Associations between early maternal behaviours and child language at 36 months in a cohort experiencing adversity

Abstract

Background Variations in parenting, more specifically less responsive and more directive parenting, contribute to language difficulties for children experiencing adversity. Further investigation of associations between specific responsive and directive behaviours and child language is required to understand how behaviours shape language over time within different populations. As language is dyadic, further exploration of how mother–child interactions moderate associations is also important. Aims To investigate associations between specific responsive and directive maternal behaviours, the quality of mother–child interaction (fluency and connectedness) and child language in a cohort experiencing adversity. Methods & Procedures Pregnant women experiencing adversity were recruited from maternity hospitals in Australia. At 12 months, videos of mother–infant free play were collected. Videos were coded for maternal behaviours and fluency and connectedness (n = 249). At 36 months, child language was measured using a standardized language test. Linear regression models were used to examine associations and the moderating role of fluency and connectedness was explored. Outcomes & Results Responsive yes/no questions were positively associated with language scores. Unsuccessful redirectives were negatively associated with language scores. The moderation effect of fluency and connectedness was equivocal in the current data. Conclusions & Implications Findings reproduce and extend previous research highlighting key features of mother–child interactions associated with child language trajectories. Findings also augment knowledge of risk and protective factors related to language for children experiencing adversity and highlight where targeted interventions might be successful.

Twins' and Singletons' Linguistic Environment: A Systematic Review

“…According to the social interactionist perspective (Snow, 1972), which emphasizes the environmental role and the value of daily interactions for language development, the linguistic environment's features were widely explored and were found to be predictors of children's linguistic skills (Mol et al, 2008; Farrant and Zubrick, 2012; Rowe, 2012; Weisleder and Fernald, 2013; Levickis et al, 2014; Tamis-LeMonda et al, 2014; Hudson et al, 2015; Sandbank and Yoder, 2016; Conway et al, 2018; Paavola-Ruotsalainen et al, 2018; Smith et al, 2019). Within the twin population, several characteristics of the linguistic environment were explored and compared with those of singletons to highlight variables potentially associated with the lower linguistic skills found among twins: input quantity, input complexity, child-directed speech (CDS) linguistic features, parental responsiveness and directiveness, joint attention (JA), and book reading.…”

“…In addition, parental responsiveness and directiveness were shown to be related, in opposite directions, with the children's linguistic skills (Murray and Hornbaker, 1997; Paavola et al, 2005; Levickis et al, 2014; Hudson et al, 2015; Conway et al, 2018; Paavola-Ruotsalainen et al, 2018; Smith et al, 2019). Parental responsiveness refers to parenting behaviors and communicative acts that follow linguistic input and actions produced by the child (Paavola et al, 2005; Tamis-LeMonda et al, 2014).…”

“…On the other hand, directiveness is characterized by the parental inclination to redirect the infant's attention to control the child's behavior (Murray and Hornbaker, 1997; Smith et al, 2019). Several studies identified a negative association between parental directiveness and children's receptive and expressive language skills at 24 (Murray and Hornbaker, 1997), 36, and 48 months (Conway et al, 2018; Smith et al, 2019).…”

Influential factor combinations leading to language outcomes following a home visiting intervention: A qualitative comparative analysis (QCA)

“…2018, Smith et al . 2019, Waldfogel and Washbrook 2010). It is modifiable in early interventions (Guttentag et al .…”

Protocol for the Adaptation of a Direct Observational Measure of Parent-Child Interaction for Use With 7–8-Year-Old Children

“…Videos were rated on a 5-minute segment, from minute 2:00 to minute 7:00. Commencing scoring at minute 2:00 allowed the dyad time to 'warm up' (Smith et al, 2019). Many dyads swapped toy sets during this period, so duration with each toy was recorded to the nearest 30 seconds, and 'main toy' was recorded as the toy set used by the child for the most time during the 5-minute segment.…”