Search

Background: Very young children from lower socioeconomic status (SES) backgrounds often show poorer language development. Whilst there have been attempts to provide early intervention programmes, these sometimes miss the most disadvantaged groups. Aims: This report presents preliminary feasibility and effectiveness data for a novel language intervention designed for parents of toddlers in the United Kingdom. Methods and Procedures: In total, 43 UK families of 2–4‐year‐olds were recruited to the study, half of whom completed an 8‐week course (Tots Talking) focussed on parent interaction, and half of whom acted as wait‐list controls. Results and Outcomes: Results suggest that such programmes are feasible for families with 86% staying in the intervention. In addition, greater changes in underlying communication skills such as joint attention and gesture were evident compared to wait‐list controls. Conclusions and Implications: We conclude that pre‐verbal skills may be more important to measure as initial outcomes than language or vocabulary change in this population. What This Paper Adds: What is already known on the subject: Children from lower socioeconomic status (SES) backgrounds are at higher risk of communication difficulties and there is a need for community intervention programmes for very young children. What this study adds: This study suggests that such programmes can be feasible and effective, but that very early/basic communicative skills (such as joint attention) may be boosted first rather than language or vocabulary. What are the clinical implications of this work?: Children's centres and other community services could feasibly run short parent facing courses emphasising contingent communication in low SES families and other diverse groups. These may be more successful run with younger preschoolers. Joint attention may be a better focus of intervention before expecting vocabulary or language change. Community health professionals may find this information useful in referring and supporting families in need. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The present research explores how justifications for indulgence influence the translation of 'good' intentions into action. Three studies investigated the nature of such justifications and their relation to indulgence. Study 1 identified six ways that people justify indulgence to themselves - that they are deserving or curious, that the indulgence is an exception to the norm or can be compensated for later, or that the tempting food is available or irresistible. Study 2 showed that the use of justifications undermined participants' strong (but not weak) intentions to halve their consumption of a nominated high-fat food. Study 3 found that priming the use of justifications increased the amount of chocolate that participants consumed in a subsequent, ostensibly unrelated, taste test. Again, justification use had a greater effect on participants with strong intentions to limit indulgence. Taken together, the studies suggest a new approach to understanding intention-behaviour discrepancies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]