Early Childhood Research Quarterly

8/9/2019 Early Childhood Research Quarterly

1/14

Early Childhood Research Quarterly 25 (2010) 98111

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Early Childhood Research Quarterly

Predicting elements of early maternal elaborative discourse from 12 to18 months of age

Lenna L. Ontai , Elita Amini Virmani

University of California, Davis, United States

a r t i c l e i n f o

Article history:

Received 30 August 2008

Received in revised form 30 July 2009

Accepted 3 August 2009

Keywords:

Parentchild interaction

Early childhood

Discourse

a b s t r a c t

To date, much of the research investigating maternalchild discourse has focused on the

preschool period of childrens development, with little attention paid to how these styles

develop. The current study aimed to assess whether maternal elaborative discourse ele-

ments seen in preschool are also evident during the toddler years, and whether the use

of these elements is predicted by childrens temperament, maternal mind mindedness,

and attachment security. Results revealed that elaborative discourse elements are used by

mothers during discoursewith 12- and 18 month-oldchildren, and thatchild temperament,

attachment security, and maternal mind mindedness at 12 months predicted maternal use

of these elements when children were 18 months old. These results provide evidence that

elements of maternal discourse style begin forming prior to childrens active involvement

in discourse interactions and that child, maternal, and relationship characteristics assume

important roles in shaping early discourse styles.

2009 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Research has established the importance of shared discourse between parents and children for a range of social and

cognitive developmental outcomes for children (seeFivush, Haden, & Reese, 2006,for a review). Researchers in this field

have focused on contexts in which discourse naturally occurs within the parentchild relationship such as reading (Fletcher

& Reese, 2005)and reminiscing about past events (Fivush et al., 2006).Results have established associations between the

quality of parent discourse style and childrens emotion understanding (e.g., Denham, Zoller, & Couchoud, 1994; Dunn,

Brown, & Beardsall, 1991; see also Thompson, Laible, & Ontai, 2003, for a review), language expression (Bus, van Ijzendoorn,

& Pellegrini, 1995; Karrass & Braungart-Rieker, 2005; Scarborough & Dobrich, 1994),and autobiographical memory (Fivush

et al., 2006; Haden, Ornstein, Eckerman, & Didow, 2001; Nelson & Tessler, 1994; Reese, Haden, & Fivush, 1993).Much of the

research in this area has tended to assume parental discourse is a stable and inherent characteristic of the parent (Ninio,

1980).As a result, little is known about how parental discourse develops and evolves (Fivush et al., 2006; Fletcher & Reese,

2005).Further, little is known about the role child and parent characteristics assume in the development of this process(Fivush et al., 2006; Fletcher & Reese, 2005).The current study aims to address these gaps by examining characteristics of

early motherchild discourse and factors that contribute to predicting elaborative discourse elements used during early

discourse interactions.

To date, a substantial body of the research on motherchild discourse during the preschool period has focused on the

content of mothers discourse, such as frequency of emotion and mental-state terms ( Brown, Donelan-McCall, & Dunn,

1996; Denham et al., 1994; Dunn et al., 1991; Furrow, Moore, Davidge, & Chiasson, 1992; Kuebli, Butler, & Fivush, 1995;

Corresponding author at: Human and Community Development, University of California, One Shields Ave., Davis, CA 95616, United States.

Tel.: +1 530 752 6410; fax: +1 530 752 5660.

E-mail address:[email protected](L.L. Ontai).

0885-2006/$ see front matter 2009 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.doi:10.1016/j.ecresq.2009.08.001
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/08852006mailto:[email protected]://localhost/var/www/apps/conversion/tmp/scratch_5/dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ecresq.2009.08.001http://localhost/var/www/apps/conversion/tmp/scratch_5/dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ecresq.2009.08.001mailto:[email protected]://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/08852006


2/14

L.L. Ontai, E.A. Virmani / Early Childhood Research Quarterly 25 (2010) 98111 99

Ruffman, Slade, & Crowe, 2002).However, other researchers have examined the quality of discourse by investigating the

elaborative nature of mothers talk during different kinds of discourse interactions. This line of investigation has found that

maternal use of elaborative discourse styles, marked by open-ended questions and expansion of information provided by

children (Fivush & Fromhoff, 1988; McCabe & Peterson, 1991)is related to an array of social competencies in children. For

instance, mothers elaborative responses to their childrens utterances during conversations predicted childrens theory of

mind (Welch-Ross, 1997).In contrast, such positive child outcomes have not been found to be associated with evaluative

discourse styles, which tend to provide children with few details and ask yes or no type questions (see Fivush et al.,

2006for a review). Furthermore, maternal elaborative discourse during reminiscing conversations with their children has

been found to be associated with childrens conscience development (Laible & Thompson, 2000),theory of mind (Ontai &

Thompson, 2008), and memory (Fivush & Fromhoff, 1988; Haden, Haine, & Fivush, 1997; McCabe & Peterson, 1991; Reese &

Fivush, 1993; Tessler & Nelson, 1994).

Prior to the preschool period, the contexts in which parentchild discourse occurs tend to be qualitatively different from

thetoddler years. During infancy and toddlerhood, children are more passive verbal partners. As such, discourse interactions

tend to occur duringplayand book reading. However,shared book reading in infancy andtoddlerhoodhas been found to elicit

more complex motherchild discourse interactions than does play (Hoff, 2006), andis commonwith mothers andchildrenas

young as 9 months of age (Karrass & Braungart-Rieker, 2005; Senechal, LeFevre, Thomas, & Daley, 1988). Given the common

nature and conversational richness of book-reading interactions, much of the discourse research with infants and toddlers

has focused on this context. Despite the differences in context, quality discourse during shared book reading shares many

similar elements with other discourse settings more common in the preschool period. Quality ratings of discourse during

shared book reading with toddlers are rooted in the premise that book-reading interactions should engage the child in

the task and elicit responses while also matching the childs abilities ( Whitehurst et al., 1988).Thus, much like elaborative

styles of reminiscing, quality discourse during early shared book reading involves mothers asking open-ended questions,

expanding on childrens utterances, and making modifications to shadow childrens abilities (Whitehurst et al., 1988).

The prevalence of book reading over other contexts for shared discourse in infancy and toddlerhood may provide an

opportunity for parents to begin formulating discourse styles with their children. In fact, mothers discourse styles when

reading books with their children have been found to vary even with children as young as 17 months of age ( Ninio, 1980).

Given the importance of discourse styles on an array of developmental outcomes, it is valuable to understand mechanisms

that contribute to the development of parental discourse elements. While there is evidence that mothers use consistent

styles within contexts during the preschool (Farrant & Reese, 2000)and early school years (Reese et al., 1993),there has

been limited research on how the elements of discourse styles are formed or develop across developmental periods (Fivush

et al., 2006). As a result, there is limited understanding of when maternal discourse styles are established. In an effort to add

to our understanding of the early foundations of maternal discourse styles, the current study will examine book-reading

interactions during toddlerhood, when elements of discourse styles are likely to emerge, to explore whether characteristics

of book reading during toddlerhood mirror elements of elaborative discourse seen during the preschool period. Such an

examination is necessary for the field which has, to date, focused little attention to this important period when parents and

children are frequently engaging in verbal interactions but children do not yet have the verbal skills to fully participate.

Thus, it is likely that if parental discourse styles are indeed an inherent characteristic, as has been traditionally assumed

in the field (Ninio, 1980),elements of the discourse styles used with preschoolers are likely to be seen during this period.

In contrast, if discourse elements used with toddlers are qualitatively different than those documented with preschoolers,

then it is likely that the discourse style develops around childrens discourse input rather than dominated by inherent

parent characteristics. However, it may be that early characteristics of the child or the parentchild relationship assume

an important role in shaping discourse styles. Thus, the current study will examine possible parent, child, and relationship

predictors of the use of these elements.

One predictive factor for which there is some support in the literature is mothers perceptions of the cognitive abilities of

their children, which appears to influence their discourse styles (Deloache & Demendoza, 1987; McCabe & Peterson, 1991;

Reese et al., 1993).For instance, a study of mothers and children between the ages of 2 and 3 and a half years of age found

that mothers tended to use more elaborative discourse as their children grew older and were more active participants in the

interaction (McCabe & Peterson, 1991; Reese et al., 1993). Furthermore, during shared book reading, parents tend to deviate

from the text and focus more on the pictures by pointing and commenting about them when their children are younger

than 12 months (seeFletcher & Reese, 2005,for a review); whereas by 18 months of age, parents begin to use the book

to elicit more extended conversations (Martin, 1998; Senechal, Cornell, & Broda, 1995; Wheeler, 1983).When asked why

they read with their children the way they do, mothers with children between the ages of 1 and 2 years of age report that

their behaviors are based on their perceptions of their childrens linguistic and cognitive abilities (Deloache & Demendoza,

1987; Martin, 1998; Martin & Reutzel, 1999).Thus, this shift in the content of conversations with their children between

late infancy and preschool may reflect mothers beliefs about their childrens cognitive abilities, and toddlerhood may be a

particularly salient developmental period for this shift to take place. These results are consistent with other investigations

that find support for the role of mothers beliefs about their children as mental beings in shaping interactions (seeSharp

& Fonagy, 2008, for a review). This maternal mind mindedness has been theorized to be an important mediating process

between maternal behaviors and child outcomes (Carpendale & Lewis, 2004).Initial support for these links comes from

studies finding significant relations between mind mindedness and childrens theory of mind during preschool ( Meins &

Fernyhough, 1999; Meins et al., 2002, 2003). Extending from this work, it is possible that mothers mind mindedness beliefs


3/14

100 L.L. Ontai, E.A. Virmani / Early Childhood Research Quarterly 25 (2010) 98111

contribute to the formation of maternal discourse styles, particularly during toddlerhood, something that will be examined

in the current study.

The relational context of shared discourse interactions has also proved to be an important factor to consider. According

to attachment theory, secure dyads have a more open, fluid communication style that permits greater sharing of feelings

and thoughts (Bowlby, 1969/1982; Bretherton, 1990).Thus, the quality of the attachment relationship sets the relational

context through which children and mothers experience discourse interactions. Investigating shared discourse within the

larger context of family dynamics has revealed that the quality of the parentchild attachment relationship is associated

with elaborative styles of discourse (Bost et al., 2006; Bus, Belsky, van Ijzendoorn, & Crnic, 1997; Bus & van Ijzendoorn, 1992;

Frosch, Cox, & Goldman, 2001), and that theyinteractin importantways to affect childrens development (Laible & Thompson,

2000; Ontai & Thompson, 2002).Furthermore,Carpendale and Lewis (2004)have theorized that the relationship between

attachment and discourse may be further enhanced by mothers mind mindedness suggesting that these two constructs are

intricately linked in constructing the shared discourse environment. For instance, mothers who share a secure attachment

relationship with their children and believe them to be mental beings may be more likely to engage in elaborative discourse.

To explore this possibility, the current study will test for an interaction between attachment security and maternal mind

mindedness in predicting elaborative discourse elements.

In addition,there is somesupportfor an association betweendiscourseand attributes of childrens temperament, although

the findings tend to be mixed across the limited number of studies. For instance, Laible (2004a, 2004b)found that mothers

used more elaborative discourse when reminiscing about negative emotions with their children when they rated their

children as high on effortful control. Further, mothers were also more likely to use elaboration with children they rated high

on negativereactivity, indicating mothers may use elaboration to helphighly reactive children learn to regulatetheir negative

emotions. In another study,Lewis (1999)found that mothers who rated their children as more social and active tended to

use more elaborative discourse during reminiscing conversations. Finally, Farrant and Reese (2000) found that children who

were able to sustain attention during reminiscing conversations had mothers who asked more elaborative questions during

the exchange. Due to the small field of studies in this area, Fletcher and Reese (2005)note that there remains a relatively

weak understanding of the role childrens temperament assumes in influencing parental discourse style, especially with

young children. To add to our understanding of this association, the current study will examine childrens temperament in

relation to maternal discourse elements.

We propose that maternal elaborative discourse style develops through early discourse interactions starting before chil-

dren becomeactive verbalpartners. Building on previous research,the goal of thecurrent study is to addto theunderstanding

of maternal discourse styles by addressing several aims. First, to assess whether mothers begin using elements of elabo-

rative discourse prior to the preschool period, the current study examines mothers use of elaborative discourse elements

during shared book reading with their children at 12 and 18 months of age, when mothers begin to engage in more complex

discourse interactions with their children (Martin, 1998; Senechal et al., 1995; Wheeler, 1983).Evidence of elaborative ele-

ments prior to childrens active engagement in verbal interchanges would offer evidence supporting the assumption that

maternal discourse styles are somewhat inherent characteristics of mothers (Ninio, 1980).Second, the current study aims

to examine individual characteristics of children and mothers in predicting early maternal elaborative discourse elements

by examining associations between childrens temperament, attachment security, and mothers mind mindedness at 12

months, and maternal elaborative discourse elements at 18 months. Finally, the current study aims to test for a possible

moderating role of attachment security on mind mindedness in predicting maternal elaborative discourse elements at 18

months of age.

1. Method

1.1. Participants

A total of 35 mothers and their children (15 males; 20 females M age = 11.34 months, SD = 2.91 months) participated

in the study. All participants were recruited to participate in a larger research study of infant development from infant

and toddler childcare centers and newspaper advertisements in a medium-sized Western city in the United States. The

majority of the children in the current sample were European-American (82.9%); the remaining children were Asian-Pacific

Islander (8.5%), Latino/Hispanic (2.9%), and Other (5.7%). Most of the children lived in middle-upper class households ( M

income = $50,00070,000) with both biological parents (97.1%) and an average maternal education of four or more years of

college. Due to a change in protocol and mechanical errors with recording equipment during the 12-month data collection,

11 participants do not have discourse data for the 12-month visit.

1.2. Measures

1.2.1. Shared book reading

Mothers readThe Feelings Book(Parr, 2000)which depicted illustrations of children displaying a range of emotions (e.g.,

silly, sad, excited). The book was chosen because it had minimal text and relies mainly on pictures to tell the story, which

has been found to promote spontaneous motherchild conversation ( Senechal et al., 1995).Book-reading conversations

were transcribed verbatim from audiotapes. Two independent coders who were blind to the study hypotheses and unaware


4/14


of other data related to the child and mother coded the transcripts for elements of elaborative maternal speech following

previous research (Ontai & Thompson, 2002, 2008).

All maternal utterances that expanded on the books text were first identified and then coded for elaborative elements

used in previous research with preschool-aged children (Ontai & Thompson, 2002, 2008). Utterances that did not expand on

the books text (e.g., Are you hungry?, Oh, dont touch that.) were not included in the coding. Utterances were defined

as a word or string of words either separated from other speech with a pause or ending with grammatical completeness

(Golinkoff & Ames, 1979). Each identified utterance was coded as a type of elaborative discourse element as follows: requests

for child engagementincluded phrases aimed at engaging the child in the book reading task (e.g., Look at that, Whats that?,

See?);linking to child included attempts to help children understand the story in relation to events in the childrens lives

and experiences (e.g., Are you ever sad?, Do you know how to dance?, Can you yell really loud?); linking to otherincluded

attempts to relate the events in the book to the experiences of another person (e.g., Sometimes mommy feels sad, Should

mommy kiss the sea lion?);descriptive discoursewas coded when mothers asked questions or made statements that elabo-

rated on the pictures or the story depicted in the book (e.g., The doggys sad., Theres a duck, See the bubbles?); evaluative

discoursewas coded when mothers used repetition (i.e. repeating the childs utterance) and evaluation (i.e. approving or

validating the childs utterance: Yes, you are right thats a butterfly!). Reliability of coding was established with 35% of the

12-month transcripts and 29% of the 18-month transcripts by calculating a Cohens kappa based on the total number of iden-

tified utterances andthe discourseelement code assigned by each coder. Cohens kappas for codingacrossall categories were

.90 for 12-month transcripts and .88 for 18-month transcripts. To determine the final code used in the case of disagreement

between coders, resolution was reached through discussion and consensus. For each coded elaborative discourse element,

the number of maternal uses of that element was summed. Proportion scores for each elaborative element were calculated

by dividing the sum of each element by the total sum of all elements resulting in proportion scores for each elaborative

discourse element (requests for child engagement, linking to child, linking to other, descriptive discourse, and evaluative

discourse).

1.2.2. Security of attachment (AQS)

Security of attachment was assessed with theAttachment Q-sort Version 3.0 (AQS)(Waters & Deane, 1985). In contrast to

lab-basedmeasuressuch as theStrange Situation, theAQS aims to capture a descriptionof secure base behaviors in thehome.

As a consequence, the AQS tends to operationalize and capture a broader range of criteria for secure attachments. However,

the AQS is an assessment of security alone (vs. security and insecurity) and thus, there are no procedures for distinguishing

secure from insecure attachments, or categorizing different forms of insecurity from the resulting continuous score.

Thus, the resulting score is interpreted as a range of security in the motherchild relationship. (For more detail in the use

of the AQS in comparison to other attachment security measurements, see Thompson & Raikes, 2003.)

The AQS consists of 90 descriptive statements of young childrens behavior during interactions with their primary care-

givers, with a focus on behaviors reflecting exploratory ease, comfort during distress, and other forms of attachment-related

behavior. These items are designed to provide a comprehensive description of childrens secure base behavior with care-

givers. The AQS is completed by sorting 90 statements into nine categories using a fixed distribution. The statements are

sorted into nine piles based on how much each behavior is characteristic of the child in question. Items extremely character-

istic of the child are placed high in the final sort (i.e. piles 79) while items uncharacteristic of the child are placed low in the

final sort (i.e. piles 13). Items that are neither characteristic nor uncharacteristic are placed in the middle piles. Research

byTeti and McGourty (1996)indicates that mothers are qualified to perform the sort given they have ample opportunity

to observe a representative sample of their childs behavior, and several researchers have found that Q-sorts from mothers

yield valid, meaningful data (Laible & Thompson, 1998, 2000; Ontai & Thompson, 2002, 2008;see alsoThompson, 2006, for

a review), as well as temporal reliability (Ontai & Thompson, 2002).

Attachment security scores were calculated from the mothers sorts by assigning each item a score corresponding to its

placement in the sort (e.g., pile 9 = score of 9, pile 1 = score of 1). The scores for each card were then correlated with the scores

each card received in the criterion sort for the hypothetical most secure child, which was devised based on independent

ratings by attachment experts (Waters & Deane, 1985).As a correlation coefficient, the resulting security scores range from

1 to 1, with higher security scores reflecting more secure attachment relationships with the parent. Three subjects did

not complete the AQS. In order to maximize on the limited sample size, mean substitution was used for these scores in all

analyses as suggested byCohen, Cohen, West, and Aiken (2003) when data is missing at random and does not comprise a

large amount of the overall sample data. In the current sample, the attachment security mean and the standard deviation

stayed the same after the substitutions were made. Furthermore, the three subjects did not significantly differ from the rest

of the sample on any of the other variables used in the analyses. The mean security score for this sample was .39 ( SD = .17),

which is consistent with mean scores for other studies with children of this age (Thompson, 1998).

1.2.3. Temperament

The Revised Infant Behavior Questionnaire (Garstein & Rothbart, 2003,IBQ-R) was used to assess child temperament at

12 months. Much research provides support for the validity of the IBQ (Bridges, Palmer, Morales, Hurtado, & Tsai, 1993;

Crockenberg & Acredolo, 1983; Goldsmith & Rothbart, 1991).Additionally, reliability, convergent validity, and relative sta-

bility have been demonstrated for use of the IBQ with infants (Worobey, 1986; Worobey & Blajda, 1989).The IBQ-R asks

caregivers to report based on behaviors during the past week, thus limiting problems with recall and biases that tend to


5/14


occur with more global questions (Garstein & Rothbart, 2003).Mothers were asked to report on the frequency of behaviors

rated on a 7-point, Likert-type scale from never to always. Items are aggregated into sub-scales that assess approach, vocal

reactivity, high-intensity pleasure, activity level, perceptual sensitivity, sadness, distress to limitations, fear, falling reac-

tivity, low-intensity pleasure, cuddliness, duration of orienting, and soothability (Garstein & Rothbart, 2003).Conceptual

and item analyses conducted by Garstein and Rothbart (2003)suggest that these sub-scales collectively comprise three

broad dimensions of infant temperament, all of which had adequate internal reliability estimates in the current sample:

surgency/extraversion (Cronbachs = .89), negative affectivity (Cronbachs = .89), and (orienting/regulation (Cronbachs =.87).

1.2.4. Maternal mind mindedness

Mind mindedness was assessed via maternal interview following the procedure set byMeins, Fernyhough, Russell, &

Clark-Carter (1998).Construct and predictive validity have been established for this measure (Meins et al., 1998).Moth-

ers were asked: Can you describe your child for me? No guidance was provided as to how to respond to the question.

Interviews were audio-taped and transcribed verbatim. Mind mindedness was coded by two independent coders accord-

ing to categories set forth byMeins et al. (1998)such that maternal attributes were coded as mental, behavioral, physical,

or general. Mental attributes were any terms used to describe the childs mental life, including any comments related to

the childs emotions, desires, or wants (e.g., child is happy most of the time). Behavioral attributes were coded as any

references to behavior such as games or activities preferred by the child (e.g., child likes to play with other children)

and characteristics of the child that were behavioral in nature (e.g., outgoing, friendly, talkative). Physicalattributes were

identified as descriptions of the child relating to the childs physical appearance or position in the family (e.g., hes the

youngest).Generalattributes were defined as any comments about the child that did not fit in the above categories. Pro-

portion scores were calculated for mothers use of mental-state terms out of the total number of attributes used. Inter-rater

agreement for the assignment of codes to each of the four categories was established for 32% of the transcripts (Cohens

kappa =.72).

1.2.5. Procedure

Each motherchild dyad was assessed on three separate occasions. An initial home visit with the motherchild pair was

conducted when the child was 12 months old. Within 2 weeks of the initial home visit, motherchild dyads came into a

university campus research laboratory for a second visit. Motherchild dyads came into the lab for a final visit when the

child was 18 months old.

At the initial 12-month home visit, mothers completed the mind mindedness interview and the first step of the AQS. To

ensure the validity of the mothers AQS sorts, Teti and McGourty (1996) specify that mothers must be properly trained, kept

nave to the construct being measured, given the AQS items to review in advance, and supervised during their sort in case

questions arise. To meet these standards in the current study, sorting took place across the home and lab visit. At the home

visit, mothers were told the task would provide a measure of their childs behavior for a range of typical behaviors seen in

children of this age. They were told that childrens behavior can change rapidly during this age and to reflect on their childs

current behavior when thinking about each item. They then received verbal and written instructions and completed the first

stage of the sort by dividing all the items into three piles that reflected Like my child, Not like my child, and Neither like

nor unlike my child. Upon completion of the initial sort, they were given a complete list of the items to reflect on before

completing the sort at the lab visit 12 weeks later. At the end of the home visit, mothers received a questionnaire packet

which included a demographic questionnaire and the IBQ-R and instructed to complete it and bring it with them to the lab

visit.

During the 12-month lab visit, mothers were instructed to read The Feelings Book with their child as they would

normally read a book with him/her. To ensure that the book reading occurred in as natural a manner as possible, the dyads

were left alone and given an audio recorder to record their conversation. Mothers then completed the final two sorts of the

AQS. First, they were given the three piles they created during their initial sort during the home visit and were reminded of

the instructions. Mothers were told that if after their 1-week observation period they found they had placed an item in the

wrong pile, they should move it to the appropriate pile so that the sort accurately reflects their childs behavior at this point

in time. They then completed the remaining two stages of the sorting process, first dividing each pile into three additional

piles, then distributing the cards evenly among the resulting nine piles. All sorting occurred under the guidance of a trained

researcher who was present to answer any questions mothers had about the meaning of the statement or about an item

placement. Sorting times ranged from about 45 min to an hour and a half.

During the 18-month lab visit, mothers were again asked to read The Feelings Book with their child. Instructions were

identical to administration at 12 months.

2. Results

2.1. Descriptives for 12 and 18 months

Descriptive statistics for all variables of interest appear inTable 1.Examination of distribution statistics revealed that all

study variables met the normality assumption for skewness except for mind mindedness (.70, SE= .40) and linking to other


6/14


Table 1

Descriptive statistics for variables of interest.

Study variables n Mean SD Range

Attachment security 35 .39 .17 .01 to .72

Mind mindedness 35 .49 .13 .26.80

Negative Affect 35 3.09 .62 2.134.45

Orient/Regulation 35 4.77 .55 3.896.05

Surgency/Extraversion 35 4.86 .52 4.036.29

Linking to child 12 months 24 .04 .06 .00.17Linking to other 12 months 24 .01 .01 .00.05

Requests for child engagement 12 months 24 .22 .11 .00.40

Descriptive discourse 12 months 24 .30 .19 .00.64

Evaluative discourse 12 months 24 .06 .07 .00.21

Linking to child 18 months 35 .07 .07 .00.23

Linking to other 18 months 35 .05 .08 .00.10

Descriptive discourse 18 months 35 .33 .20 .00.80

Request for child engagement 18 months 35 .21 .14 .00.50

Evaluative discourse 18 months 35 .09 .07 .00.23

discourse (2.50,SE= .40). To correct for this, square-root transformations were conducted, which resulted in an adequate

skewness estimation (.15) for mind mindedness. For linking to other discourse, three extreme outliers were identified and,

following recommendations set byKline (2005),modified to the value of the next most extreme score within 3 SD of the

mean (.05). The resulting square-root transformation resulted in a reduction in skewness (1.28), although the data remainskewed.

Examination of elaborative discourse elements between 12 and 18 months revealed consistency in the overall use of

requests for child engagement and descriptive discourse during book reading (r=.52,p = .05 and r=.41,p = .01 respectively).

Paired sample t-tests to test for mean differences from 12 to 18 months on the overall sample use of each discourse element

revealed no significant differences (requests for child engagement t(23)= .34,p = .74; links to child t(23)=1.22,p = .23; links

to othert(23)= 2.03,p = .06; descriptive discourset(23)=1.07,p = .30) (seeFig. 1).

2.2. Bivariate correlations between elaborative discourse elements, temperament, gender, attachment, and mind mindedness

at 12 months

Pearsons correlations used to measure intercorrelations between attachment, maternal mind mindedness, temper-

ament, and maternal elaborative discourse elements at 12 months appear in Table 2. Results for the temperamentvariables showed that child negative affect was significantly associated with mother requests for child engagement

(r=.65,p = .001) and linking to child discourse at 12 months (r=.48,p = .02) such that children higher in negative affect

had mothers who used requests for engagement less frequently and used linking to child discourse elements more

frequently. The only other significant association was a positive association between mothers use of linking to child

discourse at 12 months and mind mindedness (r=.41, p = .048), such that mothers who linked the story to events their

children had experienced also tended to see their children as mental beings. There were no associations between gen-

der or attachment security and any of the maternal elaborative discourse elements when children were 12 months of

age.

Fig. 1. Maternal discourse style elements from 12 months to 18 months.


7/14


Table 2

Bivariate correlations between maternal discourse variables (12 month n = 24 and 18 monthn = 35) with predictors.

Variable Gendera Attachment

security

Mind mindedness Surgency/Extraversion Orienting/Regulation Negative

Affect

12-month discourse

Requests for child engagement .09 .17 .14 .25 .01 .65**

Linking to child .19 .34 .41* .20 .24 .48*

Linking to other .19 .01 .11 .18 .12 .03

Descriptive discourse .24 .13 .03 .24 .37 .37Evaluative discourse .03 .01 .16 .15 .15 .33

18-month discourse

Requests for child engagement .27 .02 .27 .14 .06 .27

Linking to child .14 .01 .34* .13 .29 .10

Linking to other .44** .01 .24 .06 .07 .18

Descriptive discourse .30 .05 .09 .14 .08 .22

Evaluative discourse .17 .47** .22 .39* .21 .39*

a Gender coded as boys= 0, girls= 1.* p


8/14


Table 3

Summary of hierarchical regression analysis for 12-month variablespredicting linking to child discourse during sharedbook reading at 18 months (N=35).

Variable Model 1 Model 2 Model 3

B SE B B SE B B SE B

Constant .19 .15 .21 .15 .20 .13

Gendera .02 .03 .13 .01 .03 .08 .03 .02 .22

Surgency/Extraversion .01 .03 .10 .00 .03 .02 .01 .03 .11

Orienting/Regulation .05 .03 .38 .04 .03 .32 .07 .03 .51

*

Negative Affect .01 .02 .12 .01 .02 .11 .01 .02 .11

Mind mindedness .20 .10 .35* .21 .08 .37*

Attachment .19 .09 .44

Attachmentmind mindedness 1.73 .55 .56**

R2(R2) .13 () .23 (.10) .45 (.22)

F-value (df) 1.11 (4, 30) 1.85 (5, 29) 3.13* (7, 27)

Note. Attachment and mind mindedness were centered prior to creating attachment mind mindedness variable.a Gender coded as boys = 0, girls = 1.* p


9/14


Table 4

Summary of hierarchical regressionanalysis for 12-month variablespredicting descriptive discoursestyle during shared bookreading at 18 months(N=35).


B SE B B B SE B B SE B B

Constant .21 .41 .20 .42 .20 .35

Gendera .10 .07 .26 .10 .07 .26 .02 .06 .05

Surgency/Extraversion .06 .08 .05 .05 .09 .14 .01 .08 .02

Orienting/Regulation .02 .08 .05 .02 .08 .05

.08 .07

.21Negative Affect .05 .06 .16 .05 .06 .16 .15 .06 .49*

Mind mindedness .01 .27 .01 .02 .22 .01

Attachment .75 .25 .67**

Attachmentmind mindedness 5.49 1.44 .67**

R2(R2) .13 () .13 (.00) .45 (.32)

F-value (df) 1.09 (4, 30) .84 (5, 29) 3.15* (7, 27)

Note.Attachment and mind mindedness were centered prior to creating attachment mind mindedness variable.a Gender coded as boys= 0, girls= 1.* p


10/14


Table 5

Summary of hierarchical regression analysis for 12-month variables predicting evaluative discourse during shared book reading at 18 months (N=35).


B SE B B B SE B B SE B

Constant .15 .12 .15 .12 .13 .11

Gendera .01 .02 .10 .01 .02 .09 .04 .02 .27

Surgency/Extraversion .05 .03 .43* .05 .03 .40 .06 .02 .44*

Orienting/Regulation .01 .02 .11 .01 .02 .10 .04 .02 .30Negative Affect .04 .02 .34* .04 .02 .34* .00 .02 .02

Mind mindedness .05 .08 .09 .05 .07 .10

Attachment .23 .08 .63**

Attachmentmind mindedness 1.12 .46 .41*

R2(R2) .29 () .30 (.01) .48 (.19)

F-value (df) 3.08* (4, 30) 2.47 (5, 29) 3.60** (7, 27)

Note.Attachment and mind mindedness were centered prior to creating attachment mind mindedness variable.a Gender coded as boys = 0, girls = 1.* p


11/14


discourse at different developmental periods beginning in infancy. These results represent an initial step toward this aim.

However, studies with preschool-aged children have found differences between the use of elaborative discourse during

storybook reading and reminiscing (Haden & Fivush, 1996; Laible, 2004a, 2004b; Lucariello & Nelson, 1987)suggesting that

the stability of elaborative discourse across new contexts as children get older may depend on other factors. Furthermore,

the function of these elements may vary greatly between their use with 12-month olds and 18-month olds. To understand

how this process develops and functions over time, both within and across discourse contexts, future research is needed

that follows mothers and children from infancy, when shared book reading is a significant context of discourse interactions,

into the preschool years when shared discourse contexts become more variable.

When examining 12-month predictors of maternal elaborative discourse elements at 18 months, attachment security

proved to be a significant factor when predicting descriptive and evaluative discourse elements. Thestrength of thenegative

predictiveassociation between 12-month attachment and mothers use of evaluations and linking of discourse to others at 18

months is particularly noteworthy in light of attachment theory which proposes that secure bonds facilitate open and fluid

shared discourse (Bowlby, 1969/1982; Bretherton, 1990). While several previous studies have found significant associations

between attachment security and open, elaborative discourse during preschool (Bost et al., 2006; Bus et al., 1997; Bus & van

Ijzendoorn, 1992; Frosch et al., 2001),the current results suggest that attachment security may also be negatively related

to mothers early use of more closed evaluative elements of discourse. This pattern may ultimately translate into more

elaborative discourse for more securely attached children as they develop, something that should be addressed in future

longitudinal studies. Moreover, the current results also replicate previous studies which have established the attachment

relationshipas an importantmoderator of discourseeffects on child outcomes (Laible & Thompson, 2000; Ontai & Thompson,

2002). Thecurrent results extendthisto suggestthat the attachment relationshipshapes thecharacteristics of earlydiscourse,

lending further support to the critical role that attachment quality assumes in shaping parentchild discourse interactions.

In the case of early book reading, attachment may also influence the frequency of book reading (Bus & van Ijzendoorn, 1992,

1997), whichmay ultimately result in more quality book reading over time if done withinthe context of a secure relationship.

In addition to attachment, mothers perceptions of their children as mental beings also proved to be an important factor

in predicting elaborative discourse elements. Specifically, maternal mind mindedness was found to independently predict

mothers use of linking to child elements during discourse. While the current analyses did not examine potential processes

responsible for this association, some have argued that parents accurate perceptions of their childrens internal qualities are

critical to forming a sensitive and caring relationship necessary for secure attachment (e.g., Fonagy & Target, 1997; Meins,

Fernyhough, Fradley, & Tuckey, 2001).Thus, parents who have the ability to see their children as individual beings with

their own thoughts, feelings, and desires are able to respond to them in a more sensitive and appropriate manner. Meins and

colleagues argue that these characteristics result in more mental-state language with their children (Meins & Fernyhough,

1999; Meins et al., 2002).The current results suggest that mind mindedness may also be important in shaping elements of

elaborative discourse as well.

The significant interactions between maternal mind mindedness and attachment security found in the current study

help to further explain how these two constructs contribute to shaping discourse. The significant moderation of attachment

security on maternal mind mindedness for three of the discourse elements is consistent with the hypothesis that both

constructs work together to affect early maternal discourse style. While others have hypothesized that mind mindedness

and relationship quality interact in important ways to affect parentchild interactions (e.g., Carpendale & Lewis, 2004;

Thompson, 2006),to our knowledge, this is the first study to document such an association. Overall, the pattern of results

for the interactions reveal that mothers who have high relationship quality and are mind minded about their children

tend to draw more links to their children when reading and use more evaluative and less descriptive discourse. This pattern

suggeststhat mothers whohavemore secureattachments with their children tend to focus their reading interactionson their

children and their experiences, and focus less attention on describing the pictures. The finding for evaluative discourse use

is surprising, especially in light of the negative bivariate relationship between attachment security and evaluative discourse.

This particular result suggests that maternal mind mindedness is particularly salient when predicting evaluative discourse.

However, consistent with theories and previous research on attachment security (see Thompson, 2006,for a review) and

mind mindedness (seeSharp & Fonagy, 2008,for a review), the overall pattern of results show that secure attachment

relationships, coupled with the ability to consider the child as a mental being, facilitate conversations that reflect the childs

experiences and create meaning for the child.

In contrast, mothers in less secure dyads who were mind minded about their child tended to utilize more descriptive

discourse indicating that mind mindedness can protect against discourse disruptions that may otherwise be associated with

low attachment security. Thus, mind mindedness appears to bolster the use of certain elaborative elements, even in the

absence of a secure attachment relationship. However, this was not the case for linking discourse to the child, indicating

that higher attachment security is an important factor in the early use of this type of discourse. Given that the current study

utilized theAQS methodology to assessattachment, it is limited to examining theinterplay of security andmind mindedness.

Future research using assessment methods that result in categorical distributions of secure and forms of insecure attachment

classifications need to be conducted to explore whether there are variations for types of insecure attachment relationships.

In addition to the results for attachment and maternal mind mindedness, dimensions of childrens temperament at 12

months also contributed to predicting the use of elaborative discourse elements at 18 months, although different dimensions

contributed to each of the three discourse elements for which significant models were found. Specifically, linking to child

discoursewas predicted in partby higher scores on theorienting/regulating dimension, descriptive discourseby higher scores


12/14


on the negative affect dimension, linking to other by lower scores on the negative affect dimension, and evaluative discourse

by lower scores on the surgency/extraversion dimension. The fact that findings were not consistent across elaborative

discourse elements may reflect the inconsistencies found across the field in studies of older children, whereby concurrent

associations have been found for different dimensions across studies on parentchild reminiscing, with little consistency in

the pattern (Fletcher & Reese, 2005).The current results suggest that different dimensions of temperament may be related

to different elaborative elements in early discourse contexts. This may result in differences across studies depending on how

theydefine and measure elaborative discourse. Alternatively, mothers may adjust their discoursestyles overtimein response

to their perceptions of their childs temperamental tendencies, resulting in varying associations across early childhood. On

theotherhand, maternal reports of temperamentmay not alwaysbe themost accurate as mothers maybe prone to depicting

their children in a more positive light. Observer ratings of temperament may reveal different relations. Further longitudinal

research with multiple assessments of both temperament from different sources, and multiple measurements of maternal

discourse across early childhood is needed to better understand how childrens temperament may affect maternal discourse

over time.

Taken together these findings have the potential to inform parent educators working to improve discourse interactions

between parents and their young children. First, while the current study only looked at short-term longitudinal effects

of attachment security on maternal discourse, the associations point to the foundational nature of a secure attachment

relationship for elaborative discourse between mothers and children. The current results along with those of previous

research suggest that programs aiming to nurture the shared discourse between mothers and their children must also

attend to the quality of the relationship. Further, the results suggest that in the absence of a secure attachment relationship,

elaborative discourse may be fostered by promoting maternal mind mindedness through teaching mothers to see their

children as independent mental beings. Recent evidence points to the positive effect that facilitating reflective capacities

of mothers has on parentchild relationships and childrens behavior. That is, mothers who learn how to reflect on their

childrens experiences,or to be insightful,tend to be ableto foster better relationshipswith their children (Sladeetal.,2005),

which ultimately has a positive impact on child outcomes (Oppenheim, Goldsmith, & Koren-Karie, 2004).Similar processes

may be employed to promote more elaborative and meaningful discourse interactions between parents and children.

There are several limitations to the study that may limit the generalizability of the findings. First, the sample size is

relatively small and thus, may not fully capture the predictive power of all of the variables of interest potentially resulting

in Type II errors. Second, the skewness in the data for linking to other discourse may lead to Type I errors. Further research

with larger samples is needed to replicate these patterns of results. Second, as mentioned previously, the current sample

is highly educated. As a result, the use of elaborative discourse elements may not be representative of the population as a

whole. Further, these parents may be more prone to seeing their children as independent mental beings. While it should be

noted that there is no empirical evidence supporting an association between low maternal education and mind mindedness,

the current findings may not apply to a less educated sample. Further studies with larger, more diverse samples are needed.

Overall, the current results suggest that maternal discourse styles are developing across the toddler years, and attachment

and maternal mind mindedness assume important roles in this process. These findings help to further the understanding of

how discourse styles are shaped during early interactions.

Acknowledgments

The authors greatly appreciate the cooperation of the faculty and staff of the Center for Child and Family Studies in the

Department of Human and Community Development at the University of California, Davis, and all the participating families

in conducting this study. The authors also wish to thank the undergraduate research assistants from the Infant Development

Lab who helped carry out this project.

References

Bost, K. K., Shin, N., McBride, B. A., Brown, G. L., Vaughn, B. E., Coppola, G., et al. (2006). Maternal secure base scripts, childrens attachment security, andmotherchild narrative styles.Attachment & Human Development,8, 241260.

Bowlby, J. (1969/1982).Attachment and loss. AttachmentNew York: Basic.Bretherton, I. (1990). Communication patterns, internal working models, and the intergenerational transmission of attachment relationships. Infant Mental

Health Journal,11, 237252.Bridges, L. J., Palmer, S. A., Morales, M., Hurtado, M., & Tsai, D. (1993). Agreement between affectively based observational and parent-report measures of

temperament at infant age 6 months. Infant Behavior & Development,16, 501506.Britto, P. R., Brooks-Gunn, J., & Griffin, T. M. (2006). Maternal reading and teaching patterns: Associations with school readiness in low-income African

American families.Reading Research Quarterly,41, 6889.Brown, J. R., Donelan-McCall, N., & Dunn, J. (1996). Why talk about mental states? The significance of childrens conversations with friends, siblings, and

mothers.Child Development,67, 836849.Bus, A. G., Belsky, J., van Ijzendoorn, M. H., & Crnic, K. (1997). Attachment and bookreading patterns: A study of mothers, fathers, and their toddlers. Early

Childhood Research Quarterly,12, 8198.Bus, A. G., & van Ijzendoorn, M. H. (1992). Patterns of attachment in frequently and infrequently reading motherchild dyads. Journal of Genetic Psychology,

153, 395403.Bus, A. G., & van Ijzendoorn, M. H. (1997). Affective dimension of motherinfant picturebook reading.Journal of School Psychology,35, 4760.

Bus, A. G., van Ijzendoorn, M. H., & Pellegrini, A. D. (1995). Joint book reading makes for success in learning to read: A meta-analysis on intergenerationaltransmission of literacy.Review of Educational Research,65, 121.


13/14


Carpendale, J. I. M., & Lewis, C. (2004). Constructing an understanding of mind:The developmentof childrenssocial understanding within social interaction.Behavioral and Brain Sciences,27, 79151.

Cohen, J., Cohen,P., West, S.G., & Aiken,L. S.(2003).Applied multiple regression/correlation analysis for the behavioral sciences (3rd ed.). Mahwah, NJ:Erlbaum.Crockenberg, S., & Acredolo, C. (1983). Infant temperament ratings: A function of infants, of mothers, or both? Infant Behavior & Development,6, 6172.Deloache, J. S., & Demendoza, O. A. P. (1987). Joint picturebook interactions of mothers and 1-year-old children. British Journal of Developmental Psychology,

5, 111123.Denham, S. A., Zoller, D., & Couchoud, E. A. (1994). Socialization of preschoolers emotion understanding. Developmental Psychology,30, 928936.Dunn, J., Brown, J., & Beardsall, L. (1991). Family talk about feeling states and childrens later understanding of others emotions. Developmental Psychology,

27, 448455.Farrant, K., & Reese, E. (2000). Maternal style and childrens participation in reminiscing: Stepping stones in childrens autobiographical memory develop-

ment.Journal of Cognition & Development,1, 193225.Fivush, R., & Fromhoff, F. A. (1988). Style and structure in motherchild conversations about the past. Discourse Processes,11, 337355.Fivush, R., Haden, C. A., & Reese, E. (2006). Elaborating on elaborations: Role of maternal reminiscing style in cognitive and socioemotional development.

Child Development,77, 15681588.Fletcher, K. L., & Reese, E. (2005). Picture book reading with young children: A conceptual framework.Developmental Review,25, 64103.Fonagy, P., & Target, M. (1997). Attachment and reflective function: Their role in self-organization. Development & Psychopathology,9, 679700.Frosch, C. A., Cox, M. J., & Goldman, B. D. (2001). Infantparent attachment and parental and child behavior during parenttoddler storybook interaction.

Merril-Palmer Quarterly,47, 445474.Furrow, D., Moore, C., Davidge, J., & Chiasson, L. (1992). Mental terms in mothers and childrens speech: Similarities and relationships. Journal of Child

Language,19, 617631.Garstein, M. A., & Rothbart, M. K. (2003). Studying infant temperament via revision of the infant behavior questionnaire. Journal of Infant Behavior and

Development,26, 6486.Goldsmith, H. H., & Rothbart, M. K. (1991). Contemporary instruments for assessing early temperament by questionnaire and in the laboratory. In A.

Angleitner, & J. Strelau (Eds.), Explorations in temperament: International perspectives on theory and measurement. Perspectives on individual differences(pp. 249272). New York: Plenum.

Golinkoff, R. M., & Ames, G. J. (1979). A comparison of fathers and mothers speech to young children. Child Development,50, 3842.Haden, C. A., & Fivush, R. (1996). Contextual variation in maternal conversational styles. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly,42, 200227.

Haden, C. A., Haine, R. A., & Fivush, R. (1997). Developing narrative structure in parentchild reminiscing across the preschool years. DevelopmentalPsychology,33, 295307.

Haden, C. A., Ornstein, P. A., Eckerman, C. O., & Didow, S. M. (2001). Motherchild conversational interactions as events unfold: Linkages to subsequentremembering.Child Development,72, 10161031.

Haden, C. A., Reese, E., & Fivush, R. (1996). Mothers extratextual comments during storybook reading: Stylistic differences over time and across texts.Discourse Processes,21, 135169.

Hoff, E. (2006). How social contexts support and shape language development. Developmental Review,26, 5588.Karrass, J., & Braungart-Rieker, J. M. (2005). Effects of shared parentinfant book reading on early language acquisition. Applied Developmental Psychology,

26, 113148.Kline, R. B. (2005).Principles of structural equation modeling(2nd ed.). New York: Guilford.Kuebli, J., Butler, S., & Fivush, R. (1995). Motherchild talk about past emotions: Relations of maternal language and child gender over time. Cognition &

Emotion,9, 265283.Laible, D. J. (2004a). Motherchild discourse about a childs past behavior at 30-months and early socioemotional development at age 3. Merill-Palmer

Quarterly,50, 159180.Laible, D. J. (2004b). Motherchild discourse in two contexts: Links with child temperament, attachment security, and socioemotional competence.

Developmental Psychology,40, 979992.Laible, D. J., & Thompson, R. A. (1998). Attachment and emotional understanding in preschool children. Developmental Psychology,34, 10381045.

Laible, D. J., & Thompson, R. A. (2000). Motherchild discourse, attachment security, shared positive affect, and early conscience development. ChildDevelopment,71, 14241440.

Lewis, K. D. (1999). Maternal style in reminiscing: Relations to child individual differences. Cognitive Development,14, 381399.Lucariello, J., & Nelson, K. (1987). Remembering and planning talk between mothers and children. Discourse Processes,10, 219235.Martin, L. E. (1998). Early book reading: How mothers deviate from printed text for young children. Reading Research and Instruction,37, 137160.Martin, L. E., & Reutzel, D. R. (1999). Sharing books: Examining how and why mothers deviate from the print. Reading Research and Instruction, 39,

3970.McCabe, A.,& Peterson,C. (1991). Getting thestory: A longitudinalstudy of parentalstyles ineliciting narratives anddevelopingnarrative skill.In A. McCabe,

& C. Peterson (Eds.),Developing narrative structure (pp. 217253). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Meins, E., & Fernyhough, C. (1999). Linguistic acquisitional style and mentalising development: The role of maternal mind-mindedness. Cognitive Develop-

ment,14, 363380.Meins, E., Fernyhough, C., Fradley, E., & Tuckey, M. (2001). Rethinkingmaternalsensitivity: Mothers comments on infants mental processes predict security

of attachment at 12-months. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry,42, 637648.Meins, E., Fernyhough, C., Russell, J., & Clark-Carter, D. (1998). Security of attachment as a predictor of symbolic and mentalising abilities: A longitudinal

study.Social Development,7(1), 124.Meins, E., Fernyhough, C., Wainwright, R., Clark-Carter, D.,Das Gupta,M., Fradley, E., et al.(2003). Pathways to understanding mind: Construct validity and

predictive validity of maternal mind-mindedness.Child Development,74, 11941211.

Meins, E., Fernyhough, C., Wainwright, R., Gupta, M. D., Fradley, E., & Tuckey, M. (2002). Maternal mind-mindedness and attachment security as predictorsof theory of mind understanding.Child Development,73, 17151726.

Nelson, K.,& Tessler,M. (1994). Makingmemories: Theinfluenceof joint encoding on laterrecall by young children. Consciousness and Cognition,3, 307326.Ninio, A. (1980). Picture-book reading in motherinfant dyads belonging to 2 subgroups in Israel. Child Development,51, 587590.Ontai, L. L., & Thompson, R. A. (2002). Patterns of attachment and maternal discourse effects on childrens emotion understanding from 3 to 5 years of age.

Social Development,11, 433450.Ontai, L. L., & Thompson, R. A. (2008). Attachment, parentchild discourse and theory-of-mind development. Social Development,17, 4760.Oppenheim, D., Goldsmith, D., & Koren-Karie, N. (2004). Maternal insightfulness and preschoolers emotion and behavior problems: Reciprocal influences

in a therapeutic preschool program.Infant Mental Health Journal,25, 352367.Parr, T. (2000).The feelings book. New York, NY: Little Brown & Co.Reese, E., & Fivush, R. (1993). Parental styles of talking about the past. Developmental Psychology,29, 596606.Reese,E., Haden,C. A.,& Fivush, R. (1993). Motherchildconversations about thepast:Relationships of style andmemory over time. Cognitive Development,

8, 403430.Ruffman, T., Slade, L., & Crowe, E. (2002). The relation between childrens and mothers mental state language and theory-of-mind understanding. Child

Development,73, 734751.Scarborough, H. S., & Dobrich, W. (1994). On the efficacy of reading to preschoolers. Developmental Review,14, 245302.Senechal, M., Cornell, E. H., & Broda, L. S. (1995). Age-related differences in the organization of parentinfant interactions during picture-book reading.

Early Childhood Research Quarterly,10, 317337.


14/14


Senechal, M., LeFevre, J., Thomas, E., & Daley, K. (1988). Differential effects of home literacy experiences on the development of oral and written language.Reading Research Quarterly,32, 96116.

Sharp, C., & Fonagy, P. (2008). The parents capacity to treat the child as a psychological agent: Constructs, measures and implications for developmentalpsychology.Social Development,17, 737754.

Slade, A. A., Sadler, L. S., De Dios-Kenn, C., Webb, D., Currier-Ezepchick, J., & Mayes, L. (2005). Minding the baby: A reflective parenting program. ThePsychoanalytic Study of the Child,60, 74100.

Tessler,M., & Nelson, K. (1994). Makingmemories: Theinfluenceof joint encoding on later recallby young children. Consciousnessand Cognition,3, 307326.Teti, D. M., & McGourty, S. (1996). Using mothers versus trained observers in assessing childrens secure base behavior: Theoretical and methodological

considerations.Child Development,67, 597605.Thompson, R. A. (1998). Early sociopersonality development. In W. Damon, & N. Eisenberg (Eds.), Handbook of child psychology: Social, emotional, and

personality development(5th ed., Vol. 1, pp. 25104). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons Inc.Thompson, R. A. (2006). The development of the person: Social understanding, relationships, conscience, self. In N. Eisenberg, W. Damon, & R. M. Lerner

(Eds.),Handbook of child psychology: Social, emotional, and personality development(6th ed., Vol. 3, pp. 2498). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons Inc.Thompson, R. A., Laible, D. J., & Ontai, L. L. (2003). Early understandings of emotion, morality, and self: Developing a working model. In R. V. Kail (Ed.),

Advances in child development and behavior(pp. 131171). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.Thompson, R. A., & Raikes, H. A. (2003). Toward the next quarter-century: Conceptual and methodological challenges for attachment theory. Development

and Psychopathology,15, 691718.Waters,E., & Deane, K. E. (1985). Defining and assessingindividual differencesin attachmentrelationships: Q-methodology and the organization of behavior

in infancy and early childhood.Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development,50(12), 4165.Welch-Ross, M. (1997). Mother-child participationin conversations aboutthe past:Relationshipsto preschoolers theoryof mind.DevelopmentalPsychology,

33, 618629.Wheeler, M. P. (1983). Context-related age changes in mothers speech: Joint book reading. Journal of Child Language,10, 259263.Whitehurst, G. J., Falco, F. L., Lonigan, C. J., Fischel, J. E., Debaryshe, B. D., Valdezmenchaca, M. C., et al. (1988). Accelerating language-development through

picture book reading.Developmental Psychology,24, 552559.Worobey, J. (1986). Convergence among assessments of temperament in the first month. Child Development,57, 4755.Worobey, J., & Blajda, V. M. (1989). Temperament ratings at 2 weeks,2 months,and 1 year: Differentialstability of activity and emotionality. Developmental

Psychology,25, 257263.

Documents

Early Childhood Research Quarterly