Search

The association between prenatal stress and children's socioemotional development is well established. The COVID‐19 pandemic has been a particularly stressful period, which may impact the gestational environment. However, most studies to‐date have examined prenatal stress at a single time point, potentially masking the natural variation in stress that occurs over time, especially during a time as uncertain as the pandemic. This study leveraged dense ecological momentary assessments from a prenatal randomized control trial to examine patterns of prenatal stress over a 14‐week period (up to four assessments/day) in a U.S. sample of 72 mothers and infants. We first examined whether varied features of stress exposure (lability, mean, and baseline stress) differed depending on whether mothers reported on their stress before or during the pandemic. We next examined which features of stress were associated with 3‐month‐old infants' negative affect. We did not find differences in stress patterns before and during the pandemic. However, greater stress lability, accounting for baseline and mean stress, was associated with higher infant negative affect. These findings suggest that pathways from prenatal stress exposure to infant socioemotional development are complex, and close attention to stress patterns over time will be important for explicating these pathways. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Young children can experience violence directly or indirectly in the home, with some children exposed to multiple forms of violence. These polyvictims often experience violence that is severe, chronic, and multifaceted. The current study used latent class analysis to identify and examine the pattern of profiles of exposure to family violence (i.e., violence directed towards the child and between caregivers) among a sample of 474 children ages 3-6 year who were drawn from the Multidimensional Assessment of Preschoolers Study (Wakschlag et al., 2014). The data yielded 3 classes: a polyvictimized class (n = 72; 15.2%) with high probability of exposure to all forms of violence, a harsh parenting class (n = 235; 49.5%), distinguished mainly by child-directed physical discipline in the absence of more severe forms of violence, and a low-exposure class (n = 167; 35.2%). Classes were differentiated by contextual factors, maternal characteristics, and mother-reported and observational indicators of parenting and child functioning with most effect sizes between medium and large. These findings add to emerging evidence linking polyvictimization to impaired caregiving and adverse psychological outcomes for children and offer important insight for prevention and intervention for this vulnerable population. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Contextual variation in child disruptive behavior is well documented but remains poorly understood. We first examine how variation in observed disruptive behavior across interactional contexts is associated with maternal reports of contextual variation in oppositional-defiant behavior and functional impairment. Second, we test whether child inhibitory control explains the magnitude of contextual variation in observed disruptive behavior. Methods Participants are 497 young children (mean age = 4 years, 11 months) from a subsample of the MAPS, a sociodemographically diverse pediatric sample, enriched for risk of disruptive behavior. Observed anger modulation and behavioral regulation problems were coded on the Disruptive Behavior Diagnostic Observation Schedule ( DB- DOS) during interactions with parent and examiner. Oppositional-defiant behavior, and impairment in relationships, with parents and nonparental adults, were measured with the Preschool Age Psychiatric Assessment ( PAPA) interview with the mother. Functional impairment in the home and out-and-about was assessed with the Family Life Impairment Scale ( FLIS), and expulsion from child care/school was measured with the baseline survey and FLIS. Results Observed disruptive behavior on the DB- DOS Parent Context was associated with oppositional-defiant behavior with parents, and with impairment at home and out-and-about. Observed disruptive behavior with the Examiner was associated with oppositional-defiant behavior with both parents and nonparental adults, impairment in relationships with nonparental adults, and child care/school expulsion. Differences in observed disruptive behavior in the Parent versus Examiner Contexts was related to the differences in maternal reports of oppositional-defiant behavior with parents versus nonparental adults. Children with larger decreases in disruptive behavior from Parent to Examiner Context had better inhibitory control and fewer attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder symptoms. Conclusions The DB- DOS showed clinical utility in a community sample for identifying contextual variation that maps onto reported oppositional-defiant behavior and functioning across contexts. Elucidating the implications of contextual variation for early identification and targeted prevention is an important area for future research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The juvenile justice system's interventions are expected to help reduce recidivism. However, previous studies suggest that official processing in juvenile court fails to reduce adolescents' criminal behavior in the following year. Longer term effects have not yet been investigated with a rigorous method. This study used propensity score matching to assess the impact of juvenile court processing into young adulthood. Method: Participants were part of a prospective longitudinal study of 1,037 boys from low- socioeconomic areas of Montreal, followed from ages 6-25 years. During their adolescence, 176 participants were processed in juvenile court, whereas 225 were arrested, but not sent to court. Propensity score matching was used to balance the group of participants exposed to juvenile court and the unexposed comparison group on 14 preadolescent child, family and peer characteristics. The two groups were compared on their official adult criminal outcomes. Results: The risk of conviction for an adult offence was 50.0% for court-processed participants compared with 24.3% for their matched counterparts, OR = 3.13, 95% CI = 1.80-5.44. Court-processed participants committed an average of 0.39 violent crimes, compared with 0.15 for their matched counterparts; Poisson model IRR = 2.60, 95% CI = 1.39-4.87. They also committed an average of 2.38 nonviolent crimes, compared to 1.30 for their matched counterparts, IRR = 1.87, 95% CI = 1.19-2.93. Conclusions: Rather than decreasing recidivism, juvenile court intervention increased both violent and nonviolent future crimes. Along with previous studies, this study highlights a pressing need for more research and knowledge transfer about effective interventions to reduce recidivism among youths who commit crime. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]