuable as people. |
0.775 |
−0.034 |
|
Children seem to be positive about themselves. |
0.768 |
0.005 |
|
Children seem to think they can do things as well as others. |
0.718 |
0.077 |
|
The child, on the whole, seems satisfied with
himself. |
0.717 |
−0.049 |
|
Children sometimes seem to think they’re a total mess. |
0.036 |
1.005 |
|
Negative child’s
self-esteem: 3 items (α = 0.77) |
Children seem to think they are useless in some way |
0.048 |
0.726 |
|
Children seem to think that no matter what they do they will fail. |
−0.138 |
0.498 |
|
Inter-factor correlation I |
− |
−0.158** |
|
|
Inter-factor correlation II |
|
− |
|
|
Child’s critical
thinking attitude scale |
Children are good at thinking about complex problems in sequence. |
0.896 |
−0.132 |
|
Logical and intensive attitudes: 6 items (α = 0.87) |
Children seem to be confident in thinking things correctly. |
0.864 |
−0.068 |
|
Children are able to continue to deal with such
difficult issues as those that do not occur in one line. |
0.761 |
0.027 |
|
Children try to think from as many perspectives as possible, not just one or two. |
0.63 |
0.136 |
|
Children are the ones who can concentrate well when working on a problem. |
0.508 |
0.143 |
|
A child is a person who listens to people who don’t like you. |
0.497 |
0.212 |
|
Children seem to want to know more about any topic. |
−0.047 |
0.916 |
|
Curiosity: 4 items (α = 0.84) |
Children seem to want to learn as much as
possible, even if it may or may not be useful. |
0.09 |
0.809 |
|
Children seem to want to ask questions that they don’t know. |
−0.048 |
0.681 |
|
Children seem to like trying new things. |
0.079 |
0.559 |
|
Inter-factor correlation I |
− |
0.552** |
|
|
Inter-factor correlation II |
|
− |
|
|
Note: α, Cronbach’s α coefficient (approximately between the sub-items constituted).
2.2. Ethics
Data were collected according to the ethical principles set forth in the Declaration of Helsinki (World Medical Association, 2000), the Code of Conduct of the American Psychological Association (APA, 2017), and the Code of Conduct of the Japanese Psychological Association (Japanese Psychological Association, 2009).The investigator described the objectives and methods of the survey in a document accessible to the subjects to allow them to be fully informed concerning their participation and were able to make decisions. The study data were anonymized, and means was used to store the subject’s name or identity. The subjects were instructed that they were free to participate or cease participation in the study at any time, and they provided written informed consent after submitting a questionnaire.
2.3. Statistical Analyses
Factor analyses were performed using maximum likelihood promax rotation, and the factors were set so that the Cronbach’s alpha factor was 0.7 or higher. Inter-group comparisons were assessed using parametric methods, assuming normality according to prior work in the field of psychology (Kotani et al., 2016; Kuroiwa, Tajima, & Miki, 2018; Tajima et al., 2018). For each item, inter-group comparisons among between the three groups were performed using the Tukey test, and comparisons between two groups were performed using an unpaired t-test. Data are presented as means ± SDs. Hazard ratios of less than 5% were considered to indicate significance. In addition, we performed structural covariance analyses (AMOS) for the causal estimation of the respective factors. Statistical analyses were performed using SPSS 27.0 software (IBM Corp., NY, USA). In previous work, no major psychological development was seen between age groups, (Tajima et al., 2018), so all ages from early childhood to middle childhood were included in the analysis.
3. Results
3.1. Results of Factor Analysis for Each Item and Determination of Synthetic Variables
To organize question items consisting of multiple items, based on the results of factor analysis (maximum likelihood promax rotation), the sum for each item constituting a factor at the factor level was calculated in the form of a synthetic variable. The synthetic variable items for mother-child interactions were child communication power (α = 0.92), child’s independent thinking and behavior (α = 0.88), parent coordination power (α = 0.92), parent’s receptive parenting power (α = 0.83), and parent-child satisfaction (α = 0.93) (Table 2). The synthetic variable items for maternal development were response (α = 0.84), control (α = 0.74), positive parental self-affirmation (α = 0.88), negative parental self-affirmation (α = 0.80), positive table interaction (α = 0.87), and positive food preparation (α = 0.83) (Table 3). The synthetic variable items for offspring development were self-control (α = 0.84), assertiveness (α = 0.86), coordination (α = 0.83), positive self-affirmation of offspring (α = 0.87), negative self-affirmation of offspring (α = 0.77), logical and focused attitudes (α = 0.87), and curiosity (α = 0.84) (Table 4).
3.2. Comparison of Mean Psychological and Behavioral
Development Scores Related to Maternal and Child
Development by Experiences of Collaborative
Vegetable Cooking
Psychological development in parent-child behavior and satisfaction in mother-child interactions were assessed in five items, namely, children’s communication ability, children’s independent thoughts and behaviors, ability of parental coordination, parents’ receptive parenting ability, and parent-child satisfaction (Figure 1). In all of these items, the parent-child collaborative cooking experience group of vegetable cooking had a significantly higher score than the parent-child collaborative cooking experience group without vegetable cooking (p < 0.001). Parental development was assessed in terms of response, control, self-affirmation, positive and table interactions, and positive eating readiness (Figure 2). In the four items outside of than the control, the vegetable cooking group had significantly higher scores than the non-vegetable cooking group and the no cooking group (p < 0.001).
Children’s development was assessed in six items, namely, self-control, assertiveness, coordination, self-affirmation, logical and intensive attitudes, and curiosity (Figure 3). In all six items, the vegetable cooking group scored significantly higher than the non-vegetable group and the non-cooking group (p < 0.05 or p < 0.001).
Figure 1. Relationship between Parent-child Co-cooking and Parent-child Behavior and Satisfaction.
Figure 2. Psychological development of parents in the collaborative vegetable-cooking group, the collaborative non-vegetable co-cooking group except, and the noncollaborative cooking group.
Figure 3. Psychological development of children in the collaborative vegetable-cooking experience group, the collaborative cooking without vegetables group, and the noncolla-borative cooking group.
3.3. Mean Psychological and Behavioral Development Scores
Related to Maternal and Child Development in
Collaborative Vegetable Cooking
The results for the approximate daily vegetable intake of the children participants are shown in Figure 4. Children in the parent-child collaborative cooking experience group of vegetable cooking had significantly higher scores than the other groups (p < 0.001).
Figure 4. Vegetable intake in the collaborative vegetable cooking group, the collaborative cooking group without vegetables, and the noncollaborative cooking experience group.
We conducted a covariance structural analysis to determine the effects of mother-child interactions on children’s vegetable intake, child development, maternal development, and the effects of children on maternal development. We conducted a covariance structure analysis that took the procedure of a multi-population simultaneous analysis to examine the influence between the variables by dividing them into a parent-child collaborative cooking experience group of vegetable cooking and a parent-child collaborative cooking experience group other than vegetable cooking (Figure 5). The maximum likelihood method was used for parameter estimation. CFI = 0.89 and RMSEA = 0.06 were found for the model and indicated good fit. Analysis in Fig. 5 indicated a significant path coefficient between mother-child interaction and children’s vegetable intake in the vegetable co-cooking group (β = 0.17, p < 0.001), but no significant path coefficient was found in the general (non-vegetable) co-cooking group (β = −0.03, ns), suggesting that mother-child reciprocal negotiation with vegetable co-cooking experience could have impacted children’s vegetable intake. Mother-child interactions also showed that both vegetable and non-vegetable cooking groups had significant positive path coefficients with child development (β = 0.55, p < 0.001; β = 0.46, p < 0.001) and significant positive path coefficients with maternal development (β = 0.53, p < 0.001; β = 0.53, p < 0.001), suggesting that the mother-child co-cooking experience itself had an impact on both mother and child development. In addition, a significant positive path coefficient was seen between child development and maternal development (β = 0.34, p < 0.001; β = 0.27, p < 0.01), which suggests that parental development is guided according to child development.
![]()
Figure 5. Estimating the influence of the presence of vegetable co-cooking on parent-child collaborative cooking on children’s vegetable intake and parent-child development (multi-population simultaneous and covariance structural analysis). The values are standardized estimates. The vegetable co-cooking group/general co-cooking group are shown in order. **p < 0.01, ***p < 0.001, χ2 = 678.04, df = 206, CFI = 0.89, RMSEA = 0.06, SRMR = 0.07.
3.4. Causal Direction in the Relationship between Parent-Child
Behavior and Child Vegetable Intake and Parent-Child
Development in Co-Cooking.
We conducted a covariance structure analysis to estimate the effects of mother–child interactions on children’s vegetable intake and child development and on maternal development, as well as the effects of children on maternal development. We conducted a covariance structure analysis using a multi-population simultaneous analysis to examine the mutual influence among the variables by group (Figure 5). The maximum likelihood method was used for the parameter estimation. Goodness of fit was positively evaluated, CFI = 0.89 and RMSEA = 0.06. The analyses given in Figure 5 indicate a significant path coefficient between mother–child interaction and children’s vegetable intake in the vegetable co-cooking group (β = 0.17, p < 0.001), but no significant path coefficient was seen in the general co-cooking group (β = −0.03, ns), which suggests that mother–child reciprocal negotiation with the vegetable co-cooking experience could have impacted children’s vegetable intake. The assessment of mother–child interactions also showed that both the vegetable and non-vegetable cooking groups had significant and positive path coefficients for child development (β = 0.55, p < 0.001; β = 0.46, p < 0.001), as well as significant positive path coefficients for maternal development (β = 0.53, p < 0.001; β = 0.53, p < 0.001), suggesting that the mother–child co-cooking experience itself impacts both maternal and child development. In addition, a significant positive path coefficient was seen between child development and maternal development (β = 0.34, p < 0.001; β = 0.27, p < 0.01), suggesting that parental development is guided by child development.
3.5. Relationship between Children’s Independence and
Parent-Child Behavior and Satisfaction in
Cooking Vegetable Dishes
In the parent–child vegetable-co-cooking experience groups (n = 420) in which the parents’ and children’s feelings of satisfaction with the behavior of the parents and children were divided into three groups (Group A;“Parents are doing the cooking”; Group B; “Parents and children are cooking together”; Group C; “It is left to the children”) in cooking processes (choosing food, washing ingredients, cooking, tasting, and arrange in a serving dish) (Table 5). In all items, the group who responded that activities were to be left to the child had significantly higher scores than the other groups (p < 0.05).
Table 5. Relationship between children’s autonomy and parent–child behavior and satisfaction in vegetable co-cooking.
Choose foods |
|
Group A (n = 207) |
Group B (n = 182) |
Group C (n = 31) |
Child’s communication skills |
3.29 ± 0.52 |
3.48 ± 0.44c |
3.47 ± 0.57 |
Child’s independent thinking and behavior |
2.90 ± 0.56 |
3.20 ± 0.53c |
3.24 ± 0.63e |
Parent’s cooperative skills |
3.28 ± 0.50 |
3.40 ± 0.50 |
3.39 ± 0.59 |
Choose foods |
Parent’s receptive parenting skills |
3.00 ± 0.48 |
3.26 ± 0.51c |
3.33 ± 0.53e |
Parent-child satisfaction |
3.32 ± 0.54 |
3.49 ± 0.54b |
3.58 ± 0.50d |
Wash foods |
|
Group A (n = 72) |
Group B (n = 163) |
Group C (n = 185) |
Child’s communication skills |
3.18 ± 0.51 |
3.40 ± 0.52b |
3.46 ± 0.47f |
Child’s independent thinking and behavior |
2.82 ± 0.51 |
3.11 ± 0.57b |
3.10 ± 0.57e |
Parent’s cooperative skills |
3.09 ± 0.56 |
3.36 ± 0.51c |
3.41 ± 0.46f |
Parent’s receptive parenting skills |
2.87 ± 0.50 |
3.20 ± 0.50c |
3.18 ± 0.49f |
Parent-child satisfaction |
3.15 ± 0.60 |
3.45 ± 0.53c |
3.48 ± 0.50f |
Tear food |
|
Group A (n = 29) |
Group B (n = 121) |
Group C (n = 270) |
Child’s communication skills |
2.89 ± 0.68 |
3.34 ± 0.46c |
3.46 ± 0.46f |
Child’s independent thinking and behavior |
2.64 ± 0.60 |
3.06 ± 0.56b |
3.10 ± 0.55f |
Parent’s cooperative skills |
2.96 ± 0.67 |
3.29 ± 0.51b |
3.40 ± 0.47f |
Parent’s receptive parenting skills |
2.71 ± 0.50 |
3.13 ± 0.52c |
3.19 ± 0.49f |
Parent-child satisfaction |
2.96 ± 0.70 |
3.35 ± 0.51b |
3.49 ± 0.51fg |
Cut food |
|
Group A (n = 80) |
Group B (n = 227) |
Group C (n = 113) |
Child’s communication skills |
3.33 ± 0.60 |
3.35 ± 0.46 |
3.51 ± 0.49dg |
Child’s independent thinking and behavior |
2.90 ± 0.62 |
3.04 ± 0.54 |
3.21 ± 0.57fg |
Parent’s cooperative skills |
3.28 ± 0.60 |
3.31 ± 0.47 |
3.44 ± 0.50 |
Parent’s receptive parenting skills |
2.98 ± 0.56 |
3.11 ± 0.47 |
3.30 ± 0.50fh |
Parent-child satisfaction |
3.31 ± 0.63 |
3.39 ± 0.53 |
3.54 ± 0.49dg |
Cook by heating |
|
Group A (n = 177) |
Group B (n = 180) |
Group C (n = 63) |
Child’s communication skills |
3.33 ± 0.55 |
3.39 ± 0.46 |
3.55 ± 0.45e |
Child’s independent thinking and behavior |
2.95 ± 0.57 |
3.10 ± 0.55a |
3.24 ± 0.57e |
Parent’s cooperative skills |
3.28 ± 0.55 |
3.34 ± 0.48 |
3.50 ± 0.45e |
Parent’s receptive parenting skills |
3.03 ± 0.52 |
3.16 ± 0.48a |
3.39 ± 0.49fh |
Parent-child satisfaction |
3.34 ± 0.58 |
3.44 ± 0.52 |
3.56 ± 0.48d |
Seasoning |
|
Group A (n = 161) |
Group B (n = 203) |
Group C (n = 56) |
Child’s communication skills |
3.31 ± 0.55 |
3.42 ± 0.46 |
3.50 ± 0.48d |
Child’s independent thinking and behavior |
2.89 ± 0.57 |
3.13 ± 0.53c |
3.28 ± 0.57f |
Parent’s cooperative skills |
3.25 ± 0.52 |
3.38 ± 0.49a |
3.46 ± 0.50d |
Parent’s receptive parenting skills |
2.99 ± 0.48 |
3.18 ± 0.50b |
3.38 ± 0.49fg |
Parent-child satisfaction |
3.32 ± 0.58 |
3.46 ± 0.51a |
3.53 ± 0.51d |
Taste |
|
Group A (n = 62) |
Group B (n = 249) |
Group C (n = 109) |
Child’s communication skills |
3.10 ± 0.63 |
3.39 ± 0.47c |
3.54 ± 0.41fg |
Child’s independent thinking and behavior |
2.74 ± 0.60 |
3.07 ± 0.54c |
3.20 ± 0.54f |
Parent’s cooperative skills |
3.09 ± 0.59 |
3.34 ± 0.49b |
3.47 ± 0.44fg |
Parent’s receptive parenting skills |
2.86 ± 0.53 |
3.14 ± 0.48c |
3.29 ± 0.50fg |
Parent-child satisfaction |
3.13 ± 0.61 |
3.43 ± 0.52c |
3.55 ± 0.50f |
arrange in a serving dish |
|
Group A (n = 92) |
Group B (n = 197) |
Group C (n = 131) |
Child’s communication skills |
3.21 ± 0.59 |
3.38 ± 0.48a |
3.52 ± 0.43fg |
Child’s independent thinking and behavior |
2.77 ± 0.58 |
3.07 ± 0.56c |
3.24 ± 0.49fg |
Parent’s cooperative skills |
3.16 ± 0.59 |
3.35 ± 0.49b |
3.44 ± 0.43f |
Parent’s receptive parenting skills |
2.88 ± 0.53 |
3.15 ± 0.48c |
3.29 ± 0.47fg |
Parent-child satisfaction |
3.21 ± 0.61 |
3.42 ± 0.52b |
3.55 ± 0.50f |
Data are shown as means±SDs, Group A; “Parents are doing the cooking”; Group B; “Parents and children are cooking together”; Group C; “It is left to the children”‘; Tukey test for group comparison: a,, p < 0.05 Group B vs. Group A; b, p < 0.01 Group B vs. Group A; c, p < 0.001 Group B vs. Group A; d, p < 0.05 Group C vs. Group A; e, p < 0.01 Group C vs. Group A; f, p < 0.001 Group C vs. Group A; g, p < 0.05 Group C vs. Group B; h, p < 0.01 Group C vs. Group B.
4. Discussion
This questionnaire-based study was conducted among mothers with first children aged 3 - 12 years to identify the influence of parent-child collaborative cooking on the psychological development of parents and children. The results showed that the vegetable-cooking group had a significantly higher score for six items in parent-child psychological and behavioral development and for children’s vegetable intake than the non-vegetable co-cooking and non-co-cooking groups. Previous studies suggest that co-cooking promotes psychological development in children’s behavior and the satisfaction of parents and children. However, specific objects and special materials were observed in previous studies, such as diluted lactic beverages and hot cake mixing (Kotani et al., 2016; Kuroiwa, Tajima, & Miki, 2018; Tajima et al., 2018). This study focused on vegetable cooking, including both routine and diverse ingredients and processes, producing a more distinct impact on the quality of parent-child interactions and on the development of the parent and child (children’s non-recognition and cognitive abilities and mothers’ nurturing attitudes). This finding is significant, not only because it confirmed the importance of the experience of parent-child co-cooking but also because it suggested a general and wide-ranging influence of vegetable dishes as cooking objects.
A stratified analysis of vegetable parent-child co-cooking group according to the level of involvement of children in each of the vegetable cooking processes showed that, where cooking tasks were left to children, significantly higher scores were found in both the behavior and satisfaction of parents and children. Leaving cooking tasks to the child has a positive impact on their communication and their independent thinking and behavior, as well as parental coordination, receptive parenting acuity, and parent-child satisfaction; these may be important factors leading to psychological development.
Covariance structural analysis (multi-population simultaneous analysis) was conducted across the vegetable and the non-vegetable co-cooking groups, to estimate the causal relationship between the mother-child co-cooking experience and the interaction in mother-child co-cooking, the child’s development (social-emotional and cognitive development), the mother’s development [response to children (response and control), social-emotional development (self-esteem), positive attitude toward eating education activities], and the interaction and causal relationship between mother-child co-cooking and the child’s vegetable intake. The results showed that both the parent-child co-cooking experience group of vegetable cooking and the parent-child co-cooking experience group other than vegetables were considered influential on the development of both mother and child through the pathway along which child development affects the mother’s development, indicating the significant contribution that parent-child co-cooking makes to the development of mother and child. In addition to confirming that child development is achieved through collaborative activities (Tajima, 2003), it has been suggested that collaborative cooking has an impact on the general development of parents and children (Kotani et al., 2016). However, the impacts of mother-child interactions on children’s vegetable intake were only seen in the group of parent-child co-cooking experiences of vegetable cooking, suggesting that the experience of dealing with vegetable cooking contributes to the specific developmental of the habit of eating vegetables. This supports the context-dependent and domain-intrinsic theory of development (Bronfenbrenner, 1977), in which experience domains develop, suggesting the importance of experiencing the co-cooking of vegetable cooking for the purpose of increasing vegetable intake. The experience of co-cooking vegetables was associated with a higher daily vegetable intake. One possible contributor to this is that vegetable co-cooking with parents and children produced a higher chance of repeatedly consuming vegetables and an increased preference for vegetables. It has been reported that eating vegetables has a positive impact on children’s taste development and increases the likelihood of preferring vegetables (Anzman-Frasca et al., 2012). Multiple environmental factors, including cooking and harvesting experience and parental attitudes, affect children’s preference for vegetables (Yonezawa et al., 2024). Further, greater preference for vegetables influences subsequent vegetable intake (Fletcher et al., 2017). The results of this study suggest that the parent-child vegetable co-cooking is related to the frequency of vegetable consumption, vegetable preferences, and higher vegetable intake scores.
This study examines the effects of vegetable cooking on the behavior and development of parents and children, but future studies should examine the relationships between the various features of vegetable cooking behavior, including such certain specific kinds of vegetable cooking characteristics. For example, the predictions shown in Figure 6 could be considered. Vegetable cooking was examined here because it is closely related to various cooking processes, ingredients, and healthy meals. Various cooking processes are considered to be prone to self-efficacy as a result of the physical sensation of improving cooking skills (Cunningham-Sabo & Lohse, 2013; Zahr & Sibeko, 2017; Overcash et al., 2018). Moreover, the physical sensations of changing color, shape, and scent are easy to obtain from the diverse food materials, leading to an increase in speech between parent and child (Hanaoka et al., 2018). In addition, the close association between vegetables and a healthy diet has been suggested to impact on QOL gains and mental health as well (Saxe-Custack et al., 2021). Figure 6 is a conceptualized figure connecting previous studies. Future research is required to clarify cause and effect more directly. The limitations of this study include the subjectivity and variability in children’s assessments as reported by their parents. In our target population in Japan, various confounding factors (income, education, living environment, etc.) are evident in parents’ and children’s backgrounds. Long-term follow-up or intervention studies with children are required in certain populations. Additionally, this study primarily focuses on non-cognitive abilities; therefore, a more comprehensive assessment of child development should be considered in future studies.
![]()
Figure 6. Predicting the impact of the features of vegetable cooking and parent-child co-cooking on psychological development.
5. Conclusion
Parent-child vegetable compared with parent-child non-vegetable co-cooking and no co-cooking suggested that there was a positive association in psychological development centered on children’s non-cognitive abilities.
Acknowledgements
We would like to express our deepest gratitude to everyone who participated in the questionnaire. I would also like to express my heartfelt gratitude to Dr. Takeyuki Hara, Research and Education Center for Lifespan Development, Shirayuri University, who conducted the covariance structure analysis.