Individual Differences in Infant Skills as Predictors of Child‐Caregiver Joint Attention and Language

Abstract

Current research suggests that the extent to which child-caregiver dyads engage in interactions involving episodes of joint or coordinated attention can have a significant impact on early lexical acquisition. In this regard it has been recognized that individual differences in early developing child communication skills, such as capacity to follow gaze and early infant language, may contribute to these child-caregiver interactional patterns, as well as to subsequent language development. To address this expectation, 21 infant-parent dyads were recruited for participation in a longitudinal study. Early infant language, responding to joint attention skill, and cognitive development were assessed at 12 months of age. Child-caregiver joint attention episodes, as well as responding to joint attention skill and child language, were assessed at 18 months of age. Developmental outcome, using the MacArthur Communicative Development Inventories and the Bayley Scales of Infant Development-II, was assessed at 21 and 24 months of age. Consistent with previous findings, results indicated that individual differences in child-caregiver episodes of joint attention were related to language at 18 months. In addition, though, 12 month vocabulary and responding to joint attention skill were associated with some aspects of 18 month child-caregiver interaction, as well as subsequent language development. In general, 12 month child measures and 18 month child-caregiver interaction measures appeared to make unique contributions to language development in this sample. These results suggest the need to further consider the role of infant skills in the connections between child-caregiver joint attention episodes and language development.Language development occurs within a social context. Effective communicative interactions involve continuous modification to allow for efficient processing of information. Because infants and toddlers are limited in their capacity to effectively process information, adults tend to be the agents of modification, using simplified speech and clear acts of reference in combination to format communication and facilitate lan-

Joint attention and word learning in Ngas-speaking toddlers in Nigeria

“…They also showed that the number of 'higher level' joint attention initiations performed by toddlers predicted later expressive language. In a subsequent study (Markus, Mundy, Morales, Delgado & Yale, 2000), infant's ability to respond to joint attention behaviors at 1;0 was correlated with expressive vocabulary size at 1;6. A similar study (Morales, Mundy, Delgado, Yale, Messinger, Neal & Schwartz, 2000) found that a composite estimate of the ability to respond to joint attention behaviors (primarily gaze following) between 0;6 and 1;6 was correlated with both expressive and receptive vocabulary at 2;6.…”

Social cognition in the first year

“…As shown in Figure 2, the negative component of the infant event-related potential, a neural correlate indexing attentional processes [39], was enhanced in amplitude (red line) when infants were engaged in a joint attention interaction compared with a nonjoint attention interaction. Given the interplay between joint attention and later cognitive skills [40,41], the results suggest a general learning mechanism that might underlie a range of cognitive developments. To ascertain whether this is the case, such paradigms should be applied to a range of cognitive skills.…”

Analogous and Distinctive Patterns of Prelinguistic Communication in Toddlers With and Without Hearing Loss

“…The coordination ofsocial and object schemes represents a qualitative change in infants' cognition (Adamson, 1995;Adamson & Chance, 1998;Sugarman, 1978Sugarman, , 1983. Following this developmental achievement, infants begin to show an ability to collaborate with adults in joint attention and in joint action, and they start to establish collaborative picture book viewing and mutual play with objects (Carpenter et al, 1998;Markus, Mundy, Morales, Delgado, & Yale, 2000;Mundy, Kasari, Sigman, & Ruskin, 1995;Ninio & Bruner, 1978).…”