The significance of speech to newborns.

Rheingold, Harriet L.; Adams, Judith L.

doi:10.1037/0012-1649.16.5.397

Cited by 32 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…For the infant's rudimentary communication skills to develop into competencies, parental attunement and responsiveness through “subtle, nonconscious behaviors, [help guide the] infant in the regulation of emotions, language acquisition, and participation in social exchanges” (Koester & Lahti‐Harper, , p. 5). As the more skilled partner in the didactic infant–caregiver interaction, parents are biologically prepared to adjust to the infant's survival needs and scaffold the adoption of appropriate sociocultural communication skills (Papoušek & Papoušek, ; Rheingold & Adams, ).…”

Section: What Is Intuitive Parenting?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Expectant Fathers’ Intuitive Parenting: Associations With Parent Characteristics and Postpartum Positive Engagement

Schoppe‐Sullivan

Altenburger

Dush

et al. 2014

Infant Mental Health Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study examined expectant fathers’ intuitive parenting behavior, its correlates, and its associations with fathers’ postpartum positive engagement. One hundred eighty-two expectant couples completed the Prenatal Lausanne Trilogue Play in the third trimester of pregnancy. Coders rated expectant fathers’ and mothers’ intuitive parenting behavior during this procedure. Expectant parents also completed surveys regarding their psychological and demographic characteristics. At 3 months postpartum, fathers completed time diaries that assessed the time they spent in developmentally appropriate positive engagement activities with their infants. Examination of correlates of expectant fathers’ intuitive parenting behavior revealed that expectant fathers showed lower levels of these behaviors than expectant mothers, that intuitive parenting behavior was moderately positively associated for mothers and fathers, and that individual differences in expectant fathers’ intuitive parenting behavior were associated with parent demographic and psychological characteristics. In particular, expectant fathers showed greater intuitive parenting behavior when they had greater human capital and more progressive beliefs about parent roles, and when their partners had lower parenting self-efficacy. Findings also indicated that expectant fathers’ greater intuitive parenting behavior was predictive of fathers’ greater subsequent engagement in developmentally appropriate activities at 3 months postpartum, but only when expectant mothers demonstrated low levels of intuitive parenting behavior.

show abstract

Section: What Is Intuitive Parenting?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Expectant Fathers’ Intuitive Parenting: Associations With Parent Characteristics and Postpartum Positive Engagement

Schoppe‐Sullivan

Altenburger

Dush

et al. 2014

Infant Mental Health Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The second distinction characterizes the child's attention to symbols. Although adult partners often speak during even their first encounter with a newborn (Rheingold & Adams, 1980), infants typically begin to attend to and understand symbolic content and to produce symbolic acts late in their first year and then with increasing regularity and variety during their second year (Adamson, 1996). Thus, initial periods of joint engagement are nonsymbol-infused and then, as symbolic skills emerge, they become symbol-infused (Adamson et al, 2004).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Joint Engagement and the Emergence of Language in Children with Autism and Down Syndrome

Adamson

Bakeman

Deckner

et al. 2008

J Autism Dev Disord

280

331

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Systematic longitudinal observations were made as typically-developing toddlers and young children with autism and with Down syndrome interacted with their caregivers in order to document how joint engagement developed over a year-long period and how variations in joint engagement experiences predicted language outcome. Children with autism displayed a persistent deficit in coordinated joint attention; children with Down syndrome were significantly less able to infuse symbols into joint engagement. For all groups, variations in amount of symbol-infused supported joint engagement, a state in which the child attended to a shared object and to language but not actively to the partner, contributed to differences in expressive and receptive language outcome, over and above initial language capacity. KeywordsAutism; Down syndrome; joint attention; language; parent-child interactionThe early development of joint engagement and the acquisition of language are usually intertwined. As infants acquire joint attention skills, they gain entrance into "primordial sharing situations" (Werner & Kaplan, 1963) that serve as "zones of proximal development" (Vygotsky, 1978) where caregivers can facilitate their introduction to symbols during affect-laden and intention-filled social interactions (Adamson, 1996;Hobson, 2000;Tomasello, 1995). Then, as the child acquires a vocabulary, the scope of joint engagement increasingly expands as the focus of shared attention is displaced from present objects to symbols that refer to them, to future and past events, and to internal states (Adamson & Bakeman, 2006). Developmental disorders may disrupt the mutual relation between joint attention and language. Problems sustaining joint attention may alter and even curtail a toddler's access to language facilitating interactions. For example, the early deficits in joint attention skills in young children with autism that have been documented in home videotapes (e.g., Baranek, 1999;Werner & Dawson, 2005), standardized tests (Lord, 1995;Mundy, Sigman, & Kasari, 1990; Wetherby, Watt, Morgan, & Shumway, 2007), screening questionnaires (Baron-Cohen et al., 1996;Robins, Fein, Barton, & Green, 2001), and laboratory-based studies (McArthur & Adamson, 1996;Sigman & Ruskin, 1999;Stone, Ousley, Yoder, Hogan, & Hepburn, 1997; see Leekam & Moore, 2001, for a review) likely play a pivotal role in their problems acquiring and using Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Lauren B. Adamson, Department of Psychology, Box 5010, Georgia State University, Atlanta, GA 30302-5010, USA. Electronic mail may be sent via Internet to ladamson@gsu.edu. NIH Public AccessAuthor Manuscript J Autism Dev Disord. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2010 January 1. NIH-PA Author Manuscript NIH-PA Author Manuscript NIH-PA Author Manuscript language (Charman, 2004;Dawson et al., 2004;Happe, 1998;McDuffie, Yoder, & Stone, 2005;Sigman & Ruskin, 1999, Smith, Mirenda, & Zaidman-Zait, 2007Toth, Munson, Meltzoff, & Dawson, 2006). Thus, although older estimate...

show abstract

“…In part, this gap may be due to the difficulty of discerning when symbols begin to infuse joint attention. A lower boundary is difficult to draw because people from the start often surround infants with language and act as if the infant understands their utterances (e.g., see Rheingold & Adams, 1980) and because many children speak rarely during ongoing social interactions during the early months of language acquisition (Bakeman & Adamson, 1986). Nevertheless, by the last half of the 2nd year there are several signs that symbols are beginning to be woven into the fabric of shared attention.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

The Development of Symbol‐Infused Joint Engagement

2004

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Fifty-six children were observed longitudinally from 18 to 30 months of age interacting with their mothers during a Communication Play that contained 8 scenes designed to encourage interacting, requesting, commenting, and narrating. Of primary concern was how often symbols infused the child's states of engagement with people and objects and how experience in such symbol-infused states related to language acquisition. Findings indicate that symbols increasingly infuse joint engagement, and that both the timing and the trajectory vary widely among typically developing toddlers, especially during the last half of the 2nd year. Moreover, variations in amount of symbol-infused supported joint engagement may both be influenced by variations in the onset of language and contribute to differences in language facility at 30 months.

show abstract

The significance of speech to newborns.

Cited by 32 publications

References 8 publications

Expectant Fathers’ Intuitive Parenting: Associations With Parent Characteristics and Postpartum Positive Engagement

Expectant Fathers’ Intuitive Parenting: Associations With Parent Characteristics and Postpartum Positive Engagement

Joint Engagement and the Emergence of Language in Children with Autism and Down Syndrome

The Development of Symbol‐Infused Joint Engagement

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About