Pupillary and Attentional Responses to Infant Facial Expressions in Mothers Across Socioeconomic Variations

Abstract

Maternal responses to infant facial expressions were examined in two socioeconomically diverse samples of South African mothers (Study I, N = 111; and Study II, N = 214; age: 17-44 years) using pupil and gaze tracking. Study I showed increased pupil response to infant distress expressions in groups recruited from private as compared to public maternity clinics, possibly reflecting underlying differences in socioeconomic status (SES) across the groups. Study II, sampling uniformly low-SES neighborhoods, found increased pupil dilation and faster orientation to expressions of infant distress, but only in the highest income group. These results are consistent with maternal physiological and attentional sensitivity to infant distress cues but challenge the universality of this sensitivity across socioeconomic diversity.

Bored of the rings: Methodological and analytic approaches to operationalizing Bronfenbrenner's PPCT model in research practice

“…Yrttiaho et al's (2021) study was not longitudinal, and this is a major limitation from a bioecological perspective. To address this limitation, the authors could collect data on an outcome (e.g., parenting practices) at a theoretically relevant point in time.…”

“…A follow-up study or analysis could then examine the impact of skin color as a demand person characteristic input. Yrttiaho et al (2021) Yrttiaho et al ( 2021) utilized a lab-based approach to examine the interrelation of infant distress, socioeconomic status, maternal mental health, and maternal stress response (measured by pupil dilation and speed). Across two samples, drawn from diverse socioeconomic populations, the authors demonstrated that mothers in higher socioeconomic groups had stronger pupillary response and quicker saccadic reaction time to images of infants in distress.…”

“…With mothers as the developing persons of interest, the antecedent person characteristics of interest were standardized pictures of infants in different states of distress (Yrttiaho et al, 2021). In Study I, the authors tested four possible faces as stimuli: strong positive (smiling baby), mild positive (neutral baby), mild negative (frowning baby), and strong negative (crying/ screaming baby).…”

“…Their results call into question organicist perspectives on maternal responsiveness (i.e., a universal trait) and support Bronfenbrenner's proposition that "…the model identifies any differences in developmental processes and outcomes associated with different ecological niches" (1989, p. 200). Yrttiaho et al's (2021) study was not longitudinal, and this is a major limitation from a bioecological perspective. To address this limitation, the authors could collect data on an outcome (e.g., parenting practices) at a theoretically relevant point in time.…”

“…This approach would yield two perspectives about mother-infant interactions and be in line with Bronfenbrenner's recommendation to include more than one proximal process in the model. Yrttiaho et al (2021) demonstrated synergy through a simple multigroup approach; the mothers from the high-income groups had faster pupillary dilation and attentional response time in response to strong negative infant stimuli. The authors utilized another person characteristic, maternal mental health, but did not use it as a grouping factor; instead, it was included as a covariate in hierarchical regressions.…”