Association of proximal elements of social disadvantage with children's language development at 2 years: an analysis of data from the Children in Focus (CiF) sample from the ALSPAC birth cohort

Abstract

Background An association between social disadvantage and early language development is commonly reported in the literature, but less attention has been paid to the way that different aspects of social disadvantage affect both expressive and receptive language in the first 2 years of life. Aims To examine the contributions of gender, parental report of early language skills and proximal social variables (the amount of stimulation in the home, the resources available to the child and the attitudes/emotional status of the primary carer and the support available to him/her) controlling for distal social variables (family income and maternal education) to children's expressive and receptive language development at 2 years in a community ascertained population cohort. Methods & Procedures Data from 1314 children in the Children in Focus (CiF) sample from the Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children (ALSPAC) were analyzed. Multivariable regression models identified the contribution of proximal (what parents do with their children) measures of social disadvantage adjusting for more distal (e.g., family income and material wealth) measures as well as early language development at 15 months to the development of verbal comprehension, expressive vocabulary and expressive grammar (word combinations) at 2 years of age. Outcome & Results In the final multivariable models gender, earlier language and proximal social factors, co‐varying for distal factors predicted 36% of the variance for expressive vocabulary, 22% for receptive language and 27% for word combinations at 2 years. Language development at 15 months remained a significant predictor of outcomes at 24 months. Environmental factors were associated with both expressive scales but the picture was rather more mixed for receptive language suggesting that there may be different mechanisms underlying the different processes. Conclusions & Implications This study supports the argument that social advantage makes a strong contribution to children's language development in the early years. The results suggest that what parents/carers do with their children is critical even when structural aspects of social disadvantage such as family income and housing have been taken into consideration although this relationship varies for different aspects of language. This has the potential to inform the targeting of public health interventions focusing on early language and pre‐literacy skills on the one hand and home learning environments on the other and, potentially, the two in combination.

Pathways from the early language and communication environment to literacy outcomes at the end of primary school; the roles of language development and social development

“…Significant, direct paths from early SES to all predictor variables and to the academic outcome measure were observed. This complements the findings of Law et al (2019), who reported similar SES effects on language development at age 2 years in the ALSPAC dataset; we now provide evidence of such effects extending into later childhood. The present results extend previous findings to demonstrate that early SES influences upon literacy outcomes remain even when a number of other factors are taken into consideration: social adjustment and literacy skills at age 5 years, and PIQ, decoding skills, and language development and social development aged 7-9 years and literacy outcomes aged 11 years.…”

“…This adds to mounting evidence that quality of ELCE makes a difference even in otherwise adverse circumstances. To give some examples, mitigating effects of higher quality ELCE have been reported for early language development (Law et al, 2019), early cognitive development (Melhuish, 2010;Melhuish et al, 2008), and even on academic achievement at GCSE and A level (Sammons et al, 2018). Our findings are also congruent with research beyond the UK, including studies from Australia, Germany and USA.…”

“…Improving early family SES indicators such as education and income would likely have a direct impact on child outcomes throughout primary schools. Further, as positive ELCE was observed to have an influence on later skills and outcomes even in the presence of early SES challenges, the present results provide yet additional support for the importance of early childhood interventions (Law et al, 2019;Melhuish, 2010;Sammons et al, 2004).…”

“…Given that provision of a high-quality early learning environment draws on both temporal and financial resources, the construct should also be considered with reference to socioeconomic status (SES). Deleterious effects of poverty have been consistently observed for children's language development and social development (Bradley & Corwyn, 2002;Hoff, 2003;Law et al, 2019) as well as for literacy outcomes (Feinstein, 2003;Jerrim et al, 2015). Even so, a recent analysis has shown that while SES is an influential factor, good quality early learning environments can be created even in resource-limited families (Law et al, 2019).…”

“…Deleterious effects of poverty have been consistently observed for children's language development and social development (Bradley & Corwyn, 2002;Hoff, 2003;Law et al, 2019) as well as for literacy outcomes (Feinstein, 2003;Jerrim et al, 2015). Even so, a recent analysis has shown that while SES is an influential factor, good quality early learning environments can be created even in resource-limited families (Law et al, 2019). That is: while the availability of resources is significant, good use of whatever is available is more important (Hoff, 2003).…”