Maternal play behaviors, child negativity, and preterm or low birthweight toddlers’ visual–spatial outcomes: Testing a differential susceptibility hypothesis

Abstract

Objective We examined the joint roles of child negative emotionality and parenting in the visual-spatial development of toddlers born preterm or with low birthweights (PTLBW). Method Neonatal risk data were collected at hospital discharge, observer- and parent-rated child negative emotionality was assessed at 9-months postterm, and mother-initiated task changes and flexibility during play were observed during a dyadic play interaction at 16-months postterm. Abbreviated IQ scores, and verbal/nonverbal and visual-spatial processing data were collected at 24-months postterm. Results Hierarchical regression analyses did not support our hypothesis that the visual-spatial processing of PTLBW toddlers with higher negative emotionality would be differentially susceptible to parenting behaviors during play. Instead, observer-rated distress and a negativity composite score were associated with less optimal visual-spatial processing when mothers were more flexible during the 16-month play interaction. Mother-initiated task changes did not interact with any of the negative emotionality variables to predict any of the 24-month neurocognitive outcomes, nor did maternal flexibility interact with mother-rated difficult temperament to predict the visual-spatial processing outcomes.

Parenting style impacts cognitive and behavioural outcomes of former preterm infants: A systematic review

“…For the purposes of this review, responsivity was more narrowly characterized as parental sensitivity, such that a parent responds to a child's signalling (Johnson et al, 2009;Treyvaud et al, 2009;Treyvaud et al, 2016). This concept is well described in attachment theory (Dilworth-Bart et al, 2012) and may explain why parental responsivity is strongly associated with improved child cognitive and behavioural outcomes in former preterm infants. These outcomes include improved scores on standard assessments such as the Bayley and Stanford-Binet tests, increased math, language, and reading skills, and decreased emotional symptoms, conduct problems, hyperactivity, and/or peer difficulties (Feldman et al, 2002;Smith et al, 2001;Treyvaud et al, 2016).…”

“…Parental coercion is coded during parent-child tasks using various instruments that determine parental intrusiveness, restrictiveness, taking over for the child too quickly, over controlling, or directive behaviours (Dilworth-Bart et al, 2012;Foster-Cohen, Friesen, Champion, & Woodward, 2010;Hebert, 2002;Poehlmann et al, 2011;Poehlmann et al, 2012;Shah et al, 2013;Smith et al, 1996;Smith et al, 2000;Treyvaud et al, 2009;Treyvaud et al, 2016). Aggregate data support no positive or negative associations between parental coercion and subsequent child outcomes in former preterm infants.…”

“…Each axis was represented in few studies, and many focused on a modifier of parenting style, such as child temperament (Dilworth‐Bart et al, ) or neonatal pain (Vinall et al, ), on child outcome. Thus, quality of evidence from these studies was lower due to indirectness of measurements, unless the effects of parenting style axes were also analysed without the modifier.…”

“…The worst outcomes of preterm-born infants have multiple etiologies, from acute illness to interruption of the normal sequence of brain development (Aylward, 2005;Kinney, 2006). Parental factors also influence neurodevelopmental outcomes of preterm infants (Dilworth-Bart, Miller, & Hane, 2012;Hebert, 2002;Shah, Robbins, Coelho, & Poehlmann, 2013;Treyvaud et al, 2016).…”

Executive Function Deficits Mediate Poverty’s Effects on Academic Achievement: Target for Intervention in At-Risk Children

“…The study was not designed to examine whether differences between children in high poverty vs. affluent communities in academic outcomes were mediated by differences in EF. In a more direct assessment of mediation in a study of 49 children (54 -66 months old) in a small town, Dilworth-Bart et al (2012) found that EF did significantly mediate the effects of socioeconomic status (SES) on math competency, but notes that the study was limited both by sample size and constricted range of SES, as the children were mostly from well-educated middle-income homes. The most compelling existing data of mediation by EF deficits of the effects of poverty on academic outcomes is provided by a study of the development of brain regions important in EF (Hair et al 2015).…”