Two of our IDDLab graduate students presented posters at this year’s Cognitive Development Society meeting in Madison, WI

Ann Folker (with co-authors Steve Petrill, Ohio State Univ., and IDDLab director Kirby Deater-Deckard), presented, Between-task and between-year intraindividual variability in cognitive performance: Associations with children’s attention problems. See abstract #1 below.

Sarah McCormick (with co-authors Juliet Barry [IDDLab honors thesis student and RA], Mamatha Chary, IDDLab grad student alum, & lab director Kirby Deater-Deckard), presented, Associations between parental and child mental-state language, household chaos, and theory of mind in father-preschooler dyads. See abstract #2 below.

Abstract 1 (Folker et al.):

Identification of attention problems in children is crucial for optimal academic and social development. Intraindividual variability (IIV) in cognitive performance tasks is an indicator of attention problems, even after controlling for average levels of cognitive performance (Kofler et al., 2014). Previous work has primarily focused on between-task and between-trial IIV, rather than assessing if longer range IIV indicators (i.e., between-year) also predict attention problems. The present study assessed between year and between-task IIV (quantified using the coefficient of variation) in cognitive performance using three waves of data (when children were 6, 7, and 8) from the Western Reserve Reading Project (N = 607). Between-year and between-task IIV in cognitive performance were computed and correlated to test the association between the two types of IIV. Multiple regression was used to test if between-year and between-task IIV predict child attention problems. Results found that between-year and between task IIV were significantly positively associated with each other. Controlling for average levels of
cognitive performance, between-task IIV significantly predicted worse child attention at age 8 (b = -.63, SE = .26, p = .017), but not at age 6 or 7. Identifying behavioral cognitive performance attributes that are related to children’s attention problems is important in informing targeted interventions to reduce problems and promote positive outcomes.

Abstract 2 (McCormick et al.):

Parental use of mental state language has been consistently associated with child theory of mind development, or the ability to understand the beliefs, desires, and knowledge of the self and others (Wellman, 1990). Parental discussion of mental states (e.g., thinking, knowing, believing) make these concepts more salient to children (Devine & Hughes, 2018; Dunn et al., 1991), and a recent meta-analysis reported an overall modest positive association between parental mental-state talk and both concurrent and longitudinal theory of mind understanding (Devine & Hughes, 2018). However, very little work examines this association between fathers and children or considers the child’s own use of mental state language. Additionally, this association is rarely considered within the broader context of the home environment. One potential aspect of the home environment that may influence the association between mental state language and theory of mind development is household chaos. Chaotic households tend to be noisy, unpredictable, and lack routines. Higher levels of household chaos have consistently been associated with a wide range child and family outcomes such as poorer sleep, higher child behavior problems, and lower executive function scores (Marsh et al., 2020). This observed detrimental effect may occur because household chaos may interfere with and disrupt the proximal processes that occurs between children and parents in the home environment (Evans et al., 2005). Higher levels of household chaos may serve to decrease either the amount of interactions that occur or the quality of these interactions (e.g. less discussion of mental states), resulting in lower theory of mind skill use. Hypothesis: We expect to find that greater parental and child mental state language use will be positively associated with child theory of mind scores. Additionally, we expect that associations between parental mental state language use and theory of mind abilities will vary depending on levels of chaos reported in the household. Specifically, the association between parental mental state language use and theory of mind is expected to be strongest in the context of low household chaos, and weakest in the context of high household chaos. Methods: Data were collected from a community sample of fathers and their 3- to 5-year-old children (N = 88 dyads, Mchildage = 51 months). Children completed tasks to assess theory of mind (Wellman & Liu, 2004). Fathers completed the abbreviated Chaos, Order, and Hubbub scale (CHAOS; Matheny et al., 1995). Father-child dyads completed two 5-minute interaction tasks which were videotaped and coded for mental state language use by parents and children (Ruffman, Slade, & Crowe, 2002). Results: Preliminary analyses show that father use of mental state language was highly correlated with child use of mental state language (r = .428, p = .002). Surprisingly, neither parent mental state language use (r = .054, p = .719) nor child mental state language use (r = .067, p = .656) was correlated with child theory of mind scores, inconsistent with the extant literature. Regression analyses further showed no main or interaction effects of parent mental state language and household chaos on child theory of mind scores. Additional exploratory and contextual variables will be discussed along with future directions.